|
Post by joeypotsandpans on Jun 21, 2019 12:38:29 GMT -5
Joey, please wear an Afrezza hat when you get to the main event final table 😊 I’ll be rooting for you Thanks!! Should I get to the final table and knowing that it would be televised for hours with cameras fixated...I'm thinking I would be more in the Conor Daly mode, only I will be totally visible titrating live at the table (are you listening Mike , lol).
|
|
|
Post by mytakeonit on Jun 21, 2019 12:56:47 GMT -5
Well Vroom Vroom then ... go for it and Good Luck joey !!!
But, that's mytakeonit
|
|
|
Post by joeypotsandpans on Jun 21, 2019 13:11:26 GMT -5
Well Vroom Vroom then ... go for it and Good Luck joey !!! But, that's mytakeonit Thanks! you know from your perspective it would be a tough decision, the entry fee for the Main Event is 10K, you would probably opt to buy 10K worth more shares
|
|
|
Post by mytakeonit on Jun 21, 2019 13:14:38 GMT -5
Did more than double that the other day. I don't play poker so I need something to spend $$$ on. Ha! Will be in Vegas in August.
But, that's mytakeonit
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Jun 21, 2019 18:40:54 GMT -5
I don’t believe this is an idle threat and I believe that there are some powerful institutional backers involved in a shakeup of MannKind. I also want to be clear that I have no definitive proof other than my contacts, but I am of the opinion the management has erred in not seriously evaluating the present sentiment of shareholders - both retail and institutional. I hope this can be resolved ASAP. All of the other wild stuff that MK has said that didn't come true (which was all of it?) doesn't make you wonder, just a little, whether it is another idle threat?
You, sports, I, and others have been here since before FDA approval. We've had, technically, 4 CEOs in that time. Hakan Edstrom, Al Mann (briefly), Matt Pfeffer, and Mike Castagna.
The stock has been under attack since the day after FDA approval. SOMEONE (maybe several someones) wants to deny capital to Mannkind. I don't know who they are or their agenda, but I've seen their actions. The SI is often unusually high and there have been times on the SHO list. DTCC covering that level of naked shorting effectively dilutes the stock. The stock price charts provide the proof. There will be people that will say that it is the product (Afrezza) and management that are to blame for the low stock price, and all I will say is it isn't the whole story and nobody can convince me differently.
Mike Castagna and his management team, have, unequivocally, done a better job than the 3 previous CEOs.
Hakan (and Al) got screwed both by circumstances (and design?) and an inadequately buttressed global marketing agreement.
Nobody on this board anticipated UTHR and TreT. Matt and team did not bring India, Brazil, UTHR, TreT, and Afrezza sales that eclipse Sanofi with a fraction of the resources. AND, nobody, Wild Bill included, has said how much of the weekly Rx is from VDEX. If it's 90%, Wild Bill and MK may have a point. But since there's been no data and because Wild Bill looks so frighteningly desperate, I'm skeptical.
I have a couple decades of experience estimating requirements, putting plans in place, and making sure money gets spent to make things happen and have tremendous respect for what Doctors Castagna and Kendall have achieved and are achieving on a shoestring budget with an extraordinarily difficult environment for acquiring operating capital. I consider an attack on them is an effort to derail the progress that's being made and an attack on Mannkind and Mannkind shareholders.
I respect your opinion but differ on a few key points: Alfred Mann, founder and longtime CEO ran a biotech development company. Hakan Edstrom was largely responsible for development of the Afrezza we know today, including the change in inhaler design and a successful and efficient manufacturing process. It was only natural that Mann tapped the former COO because nobody understood the drug/device better. When Sanofi terminated the distribution agreement, I was surprised that Mann didn't reopen negotiations with Glaxo-Smith-Kline. Frankly, I think that they offended Al with their brashness (the British can be almost as arrogant as the French). So Al and the BoD decided to take the risk of going it alone primarily, I think, because that is exactly what Mann had done with the mini-pump that now is branded by Medtronic when they first low-balled him. His thinking was that MannKind would drive sales of Afrezza to a point where potential buyers would be convinced of its market viability. Hakan himself knew he wasn't suited for that kind of company (he told me as much) and that Al had appointed him CEO largely out of gratitude for helping him develop a breakthrough in insulin. Al Mann then turned to Matt Pfeffer to take the CEO position. I have the utmost respect for Pfeffer and for those detractors who love to rip the man, it should be noted that one of Matt's first major decisions was to hire Michael Castagna to set up the infrastructure necessary for MannKind to sell Afrezza. It was an excellent choice for a Commercial Officer. What very few shareholders know is that it was Matt Pfeffer who sought David Kendall for the new CMO (the current CMO specialized in oncology).
