|
|
Post by traderdennis on Jul 22, 2019 23:41:30 GMT -5
What makes perfect sense is Afrezza revenues are growing milestone payments are coming in and more partnerships are pending. What dosent make sense is our current PPS. But if theres one thing you can count on is change. Let me break it down for you. MNKD got a deal from Deerfield in 2013 for $160M with heavy Covenants. Basically Deerfield locked up MNKD's IP, Plant/Facilities and potential FDA Approval of Afrezza as collateral. MNKD had gone thru 2 CRLs so Deerfield was protecting themselves. Now the terms were probably amended to allow MNKD to partner with Sanofi but when that deal DIED, Deerfield slammed down hard on MNKD. Now Deerfield made a ton of profit on the deal, probably in the neighborhood of $350 Million in total which included sales milestones. So the SHORTS knew this and SHORTED MNKD from $50 a share. They alone made about $150MM. They knew as long as Deerfield held the collateral MNKD hands would be tied and couldn't do anything until the debt was paid off. Well that time is NEAR and MNKD is about to payoff Deerfield, Refinance their existing debt and get additional capital - probably $100 - $150MM. Once that happens or should I say soon before that happens the SHORTS will start to cover and the stock will rise. MNKD should be able to get a MUCH BETTER Debt Deal because they are a much stronger company. They have an approved FDA drug, Rising Revenues >50% YOY, a Salesforce (allbeit small), several new partners (UTHR is huge), 8 pipeline drugs and international sales. We should know by Aug. 31st or before. My hunch is within the next 2 weeks. MNKD wants to get rid of Deerfield and Mike is catching a lot of heat of the $1 stock price. Another scenario is MNKD could partner with a Marketing Partner for a huge Upfront Fee of $600MM (plus royalties) and pay off ALL DEBT and use that money for R&D plus sign new partners for their pipeline. UTHR has another molecule in advanced development and there's talk about EPI being back on the table. MNKD only has 75 salespeople and they need an army to hit the Type 2 Market. Especially now with all of the chatter about inhaled insulin being prescribed early in the Type 2 Diagnosis and other studies that Inhaled Insulin could prevent Dementia and Alzheimers. That would be HUGE and I'm sure Mike will work that into the negotiations. Both scenarios work for me. So a lot could happen soon..... Your metric are just fantasy. 6mm per quarter in revenue 2018. Not even close to 9 this year. Shorts have made well over 1/2 billion if not more. There was well over 100 million short shares when the price was 50 per share. You forgot to account for the reverse split. Deerfield loaned Mnkd 160mm when projected revenue of Afrezza was up to 1 billion per year. Afrezza has issues getting to 25 million in 2018. At the current growth 2020 will not make 50 million. The deal will be downright ugly when it comes. |
|
|
|
Post by sellhighdrinklow on Jul 22, 2019 23:55:03 GMT -5
Let me break it down for you. MNKD got a deal from Deerfield in 2013 for $160M with heavy Covenants. Basically Deerfield locked up MNKD's IP, Plant/Facilities and potential FDA Approval of Afrezza as collateral. MNKD had gone thru 2 CRLs so Deerfield was protecting themselves. Now the terms were probably amended to allow MNKD to partner with Sanofi but when that deal DIED, Deerfield slammed down hard on MNKD. Now Deerfield made a ton of profit on the deal, probably in the neighborhood of $350 Million in total which included sales milestones. So the SHORTS knew this and SHORTED MNKD from $50 a share. They alone made about $150MM. They knew as long as Deerfield held the collateral MNKD hands would be tied and couldn't do anything until the debt was paid off. Well that time is NEAR and MNKD is about to payoff Deerfield, Refinance their existing debt and get additional capital - probably $100 - $150MM. Once that happens or should I say soon before that happens the SHORTS will start to cover and the stock will rise. MNKD should be able to get a MUCH BETTER Debt Deal because they are a much stronger company. They have an approved FDA drug, Rising Revenues >50% YOY, a Salesforce (allbeit small), several new partners (UTHR is huge), 8 pipeline drugs and international sales. We should know by Aug. 31st or before. My hunch is within the next 2 weeks. MNKD wants to get rid of Deerfield and Mike is catching a lot of heat of the $1 stock price. Another scenario is MNKD could partner with a Marketing Partner for a huge Upfront Fee of $600MM (plus royalties) and pay off ALL DEBT and use that money for R&D plus sign new partners for their pipeline. UTHR has another molecule in advanced development and there's talk about EPI being back on the table. MNKD only has 75 salespeople and they need an army to hit the Type 2 Market. Especially now with all of the chatter about inhaled insulin being prescribed early in the Type 2 Diagnosis and other studies that Inhaled Insulin could prevent Dementia and Alzheimers. That would be HUGE and I'm sure Mike will work that into the negotiations. Both scenarios work for me. So a lot could happen soon..... Your metric are just fantasy. 