|
|
Post by mango on Apr 4, 2020 10:40:06 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by hellodolly on Apr 4, 2020 11:32:04 GMT -5
OMG, I just read their incentive scoring, these jerkwads gave themselves extra credit to compensate for their crap Afrezza sales.For 2019, there were four main corporate objectives that were specified in early 2019 and subsequently evaluated in March 2020 as follows: - Achieve Afrezza net sales expectations 40% = 9/40 points- Deliver cash on hand expectations 20% = 40/20 points - Deliver on business development priorities 20% = 24/20 points- Progress clinical development programs and regulatory submissions 20% = 20/20 points
Overall result: 93 out of 100 possible pointsAs a result of this assessment, 93% of the target STI opportunity for each executive officer will be paid in April 2020 as non-equity incentive compensation for 2019. Man, they have really posted some crazy math, IMHO. If I read this, as it is posted, what this is SUPPOSED to represent is the overall weighting of four performance metrics, (Sales, Cash, Priorities and Clinical Progress) and an assigned percentage of overall weight that equals 100%. OK, that's all good. Anyone can understand this if you have any background or understanding in using weighted performance appraisals. It's obvious that "Sales" carries the most weight in the organization as a 40% value was assigned to this performance metric. The compensation committee determines the overall effectiveness of their performance by looking at the financial figures. I get all that. What get's me, is achieving more points in a given performance metric that has a weight of 20, for instance. Cash on hand achieved a score of 40/20? Shouldn't that be 20/20 if they met all the goals in that category? 20/20 would mean a 100% effectiveness in THAT PERFORMANCE METRIC. Maybe they should have weighed that metric as 40 points but, they didn't...so 20/20 is the correct value. They did great, pat on the back, 20/20 was spot on! 40/20 is funny money. The same for the other category related to priorities, 24/20. That should be 20/20 as well. Now, unless the PR department failed to separate the weights from the achievements and commingled metrics, this is total BS! The way I see it, they achieved a 69% of 100% possible points of the performance metrics chosen by the organization. I've never been given a weight over the designated amount because it doesn't equal 100. The way I read this, it's flawed. - Achieve Afrezza net sales expectations 40% - Deliver cash on hand expectations 20% - Deliver on business development priorities 20% - Progress clinical development programs and regulatory submissions 20% |
|
|
|
Post by hellodolly on Apr 4, 2020 12:05:49 GMT -5
From the filing:
"Base salaries for executive officers were frozen for 2020, including the chief executive officer whose salary is benchmarked well below the median of the corresponding salaries of our peer group;
The achievement of corporate objectives relevant to the short-term incentive compensation plan was mixed – the Afrezza sales objective was underachieved whereas cash management and collaboration-related objectives were overachieved; and
Areas for improvement in compensation plans were identified and addressed, including the implementation of an incentive-compensation clawback policy as well as stock ownership guidelines (which also apply to non-executive directors).
From 'Consideration of Say-on-Pay Results'
Currently, salaries for executive officers are frozen for 2020. The Compensation Committee, with support from Mercer combined with the insights obtained from management meetings with institutional investors, will continue to evaluate our compensation programs and trends in executive compensation and will implement changes to our executive compensation programs as necessary to ensure that they are aligned with stockholders’ best interests. -
My comment- Of course stockholders, non-institutional' like us retail owners own more than the combined 1.09% owned by the Executive team. Whose stockholder interests are they referring to? Tutes?
From Short Term Incentive Plan
"As a result of this assessment, 93% of the target STI opportunity for each executive officer will be paid in April 2020 as non-equity incentive compensation for 2019." Cash.
