|
Post by brotherm1 on Jan 12, 2020 22:13:10 GMT -5
might be a program error
|
|
rwp
Newbie
Posts: 24
Sentiment: Long
|
Post by rwp on Jan 12, 2020 22:13:30 GMT -5
It probably means there is a coding error on the site and/or database.
|
|
|
Post by cretin11 on Jan 12, 2020 22:30:51 GMT -5
>> The company is now looking at CFBE in 2021 if TreT gets approved. If it is not approved then it would take another 2 years probably
So translating that into EPS, we are looking at a net loss of about mil40$ in 2019 (which roughly translates to -.15$ per share) and probably half of that for 2020. Assuming you are right in 2021 or soon after EPS will be positive and improve with lets say 0.1$ per year. So let´s assume in about 10 years the EPS will hit 1$ (a little longer and a little less over all if the great management keeps giving shares away without need.. only 2% more this Christmas)
So, what is a fair current value for a share with an expected EPS of 1$ in 10years, are there examples of similar stocks? Hahaha...I admit I literally laughed out loud and spit wine when I saw a 10-year projection of a $.10 per year improvement. This really needs to be saved! OMG...priceless. Almost as funny as saying an offer of $2 billion for this company would be rejected! (In truth, there’s no way such an offer would be made today anyway, it would start at a much lower number. And maybe then it might be rejected.)
|
|
|
Post by awesomo on Jan 12, 2020 22:36:38 GMT -5
>> The company is now looking at CFBE in 2021 if TreT gets approved. If it is not approved then it would take another 2 years probably So translating that into EPS, we are looking at a net loss of about mil40$ in 2019 (which roughly translates to -.15$ per share) and probably half of that for 2020. Assuming you are right in 2021 or soon after EPS will be positive and improve with lets say 0.1$ per year. So let´s assume in about 10 years the EPS will hit 1$ (a little longer and a little less over all if the great management keeps giving shares away without need.. only 2% more this Christmas)
So, what is a fair current value for a share with an expected EPS of 1$ in 10years, are there examples of similar stocks? Hahaha...I admit I literally laughed out loud and spit wine when I saw a 10-year projection of a $.10 per year improvement. This really needs to be saved! OMG...priceless. I'm pretty sure you're confusing earnings per share with price per share.
|
|
|
Post by prcgorman2 on Jan 13, 2020 7:06:28 GMT -5
Allergan paid a 500% premium for Tobira. Is a 1000% premium unthinkable? Perhaps not, but it is probably safe to say it is highly unlikely. But when you talk about valuation, it’s important to remember the range of EPS multipliers starts in the 20x to 25x P/E area on AVERAGE. Their have been examples of pharma companies with a 70x PE multiplier. Will MNKD be one of those? It’s probably more likely than a 1000% acquisition premium.
What would it take to see a 70x PE multiplier on the EPS? Well, for starters it would take a very successful product in a very large market. There can be no question about the size of the market. Diabetes is either the largest or second largest cost of medical drugs in the US in front of or behind cancer and in front of pain by a wide margin. And, the market is growing (sadly).
CFBE is a debate, but a wild guess would put profitability at somewhere between 2000 and 3000 Rx per week depending upon many factors. 4000 per week should be safely profitable for MNKD and that is on Afrezza alone. At current rates of Rx growth it will take far less than 10 years to be profitable on Afrezza alone.
CFBE and profitability is very important because once that’s acheived on the shoulders of solid growth, the cost of capital drops dramatically. No more warrants and crap interest rates. Bonds become possible. Dividends become possible. Options become more attractive. And with cheap capital, serious investment in growth becomes possible. The old saying, it takes money to make money proves itself again.