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Jun 21, 2019 19:12:29 GMT -5
Michael Castagna closed the deal on Kendall after he became CEO and, while he has never publicly taken all the credit, he also never refuted the belief the the hiring of our reputable CMO was all his idea (to his credit).
Pfeffer hired Castagna and was targeting Dr. Kendall. So how did Castagna wind up becoming CEO? I believe that was largely maneuvered by Castagna, himself, convincing the Mann Group, who was tight with the Board of Directors, that he was more qualified than Matt to be CEO.
My opinion as a shareholder, after a couple years of evaluating his performance, is that Castagna is not qualified to be CEO. He throws a great curve ball, but is unable to get the ball across the plate. Do you think Pfeffer couldn't have secured deals with Brazil and India (by the way, if you haven't noticed, Cipla is currently in a severe tailspin in drug sales and is on the verge of total collapse). Pfeffer would have got China, Mexico and Europe.
IMO, castagna took advantage of the Mann family to his advantage and hoped to "learn on the fly" once he replaced Pfeffer. His decision to reward himself and the team he put together seems clearly based on the hope securing the loyalty of his team rather than rewarding them for performance.
I stop here by simply saying that Alfred Mann was a legend, Hakan Edstrom was a brilliant product developer and Matthew Pfeffer was 100% committed to bring Al Mann's vision to reality. As CEO, he hired excellent people and was executing his plan to hire more when Castagna made his bold move against Pfeffer.
I have the the utmost respect for the first three CEOs. I've lost all respect for Michael Castagna. In my opinion he will either destroy this company or, under his inept leadership, the company will be sold for a fraction of its value.
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Jun 21, 2019 19:41:04 GMT -5
"In my opinion he will either destroy this company or, under his inept leadership, the company will be sold for a fraction of its value." Holdem, I'm hoping for the latter alternative, with one minor condition: that the sale is for a fraction of your valuation of the company and not mine.
|
|
|
Post by cedafuntennis on Jun 21, 2019 19:57:55 GMT -5
MK......... Follow MNKD ($1.18) - Well it appears that management did not have the professional inclination to address valid concerns raised by Bill and Vdex - as I had expected. As a result, it’s time to raise the stakes and pressure here a bit. Some key institutional investors will now hear a message pertaining to management re-alignment with shareholder interests and the opportunity offered by overt consideration of strategic alternatives regarding Afrezza - strategic partnerships and also new novel approaches such as Vdex which aim to address the fundamental issues of unsustainably high customer acquisition costs and lack of financial funding. Could go on more, but will be looking to bring money to the table over the next couple of quarters to shake things up. If that means heads roll in management, that is their problem. They, not I, have brought this upon themselves. Will also expand the effort to professional proxy services such as ISS and others to go into future votes with significant momentum to build on the recent low vote on Say on Pay....Nothing personal, but this is still a $40 per share company in terms of mid term potential, but a $2 a share CEO and IR duo. Either the company changes or they change. No other way to unlock value. #MNKD 38m Michael Kovacocy Michael KovacocyAnd if this eventually results in a change of management, I will personally look to lobby new management to seek legal action on behalf of MannKind against current management for recent grants of bonuses and raises. Clawback will be a theme. Maybe nothing happens. But I can guarantee one thing - if this ends up with heads rolling and management being replaced, I will put 100% effort into making sure any excessive pay is coughed up by the CEO and gang. They should NEVER have done what they did, and they should be held to account for it. While i think that Mike has done a very good job overall (except for the marketing effort and the cash drain it caused at the expense of increasing patient retention and education), I 100% agree with the greed in forcing the salary raise. Undeserved at this stage but it was approved by the shareholders... Don't know what legal remedy we have on that front except for voting out the entire BOD.
