|
|
Post by sweedee79 on Aug 7, 2018 13:52:29 GMT -5
Something shady has been going on by my standards..
And I too wonder about some of our posters on this board...
Can't imagine the pressure Mike has been under to deliver.. I'm sickened..
|
|
|
|
Post by goyocafe on Aug 7, 2018 13:58:32 GMT -5
thinking deerfield through, secured the assets with finance, and then participated in reducing financing through the shorting of the stock price? To make money. To be left with the assets? Both? it there a word for that? They need personnel to make those assets worth anything. I’d like to think if it came down to a takeover, they’d have the keys to an empty factory. |
|
|
|
Post by compound26 on Aug 7, 2018 14:07:19 GMT -5
The logic is quite clear. The company absolutely must raise money over the next eight weeks or so and that will have to involve dilution given the revenue miss and the lack of assets to secure a loan. The hedge fund knows that the shares will effectively create a discount to the current price so there is an arbitrage there between the price and the discounted price. So the hedge fund piles in and the price drops, this is a bonus for the hedge fund since it adds to the margin in the arbitrage. I think the likely outcome is that Deerfield will provide the money at a price. They have first claim on the assets so they are covered, and they will want to get their warrants repriced. My bet would be that Deerfield buy stock at a small discount, and the warrants get repriced to the current price. Deerfield will make money on the stock arbitrage, and have a heap of cheap warrants to secure a short position. Not sure if you are short of MNKD. But to me your writing style is very similar to that of matt . What you wrote might be true. But in my view, your posts suggest that your thinking is very rigid and without imagination. Just like you had never though that Sanofi would pony up $50 million or so as settlement with Mannkind even though quite a few in this board thought that was very likely. I think you would not have thought Deerfield would loose the minimum cash hold last year to $10 million at one point. Similarly, I noticed that our famous bankruptcy expert matt yet again started to write about bankruptcy of Mannkind after he had wrote about it abundantly predicting mannkind to declare bankruptcy in thanksgiving 2016 and then by August 2017. My point is that yes, Deerfield has a covenant with mannkind that requires the latter to have a minimum cash hold of $25 million. Yes, Deerfield has the Danbury facility as collateral for its debt. However, given that mannkind has paid down the Deerfield debt to $25 million, mannkind has for the first time (since they secured their financing with Deerfield a few years back) the flexibility to do some major restructuring of the Deerfield debt, for example, by taking a new piece of debt from a new lender/investor, to take out the Deerfield debt entirely, or for the new lender/investor to take a second lien position to the danbury facility, with Deerfield remaining as the creditor taking the first/senior lien. Note that also Mannkind is growing its gross revenue/net revenue at 100% + annually. While we are not seeing hockey stick growth yet, 100% + annual growth rate is nothing to sneer at. I would say it is not so easy to find public companies whose main product has great market potential and its sales is growing at 100% + annually. I think Mannkind is on a similar growth track to that of Dexcom (at a market cap of around $8 billion currently) looking a few years back. As MK pointed out, when mannking is print $7/8 million a quarter by the fourth quarter, wall street will start to notice mannkind. For the members here, if you have not read the book “devering happiness”, I recommend it to you guys. It's a great book and very entertaining. www.amazon.com/Delivering-Happiness-Profits-Passion-Purpose/dp/0446576220/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1533668552&sr=8-1&keywords=delivering+happiness In it, there was a point, Zappos was growing very fast, but was very much cash strapped and was facing a crisis. But then they got a lifeline via a loan from Wells Fargo as the bank saw great potential in Zappos in its growing sales. "Then something happened that changed everything: a loan from Wells Fargo Bank. No longer did they have to sit down every week, deciding which vendors to pay and which to put off. The company was saved. Now, for the first time, they were ready to become profitable and grow." www.customerville.com/en/download/guides/zappos |
