|
Post by agedhippie on Sept 11, 2018 21:09:34 GMT -5
The basis of modelling is that you take what you know for sure and then build on that. Right now you know the cash position, the burn rate, the revenue growth rate, and what debt is falling due and can project that forwards. Then it gets to the part you are talking about, the maybes. First the high probability events; Brazil in Q1, India in H2, UT in Q1 and Q2 (upfront, and milestone). These are very likely to happen so add them in, the only question is the value for Brazil and India (I think both will be low. For Brazil because BIOMM don't have much money, India because they will want to see how it goes). Now it's the possibles. The warrants will get left until just before expiry because that's what you do with warrants (full disclosure - I trade SPAC warrants). Since these are professional investors they will short against the warrants to lock in the gain, Deerfield probably do the same with their $1.80 conversion rights, so the price needs to survive that combined shorting - I reckon it probably does so expect the warrant money late Q1, early Q2 (we will be able to see which from the Q1 10Q). I also think in Q2 or Q3 there may be another $10M upfront payment from UT for a second drug. Everything else is a low probability event in my mind and I would assign minimal value to it. Will this be 100% correct? No, but it should be accurate enough to get a feel of where the business may be going and that's what modelling is all about. You get a range in which you think things will probably fall. If you don't do this sort of exercise then you really should unless you intend to hold regardless in which case why even read SA since it would have to be an article of faith that it is wrong (LFD, and the lunatic fringe aside). So regarding the warrants, if warrant holders shorting, holder would want the spread in price to be as large as possible, correct? 14mm @ $2.38 exercisable between 10-11-18 and 4-10-19 so on this group of warrants, not much activity until late March / early April? Do you envision a point in time (when)where warrant holders drive up SP to max their gain? Why all the current pressure to suppress SP now other than to; make equity funding highly dilutive (I realize no need to issue equity currently) capture as much $$ as possible for short(s) looking to close out position sooner rather than later BK company Seems without all the effort to hold down SP, given recent good news and positive positioning for the future, it should be trading north of $3.25/share. The warrant is insurance against the short going badly wrong.It lets them short in the knowledge that they have a the shares backstopped if they called caught. Meanwhile they are free to rinse and repeat the spike we just saw. If the warrant is out of the money and cannot be used to underpin a short position they can still sell Calls against the warrant value make money that way. Mannkind has the option to make an offer to buy in those warrants. They can make an offer to buy them back at a premium, 20% over value usually gets a good response.
|
|
|
Post by joeypotsandpans on Sept 12, 2018 18:47:11 GMT -5
An excerpt of an exchange of comments, anyone see anything wrong with this picture or line of thinking?
user 37738526 Comments121 | + Follow Spence, I don't truly think warrants or the current script or even financial condition matters at all. What I think truly matters is if an idea is better, it will replace the one that isn't as good. This may seem foolish, but for MANY YEARS I fought cordless headphones, because I didn't like charging them. Yet, I now have cordless headphones on my head. Why? Cordless is better. All I know is if inhaling is better than injecting, inhaling will sooner or later replace injecting. 12 Sep 2018, 02:01 PM Reply0Like Spencer Osborne, Contributor Comments14888 | + Follow Author’s reply » User... Betamax vs VHS Brita vs zero Blue ray vs hd DVD Hardie vs vinyl Rhino vs paint. Aluminum truck body vs steel Solar vs turbine Fiber mesh vs welded wire mesh Epoxy floor vs sheet rubber The list can keep going. Another factor is cost. Cost has to be right 12 Sep 2018, 02:41 PM Reply0Like user 37738526 Comments121 | + Follow When I invested into NFLX back in 2008-2009, I was told the same thing. 12 Sep 2018, 03:05 PM Reply0Like Spencer Osborne, Contributor Comments14888 | + Follow Author’s reply » Mnkd is not netflix 12 Sep 2018, 03:45 PM Reply0Like user 37738526 Comments121 | + Follow I never said NFLX was MNKD. Yet, I was told by a friend that NFLX didn't have any money back then and that CSTR did. He invested into CSTR, I invested into NFLX. I am now a multi-millionaire and he is still a broke doctor in debt to his eye balls. 12 Sep 2018, 05:45 PM Reply
|
|
|
SA
Sept 12, 2018 19:22:51 GMT -5
sky likes this
Post by robbmo on Sept 12, 2018 19:22:51 GMT -5
I think it is the common misconception that "insulin is insulin", which is in the process of being corrected. If "insulin is insulin", I think it would be spot on. However, there are some key differences between SC and Afrezza that are being overlooked, IMHO.