|
|
|
|
Post by morfu on Apr 4, 2020 13:46:34 GMT -5
OMG, I just read their incentive scoring, these jerkwads gave themselves extra credit to compensate for their crap Afrezza sales.For 2019, there were four main corporate objectives that were specified in early 2019 and subsequently evaluated in March 2020 as follows: - Achieve Afrezza net sales expectations 40% = 9/40 points- Deliver cash on hand expectations 20% = 40/20 points - Deliver on business development priorities 20% = 24/20 points- Progress clinical development programs and regulatory submissions 20% = 20/20 points
Overall result: 93 out of 100 possible pointsAs a result of this assessment, 93% of the target STI opportunity for each executive officer will be paid in April 2020 as non-equity incentive compensation for 2019. Man, they have really posted some crazy math, IMHO. If I read this, as it is posted, what this is SUPPOSED to represent is the overall weighting of four performance metrics, (Sales, Cash, Priorities and Clinical Progress) and an assigned percentage of overall weight that equals 100%. OK, that's all good. Anyone can understand this if you have any background or understanding in using weighted performance appraisals. It's obvious that "Sales" carries the most weight in the organization as a 40% value was assigned to this performance metric. The compensation committee determines the overall effectiveness of their performance by looking at the financial figures. I get all that. What get's me, is achieving more points in a given performance metric that has a weight of 20, for instance. Cash on hand achieved a score of 40/20? Shouldn't that be 20/20 if they met all the goals in that category? 20/20 would mean a 100% effectiveness in THAT PERFORMANCE METRIC. Maybe they should have weighed that metric as 40 points but, they didn't...so 20/20 is the correct value. They did great, pat on the back, 20/20 was spot on! 40/20 is funny money. The same for the other category related to priorities, 24/20. That should be 20/20 as well. Now, unless the PR department failed to separate the weights from the achievements and commingled metrics, this is total BS! The way I see it, they achieved a 69% of 100% possible points of the performance metrics chosen by the organization. I've never been given a weight over the designated amount because it doesn't equal 100. The way I read this, it's flawed. - Achieve Afrezza net sales expectations 40% - Deliver cash on hand expectations 20% - Deliver on business development priorities 20% - Progress clinical development programs and regulatory submissions 20% - Deliver cash on hand expectations 20% = 40/20 points
"Assessed quantitatively on the basis of cash and cash equivalents plus cash available from committed financing sources at year-end that exceeded a specified percentage of total actual 2019 net cash used in operating activities."
I argue, that while they might have gotten 200% of that worded performance matrix (why does that count to more than 100%), selling out shares in 2018 was not the spirit of it, but finding some helpful financing. In 2019 they did not do that, so I argue for 0 points instead of 20 or 40, resulting in 49 total points. Dear BoD, as a logical consequence the Management should ask for more shares and sell them cheaply.. oh that is what they are doing right now...
|
|
|
|
Post by mango on Apr 4, 2020 15:57:32 GMT -5
From the filing: " Base salaries for executive officers were frozen for 2020, including the chief executive officer whose salary is benchmarked well below the median of the corresponding salaries of our peer group; The achievement of corporate objectives relevant to the short-term incentive compensation plan was mixed – the Afrezza sales objective was underachieved whereas cash management and collaboration-related objectives were overachieved; and Areas for improvement in compensation plans were identified and addressed, including the implementation of an incentive-compensation clawback policy as well as stock ownership guidelines (which also apply to non-executive directors). From 'Consideration of Say-on-Pay Results' Currently, salaries for executive officers are frozen for 2020. The Compensation Committee, with support from Mercer combined with the insights obtained from management meetings with institutional investors, will continue to evaluate our compensation programs and trends in executive compensation and will implement changes to our executive compensation programs as necessary to ensure that they are aligned with stockholders’ best interests. - My comment- Of course stockholders, non-institutional' like us retail owners own more than the combined 1.09% owned by the Executive team. Whose stockholder interests are they referring to? Tutes? From Short Term Incentive Plan "As a result of this assessment, 93% of the target STI opportunity for each executive officer will be paid in April 2020 as non-equity incentive compensation for 2019." Cash. What does this mean? They are still getting the increases in compensations? |
|
|
|
Post by winner on Apr 4, 2020 16:54:50 GMT -5
My very first negative post as it relates to MNKD. If you were to read my past post, you will come to know that I truly believe in Afrezza. I have lost faith in the current management team.To think that they (whomever) gave themselves a grade point of 93 out of 100 in my humble opinion is truly pathetic. In my humble opinion, a reverse split is in the making. I could be wrong. I am currently down 6 figures. I sold ~ 50% of my position on Friday (are you ready for this) and placed the entire amount in small cap Canadian Oil companies. If the Russians, Saudis and the U.S. OF A can agree on a significant reduction, I MAY, I repeat MAY, make tens of thousands of dollars back next week. Of course, the flip side is I could lose a substantial amount of my gamble, I mean investment. As a blue collar worker, I am of the opinion, that I still have a significant MNKD equity position but I am tired of seeing day in/ day out erosion of share price. I use to think that RLS was going to be our white knight, alas to date, this has not materialized.