|
|
|
Post by traderdennis on Aug 7, 2018 15:01:59 GMT -5
The logic is quite clear. The company absolutely must raise money over the next eight weeks or so and that will have to involve dilution given the revenue miss and the lack of assets to secure a loan. The hedge fund knows that the shares will effectively create a discount to the current price so there is an arbitrage there between the price and the discounted price. So the hedge fund piles in and the price drops, this is a bonus for the hedge fund since it adds to the margin in the arbitrage. I think the likely outcome is that Deerfield will provide the money at a price. They have first claim on the assets so they are covered, and they will want to get their warrants repriced. My bet would be that Deerfield buy stock at a small discount, and the warrants get repriced to the current price. Deerfield will make money on the stock arbitrage, and have a heap of cheap warrants to secure a short position. Not sure if you are short of MNKD. But to me your writing style is very similar to that of matt . What you wrote might be true. But in my view, your posts suggest that your thinking is very rigid and without imagination. Just like you had never though that Sanofi would pony up $50 million or so as settlement with Mannkind even though quite a few in this board thought that was very likely. I think you would not have thought Deerfield would loose the minimum cash hold last year to $10 million at one point. Similarly, I noticed that our famous bankruptcy expert matt yet again started to write about bankruptcy of Mannkind after he had wrote about it abundantly predicting mannkind to declare bankruptcy in thanksgiving 2016 and then by August 2017. My point is that yes, Deerfield has a covenant with mannkind that requires the latter to have a minimum cash hold of $25 million. Yes, Deerfield has the Danbury facility as collateral for its debt. However, given that mannkind has paid down the Deerfield debt to $25 million, mannkind has for the first time (since they secured their financing with Deerfield a few years back) the flexibility to do some major restructuring of the Deerfield debt, for example, by taking a new piece of debt from a new lender/investor, to take out the Deerfield debt entirely, or for the new lender/investor to take a second lien position to the danbury facility, with Deerfield remaining as the creditor taking the first/senior lien. Note that also Mannkind is growing its gross revenue/net revenue at 100% + annually. While we are not seeing hockey stick growth yet, 100% + annual growth rate is nothing to sneer at. I would say it is not so easy to find public companies whose main product has great market potential and its sales is growing at 100% + annually. I think Mannkind is on a similar growth track to that of Dexcom (at a market cap of around $8 billion currently) looking a few years back. As MK pointed out, when mannking is print $7/8 million a quarter by the fourth quarter, wall street will start to notice mannkind. For the members here, if you have not read the book “devering happiness”, I recommend it to you guys. It's a great book and very entertaining. www.amazon.com/Delivering-Happiness-Profits-Passion-Purpose/dp/0446576220/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1533668552&sr=8-1&keywords=delivering+happiness In it, there was a point, Zappos was growing very fast, but was very much cash strapped and was facing a crisis. But then they got a lifeline via a loan from Wells Fargo as the bank saw great potential in Zappos in its growing sales. In my opinion, Deerfield will play nice and negotiate. To accept stock as payment, they required an alternating set of future and present tranches to be paid. The company is not the same one they initially loaned to, plus they now have a three year sales. Refills are just barley at 1-1 over new RX, they should be closer to 3 and at least at 2:1. The TV campaign to grow new RX was a disaster when measuring at a cost per new rx. I have 20 shares long from leftovers of a long position in 2014. I have not traded short in a while in MNKD. My lotto calls expired. |
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Aug 7, 2018 15:09:11 GMT -5