|
|
|
Post by hellodolly on Jun 21, 2019 20:05:18 GMT -5
MK......... Follow MNKD ($1.18) - Well it appears that management did not have the professional inclination to address valid concerns raised by Bill and Vdex - as I had expected. As a result, it’s time to raise the stakes and pressure here a bit. Some key institutional investors will now hear a message pertaining to management re-alignment with shareholder interests and the opportunity offered by overt consideration of strategic alternatives regarding Afrezza - strategic partnerships and also new novel approaches such as Vdex which aim to address the fundamental issues of unsustainably high customer acquisition costs and lack of financial funding. Could go on more, but will be looking to bring money to the table over the next couple of quarters to shake things up. If that means heads roll in management, that is their problem. They, not I, have brought this upon themselves. Will also expand the effort to professional proxy services such as ISS and others to go into future votes with significant momentum to build on the recent low vote on Say on Pay....Nothing personal, but this is still a $40 per share company in terms of mid term potential, but a $2 a share CEO and IR duo. Either the company changes or they change. No other way to unlock value. #MNKD 38m Michael Kovacocy Michael KovacocyAnd if this eventually results in a change of management, I will personally look to lobby new management to seek legal action on behalf of MannKind against current management for recent grants of bonuses and raises. Clawback will be a theme. Maybe nothing happens. But I can guarantee one thing - if this ends up with heads rolling and management being replaced, I will put 100% effort into making sure any excessive pay is coughed up by the CEO and gang. They should NEVER have done what they did, and they should be held to account for it. While i think that Mike has done a very good job overall (except for the marketing effort and the cash drain it caused at the expense of increasing patient retention and education), I 100% agree with the greed in forcing the salary raise. Undeserved at this stage but it was approved by the shareholders... Don't know what legal remedy we have on that front except for voting out the entire BOD. Kovacocy says he will be searching or discussing (can't call his exact words) "for legal remedies" (his exact words) on that matter. He's full of hot air. Has no clue and his statement on the matter says it all but, we have people who are willing to place their trust in him. Oh well.
|
|
|
Post by prcgorman2 on Jun 21, 2019 20:15:08 GMT -5
mnholdem, good post, but Mike angling for the job of CEO doesn’t bother me, and Matt losing the job of CEO doesn’t bother me either. I do agree that Matt P appeared to be genuinely committed to honoring Al’s legacy and making Mannkind a success if he could. And I think Matt was a pretty good CFO and appreciate his stewardship in the interim until Mike took the reins. I also appreciate that he recognized and hired talent. Maybe he would have closed the deal with Dr. Kendall too. And maybe he would have found a better Indian partner than Cipla. But I, and apparently the Board of Directors (who appear to be competent and I’m grateful we have Kent Kresa as our chairman) lost confidence in Matt P as compared to what they saw was usefully being accomplished by Mike. This may end up being a woefully painful comparison for me to remember having made (in the future), but Steve Jobs was well known for being a gigantic egotistical expletive. He was also a briliant CEO who made many enemies. Ego doesn’t bother me. VDEX Bill’s ego doesn’t concern me. Mannkind was on extremely shaky ground, and has made provable, measured, progress. Could someone else have done better? Could Matt have done better? We’ll never know. It’s water under the bridge. I’m conservative. I don’t like changing horses in midstream (you can drown), and I believe you dance with the one what brung you. Maybe Matt was that dance partner, but it isn’t clear to me that’s true. What I see is India, Brazil, UTHR, TreT, and improved and improving Afrezza sales under Mike, and possibly, if we can hope SO is correct in his guesses, a brillian restructure of debt with useful injection of runway operating capital. You, and Sports have succeeded in making me uncomfortable (not that I can ever get too comfortable with this investment) because of your tenure and steadfast positive contributions and I don’t like being a respectful opposition, but apparently I’m there. I hope you’re wrong in your opinion of Mike’s competence.