I’ve stated befoe my assumptions about when the PPS starts to reflect the value that Nate Pile is convinced is there. 10 years is an overly cynical horizon (or just plain bashing if you’re so inclined to think that way). $2B acquisition is too high for a small BP currently worth a smallish fraction of that. Nothing is constant but change. There is a trend in place and it is positive. If we want to invest on forward looking information (and EVERY investment is based on forward looking information), then a positive outlook engenders a certain amount of additional goodwill and blue sky. I think the shorts are helping to shave that to a minimum. At some point it could be very difficult to keep the lid on. And what happens if the lid is actually on a pressure cooker? GLTA
|
|
|
Post by morfu on Jan 13, 2020 7:12:03 GMT -5
Hahaha...I admit I literally laughed out loud and spit wine when I saw a 10-year projection of a $.10 per year improvement. This really needs to be saved! OMG...priceless. I'm pretty sure you're confusing earnings per share with price per share. With about mil250 shares, that is quite easy to translate into mil25$ income gain per year, I am really not sure why this would be funny, I still think it is realistic, hopefully on the low end. It also represents 7% of the actual share value, so if true, it would mean my projected EPS in 10 years is about 70% of the current share value, which seems pretty high. If these numbers were guaranteed and further growth expected beyond the 1$EPS in 10years, I would hope for a current share price in the range 50-100$, but again anybody else has something to contribute beside amusement? (It might be my first post one here someone is willing to save, so I am grateful even so it seems for a nonsensical reason)
|
|
|
Post by morfu on Jan 13, 2020 7:13:33 GMT -5
>> The company is now looking at CFBE in 2021 if TreT gets approved. If it is not approved then it would take another 2 years probably
So translating that into EPS, we are looking at a net loss of about mil40$ in 2019 (which roughly translates to -.15$ per share) and probably half of that for 2020. Assuming you are right in 2021 or soon after EPS will be positive and improve with lets say 0.1$ per year. So let´s assume in about 10 years the EPS will hit 1$ (a little longer and a little less over all if the great management keeps giving shares away without need.. only 2% more this Christmas)
So, what is a fair current value for a share with an expected EPS of 1$ in 10years, are there examples of similar stocks?
The mean S&P 500 ratio is about 21 or so x earnings And new Bio-Stocks are easily getting 10x the average and more, so that might not be helpful
|
|
|
Post by prcgorman2 on Jan 13, 2020 7:19:47 GMT -5
List your assumptions on $1/share with a short simple example of the income statement you envision. I think your 10 year horizon is unlikely.
|
|
|
Post by cjm18 on Jan 13, 2020 9:54:59 GMT -5
Phase 1 completion of tret didn’t do much for the stock price. But a uhtr deal was announced 3 months later (which did do much). So might we hear about uhtr’s decision to make a deal about drug #2 soon?
|
|
|
Post by bababooey on Jan 13, 2020 21:51:53 GMT -5
Allergan paid a 500% premium for Tobira. Is a 1000% premium unthinkable? Perhaps not, but it is probably safe to say it is highly unlikely. But when you talk about valuation, it’s important to remember the range of EPS multipliers starts in the 20x to 25x P/E area on AVERAGE. Their have been examples of pharma companies with a 70x PE multiplier. Will MNKD be one of those? It’s probably more likely than a 1000% acquisition premium. What would it take to see a 70x PE multiplier on the EPS? Well, for starters it would take a very successful product in a very large market. There can be no question about the size of the market. Diabetes is either the largest or second largest cost of medical drugs in the US in front of or behind cancer and in front of pain by a wide margin. And, the market is growing (sadly). CFBE is a debate, but a wild guess would put profitability at somewhere between 2000 and 3000 Rx per week depending upon many factors. 4000 per week should be safely profitable for MNKD and that is on Afrezza alone. At current rates of Rx growth it will take far less than 10 years to be profitable on Afrezza alone. CFBE and profitability is very important because once that’s acheived on the shoulders of solid growth, the cost of capital drops dramatically. No more warrants and crap interest rates. Bonds become possible. Dividends become possible. Options become more attractive. And with cheap capital, serious investment in growth becomes possible. The old saying, it takes money to make money proves itself again. I’ve stated befoe my assumptions about when the PPS starts to reflect the value that Nate Pile is convinced is there. 10 years is an overly cynical horizon (or just plain bashing if you’re so inclined to think that way). $2B acquisition is too high for a small BP currently worth a smallish fraction of that. Nothing is constant but change. There is a trend in place and it is positive. If we want to invest on forward looking information (and EVERY investment is based on forward looking information), then a positive outlook engenders a certain amount of additional goodwill and blue sky. I think the shorts are helping to shave that to a minimum. At some point it could be very difficult to keep the lid on. And what happens if the lid is actually on a pressure cooker? GLTA Your assumptions are greatly flawed. Although the diabetes market is extremely large, only a small fraction of diabetics actually require prandial insulin (somewhere along the lines of 5% of all diabetics use prandial insulin). Stop with insanity, you are misleading people. Worse than a short imo.