agedhippie Not sure if you are short of MNKD. But to me your writing style is very similar to that of matt . What you wrote might be true. But in my view, your posts suggest that your thinking is very rigid and without imagination. Just like you had never though that Sanofi would pony up $50 million or so as settlement with Mannkind even though quite a few in this board thought that was very likely. I think you would not have thought Deerfield would loose the minimum cash hold last year to $10 million at one point. Similarly, I noticed that our famous bankruptcy expert matt yet again started to write about bankruptcy of Mannkind after he had wrote about it abundantly predicting mannkind to declare bankruptcy in thanksgiving 2016 and then by August 2017. My point is that yes, Deerfield has a covenant with mannkind that requires the latter to have a minimum cash hold of $25 million. Yes, Deerfield has the Danbury facility as collateral for its debt. However, given that mannkind has paid down the Deerfield debt to $25 million, mannkind has for the first time (since they secured their financing with Deerfield a few years back) the flexibility to do some major restructuring of the Deerfield debt, for example, by taking a new piece of debt from a new lender/investor, to take out the Deerfield debt entirely, or for the new lender/investor to take a second lien position to the danbury facility, with Deerfield remaining as the creditor taking the first/senior lien. Note that also Mannkind is growing its gross revenue/net revenue at 100% + annually. While we are not seeing hockey stick growth yet, 100% + annual growth rate is nothing to sneer at. I would say it is not so easy to find public companies whose main product has great market potential and its sales is growing at 100% + annually. I think Mannkind is on a similar growth track to that of Dexcom (at a market cap of around $8 billion currently) looking a few years back. As MK pointed out, when mannking is print $7/8 million a quarter by the fourth quarter, wall street will start to notice mannkind. For the members here, if you have not read the book “devering happiness”, I recommend it to you guys. It's a great book and very entertaining. www.amazon.com/Delivering-Happiness-Profits-Passion-Purpose/dp/0446576220/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1533668552&sr=8-1&keywords=delivering+happiness In it, there was a point, Zappos was growing very fast, but was very much cash strapped and was facing a crisis. But then they got a lifeline via a loan from Wells Fargo as the bank saw great potential in Zappos in its growing sales. In my opinion, Deerfield will play nice and negotiate. To accept stock as payment, they required an alternating set of future and present tranches to be paid. The company is not the same one they initially loaned to, plus they now have a three year sales. Refills are just barley at 1-1 over new RX, they should be closer to 3 and at least at 2:1. The TV campaign to grow new RX was a disaster when measuring at a cost per new rx. I have 20 shares long from leftovers of a long position in 2014. I have not traded short in a while in MNKD. My lotto calls expired. Well, Trader, sounds like you're not doing much trading in MNKD lately. Hmmm. |
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Aug 7, 2018 15:15:02 GMT -5
It appears we made a deal with the devil... It also looks as though our situation has been more difficult than any of us really knew.. Not sure what is going on now.. we seem to be left in the dark .. It seems to me that there’s more upside for Deerfield if they just get out of the way at this point and take the shares they have and sell them at much higher prices. Here's the problem with that, goyo, DF is in the business of taking certain risks, and then managing them so as to mitigate them somewhat - the risk you describe is pure market risk, like we take - that's not something they would be interested in with MNKD (or most others) at this point. |
|
|
|
Post by pat on Aug 7, 2018 15:23:49 GMT -5
part of me is on board with agedhippie. Deerfield could now be trying to extract as much ownership of MNKD as possible prior to flipping the switch for go time - basically restructuring whatever is outstanding and loaning us another 100mm.
It’s obvious that one or more trolls are prowling the board here trying to sow confusion. Must admit they are very clever and educated. This is sophisticated white collar crime in my book. Perpetrated by people of very low character. But they probably drive Tesla’s and hive five each other over expensive lunches, laughing the whole time.
Definitely not the type of thing my family has served and fought to protect. But that’s a free society I guess.