|
|
|
Post by compound26 on Jun 21, 2019 20:15:12 GMT -5
Michael Castagna closed the deal on Kendall after he became CEO and, while he has never publicly taken all the credit, he also never refuted the belief the the hiring of our reputable CMO was all his idea (to his credit). Pfeffer hired Castagna and was targeting Dr. Kendall. So how did Castagna wind up becoming CEO? I believe that was largely maneuvered by Castagna, himself, convincing the Mann Group, who was tight with the Board of Directors, that he was more qualified than Matt to be CEO. My opinion as a shareholder, after a couple years of evaluating his performance, is that Castagna is not qualified to be CEO. He throws a great curve ball, but is unable to get the ball across the plate. Do you think Pfeffer couldn't have secured deals with Brazil and India (by the way, if you haven't noticed, Cipla is currently in a severe tailspin in drug sales and is on the verge of total collapse). Pfeffer would have got China, Mexico and Europe. IMO, castagna took advantage of the Mann family to his advantage and hoped to "learn on the fly" once he replaced Pfeffer. His decision to reward himself and the team he put together seems clearly based on the hope securing the loyalty of his team rather than rewarding them for performance. I stop here by simply saying that Alfred Mann was a legend, Hakan Edstrom was a brilliant product developer and Matthew Pfeffer was 100% committed to bring Al Mann's vision to reality. As CEO, he hired excellent people and was executing his plan to hire more when Castagna made his bold move against Pfeffer. I have the the utmost respect for the first three CEOs. I've lost all respect for Michael Castagna. In my opinion he will either destroy this company or, under his inept leadership, the company will be sold for a fraction of its value. I would respectfully disagree. I will not comment on the personality or personal characters of any of them as I am not close enough to comment on any of them. However, based on their performance in their respective tenure as CEO as Mannkind, MC clearly out-performed each of Matt and Hakan. Hakan's performance as a CEO was indeed awful. He did not do anything while Sanofi was slowly killing the Sanofi Afrezza launch. The only impression I have with respect to him was that painful plea for partners on the quarterly conference call. Matt indeed saved the company by choosing to get back Afrezza and go it alone and then negotiated settlement with Sanofi to get $50 million cash settlement (and some additional forgiveness of debt). Matt also signed the Receptor Life deal, which so far has yielded not much. MC on the other hand, has so far achieved quite a few things, the UT deal (worth at least $100 + million), the $6 offering (bring in $50 million at a very good offering price), growing Afrezza sales significantly (okay, not fast enough to us shareholders, but we are at weekly sales of $1.1 million today vs the Sanofi high water of $0.34 million, with a sales of 75 people (which is about 1/7 of that of Sanofi), advanced trials (STAT and recent trials), improved Afrezza titration, etc.. There are certainly blunders by MC. However, Matt was acting as CEO for about one and a half years. MC has been CEO for about two years. From my perspective, during their respective tenure, so far MC has scored in quite a few more fronts than Matt.
|
|
|
Post by golfeveryday on Jun 21, 2019 20:26:38 GMT -5
Michael Castagna closed the deal on Kendall after he became CEO and, while he has never publicly taken all the credit, he also never refuted the belief the the hiring of our reputable CMO was all his idea (to his credit). Pfeffer hired Castagna and was targeting Dr. Kendall. So how did Castagna wind up becoming CEO? I believe that was largely maneuvered by Castagna, himself, convincing the Mann Group, who was tight with the Board of Directors, that he was more qualified than Matt to be CEO. My opinion as a shareholder, after a couple years of evaluating his performance, is that Castagna is not qualified to be CEO. He throws a great curve ball, but is unable to get the ball across the plate. Do you think Pfeffer couldn't have secured deals with Brazil and India (by the way, if you haven't noticed, Cipla is currently in a severe tailspin in drug sales and is on the verge of total collapse). Pfeffer would have got China, Mexico and Europe. IMO, castagna took advantage of the Mann family to his advantage and hoped to "learn on the fly" once he replaced Pfeffer. His decision to reward himself and the team he put together seems clearly based on the hope securing the loyalty of his team rather than rewarding them for performance. I stop here by simply saying that Alfred Mann was a legend, Hakan Edstrom was a brilliant product developer and Matthew Pfeffer was 100% committed to bring Al Mann's vision to reality. As CEO, he hired excellent people and was executing his plan to hire more when Castagna made his bold move against Pfeffer. I have the the utmost respect for the first three CEOs. I've lost all respect for Michael Castagna. In my opinion he will either destroy this company or,  under his inept leadership, the company will be sold for a fraction of its value. great post Mnholdem. I’ve felt this way since the beginning of his tenure. Never felt good about him. I was appalled when people were voting him CEO of the year.