6mm per quarter in revenue 2018. Not even close to 9 this year. Shorts have made well over 1/2 billion if not more. There was well over 100 million short shares when the price was 50 per share. You forgot to account for the reverse split. Deerfield loaned Mnkd 160mm when projected revenue of Afrezza was up to 1 billion per year. Afrezza has issues getting to 25 million in 2018. At the current growth 2020 will not make 50 million. The deal will be downright ugly when it comes. Not many listen to your negative pontificating spin anyway. Have a great night ! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 22, 2019 23:57:19 GMT -5
You have a sense of humor.....You mean to tell me Deerfield who BOTTOMFEEDS off of desperate companies loaned MNKD $160M based on anticipated revenues of $1 BILLION??? MNKD received 2 CRLs and had not submitted their THIRD Filing when they entered into the agreement so there is no way ANYONE was expecting $1 Billion coming from a TWICE FAILED FILING. Just to entertain your theory IF Deerfield was expecting MNKD to hit $1 Billion in Revenues then why were the COVENANTS so HARSH? Makes no sense.
|
|
|
|
Post by tingtongtung on Jul 23, 2019 2:33:11 GMT -5
I'm hoping for a couple hundred million from somewhere. If we do, I'd like them to announce a stock buyback program. Doesn't have to be huge, but maybe $25 million or a goal of 5% of the float. Something with meat on it. Shorts will HAVE to take notice, maybe even leave forever. Long holders will finally stop bleeding, etc. JMHO I don't know if they can even do that, legally, but I'd announce it first, then make them stop me at these low prices. Seriously? Buy back shares? Why stop there, why not pay dividend too? |
|
|
|
Post by rtmd on Jul 23, 2019 5:42:15 GMT -5
You have a sense of humor.....You mean to tell me Deerfield who BOTTOMFEEDS off of desperate companies loaned MNKD $160M based on anticipated revenues of $1 BILLION??? MNKD received 2 CRLs and had not submitted their THIRD Filing when they entered into the agreement so there is no way ANYONE was expecting $1 Billion coming from a TWICE FAILED FILING. Just to entertain your theory IF Deerfield was expecting MNKD to hit $1 Billion in Revenues then why were the COVENANTS so HARSH? Makes no sense. Initially, from reading the 10-Q, there was nothing "harsh" about the loans or any covenants: "On July 1, 2013, the Company entered into the Facility Agreement, which permitted it to borrow $160.0 million through the issuance of the 2019 notes, $100.0 million of which were converted into shares of the Company’s common stock during 2013 and 2014." If anything, they've been very liberal about arranging the repayment schedule of the loans. The only "harsh" thing I see is the 25 million cash required at the end of each quarter. While initially it was understood to protect the Deerfield interest, now that MNKD no longer owes that much, it doesn't make any sense to maintain the requirement. As far as anticipating a billion in revenues, I recall reading a presentation from 2013 by the former CEO, Hakan Edstrom, where he described in detail the sophisticated analysis that Mannkind had done which predicted 200-300 million dollars in afrezza revenues just the first year. |
|
|
|
Post by sportsrancho on Jul 23, 2019 6:04:21 GMT -5
Sophisticated analysis ...where does this come from? This is why nobody believes them.. ever heard of under promise, over deliver.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 23, 2019 7:25:44 GMT -5
You have a sense of humor.....You mean to tell me Deerfield who BOTTOMFEEDS off of desperate companies loaned MNKD $160M based on anticipated revenues of $1 BILLION??? MNKD received 2 CRLs and had not submitted their THIRD Filing when they entered into the agreement so there is no way ANYONE was expecting $1 Billion coming from a TWICE FAILED FILING. Just to entertain your theory IF Deerfield was expecting MNKD to hit $1 Billion in Revenues then why were the COVENANTS so HARSH? Makes no sense. Initially, from reading the 10-Q, there was nothing "harsh" about the loans or any covenants: "On July 1, 2013, the Company entered into the Facility Agreement, which permitted it to borrow $160.0 million through the issuance of the 2019 notes, $100.0 million of which were converted into shares of the Company’s common stock