|
|
|
|
Post by lennymnkd on Aug 7, 2018 15:38:46 GMT -5
Not to mention aged hippies negative viewpoints a while back , believing cgm’s would never become of age / no pun intended 😀
|
|
|
|
Post by goyocafe on Aug 7, 2018 15:44:26 GMT -5
It seems to me that there’s more upside for Deerfield if they just get out of the way at this point and take the shares they have and sell them at much higher prices. Here's the problem with that, goyo, DF is in the business of taking certain risks, and then managing them so as to mitigate them somewhat - the risk you describe is pure market risk, like we take - that's not something they would be interested in with MNKD (or most others) at this point. Wouldn’t that suggest they also don’t want to be saddled with a bunch of assets that they then have to find a buyer for? If they don’t want to take market risks, they certainly don’t want to try to run a bio pharmaceutical company. |
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Aug 7, 2018 16:19:27 GMT -5
Here's the problem with that, goyo, DF is in the business of taking certain risks, and then managing them so as to mitigate them somewhat - the risk you describe is pure market risk, like we take - that's not something they would be interested in with MNKD (or most others) at this point. Wouldn’t that suggest they also don’t want to be saddled with a bunch of assets that they then have to find a buyer for? If they don’t want to take market risks, they certainly don’t want to try to run a bio pharmaceutical company. Certainly they don't, Goyo, and that's why exactly why I said "mitigate them somewhat." That takes the risk down some. Also, notice they've been able to get some shares, sell them and pay down the debt. |
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Aug 7, 2018 16:22:25 GMT -5
It seems to me that there’s more upside for Deerfield if they just get out of the way at this point and take the shares they have and sell them at much higher prices. Here's the problem with that, goyo, DF is in the business of taking certain risks, and then managing them so as to mitigate them somewhat - the risk you describe is pure market risk, like we take - that's not something they would be interested in with MNKD (or most others) at this point. quote: DF is in the business of taking certain risks, and then managing them so as to mitigate them somewhat question: Baba, because you are schooled in law; are there any limits as to behavior here? so I finance you and secure your assets as collateral. Then I start taking away your assets/finance while making money on them. Help me here Baba. there is allegation money was paid for information to proceed with the short. Illegal bribe. Your financer, who is being paid by you in the agreed terms, "MITIGATING?" help me here Baba. |
|
|
|
Post by lennymnkd on Aug 7, 2018 16:26:10 GMT -5
Look at Tesla / EVEN ELAN is going the rich Saudi route... your telling me me there is not a wealthy middle eastern investor that doesn’t want the prestige of being invested in part of this / doesn’t seem like a hard sell . They buy pices of art for outrageous sums ...
|
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Aug 7, 2018 16:34:50 GMT -5
Here's the problem with that, goyo, DF is in the business of taking certain risks, and then managing them so as to mitigate them somewhat - the risk you describe is pure market risk, like we take - that's not something they would be interested in with MNKD (or most others) at this point. quote: DF is in the business of taking certain risks, and then managing them so as to mitigate them somewhat question: Baba, because you are schooled in law; are there any limits as to behavior here? so I finance you and secure your assets as collateral. Then I start taking away your assets/finance while making money on them. Help me here Baba. there is allegation money was paid for information to proceed with the short. Illegal bribe.Your financer, who is being paid by you in the agreed terms, "MITIGATING?" help me here Baba. <iframe style="position: absolute; width: 28.88000000000011px; height: 6.819999999999993px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none;left: 15px; top: -5px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_36304072" scrolling="no" width="28.88000000000011" height="6.819999999999993"></iframe> <iframe style="position: absolute; width: 28.88px; height: 6.82px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 1379px; top: -5px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_84268969" scrolling="no" width="28.88000000000011" height="6.819999999999993"></iframe> <iframe style="position: absolute; width: 28.88px; height: 6.82px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 15px; top: 278px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_90299973" scrolling="no" width="28.88000000000011" height="6.819999999999993"></iframe> <iframe style="position: absolute; width: 28.88px; height: 6.82px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 1379px; top: 278px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_62799159" scrolling="no" width="28.88000000000011" height="6.819999999999993"></iframe> Not understanding your question, Peppy. Can you explain what the bolded portion? That would help. |