|
|
|
Post by awesomo on Jun 21, 2019 20:27:18 GMT -5
mnholdem, good post, but Mike angling for the job of CEO doesn’t bother me, and Matt losing the job of CEO doesn’t bother me either. I do agree that Matt P appeared to be genuinely committed to honoring Al’s legacy and making Mannkind a success if he could. And I think Matt was a pretty good CFO and appreciate his stewardship in the interim until Mike took the reins. I also appreciate that he recognized and hired talent. Maybe he would have closed the deal with Dr. Kendall too. And maybe he would have found a better Indian partner than Cipla. But I, and apparently the Board of Directors (who appear to be competent and I’m grateful we have Kent Kresa as our chairman) lost confidence in Matt P as compared to what they saw was usefully being accomplished by Mike. This may end up being a woefully painful comparison for me to remember having made (in the future), but Steve Jobs was well known for being a gigantic egotistical expletive. He was also a briliant CEO who made many enemies. Ego doesn’t bother me. VDEX Bill’s ego doesn’t concern me. Mannkind was on extremely shaky ground, and has made provable, measured, progress. Could someone else have done better? Could Matt have done better? We’ll never know. It’s water under the bridge. I’m conservative. I don’t like changing horses in midstream (you can drown), and I believe you dance with the one what brung you. Maybe Matt was that dance partner, but it isn’t clear to me that’s true. What I see is India, Brazil, UTHR, TreT, and improved and improving Afrezza sales under Mike, and possibly, if we can hope SO is correct in his guesses, a brillian restructure of debt with useful injection of runway operating capital. You, and Sports have succeeded in making me uncomfortable (not that I can ever get too comfortable with this investment) because of your tenure and steadfast positive contributions and I don’t like being a respectful opposition, but apparently I’m there. I hope you’re wrong in your opinion of Mike’s competence. Steve Jobs also took a salary of $1 as CEO from 1997 to 2011 when he returned and turned Apple around because he was that committed and convinced in the company and his ability to get the job done. His pay was completely 100% equity. Compare that to what Castagna and management just did, giving themselves raises while shareholders are being gutted and the company is financially unstable.
|
|
|
Post by prcgorman2 on Jun 21, 2019 20:40:06 GMT -5
I don’t know what to say about the raises and bonuses other than I’ve seen similar kinds of behavior from other companies and near as I can tell, it’s based on pre-negotiated performance targets that have been agreed to by the Board. Certainly, nobody can argue that management doesn’t deserve to be paid, and feel free to look across the industry and provide useful examples that show this compensation was an egregious exception. I doubt that will be easy to do. My daughter works for a small pharma company and her management (Dr.s) are extremely well paid too. It’s not surprising. These degrees aren’t earned at a community college. As for the stock options, complaining about that is just plain silly. It’s funny money. I’ve been given stock options and plenty ended up worthless except as a tax write off. These costs are not material to the operation of the company. Jobs taking $1 was shrewd, but it was for a company he’d already been CEO of and which had already made him and many others billionaires. For all I know MC is still paying off student loans. So, I’m ambivalent about the pay. It’s caused a lot of fussing, so I might be under-reacting. Still not very worried. If they fail to earn their pay, we and they know what will happen, sooner or later.
|
|
|
Post by sportsrancho on Jun 21, 2019 20:45:02 GMT -5
mnholdem, good post, but Mike angling for the job of CEO doesn’t bother me, and Matt losing the job of CEO doesn’t bother me either. I do agree that Matt P appeared to be genuinely committed to honoring Al’s legacy and making Mannkind a success if he could. And I think Matt was a pretty good CFO and appreciate his stewardship in the interim until Mike took the reins. I also appreciate that he recognized and hired talent. Maybe he would have closed the deal with Dr. Kendall too. And maybe he would have found a better Indian partner than Cipla. But I, and apparently the Board of Directors (who appear to be competent and I’m grateful we have Kent Kresa as our chairman) lost confidence in Matt P as compared to what they saw was usefully being accomplished by Mike. This may end up being a woefully painful comparison for me to remember having made (in the future), but Steve Jobs was well known for being a gigantic egotistical expletive. He was also a briliant CEO who made many enemies. Ego doesn’t bother me. VDEX Bill’s ego doesn’t concern me. Mannkind was on extremely shaky ground, and has made provable, measured, progress. Could someone else have done better? Could Matt have done better? We’ll never know. It’s water under the bridge. I’m conservative. I don’t like changing horses in midstream (you can drown), and I believe you dance with the one what brung you. Maybe Matt was that dance partner, but it isn’t clear to me that’s true. What I see is India, Brazil, UTHR, TreT, and improved and improving Afrezza sales under Mike, and possibly, if we can hope SO is correct in his guesses, a brillian restructure of debt with useful injection of runway operating capital. You, and Sports have succeeded in making me uncomfortable (not that I can ever get too comfortable with this investment) because of your tenure and steadfast positive contributions and I don’t like being a respectful opposition, but apparently I’m there. I hope you’re wrong in your opinion of Mike’s competence. Steve Jobs also took a salary of $1 as CEO from 1997 to 2011 when he returned and turned Apple around because he was that committed and convinced in the company and his ability to get the job done. His pay was completely 100% equity. Compare that to what Castagna and management just did, giving themselves raises while shareholders are being gutted and the company is financially unstable. I hear from a lot of shareholders and this is what lost their trust, they’re still long, they still want Mannkind to win but it hurt them, it hurt the company when they did that.
|
|