|
Post by longliner on Aug 8, 2019 0:20:18 GMT -5
amazing how some folks continue to state falsehoods - in this case, the appolo v df as botj being equally bad is absurd particularly when yiu look at the reasoning.... mnkd NEVER had the optiom to repay df in cash without the entire loan coming due - further df according to filings stated that their choice woukd be shares ALWAAYS... nomore I initially (years back) thought you were Cramer (seriously). But what grammar!! I agree the two loan facilities are not comparable, unless you are old... or aged. If I lose my one and only follower over this comment, I will be very bummed!
|
|
|
Post by ktim on Aug 8, 2019 1:24:27 GMT -5
That was only because someone else posted something that was clearly incorrect. You want total misinformation to reign here simply because it was a good conference call? I suspect that shouldn't be a question, because it appears that is exactly what you want as long as you consider the misinformation useful to your financial position. For how many days after the conference call should misinformation be given a pass? What was incorrect and what was misinformation? Check the thread that you are posting about. You were attacking someone for correcting misinformation. Take a look at what you posted, and let me know if you think I'm wrong... and let me know why. Don't play dumb. Either support your opinion, say you're wrong, or just... do whatever people do otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by ktim on Aug 8, 2019 1:31:28 GMT -5
Even if aged's facts were right, I think it's still OK to be annoyed with his post.
I think what I got from agedhippie's post was Mannkind may only perform well enough to have borrowed $40M, and the interest will be higher if they do perform poorly.
Meh. OK, and?
Is the other $35M potentially available on good terms a make-or-break proposition? No. So yeah, OK, thanks for the dour analysis of arcane corporate finance information from our resident pump-loving non-Afrezza-using T1. He writes good factual posts that still manage to rain on long suffering longs. I'm not surprised the posts, while good, are not entirely welcome. So be it. I'm confident aged doesn't care and will continue to write them (and I will continue to read them even if they do annoy me too sometimes).
The interest rate is set at 6.76% +the greater of LIBOR or 2% regardless of hitting targets. If a milestone target doesn't get hit in it's time window then that part of the loan doesn't get made. If the over-arching Afrezza sales target doesn't get hit then the whole loan becomes repayable. I don't see that as a serious risk though because that target is based on net revenue and it is currently being hit. Further it is net revenue so it doesn't even need to be profitable which means adding the net revenue from Brazil will add a further safety margin. This is the revenue schedule (the table is mangled but it is date then target where target is the trail 12 months net revenue; .... Fortunately, those revenue milestones seem quite plausible.
|
|
|
Post by akemp3000 on Aug 8, 2019 1:43:18 GMT -5
Aged balances out the folks who say that now mnkd is guaranteed to eventually become profitable with no further dilution. True he dumps a dose of reality on posters prognostications and most here don’t like reality. Downplaying Afrezza's superiority is NOT reality. True that the antiquated FDA Afrezza trials did not show superiority so that comes into play but the reality is that Afrezza offers a next generation superiority to any other prandial option available. To accept current recommended standards of care, that are proven ineffective, as being equal or comparable to Afrezza is misleading and harmful.
|
|
|
Post by ktim on Aug 8, 2019 2:01:53 GMT -5
True he dumps a dose of reality on posters prognostications and most here don’t like reality. Downplaying Afrezza's superiority is NOT reality. True that the antiquated FDA Afrezza trials did not show superiority so that comes into play but the reality is that Afrezza offers a next generation superiority to any other prandial option available. To accept current recommended standards of care, that are proven ineffective, as being equal to or better than Afrezza is misleading and harmful. You're right in some things... but you are not talking about financials. You are also blaming people for stating what the medical profession currently believes. It is NOT posters here on proboards that are setting the standards for medical care. Do you dislike reality, or having someone point it out to you, or both? Show me a single person here that disagrees with the science. No one is being "misleading" when they say doctors are not prescribing, because few are. Please stop this BS acting like people here are creating the problems for Afrezza. We (and you) know what the real problems have been... or if you don't please ask, because lots of us long time investors can explain.