|
|
|
SA
Sept 13, 2018 10:42:26 GMT -5
Post by agedhippie on Sept 13, 2018 10:42:26 GMT -5
I think it is the common misconception that "insulin is insulin", which is in the process of being corrected. If "insulin is insulin", I think it would be spot on. However, there are some key differences between SC and Afrezza that are being overlooked, IMHO. I don't think "insulin is insulin" is a common misconception in the diabetes community. You will find that people have definite feelings about various insulins (look at the fuss when Express Scripts said they would only cover Humalog and not Novolog). There is not a lot of insulin hopping to the extent that you get people still on Regular insulin because that is what they know and are comfortable with. Then again if you are happy with your results why change?
|
|
|
Post by mango on Sept 13, 2018 10:50:25 GMT -5
I think it is the common misconception that "insulin is insulin", which is in the process of being corrected. If "insulin is insulin", I think it would be spot on. However, there are some key differences between SC and Afrezza that are being overlooked, IMHO. I don't think "insulin is insulin" is a common misconception in the diabetes community. You will find that people have definite feelings about various insulins (look at the fuss when Express Scripts said they would only cover Humalog and not Novolog). There is not a lot of insulin hopping to the extent that you get people still on Regular insulin because that is what they know and are comfortable with. Then again if you are happy with your results why change? Insulin aspart isn't insulin. It is an altered foreign protein. It does not mimic insulin and its amino acid sequence and molecular weight does not match that of insulin. Afrezza is Human insulin and matches insulin's amino acid sequence and molecular weight because it is the exact same thing. It behaves like insulin too because it is insulin. Aspart and Afrezza are two different things. Only one is insulin.
|
|
|
Post by kite on Sept 13, 2018 10:52:20 GMT -5
I don't think "insulin is insulin" is a common misconception in the diabetes community. You will find that people have definite feelings about various insulins (look at the fuss when Express Scripts said they would only cover Humalog and not Novolog). There is not a lot of insulin hopping to the extent that you get people still on Regular insulin because that is what they know and are comfortable with. Then again if you are happy with your results why change? Insulin aspart isn't insulin. It is an altered foreign protein. It does not mimic insulin and its amino acid sequence and molecular weight does not match that of insulin. Afrezza is Human insulin and matches insulin's amino acid sequence and molecular weight because it is the exact same thing. It behaves like insulin too because it is insulin. Aspart and Afrezza are two different things. Only one is insulin. That sounds crystal clear to me. What don't doctors understand?
|
|
|
SA
Sept 13, 2018 19:52:06 GMT -5
Post by agedhippie on Sept 13, 2018 19:52:06 GMT -5
Insulin aspart isn't insulin. It is an altered foreign protein. It does not mimic insulin and its amino acid sequence and molecular weight does not match that of insulin. Afrezza is Human insulin and matches insulin's amino acid sequence and molecular weight because it is the exact same thing. It behaves like insulin too because it is insulin. Aspart and Afrezza are two different things. Only one is insulin. That sounds crystal clear to me. What don't doctors understand? Doctors don't understand why anyone thinks this is even vaguely relevant. They have been using RAA for nearly quarter of a century and nobody wants to go back to injected human insulin, there is a reason for that. What they have seen in that time is that the effect is the same as human insulin so why should they care where it comes from (the answer BTW is genetically modified E Coli the same as Afrezza). RAA is human insulin with one amino acid swapped to reduce the formation of hexamers and so speed absorption. It behaves exactly the same as injected human insulin except it has a faster onset and clearance.
|
|