|
|
Post by mattm on Jul 4, 2014 16:49:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by uvula on Jul 4, 2014 17:14:54 GMT -5
1. Transaction occurred pursuant to Rule 10B5-1 Plan
I think this is one of those preplanned sale things.
|
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Jul 4, 2014 19:12:13 GMT -5
Almost certainly, how can Matt possibly sell otherwise in the middle of partnership negotiations?
|
|
|
|
Post by garrett on Jul 5, 2014 8:16:19 GMT -5
When an insider sells stock and claims the sale was made pursuant to Rule 10b5-1, I am always suspicious.
These plans are simple agreements between the insider and their broker and are intended to protect the insider from claims of trading with non-public information. In other words, the insider can use their 10b5-1 Plan as a legitimate defense to civil or criminal liability claims.
Unless the company discloses these plan when they are executed they remain private and are not filed with any government agency. Call me cynical but abuses of 10b5-1 Plans by insiders is well known and documented and should not be relied upon as properly used. I would like to see these plans disclosed to investors via press releases as they are enacted.
|
|
|
|
Post by theprofessor69 on Jul 5, 2014 12:08:45 GMT -5
I cannot speak specific to this transaction, but I have spent over 20 years in corporate finance, a large part of it working on m&a. Every 10b5-1 plan I have seen was created and administered through a company's legal department. It is not "just an agreement between an exec and his broker".
|
|
|
|
Post by BD on Jul 5, 2014 13:43:35 GMT -5
I wonder, then, why companies do not do as was suggested above and publicize all these plans' specifics, as it seems that would be an effective way to neutralize all the FUD that is spewed as a result of such sales. Why help the shorts by making shareholders have to trust all the insiders, when doubt can be completely removed?
|
|
|
|
Post by kc on Jul 5, 2014 14:07:00 GMT -5
He also might have some very nice options coming up due to the FDA approval and needs some cash to pay for them and to pay the upcoming taxes on the options. Perhaps he vest's with 50,000 shares or more for reaching a milestone. You can bet that SR. Management will be rewarded very nicely for both FDA approval and partnership / Buyout. Selling and buying is what they do
|
|
|
|
Post by biotec on Jul 5, 2014 15:51:22 GMT -5
Its smells, And I don't like it.
|
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Jul 5, 2014 18:02:32 GMT -5
I look at it completely opposite the way you do, biotec; it would be such an obvious violation if it weren't completely legal, that it must be completely legal. I don't have to think about it another second (except of course to read these comments).
|
|
|
|
Post by garrett on Jul 5, 2014 18:43:43 GMT -5
I cannot speak specific to this transaction, but I have spent over 20 years in corporate finance, a large part of it working on m&a. Every 10b5-1 plan I have seen was created and administered through a company's legal department. It is not "just an agreement between an exec and his broker". Many large brokerage firms have "fill in the blank" 10b5-1 forms that are often used and not all of these Plans are "administered" through the company's legal department. Remember, it's not the company that has the risk - it's the insider. But you are right, we really don't know Mannkind's policy on this. In any event, the most transparent way is to disclose these Plans via press releases or other methods of public dissemination so we all know for sure. |
|
|
|
Post by mannmade on Jul 5, 2014 19:04:53 GMT -5
These are likely pre-planned tax oriented events for the vesting of taxable transactions. Remember that Matt is also likely leading the discussions on partnership as CFO with a healthy understanding of the science, so he is squeaky clean I am sure... They likely don't publicize or discuss more than they legally have to b/c frankly how much do you want people to know about your personal business? For example I believe that when David Thompson sold a large number of shares last year it caused quite a stir, but turned out to be part of a need for his divorce settlement... Am not sure I would want all that info about my personal life disclosed... I think this is likely one of the more moral companies out there and no other company that I know of has ever had a CEO with more of his personal wealth invested... And think about this as well... it is held in common shares the same as you and me which means it is not secured or collateralized against corporate assets.
And I would argue in fact that the periodic sales of stock shows they are not only complying with the law but are also showing that it is not about greed... Just look at all the shares sold pre-FDA approval and how the chatter at that time was all about another crl must be coming... Many of these people have been with Mannkind for 5 to 10 years and so are likely looking at having accumulated many shares with more to come... None of this bothers me... I keep (my personal opinion all along) referring back to what I know about the science.
Truth is that I wish there was more transparency with shorts. Why is it that short stats only come out every two weeks and are for the prior two weeks? Could it be that this way naked shorting can be protected when they trade/short back and forth before a transactions settles? Why don't we know who the short holders /traders are? We know what institutions hold shares and how many but we never know who is doing the short trading... Transparency here would go a long way towards leveling the playing field for the rest of us... Just my two cents... GLTA!
|
|
|
|
Post by thekindaguyiyam on Jul 5, 2014 19:15:21 GMT -5
After multiple battles with the FDA the last thing Alfred would do is put his company in jeopardy over a few shares of stock. Why do you believe in this mann in the first place? No one likes news that can be spun. BS spin will always happen as long as there are motley fools to publish misleading information based in greed. IMHO
|
|
|
|
Post by mannmade on Jul 5, 2014 19:39:07 GMT -5
One last add to my above post... I wish Al Mann and company ran the NSA as they seem to be able to keep a secret...  |
|
|
|
Post by rak5555 on Jul 5, 2014 22:30:25 GMT -5
Come on, think about it. How many shares and options does pfeffer have? If he were baling, wouldn't he sell more like 100,000? I have been the CFO of a publicly traded company and no way is this being handled under the table through a broker using bogus paperwork. Not only does the SEC monitor these transactions, so does the company.
|
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Jul 5, 2014 23:03:50 GMT -5
One last add to my above post... I wish Al Mann and company ran the NSA as they seem to be able to keep a secret... Would not go quite that far, mannmade! LOL |
|
