|
|
Post by peppy on Sept 26, 2016 7:18:50 GMT -5
Let's get back to the tragedy of price. 61 cents. let's hope some buyers/scripts will come in. let's try to break and hold 65 cents, the January low.
Will good conquer evil? holy smokes. |
|
|
|
Post by matt on Sept 26, 2016 7:42:14 GMT -5
Realistically, the price is not headed north until the delisting issue (which will almost certainly require a reverse split) and the next financing are completed. No prudent investor is going to load up on shares knowing that those two events are almost certain to happen in the next few months, and face it, these events are not exactly a secret to the market. Here is hoping that Matt pulls the trigger as soon as possible, because until he does any positive news is going to be overshadowed by the looming unknown, and when unknowns become reality they are rarely as bad as your imagination made them out to be.
|
|
|
|
Post by liane on Sept 26, 2016 7:46:22 GMT -5
What if they sold off one franchise (not Afrezza) - say inhaled epi; totally sold off the right to develop and market it. Would that not bring in enough to float us at least a couple years?
|
|
|
|
Post by kbrion77 on Sept 26, 2016 7:54:19 GMT -5
What if they sold off one franchise (not Afrezza) - say inhaled epi; totally sold off the right to develop and market it. Would that not bring in enough to float us at least a couple years? Would be interested to get Matt's (above) perception on this as well. Not sure what type of return you could get for these assets but I would be all in favor of selling off assets for cash. |
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Sept 26, 2016 7:57:19 GMT -5
If Mike Castanga is the Neogotiator, Do the new ADA 2016 Analogues let Afrezza in for type two?
Any chance? One post did say the individual went to a physician on the physician and list and was denied the prescription for afrezza as a type two I believe.
Do you have to try and fail the triple therapy before the combination injectable therapy can be considered? screencast.com/t/nOwBa4aaA
Most type twos at the family practice facilities?
We have to get the endo's to allow the type ones to try it, so the type ones can eat. It is a battle.
|
|
|
|
Post by lakon on Sept 26, 2016 8:30:05 GMT -5
I do not subscribe to the reverse split soon [nonsense]. MNKD will have enough money to get to July 4th, 2017. By then, they will have to show a good enough trajectory of script growth to raise more money for the next year's effort. I expect one more dilution before the 4th, possibly at 50 cents to "help" the shorts clear out, but still another $40-50 million raised. Throw in an RLS milestone, and here comes July at projected burn rates.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2016 8:44:49 GMT -5
I do not subscribe to the reverse split soon [nonsense]. MNKD will have enough money to get to July 4th, 2017. By then, they will have to show a good enough trajectory of script growth to raise more money for the next year's effort. I expect one more dilution before the 4th, possibly at 50 cents to "help" the shorts clear out, but still another $40-50 million raised. Throw in an RLS milestone, and here comes July at projected burn rates. care to expand on the enough money into july 4th 2017? when Matt - ceo him self said they only have cash into Q1 2017 which is even a bit too much stretch |
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Sept 26, 2016 9:04:12 GMT -5
What if they sold off one franchise (not Afrezza) - say inhaled epi; totally sold off the right to develop and market it. Would that not bring in enough to float us at least a couple years? Epi-TS should be attractive. As CMO Dr. Urbanski explained, the timeline for development is much faster than other API. There is generic epinephrine that has already been approved by the FDA. Technosphere, itself, has already been approved by the FDA as a drug delivery technology. Combined, the costs for a BP to take over development and bring Epi-TS to market would be among the lowest cost API in recent history.
NOTE: There is no reason why a generic epinephrine has to be used. A brand name manufacturer might also be interested.
How many are out there?