|
|
|
Post by brentie on Aug 8, 2019 2:07:34 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by sayhey24 on Aug 8, 2019 4:50:11 GMT -5
Hey Aged one....You forgot to mention part of the positive aspect you seem to have left out regards the renegotiated Amphastar commitment. Kind of plays a big role in why this deal is great for the company right now regardless of the fine print. If MannKind was to continue with junk/toxic financing, they would have stuck with their old pals at DF. Expect many more positives in the coming months along with pipeline advancements, RLS etc just to name a few. This loan is in essence a nice little bridge financing until the good stuff finally starts to roll in. Good luck! I didn't leave it out, I was reviewing the MidCap loan agreement, not the whole CC. I don't see that this loan is any better than the DF loans as it makes the loan stages conditional, and makes the continued existence of the loan conditional on monthly revenue targets, Deerfield didn't make either of those demands in it's loans. Deerfield was seen as bad because there wasn't the cash to make the payments so stock had to be used instead. If for any reason the cash isn't available with MidCap you are going to see exactly the same dynamic play out. Make no mistake this MidCap loan is hedged with more controls and penalties than the Deerfield loans. Aged - nice summary of the MidCap loan. In one respect I see this as Mike just pulling another rabbit out of his hat. I could be delusional but I am marking this as the official turning point of MNKD. A few months back, Mike said things would happen by July. I will mark this as hitting the target although it was announced August 7th, close enough. With RLS becoming real in the next 6 months repaying in cash is a nobrainer.
|
|
|
Post by hellodolly on Aug 8, 2019 5:39:01 GMT -5
• MannKind (NASDAQ:MNKD) Q2 results: • Revenues: $15.0M (+285%); Afrezza sales: $6.1M (+62% yoy and +20% sequentially). • Net loss: ($12.4M); loss/share: ($0.07). • Yesterday, the company inked an agreement with Apollo Investment Corp. and MidCap Financial Trust for a $75M secured loan facility maturing on August 1, 2024. The company drew $40M at closing. It also negotiated exchange agreements with each of its creditors in order to pay off and/or restructure its existing debt obligations. • Shares down 4% after hours. The immediate news is that this is a $40M loan of which $15M must be held in escrow leaving $25M available. The remaining $35M of the loan is dependent on hitting certain targets (and an extra $5M in escrow). Overall certain Afrezza revenue targets must be hit each month to keep the loan open. Mid-Cap have the same lock on the assets that Deerfield did. And warrants. That loan is interesting. It is $75M once all the milestones have been hit. The structure is; - first tranche $40M now - second trance $10M when $30M net Afrezza revenue is hit. This must be achieved before April 2020 so the first quarter is already completed ($6.1M) - third tranche $25M when unspecified TreT revenue targets are hit. This must be achieved before June 2021. - Repayments are monthly starting September 2021 On the plus side the Afrezza revenue targets look fairly safe. For example the August 31 target is $21.5M year to date. I can SO tracking this since they publish the target for each month. Now the not so good: - there are monthly trailing annual Afrezza targets (Minimum Afrezza Net Revenue Schedule) that *must* be hit. - interest rate is a minimum of 8.75% rising if Libor gets above 2% (there is no drop). - $15M in escrow for the initial trance rising to $20M with the subsequent tranches - Warrants issues along side each tranche. For the first tranche there are warrants covering 1.17M shares at $1.12 with a seven year expiry. The strike price and number for the remaining tranche warrants are dependent on the share price, Mid-Cap does better if the price is low. - as with Deerfield Mid-Cap has all assets and IP as security - there is a 6% exit fee based on the maximum borrowed (there is also an early repayment penalty). That's my first cut of the loan agreement. 1. I signed for a loan to buy my house. It was for $300K over 30 years at 3.5% with an adjustable rate. 2. I had to offer my house as security in exchange for the lenders money. 3. I must keep and maintain an escrow account as well, to be held for insurance and taxes? 4. I must set aside additional monies over and above the principal to cover the escrow account. 5. I was not in a position of strength as I only was able to put a mild deposit down and my FICO score went south because I have several other lenders This certainly is a better deal in the favor of the bank. Should we believe that this doesn't benefit me and therefore it must be a bad investment transaction for me and my family? Of course this is not true but, it is very much a part of banking for mortgage with most people. The example was used to illustrate a point. What MNKD did in negotiations with Midcap goes on everyday with all lending institutions. Therefore, to the extent the deal was a good one or a bad one lies in the eyes of the parties making the transactions.
