|
Post by jonnykrush on Jan 26, 2016 15:51:31 GMT -5
This could very well be a reverse merger. Receptor Life Sciences wants to go public, believes in the TS platform, gains a turn-key revolutionary diabetes treatment.
|
|
|
Post by novafett on Jan 26, 2016 16:01:35 GMT -5
Is this a good thing? Would that cause it to go private or remain public? Curios for those of us way underwater (say $3-5 or $5-7) if we just take less of a hit or breakeven. Or if this stays public and we retain our shares under a new ticker with a chance to go higher?
|
|
|
Post by jonnykrush on Jan 26, 2016 16:10:01 GMT -5
Is this a good thing? Would that cause it to go private or remain public? Curios for those of us way underwater (say $3-5 or $5-7) if we just take less of a hit or breakeven. Or if this stays public and we retain our shares under a new ticker with a chance to go higher? Could be a good thing depending on your cost basis and "sale" price. Company would be a public entity, for example Receptor Life Sciences would trade MNKD shares for Receptor shares. Reverse mergers are generally cheaper and quicker than going the IPO route, and if the acquiring company doesn't want or need to raise capital immediately it makes sense. Just my cursory understanding of it anyway.
|
|
|
Post by goyocafe on Jan 26, 2016 16:25:03 GMT -5
Is this a good thing? Would that cause it to go private or remain public? Curios for those of us way underwater (say $3-5 or $5-7) if we just take less of a hit or breakeven. Or if this stays public and we retain our shares under a new ticker with a chance to go higher? Could be a good thing depending on your cost basis and "sale" price. Company would be a public entity, for example Receptor Life Sciences would trade MNKD shares for Receptor shares. Reverse mergers are generally cheaper and quicker than going the IPO route, and if the acquiring company doesn't want or need to raise capital immediately it makes sense. Just my cursory understanding of it anyway. Would there be any benefit from all shares being called in for the exchange, thus flushing out naked shorts? Not sure how many shares are floating around without a "real" share to back it.
|
|
|
Post by jonnykrush on Jan 26, 2016 17:06:39 GMT -5
Could be a good thing depending on your cost basis and "sale" price. Company would be a public entity, for example Receptor Life Sciences would trade MNKD shares for Receptor shares. Reverse mergers are generally cheaper and quicker than going the IPO route, and if the acquiring company doesn't want or need to raise capital immediately it makes sense. Just my cursory understanding of it anyway. Would there be any benefit from all shares being called in for the exchange, thus flushing out naked shorts? Not sure how many shares are floating around without a "real" share to back it. In an ideal world your scenario could play out, unfortunately I think the big money shorts will have ample advance notice to cover, thus signaling retail shorts to cover. It's a rigged game I'm afraid and had I learned it sooner I would have played my hand differently for sure.
|
|
|
Post by patten1962 on Jan 26, 2016 17:11:00 GMT -5
To some of you that are in over $10 ps. Why not buy more at these low prices? If mannkind is purchased u take much less of a hit!
|
|
|
Post by pktrump on Jan 26, 2016 17:18:17 GMT -5
Don't Reverse mergers in general mean share dilution for the shareholders of the public company? Cant imagine a scenario where this arrangement would be good for us longs.
Is todays news just part of Matts conference comments that 'all options would be explored?' Or is this the direction MNKD had decided on moving forward?
|
|
|
Post by jonnykrush on Jan 26, 2016 18:05:56 GMT -5
To some of you that are in over $10 ps. Why not buy more at these low prices? If mannkind is purchased u take much less of a hit! ^^This!!^^ I bought years ago at 2.87 and 3.55, then stupidly bought a few at $10 thinking my little buy could help stem the crash a few days after approval, but personally I'm tapped out. It seems my other stocks rise and fall on par with mnkd, so it doesn't make sense to cash them out and buy more minky. To anyone with dry powder I say: 'damn the torpedoes full speed ahead!'
|
|
|
Post by cyn on Jan 26, 2016 18:08:53 GMT -5
Wow, Reverse Merger! What an interesting idea! Wouldn't this be a real Gomer to Big Pharma, the naked shorts and Wall Street ....Surprise, Surprise!