In closing, if I double my money in the coming week, I will re-acquire the shares that I sold last week.
BEST OF LUCK TO ALL MANNKIND SHAREHOLDERS.
|
|
|
|
Post by sportsrancho on Apr 4, 2020 17:31:49 GMT -5
Winner.... That’s a very smart idea. I wish you so much success!
I have to say that this company, this management, is completely tone deaf!
How many years can Mike C say “we’re going to be fine”...we’re not fine Mike!
How many years have we heard the shorts are finally going to pull their head out of the sand and look around and run for the hills? ...not when there’s dilution in the air.
People get irritated when I talk about dilution. I talk about it because of the Christmas massacre. I talk about it because we were conned. I talk about it because of the way they did it, with the warrants that was sloppy and toxic. ( I heard that from expert financial people in New York.) So I’m sorry if it’s irritating to people but I’m tired of losing money and I’m not gonna do it anymore. I’m not gonna do it in a market where I can jump into something else and make up some of my losses. I haven’t had that opportunity in a long time.
It’s been a long time since companies have been this undervalued. And may get more undervalued.
The problem I see with the stock price is that for a long time people invested in Mannkind because it was one of the most undervalued companies.. the rest of the market was very frothy.
The other problem is Mannkind has an internal confidence issue and Wall Street doesn’t respect them ...you can’t miss guidance, blunder along with no website, have reps and top executives quitting and giving up and maintain any kind of a good image. Give yourself raises over imaginary obstacles, and not buy any of your own stock
Your stock price is your scorecard. Hello...? Tone deaf.
|
|
|
|
Post by falconquest on Apr 4, 2020 17:55:46 GMT -5
My very first negative post as it relates to MNKD. If you were to read my past post, you will come to know that I truly believe in Afrezza. I have lost faith in the current management team.To think that they (whomever) gave themselves a grade point of 93 out of 100 in my humble opinion is truly pathetic. In my humble opinion, a reverse split is in the making. I could be wrong. I am currently down 6 figures. I sold ~ 50% of my position on Friday (are you ready for this) and placed the entire amount in small cap Canadian Oil companies. If the Russians, Saudis and the U.S. OF A can agree on a significant reduction, I MAY, I repeat MAY, make tens of thousands of dollars back next week. Of course, the flip side is I could lose a substantial amount of my gamble, I mean investment. As a blue collar worker, I am of the opinion, that I still have a significant MNKD equity position but I am tired of seeing day in/ day out erosion of share price. I use to think that RLS was going to be our white knight, alas to date, this has not materialized. In closing, if I double my money in the coming week, I will re-acquire the shares that I sold last week. BEST OF LUCK TO ALL MANNKIND SHAREHOLDERS. I believe there are many here that absolutely agree with this statement, myself included. We have the most amazing insulin product on the market and yet the company can't figure out how to sell it. On top of that, when Vdex comes along and dedicates themselves to prescribing Afrezza, Mike turns up his nose. He needs to go. |
|
|
|
Post by awesomo on Apr 4, 2020 17:56:59 GMT -5
My very first negative post as it relates to MNKD. If you were to read my past post, you will come to know that I truly believe in Afrezza. I have lost faith in the current management team.To think that they (whomever) gave themselves a grade point of 93 out of 100 in my humble opinion is truly pathetic. In my humble opinion, a reverse split is in the making. I could be wrong. I am currently down 6 figures. I sold ~ 50% of my position on Friday (are you ready for this) and placed the entire amount in small cap Canadian Oil companies. If the Russians, Saudis and the U.S. OF A can agree on a significant reduction, I MAY, I repeat MAY, make tens of thousands of dollars back next week. Of course, the flip side is I could lose a substantial amount of my gamble, I mean investment. As a blue collar worker, I am of the opinion, that I still have a significant MNKD equity position but I am tired of seeing day in/ day out erosion of share price. I use to think that RLS was going to be our white knight, alas to date, this has not materialized. In closing, if I double my money in the coming week, I will re-acquire the shares that I sold last week. BEST OF LUCK TO ALL MANNKIND SHAREHOLDERS. Well, if anything you will know if your gamble pays off relatively soon and if it does pay off it will be huge. I’d certainly prefer that over bleeding to death with MannKind all while watching the executives and the board line their pockets. |
|
|
|
Post by sportsrancho on Apr 4, 2020 18:21:27 GMT -5
There was a poem I heard when I was a little girl that always stuck with me.
