|
|
Post by Thundersnow on Aug 7, 2023 18:55:08 GMT -5
What would be MNKD's Market Cap and Share Price?
|
|
|
|
Post by dh4mizzou on Aug 7, 2023 19:02:29 GMT -5
$ 4.75 ?
|
|
|
|
Post by MnkdWASmyRtrmntPlan on Aug 7, 2023 19:44:28 GMT -5
Ahhaha, that's great, dh I belted out a good belly laugh on that thanks for that  |
|
|
|
Post by celo on Aug 7, 2023 20:01:31 GMT -5
Average price to sales ratio on the S and P is about 1.7. 1.7 by 800 million would be 1.3 billion which is near our current market cap.
We should have a multiple of around 10, like we do now, but you never know.
Being profitable with growth...More possible revenue drivers on the way...
|
|
|
|
Post by ktim on Aug 7, 2023 20:15:22 GMT -5
How did you calculate that much royalty? I believe when the slides state $250M - $300M per 10k, that number is total revenue which includes what is paid for manufacturing. Seems like out of roughly $30M revenue from UTHR ($19 royalty + $11 services), there would there would be close to $21M profit (70% of revenue from UTHR). So using the conservative $250M per 10k, that would mean $175M profit per 10k. Wasn't it stated somewhere UTHR is targeting 25K patients by 2025. At 60% dpi that would be $280M profit contribution from UTHR. 90% dpi would be $333M profit contribtion from UTHR.
Even with dilution coming from debt/warrant conversion to shares, seems double "low double digit" share price would be expected at minimum. If only our deal with UTHR had been "mid double digit" royalty. Still that will be amazing to get back above $10. That's sort of assuming Afrezza does nothing but break even, and not giving much credit for future growth of Tyvasso.
Feel free to chime in if something is wrong with my back of the napkin calculations.
|
|
|
|
Post by prcgorman2 on Aug 7, 2023 21:26:19 GMT -5
I like the Price/Earnings ratio. I don’t remember MNKD shares outstanding, and the debt convertibles will add some dilution to the shares outstanding, but if $280M is the earnings and shares outstanding is ~280M shares, than Earnings Per Share = $280M/280M or $1. Brief search of average P/E for consituents of NASDAQ is ~21. Therefore, $280M in earnings with 280M shares outstanding should result in a Price Per Share of ~$21. That’s the average, so some stocks will be below, and some above. dh4mizzou predicts $4.75. We laugh (nervously) and hope to Hell he’s wrong, joking or not.
|
|
rebby
Researcher
Posts: 62
|
Post by rebby on Aug 7, 2023 21:31:26 GMT -5
I like the Price/Earnings ratio. I don’t remember MNKD shares outstanding, and the debt convertibles will add some dilution to the shares outstanding, but if $280M is the earnings and shares outstanding is ~280M shares, than Earnings Per Share = $280M/280M or $1. Brief search of average P/E for consituents of NASDAQ is ~21. Therefore, $280M in earnings with 280M shares outstanding should result in a Price Per Share of ~$21. That’s the average, so some stocks will be below, and some above. dh4mizzou predicts $4.75. We laugh (nervously) and hope to Hell he’s wrong, joking or not. Then add clomifazine and Peds to that…..wow! |
|
|
|
Post by ktim on Aug 7, 2023 21:44:13 GMT -5
I like the Price/Earnings ratio. I don’t remember MNKD shares outstanding, and the debt convertibles will add some dilution to the shares outstanding, but if $280M is the earnings and shares outstanding is ~280M shares, than Earnings Per Share = $280M/280M or $1. Brief search of average P/E for consituents of NASDAQ is ~21. Therefore, $280M in earnings with 280M shares outstanding should result in a Price Per Share of ~$21. That’s the average, so some stocks will be below, and some above. dh4mizzou predicts $4.75. We laugh (nervously) and hope to Hell he’s wrong, joking or not. Though one thing that is deceptive about those index P/E ratios is that it averages in all the loss making companies as well... i.e. I don't think the average would be as high as 21 if you only looked at companies that are profitable. But as another example AMGN now has P/E of 17. Of course who knows what the overall market will be doing in 2 years time... or next week. In general companies don't get high P/E's simply because they are part of an index... they get high P/E because of the projected growth. If MNKD has that kind of profitability AND a projection of strong growth beyond 2025, there could be a lot of upside... especially if growth in approved drugs and a perceived strong pipeline. |
|
|
|
Post by ktim on Aug 7, 2023 21:55:43 GMT -5
From page 28 of the 10-Q looks like 266M outstanding now and up to 73M more coming with conversions, stock options etc. So that's 339M.