US Brand Name
Adrenaclick
Adrenalin
Adrenalin Chloride
Auvi-Q
Epipen
Epipen Jr
Twinject
Source: www.mayoclinic.org/drugs-supplements/epinephrine-injection-route/description/drg-20072429
|
|
|
|
Post by matt on Sept 26, 2016 10:13:15 GMT -5
What if they sold off one franchise (not Afrezza) - say inhaled epi; totally sold off the right to develop and market it. Would that not bring in enough to float us at least a couple years? They can't legally sell off a piece of the company without using all of the money received to pay off creditors. Since the shareholder equity is so far into negative territory the intangible assets are the implicit security for all the creditors claims not otherwise secured by hard assets. If the company tried to sell off a single product when the debt claims are so large, a court would almost certainly rule that such a transaction is a fraudulent conveyance. That would create legal liability for Mannkind, the officers and directors, and the company purchasing the asset (who might have to make the creditors whole, essentially paying twice for the same asset plus legal costs). No competent corporate attorney would let their client buy such an asset without written releases from all creditors, or as part of a prepackaged bankruptcy because the court would approve the sale over any creditor objections.
Now if Mannkind sold a piece of technology at fair value and used the proceeds to pay down debt that is probably permissible since creditors get the money and would do no worse than in a bankruptcy sale, but that does not help fund Afrezza going forward. The company needs cash for the insulin business.
|
|
|
|
Post by kbrion77 on Sept 26, 2016 10:24:06 GMT -5
What if they sold off one franchise (not Afrezza) - say inhaled epi; totally sold off the right to develop and market it. Would that not bring in enough to float us at least a couple years? They can't legally sell off a piece of the company without using all of the money received to pay off creditors. Since the shareholder equity is so far into negative territory the intangible assets are the implicit security for all the creditors claims not otherwise secured by hard assets. If the company tried to sell off a single product when the debt claims are so large, a court would almost certainly rule that such a transaction is a fraudulent conveyance. That would create legal liability for Mannkind, the officers and directors, and the company purchasing the asset (who might have to make the creditors whole, essentially paying twice for the same asset plus legal costs). No competent corporate attorney would let their client buy such an asset without written releases from all creditors, or as part of a prepackaged bankruptcy because the court would approve the sale over any creditor objections.
Now if Mannkind sold a piece of technology at fair value and used the proceeds to pay down debt that is probably permissible since creditors get the money and would do no worse than in a bankruptcy sale, but that does not help fund Afrezza going forward. The company needs cash for the insulin business.
Are there lessons to be learned/used from Nektar Therapeutics circa 2007-2008? I guess main difference would be Pfizer paid them $135M one time payment about a month after termination so that obviously helped their cause. They sold off assets and technology to Novartis for $115M in 2008 and repurchased convertible debt a month later. They have made quite the turnaround since the Exubera fallout. |
|
|
|
Post by ilovekauai on Sept 26, 2016 10:43:20 GMT -5
Lakon: I'm with you. I never have a met a R/S that I liked and wish all this talk about a R/S would cease. It would only validate what the naysayers say about MNKD and be a desperation move IMO. And trust me, the naysayers will have a field day blasting MNKD if a R/S happens. The SP would quickly fall back under $1 in the blink of an eye, and we all would be out many, many, shares. I mean really, a R/V...really? I say give Michael C a chance to make good, let the sales staff turn this around, relax, and most importantly do not panic. That's exactly what our detractors want us to do. MNKD will find other ways to pull in more cash w/o resorting to a R/V. Again, huge mistake if we go there. I hope everyone has a great week, and take it easy. Aloha.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2016 10:50:36 GMT -5
The price reflects the situation and, at the moment, pretty accurately. As pointed out by many, there are possibilities that can happen that could change the current situation but so far none of them have produced results yet. People who are still holding on long at this point are in two camps imo. One camp is that they don't care about the stock price because they believe in (insert belief(s)). The other camp includes folks who have lost most of their investment and have decided that there's no point in selling at this level. Unless the miracle happens and sooner rather than later, the discussion around capitulation will become moot. Mr. Market will do it for you. Meanwhile, the SP reflects what's coming next - more terrible financing that puts investors deeper in the red. With about 3 months of the relaunch coming to a close, there's no signs that mnkd can turn afrezza into a blockbuster anytime in the near or medium term future. And I have serious doubts about the label change effort with one exception - who at the FDA will be reviewing the label change? IMO, the team that reviewed afrezza leading to the 2014 adcom would not be favorable to mnkd as they weren't favorable to mnkd in 2014 during the adcom. But maybe with the recent FDA attention/shakeup, it might be different this go around with a label change effort?