"Reverse Merger" certainly falls within the realm and definition of "exploring all options"….might shed some light on the unanticipated, covert formation of RLS and the perfectly timed announcement of the TS licensing deal.
I'm OK with a reverse merger as long as existing MNKD shareholders get a reasonable offer for their existing shares, shares in the newly formed company or combination thereof. Depending on the merger terms and offer price, this might even mitigate and resolve pending lawsuits. With owning 40% of MNKD, I can't imagine Al Mann agreeing to anything less than what's good for his own investment interests (thereby extended to everyone us).
Reverse Merger would seem to make a lot of sense for RLS, assuming they have “deep” pockets to come to the bargaining table... minimal dilution by avoiding IPO process, quick turnaround time in as little as 30 days, immediate managerial and merger resource synergies, less susceptible to market conditions; and best of all, acquiring an already revolutionary, commercialized drug (Afrezza) right out of the gate to exemplify and subsidize future TS development. And, let's not forget about the added fringe benefit of acquiring a pretty impressive, high-capacity, cost-efficient manufacturing and distribution capability to market future drug candidates. JMHO
|
|
|
Post by patten1962 on Jan 26, 2016 18:18:10 GMT -5
If this reverse merger happens what kind of price do you think mannkind would hit?
|
|
|
Post by slugworth008 on Jan 26, 2016 19:29:19 GMT -5
Don't Reverse mergers in general mean share dilution for the shareholders of the public company? Cant imagine a scenario where this arrangement would be good for us longs. Is todays news just part of Matts conference comments that 'all options would be explored?' Or is this the direction MNKD had decided on moving forward? It could be they have a serious party interested in acquiring Afrezza - one that was lurking in the background and understands just how much dough they can make off of it....MNKD let a rumor slip out on purpose to throw a shot across the shorts bow. In the end who knows. Nothing surprises me anymore with this stock.
|
|
|
Post by pktrump on Jan 26, 2016 19:50:50 GMT -5
Slug
Thanks for the reply.
Given the recent announcement with RLS, I find this latest announcement odd. "A rumor slip out on purpose' seems plausible. Given Matt recently stated that they had done their DD on the RLS deal and came away 'quite impressed' with the backers, a reverse merger would seem unlikely, unless of course the reverse merger is with RLS. More likely there are other Pharmas coming out of the woodwork that are interested.
The speculation has become insane.
Wish Al would speak.
|
|
|
Post by longinvstr on Jan 26, 2016 20:52:36 GMT -5
This could very well be a reverse merger. Receptor Life Sciences wants to go public, believes in the TS platform, gains a turn-key revolutionary diabetes treatment. The RLS announcement left me with the feeling that there was a lot more there than met the eye and was disclosed. My thought to the partnership suitability question, "How did MNKD demonstrate ongoing viability?" was that RLS did not require it, they're providing it. RLS - Al demands how much? We can't pay that MNKD - OK, then let's put out the for sale sign & see what is offered. If a BP offer meets Al's threshold, you (RLS) get last look. If not, we negotiate starting from BP's best offer RLS - Very well, hoist the sign
|
|
|
Post by humann on Jan 26, 2016 20:55:25 GMT -5
The first question that comes to mind is: why would they have gone through the process of setting up a licensing deal if, in fact, they really planned on acquiring the whole company?
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Jan 26, 2016 21:02:17 GMT -5
This could very well be a reverse merger. Receptor Life Sciences wants to go public, believes in the TS platform, gains a turn-key revolutionary diabetes treatment. You don't go through expensive legal work to put in place a licensing agreement to then immediately nullify it. People wanted to speculate about SNY buying MNKD when the ink was barely dry on that deal. If RLS wanted to do such a they disadvantaged there negotiating power by some amount in having signed the licensing deal since that would contribute to other potential M&A partners putting higher value on MNKD. What you propose just doesn't make any sense.
|
|