|
|
paul
Researcher
Posts: 134
|
Post by paul on Aug 8, 2019 6:10:27 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by brotherm1 on Aug 8, 2019 7:12:14 GMT -5
I believe the December warrants were mentioned as part of the expectations. I hope that expectation for one will come to fruition.
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Aug 8, 2019 7:43:07 GMT -5
I hope someone will take the time to sort out the details of the recapitalization. It was difficult for me to understand. Overriding for me was the whys. Why the Mann recapitalization since that was unsecured debt. Ditto the Bruce recapitalizaton? I presume it must have been a demand by Apollo but I don't see why. I THINK the Mann debt of about 70M was due next year. That has been extended to 5 years which is a very, very good thing. This was a very good call. All kinds of positives. Recapitalization, increasing Afrezza revenues, positive Gross Margin on Afrezza sales, Deerfield GONE , reaffirmation of cash payments coming in from UTHR to name a few. A very good call. Lots of excellent news. I wonder how long until our resident tag team of experts begins to poke holes in it? IMO that is one of the more important benefits of this forum, considering the adage “the Devil is in the details”.
|
|
|
Post by alethea on Aug 8, 2019 7:46:37 GMT -5
What was incorrect and what was misinformation? Check the thread that you are posting about. You were attacking someone for correcting misinformation. Take a look at what you posted, and let me know if you think I'm wrong... and let me know why. Don't play dumb. Either support your opinion, say you're wrong, or just... do whatever people do otherwise. No, I wasn't attacking any facts he posted. I was objecting to him immediately putting a negative spin on a brand new loan of up to 75M, if things don't go badly wrong. I KNEW in advance that he would rain on the conference call's truly good financial developments with negative spin. I said it before he did it. You can always count on him to counter and parry almost any positive development. Readers can judge for themselves. I stand by what I said.
|
|
|
Post by stevil on Aug 8, 2019 8:41:40 GMT -5
I used to play the part of aged until I realized I'd rather spend time on school than waste it trying to convince people that could not be swayed in their thinking. I actually found it to be counterproductive because it just made people more staunch in their views against me. Anyone is free to go back through my hundreds of posts and see that I called many of the negative events- maybe not called, but explained why negative things were and were going to continually happen and people hated me for it.
I have seen aged say it before and I appreciated his sentiment when he said he doesn't need to highlight the positives all the time, or even with any normal frequency at all. There are plenty here whose hope forever springs eternal and they cannot see the other side. When you have those people already on the board, you don't need to waste time reinforcing it. I would often play devil's advocate to those people, trying to convince myself in the process that they were right. I never could and it's why I haven't been long this stock since I got in and realized all the issues it would have once Sanofi dropped us. I stick around because I am now a doctor (PGY1) and am interested in the healthcare aspect of Afrezza as well as seeing how the story continues to unfold. As long as people are here presenting facts or logical conclusions according to the facts, their motives should not be questioned. It's probably just my personality, but for people who represent "the other side" to my line of thinking, I often look forward to reading their thoughts to challenge my own. I never get upset at them, but really appreciate their work because they expose any blindspots I have. I wish the board would do the same with the understanding that facts are facts and opinions are opinions. Pay attention to the facts and take the opinions always with a grain of salt.
|
|
|
Post by mcbone on Aug 8, 2019 8:56:45 GMT -5
I didn't see any mention about addressing the dreadful retention rate in the transcript nor any questions about it at the end of the conference.
|
|
|
Post by Clement on Aug 8, 2019 8:58:07 GMT -5
After hearing the good earnings call yesterday, I thought this stock is "not a sinking boat ..... and not a rocket ship".
What should the shorts do now to make money off this very undervalued stock?
911k shares traded in first 28 min of trading.
|
|