|
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Sept 26, 2016 11:22:11 GMT -5
Ah, but many of those people aren't there any more, including Margaret Hamburg, the former FDA Commissioner who is currently facing federal RICO charges along with her hedge fund manager husband for colluding with J&J to "enrich themselves by failing to warn the public about a deadly antibiotic." Source: ahrp.org/former-fda-commissioner-charged-in-federal-racketeering-lawsuit/Those reviewers who remain with the FDA may not be the original Afrezza reviewers and even if they were, they will likely be a little more circumspect about their decisions, IMHO.  |
|
|
|
Post by liane on Sept 26, 2016 11:35:53 GMT -5
What if they sold off one franchise (not Afrezza) - say inhaled epi; totally sold off the right to develop and market it. Would that not bring in enough to float us at least a couple years? They can't legally sell off a piece of the company without using all of the money received to pay off creditors. Since the shareholder equity is so far into negative territory the intangible assets are the implicit security for all the creditors claims not otherwise secured by hard assets. If the company tried to sell off a single product when the debt claims are so large, a court would almost certainly rule that such a transaction is a fraudulent conveyance. That would create legal liability for Mannkind, the officers and directors, and the company purchasing the asset (who might have to make the creditors whole, essentially paying twice for the same asset plus legal costs). No competent corporate attorney would let their client buy such an asset without written releases from all creditors, or as part of a prepackaged bankruptcy because the court would approve the sale over any creditor objections.
Now if Mannkind sold a piece of technology at fair value and used the proceeds to pay down debt that is probably permissible since creditors get the money and would do no worse than in a bankruptcy sale, but that does not help fund Afrezza going forward. The company needs cash for the insulin business.
OK, so let me word this a bit different. Let's say they license the TS technology to a pharma to develop a drug on the TS platform. For this, MNKD receives a nice chunk upfront - say $200M, but incurs none of development, clinical trial, FDA submission, marketing costs. They also forego most, if not all, royalties. Would this not be possible with say epi? |
|
|
|
Post by audiomr on Sept 26, 2016 12:03:58 GMT -5
They can't legally sell off a piece of the company without using all of the money received to pay off creditors. Since the shareholder equity is so far into negative territory the intangible assets are the implicit security for all the creditors claims not otherwise secured by hard assets. If the company tried to sell off a single product when the debt claims are so large, a court would almost certainly rule that such a transaction is a fraudulent conveyance. That would create legal liability for Mannkind, the officers and directors, and the company purchasing the asset (who might have to make the creditors whole, essentially paying twice for the same asset plus legal costs). No competent corporate attorney would let their client buy such an asset without written releases from all creditors, or as part of a prepackaged bankruptcy because the court would approve the sale over any creditor objections.
Now if Mannkind sold a piece of technology at fair value and used the proceeds to pay down debt that is probably permissible since creditors get the money and would do no worse than in a bankruptcy sale, but that does not help fund Afrezza going forward. The company needs cash for the insulin business.
OK, so let me word this a bit different. Let's say they license the TS technology to a pharma to develop a drug on the TS platform. For this, MNKD receives a nice chunk upfront - say $200M, but incurs none of development, clinical trial, FDA submission, marketing costs. They also forego most, if not all, royalties. Would this not be possible with say epi? Maybe, if someone were interested. Might be hard to get significant upfront money with the company in its current state, though. Mannkind has always been amenable to licensing, I think, but nobody is banging down the doors. For now, it's all about Afrezza. If it gets more traction in the coming quarter, the revenue could help extend the runway. And if it really starts to take off, interest among potential partners and licensees might as well. |
|
