|
|
Post by agedhippie on Jun 29, 2017 9:18:12 GMT -5
Item (ii) is interesting. I wonder if Deerfield was behind Mike replacing Matt. Also item (v) makes me wonder if Deerfield was behind the return of Greenhill. Those seem to be two changes they have taken out of Mannkind's control. I think it's a good sign that they did that and didn't simply try to optimize recovery of the debt. At this point Deerfield are still positively engaged.
|
|
|
|
Post by novafett on Jun 29, 2017 9:19:54 GMT -5
I like it! Just disappointed it's only a small push out. Maybe we'll see incremental pushes based on progress of sales?
|
|
|
|
Post by compound26 on Jun 29, 2017 9:21:25 GMT -5
If you are a Mannkind creditor, you would like to see them succeed. If Mannkind goes bankrupt, the creditors receive a lot less money. To receive shares at a relatively high price of 1.37 does show the creditors believe a turn around could be occurring. That does put a temporary floor on the stock price. I think if Mankind shows a rise in scripts again this week, the share price should be between the original .80 cents to a dollar before the 5 for 1 split or between 4 and 5 dollars now. Maybe the creditors know something about the sales figure coming out tomorrow? I believe the conversion price between the notes and the shares is basically 90% of the share price of the preceding trading day. The $1.395 conversion price is 90% of $1.55, which is yesterday's PPS at close. I think the same conversion formula was used for the last conversion in April. I believe Mannkind and Deerfield have been in discussion about debt restructuring for quite some time and this conversion formula has been agreed long ago. As to the specific conversion price for a particular conversion, it just depends on when the two companies finally decide to ink the conversion and where the PPS was on the preceding trading day. |
|
|
|
Post by therealisaching on Jun 29, 2017 9:28:39 GMT -5
So the run way is extended from September to November? Only two months but Some of the trials should be done by then. New label at end of September too. from twitter
Dear Mr Chung, do u know or have any idea about FDA label revision? Dr. Urbansky probably knows more about it. Thanks in advance
Johnny Chung @jchungrx · Jun 26
There is nothing that I can comment on at this time. Once we have information we can share, it will be provided.
op @dinovix2778 · Jun 26
Many thanks. Appreciate your answer. We will wait for it. Thanks
Mike Castagna
@castagna2011
Replying to @dinovix2778 @jchungrx and 2 others
We have previously stated Sept on our last earnings call
|
|
|
|
Post by compound26 on Jun 29, 2017 9:41:14 GMT -5
I like it! Just disappointed it's only a small push out. Maybe we'll see incremental pushes based on progress of sales? As long as we see continued growth in sales, at minimum we will get incremental pushes provided by Deerfield. |
|
|
|
Post by seanismorris on Jun 29, 2017 9:46:00 GMT -5
Investors of MNKD on proboards seem to welcome the news, it's interesting that the market is responding in the opposite direction. The deal is dilutive, but relatively minor... maybe people didn't realize what MannKind's cash position was. Adding 2 months to the time they need to do a major dilutive event could be very helpful. The scripts number for tomorrow will be even more important given today (and yesterday's news). A bad number would be very negative for the stock, but with a good number (I still think) has MNKD with limited upside. Major dilution expected within 6 months is a significant drag...
|
|
|
|
Post by brotherm1 on Jun 29, 2017 9:50:29 GMT -5
Speaking of drags....
|
|
|
|
Post by mango on Jun 29, 2017 10:15:25 GMT -5
THE BORROWER:
MANNKIND CORPORATION
By: /s/ David Thomson
Name: David Thomson
Title: Corporate Vice President and General Counsel
THE GUARANTOR:
MANNKIND LLC
By: /s/ Matthew Pfeffer
Name: Matthew Pfeffer
Title: Authorized Signatory
huh? Last I saw Edstrom was the sole Director and member of MannKind LLC which was dissolved a long time ago. Now Pfeffer is?
|
|
|
|
Post by papanigon on Jun 29, 2017 10:55:45 GMT -5
The plot thickens.
|
|
|
|
Post by rockstarrick on Jun 29, 2017 10:56:21 GMT -5
Moves a risk item out by a quarter & cleans up the balance sheet a bit. I'll be very interested to see Rx tomorrow. A case can be made that MNKD is starting to deliver on a positive narrative - with actions, not just words. And I stand by my previous statement regarding your sentiment. waiting for Bullish 😎 |
|
|
|
Post by myocat on Jun 29, 2017 10:59:15 GMT -5
Just put in a buy order at $1.40.
|
|
|
|
Post by rockstarrick on Jun 29, 2017 11:02:29 GMT -5
Every little bit helps at this point. It looks like Deerfield is being cooperative, but very cautious, as they move forward and the 8-K suggests that perhaps Deerfield insisted that Greenhill be engaged to look at options. Likewise it looks like Deerfield is telling the Mann Group to "show me da money" or the deal is off. Taking shares at only a 10% discount to market was pretty generous on Deerfield's part, more aggressive funds would have insisted on a lot more. I would guess we can assume that Deerfield didn't dump the previous shares as someone stated, (I can't recall who made the comment, it doesn't matter at this point). |
|
|
|
Post by ilovekauai on Jun 29, 2017 11:07:08 GMT -5
I really like what Michael C. had to say about the Deerfield agreement. It oozes of confidence. I too suspect something really good is in the offing. Onwards!
|
|
|
|
Post by matt on Jun 29, 2017 11:19:19 GMT -5
Every little bit helps at this point. It looks like Deerfield is being cooperative, but very cautious, as they move forward and the 8-K suggests that perhaps Deerfield insisted that Greenhill be engaged to look at options. Likewise it looks like Deerfield is telling the Mann Group to "show me da money" or the deal is off. Taking shares at only a 10% discount to market was pretty generous on Deerfield's part, more aggressive funds would have insisted on a lot more. I would guess we can assume that Deerfield didn't dump the previous shares as someone stated, (I can't recall who made the comment, it doesn't matter at this point). I don't know that you can make that assumption at all. I think Deerfield probably did dump the earlier shares, and will likely do so with these shares. Deerfield is in the business of issuing debt; they are not a strategic equity investor that wants to hold long-term the way a healthcare fund does. Exchanging debt that is not due for several more years for shares that they can sell now reduces the amount they can lose on the loan, and shortens the duration of their debt portfolio. Converting the shares to cash now reduces Deerfield's potential loss if the company does not turn around and, like any lender, they want to maximize the upside while hedging the downside. |
|
|
|
Post by rockstarrick on Jun 29, 2017 11:31:28 GMT -5
I would guess we can assume that Deerfield didn't dump the previous shares as someone stated, (I can't recall who made the comment, it doesn't matter at this point). I don't know that you can make that assumption at all. I think Deerfield probably did dump the earlier shares, and will likely do so with these shares. Deerfield is in the business of issuing debt; they are not a strategic equity investor that wants to hold long-term the way a healthcare fund does. Exchanging debt that is not due for several more years for shares that they can sell now reduces the amount they can lose on the loan, and shortens the duration of their debt portfolio. Converting the shares to cash now reduces Deerfield's potential loss if the company does not turn around and, like any lender, they want to maximize the upside while hedging the downside. Thanks Matt, that makes sense, to me anyway. i guess the fact that Deerfield is still willing to negotiate debt with mnkd is a good thing. |
|