|
|
|
Post by prcgorman2 on Jan 13, 2020 22:02:45 GMT -5
Hit a nerve? Easily verifiable assumptions are insanity? C’mon, you can do better than that. Or maybe you can’t. I never said how many diabetics were using insulin but are you trying to imply there isn’t a big and growing multi-billion dollar market for prandial insulin? Have you seen the arguments that much of the non-insulin treatment for T2s should be replaced by the hormone that is missing if it can be proven safe? i.e., why take drugs which literally squeeze the life out of your pancreas if you can give it a rest by providing human insulin it is having trouble meeting the demand for? But I get it. If you can’t bash my post very easily you can still try to harrass me. Good luck with that.
|
|
|
Post by cjm18 on Jan 13, 2020 22:45:09 GMT -5
Allergan paid a 500% premium for Tobira. Is a 1000% premium unthinkable? Perhaps not, but it is probably safe to say it is highly unlikely. But when you talk about valuation, it’s important to remember the range of EPS multipliers starts in the 20x to 25x P/E area on AVERAGE. Their have been examples of pharma companies with a 70x PE multiplier. Will MNKD be one of those? It’s probably more likely than a 1000% acquisition premium. What would it take to see a 70x PE multiplier on the EPS? Well, for starters it would take a very successful product in a very large market. There can be no question about the size of the market. Diabetes is either the largest or second largest cost of medical drugs in the US in front of or behind cancer and in front of pain by a wide margin. And, the market is growing (sadly). CFBE is a debate, but a wild guess would put profitability at somewhere between 2000 and 3000 Rx per week depending upon many factors. 4000 per week should be safely profitable for MNKD and that is on Afrezza alone. At current rates of Rx growth it will take far less than 10 years to be profitable on Afrezza alone. CFBE and profitability is very important because once that’s acheived on the shoulders of solid growth, the cost of capital drops dramatically. No more warrants and crap interest rates. Bonds become possible. Dividends become possible. Options become more attractive. And with cheap capital, serious investment in growth becomes possible. The old saying, it takes money to make money proves itself again. I’ve stated befoe my assumptions about when the PPS starts to reflect the value that Nate Pile is convinced is there. 10 years is an overly cynical horizon (or just plain bashing if you’re so inclined to think that way). $2B acquisition is too high for a small BP currently worth a smallish fraction of that. Nothing is constant but change. There is a trend in place and it is positive. If we want to invest on forward looking information (and EVERY investment is based on forward looking information), then a positive outlook engenders a certain amount of additional goodwill and blue sky. I think the shorts are helping to shave that to a minimum. At some point it could be very difficult to keep the lid on. And what happens if the lid is actually on a pressure cooker? GLTA Your assumptions are greatly flawed. Although the diabetes market is extremely large, only a small fraction of diabetics actually require prandial insulin (somewhere along the lines of 5% of all diabetics use prandial insulin). Stop with insanity, you are misleading people. Worse than a short imo. Mealtime insulin sales worldwide was over 7billion with a b a few years ago. And growing.
|
|
|
Post by prcgorman2 on Jan 14, 2020 7:10:21 GMT -5
Would it be crazy dreaming to think Afrezza might someday be 20% of that $7B? At current outstanding shares that would be roughly $6 EPS?
|
|
|
Post by brotherm1 on Jan 14, 2020 10:39:55 GMT -5
yes, that is crazy thinking. The patent will have expired way long before countries in amounts sufficient to sell what would be needed will have obtained approval to do so. And already, Dance has been working on an inhalable for several years. Also, If inhalable becomes big, BP’s will step in also. Let’s try to keep it real here.
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Jan 14, 2020 10:46:29 GMT -5
Would it be crazy dreaming to think Afrezza might someday be 20% of that $7B? At current outstanding shares that would be roughly $6 EPS? Yes The vast majority of the meal time insulin sold is in countries where Regular human insulin is the standard. This is because in those countries it typically only costs $2 - $6 for a vial. This is unlikely to change because it's what people there can afford to pay.
|
|