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Aug 7, 2018 16:39:59 GMT -5
yes baba, (I could not copy the quote.) this behavior, www.nytimes.com/2017/05/24/business/dealbook/five-accused-of-trading-illegally-on-health-policy-leaks.htmlThree current and former partners at Deerfield Management, a health care hedge fund firm, paid Mr. Blaszczak to provide inside information about policy decisions at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, leading to millions of dollars in illegal profits, federal prosecutors in Manhattan and securities regulators said. www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2017/comp-pr2017-109.pdfINFORMATION NOT RELEASEABLE TO THE PUBLIC UNLESS AUTHORIZED BY LAW: This information has not been publicly disclosed and may be privileged and confidential. It is for internal government use only and must not be disseminated, distributed, or copied to persons not authorized to receive the information. Unauthorized disclosure may result in prosecution to the full extent of the law. |
|
|
|
Post by madog365 on Aug 7, 2018 17:13:17 GMT -5
The logic is quite clear. The company absolutely must raise money over the next eight weeks or so and that will have to involve dilution given the revenue miss and the lack of assets to secure a loan. The hedge fund knows that the shares will effectively create a discount to the current price so there is an arbitrage there between the price and the discounted price. So the hedge fund piles in and the price drops, this is a bonus for the hedge fund since it adds to the margin in the arbitrage. I think the likely outcome is that Deerfield will provide the money at a price. They have first claim on the assets so they are covered, and they will want to get their warrants repriced. My bet would be that Deerfield buy stock at a small discount, and the warrants get repriced to the current price. Deerfield will make money on the stock arbitrage, and have a heap of cheap warrants to secure a short position. Not sure if you are short of MNKD. But to me your writing style is very similar to that of matt . What you wrote might be true. But in my view, your posts suggest that your thinking is very rigid and without imagination. Just like you had never though that Sanofi would pony up $50 million or so as settlement with Mannkind even though quite a few in this board thought that was very likely. I think you would not have thought Deerfield would loose the minimum cash hold last year to $10 million at one point. Similarly, I noticed that our famous bankruptcy expert matt yet again started to write about bankruptcy of Mannkind after he had wrote about it abundantly predicting mannkind to declare bankruptcy in thanksgiving 2016 and then by August 2017. My point is that yes, Deerfield has a covenant with mannkind that requires the latter to have a minimum cash hold of $25 million. Yes, Deerfield has the Danbury facility as collateral for its debt. However, given that mannkind has paid down the Deerfield debt to $25 million, mannkind has for the first time (since they secured their financing with Deerfield a few years back) the flexibility to do some major restructuring of the Deerfield debt, for example, by taking a new piece of debt from a new lender/investor, to take out the Deerfield debt entirely, or for the new lender/investor to take a second lien position to the danbury facility, with Deerfield remaining as the creditor taking the first/senior lien. Note that also Mannkind is growing its gross revenue/net revenue at 100% + annually. While we are not seeing hockey stick growth yet, 100% + annual growth rate is nothing to sneer at. I would say it is not so easy to find public companies whose main product has great market potential and its sales is growing at 100% + annually. I think Mannkind is on a similar growth track to that of Dexcom (at a market cap of around $8 billion currently) looking a few years back. As MK pointed out, when mannking is print $7/8 million a quarter by the fourth quarter, wall street will start to notice mannkind. For the members here, if you have not read the book “devering happiness”, I recommend it to you guys. It's a great book and very entertaining. www.amazon.com/Delivering-Happiness-Profits-Passion-Purpose/dp/0446576220/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1533668552&sr=8-1&keywords=delivering+happiness In it, there was a point, Zappos was growing very fast, but was very much cash strapped and was facing a crisis. But then they got a lifeline via a loan from Wells Fargo as the bank saw great potential in Zappos in its growing sales. "Then something happened that changed everything: a loan from Wells Fargo Bank. No longer did they have to sit down every week, deciding which vendors to pay and which to put off. The company was saved. Now, for the first time, they were ready to become profitable and grow." www.customerville.com/en/download/guides/zapposGlad you posted that, my commentary on Matt’s quarterly BK predictions got deleted multiple times. |
|