during 2013 and 2014." If anything, they've been very liberal about arranging the repayment schedule of the loans. The only "harsh" thing I see is the 25 million cash required at the end of each quarter. While initially it was understood to protect the Deerfield interest, now that MNKD no longer owes that much, it doesn't make any sense to maintain the requirement. As far as anticipating a billion in revenues, I recall reading a presentation from 2013 by the former CEO, Hakan Edstrom, where he described in detail the sophisticated analysis that Mannkind had done which predicted 200-300 million dollars in afrezza revenues just the first year. You answered my point....INITIALLY....but after the failed deal with Sanofi, MNKD went back to Deerfield for amendments and DF imposed harsher covenants to protect their interests and that's when the shorts started their attack. It also didn't help that Sanofi Reps were telling doctors that Afrezza was being discontinued and what were doctors thinking....EXUBERA.....Another Inhaled Insulin FIASCO. But I digress... |
|
|
|
Post by rtmd on Jul 23, 2019 9:44:00 GMT -5
Sophisticated analysis ...where does this come from? This is why nobody believes them.. ever heard of under promise, over deliver. SWOT analysis is what they did. I can't find Hakan's original presentation but this sort of sums it up: leepublish.typepad.com/strategicthinking/page/5/" Hakan says in terms of revenue Afrezza has "blockbuster potential," offering a "multibillion dollar opportunity" globally and $5 billion by 2015 in the U.S. alone. In the process of developing Afrezza, the company has also obtained more than 500 patents; its technology has potential for other applications such as fast delivery of pain medication for migraine headaches. MannKind Corporation's journey was guided by a strategic planning process involving a question and answer approach. It set its innovation focus on diabetes based on its knowledge of the space, the history of the space, current expectations and future expectations. Hakan highlights the importance of taking both "outside in" and "inside out" analyses in its decision to move ahead to develop the technology. MannKind Corporation's subsequent planning process addressed: Purposes: "What will we do for whom and why will we do it?" Analysis: "Who will use it, who decides the need, etc." Process: "How will it be recognized in order to be successful?" The planning process also considered alternatives, involved SWOT analysis, addressed emotional decision criteria, and more. Hakan says after the firm's strategies were decided, it developed objectives, which he defines as "the state of affairs or position we intend to be in at a particular time." Activities then drove the firm to its objectives, says Hakan. He noted the importance of aligning activities with objectives so the firm could "decide what not to do as well as what to do," adding, "some people confuse objectives and activities." The journey has been longer than MannKind Corporation expected: The uniqueness of its technology has resulted in an extremely long and involved FDA regulatory approval process that Hakan says "has been very difficult for us to manage." Even with approval, MannKind Corporation still expects to spend another $1 billion working with a yet-to-be-selected strategic partner for sales and marketing. Hakan says the company will bring in the outside partner to avoid myopia about the skill sets it needs to execute its plan and reduce organizational risk." |
|
|
|
Post by rtmd on Jul 23, 2019 9:52:43 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 23, 2019 12:34:44 GMT -5
Deerfield are BOTTOM FEEDERS. They prey on vulnerable companies. They are LOAN SHARKS. They are a HIGH RISK HIGH REWARD SHOP. If the borrower survives like MNKD they make a killing. If they Default....DF owns the company. It's pretty simple. They charged a high but not crazy rate but it's the other caveats where they make their money. Most people focus on the rate but its the caveats where they get their reward for the risk. |
|
|
|
Post by traderdennis on Jul 23, 2019 12:37:58 GMT -5