For all sad words of tongue and pen, the saddest are these, “It might have been."
But rest assured I am not giving up. I am doing everything I can in whatever small way I can to help make sure Afrezza is not something that might have been.
We have all been in the trenches together for years, it doesn’t matter who buys who sells who jumps in and who gets back in, we can all be a team. We are on the same side because we’re all here for the same reason, the science, the diabetic advocacy. And an opportunity to prosper. It’s more than a stock it’s always been more than a stock , it’s a legacy, and no we are not going to end up like EYES, we are going to prove Al Mann right.
|
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Apr 5, 2020 1:03:43 GMT -5
Sports, you're clearly one of a kind!
|
|
|
|
Post by hellodolly on Apr 5, 2020 6:52:23 GMT -5
From the filing: " Base salaries for executive officers were frozen for 2020, including the chief executive officer whose salary is benchmarked well below the median of the corresponding salaries of our peer group; The achievement of corporate objectives relevant to the short-term incentive compensation plan was mixed – the Afrezza sales objective was underachieved whereas cash management and collaboration-related objectives were overachieved; and Areas for improvement in compensation plans were identified and addressed, including the implementation of an incentive-compensation clawback policy as well as stock ownership guidelines (which also apply to non-executive directors). From 'Consideration of Say-on-Pay Results' Currently, salaries for executive officers are frozen for 2020. The Compensation Committee, with support from Mercer combined with the insights obtained from management meetings with institutional investors, will continue to evaluate our compensation programs and trends in executive compensation and will implement changes to our executive compensation programs as necessary to ensure that they are aligned with stockholders’ best interests. - My comment- Of course stockholders, non-institutional' like us retail owners own more than the combined 1.09% owned by the Executive team. Whose stockholder interests are they referring to? Tutes? From Short Term Incentive Plan "As a result of this assessment, 93% of the target STI opportunity for each executive officer will be paid in April 2020 as non-equity incentive compensation for 2019." Cash. What does this mean? They are still getting the increases in compensations? Yes and No. Base salary* Mike and the rest of the XO base salaries are frozen for 2020. Mike's base salary in 2019 is listed as $510K, and if correct he will not get any base salary in 2020. Performance Bonus* In 2019 MC had a performance bonus (non-equity) of $285K. (4) Non-equity incentive plan compensation is based on individual performance in the achievement of corporate objectives. Performance is compared to these objectives annually.* Question now is what will the 2020 performance bonus equate to? Based on the results, every XO will get 93% of the 100% allowed under the performance metrics. I'm not sure what pool of money the 93% is coming out of...the $1M dollar pool for XYZ or the 2M dollar pool for ABC? I'm sure it's there, I just haven't seen it or overlooked it. SUMMARY COMPENSATION TABLE, PAGE 47. I did find this little caveat: Payments of target STI opportunities are not guaranteed and are subject to funding and corporate and individual performance.(PG 44) |
|
|
|
Post by brotherm1 on Apr 5, 2020 7:48:26 GMT -5
I had no idea a Company’s performance could or should be based on a bell curve relative to other companies. Really? Have you looked at the objectives and the subjective scores they gave each one? The BOD is supposed to prevent these types of irregularities from occurring and to protect shareholder value. They seem complicit in this particular scheme. From regenmedprovider..( A respected doctor on ST) “I’m not on PB, but whoever said the BOD seems complicit is accurate. Of course they are. This is willful blindness. It is a legal concept and actionable. The BOD knows or should have known that there are/were shenanigans. But they keep cashing their hush money checks.” There’s nothing more true than that. |
|
|
|
Post by boca1girl on Apr 5, 2020 7:49:23 GMT -5
Dolly, I think you are incorrect in saying “he will not get any base salary in 2020.”
Frozen means the executive team will not get an increase in base salary in 2020, they will be “frozen” at 2019 levels.
|
|
|
|
Post by barnstormer on Apr 5, 2020 8:30:24 GMT -5
We need to do a petition against the Reverse Split that we all suspect will happen if Mike can't get share price back over a dollar. |
|