Initially, from reading the 10-Q, there was nothing "harsh" about the loans or any covenants: "On July 1, 2013, the Company entered into the Facility Agreement, which permitted it to borrow $160.0 million through the issuance of the 2019 notes, $100.0 million of which were converted into shares of the Company’s common stock during 2013 and 2014." If anything, they've been very liberal about arranging the repayment schedule of the loans. The only "harsh" thing I see is the 25 million cash required at the end of each quarter. While initially it was understood to protect the Deerfield interest, now that MNKD no longer owes that much, it doesn't make any sense to maintain the requirement. As far as anticipating a billion in revenues, I recall reading a presentation from 2013 by the former CEO, Hakan Edstrom, where he described in detail the sophisticated analysis that Mannkind had done which predicted 200-300 million dollars in afrezza revenues just the first year. You answered my point....INITIALLY....but after the failed deal with Sanofi, MNKD went back to Deerfield for amendments and DF imposed harsher covenants to protect their interests and that's when the shorts started their attack. It also didn't help that Sanofi Reps were telling doctors that Afrezza was being discontinued and what were doctors thinking....EXUBERA.....Another Inhaled Insulin FIASCO. But I digress... The shorts had attacked prior to the Sanofi deal. Event Bank of America had 10 million shares short to cover their loan to MNKD. |
|
|
|
Post by mytakeonit on Jul 23, 2019 12:41:19 GMT -5
As long as MNKD is alive ... DF is our friend. Like going to a hospital when you are dying and they save you. They definitely charge a lot, but it is worth it for you.  Maybe not to the beneficiaries in your will, but definitely you. But, that's mytakeonit |
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Jul 23, 2019 13:39:30 GMT -5
You answered my point....INITIALLY....but after the failed deal with Sanofi, MNKD went back to Deerfield for amendments and DF imposed harsher covenants to protect their interests and that's when the shorts started their attack. It also didn't help that Sanofi Reps were telling doctors that Afrezza was being discontinued and what were doctors thinking....EXUBERA.....Another Inhaled Insulin FIASCO. But I digress... The shorts had attacked prior to the Sanofi deal. Event Bank of America had 10 million shares short to cover their loan to MNKD. One problem is that Castagna appears to like feeding sharks. |
|
|
|
Post by falconquest on Jul 23, 2019 19:29:15 GMT -5
The shorts had attacked prior to the Sanofi deal. Event Bank of America had 10 million shares short to cover their loan to MNKD. One problem is that Castagna appears to like feeding sharks. Ahh, the never ending story. If only......If we could just.......it's just around the corner........just a little more time......if it weren't for.....and so it goes. I really do think in my heart of hearts that Mankind can be successful........sometime! |
|
|
|
Post by matt on Jul 24, 2019 9:55:01 GMT -5
Deerfield are BOTTOM FEEDERS. They prey on vulnerable companies. They are LOAN SHARKS. They are a HIGH RISK HIGH REWARD SHOP. If the borrower survives like MNKD they make a killing. If they Default....DF owns the company. It's pretty simple. They charged a high but not crazy rate but it's the other caveats where they make their money. Most people focus on the rate but its the caveats where they get their reward for the risk. That is not a fair characterization of DF. If you go back to their founding and look at their deal stream over time, they have loaned money to some very substantial companies at slightly below market rates hoping to make an outsized profit on their securities, usually through convertibility. They are a bond fund, not an equity fund, and the name of the game for any bond fund is to protect their capital since they have large fixed obligations to their investors. This is no different than what happens when an individual buys a house with a mortgage; the bank puts the borrower through the wringer to insure that they can sell the paper to FannieMae or into the secondary market. However, just like the mortgage company, when things don't work out then the institution gets tough on the borrower. If MNKD had performed as expected, the DF covenants would have been little more than a rounding error on the balance sheet, but that is not what happened. See what happens when the borrower of a 30 year mortgage with 20 years to run loses their job and has a hard time finding new employment; the discussions get ugly very quickly. DF gets aggressive precisely because they don't want to own the companies they loan money to; they are a bond fund and not a biotech management company. When Dendreon declared bankruptcy, despite annualized sales of more than $300 million, DF did not make a more to foreclose on that collateral choosing instead to recover what they could in bankruptcy court when the assets were auctioned (they lost more than $100 million on that loan). That is not the behavior of a predatory lender. DF knows how to play the game, and they play rough when necessary, but they are not as bad as everyone makes them out to be. Few commercial lenders are pleasant to deal with when results are not as expected. |
|
Maybe not to the beneficiaries in your will, but definitely you.