$280/339 = $0.83 per share. x 17 = $14/share.
Though certainly could be quite a bit higher if the growth trajectory is strong with analyst price targets and institutional investors getting behind it.
|
|
|
|
Post by mytakeonit on Aug 7, 2023 22:00:00 GMT -5
So get to $5 and we go straight to $10. And in 5 years we'll be at $100.
But, that's always been mytakeonit
|
|
rebby
Researcher
Posts: 62
|
Post by rebby on Aug 7, 2023 22:02:58 GMT -5
I like the Price/Earnings ratio. I don’t remember MNKD shares outstanding, and the debt convertibles will add some dilution to the shares outstanding, but if $280M is the earnings and shares outstanding is ~280M shares, than Earnings Per Share = $280M/280M or $1. Brief search of average P/E for consituents of NASDAQ is ~21. Therefore, $280M in earnings with 280M shares outstanding should result in a Price Per Share of ~$21. That’s the average, so some stocks will be below, and some above. dh4mizzou predicts $4.75. We laugh (nervously) and hope to Hell he’s wrong, joking or not. Though one thing that is deceptive about those index P/E ratios is that it averages in all the loss making companies as well... i.e. I don't think the average would be as high as 21 if you only looked at companies that are profitable. But as another example AMGN now has P/E of 17. Of course who knows what the overall market will be doing in 2 years time... or next week. In general companies don't get high P/E's simply because they are part of an index... they get high P/E because of the projected growth. If MNKD has that kind of profitability AND a projection of strong growth beyond 2025, there could be a lot of upside... especially if growth in approved drugs and a perceived strong pipeline. “i.e. I don't think the average would be as high as 21 if you only looked at companies that are profitable” Wouldn’t this indicate a higher ratio for profitable companies? |
|
|
|
Post by ktim on Aug 7, 2023 22:17:21 GMT -5
Actually, scratch that part of my comment. Quite frankly I'm not sure how that works to get index averages you may run across. Whether it's that it's the individual P/E ratios of each company added (including negative P/Es) and then dividing by number of companies, which I think is what you're thinking. Or whether when you hear a overall P/E for an index it's taking the overall profits (reduced by money losing companies) compared to overall shares which I guess was where my mind was going. You may well be right. I'll try to be better on not talking beyond my knowledge base.
Though I still would say using an index PE isn't a very good metric. There are a lot of high growth, high flying companies like NVDA that skew averages higher. The fact that NVDA trades at nose bleed PE doesn't somehow trickle down to all companies that reside on the same market or in the same index.
|
|
rebby
Researcher
Posts: 62
|
Post by rebby on Aug 8, 2023 3:04:16 GMT -5
Actually, scratch that part of my comment. Quite frankly I'm not sure how that works to get index averages you may run across. Whether it's that it's the individual P/E ratios of each company added (including negative P/Es) and then dividing by number of companies, which I think is what you're thinking. Or whether when you hear a overall P/E for an index it's taking the overall profits (reduced by money losing companies) compared to overall shares which I guess was where my mind was going. You may well be right. I'll try to be better on not talking beyond my knowledge base. Though I still would say using an index PE isn't a very good metric. There are a lot of high growth, high flying companies like NVDA that skew averages higher. The fact that NVDA trades at nose bleed PE doesn't somehow trickle down to all companies that reside on the same market or in the same index. I appreciate the train of thought either way, I had not considered your reasoning. |
|
|
|
Post by prcgorman2 on Aug 8, 2023 6:16:22 GMT -5
Actually, scratch that part of my comment. Quite frankly I'm not sure how that works to get index averages you may run across. Whether it's that it's the individual P/E ratios of each company added (including negative P/Es) and then dividing by number of companies, which I think is what you're thinking. Or whether when you hear a overall P/E for an index it's taking the overall profits (reduced by money losing companies) compared to overall shares which I guess was where my mind was going. You may well be right. I'll try to be better on not talking beyond my knowledge base. Though I still would say using an index PE isn't a very good metric. There are a lot of high growth, high flying companies like NVDA that skew averages higher. The fact that NVDA trades at nose bleed PE doesn't somehow trickle down to all companies that reside on the same market or in the same index. Good points well made. When I’ve researched average P/E in the past and actually spent more than 10 minutes at it, the P/E was sector-based which I think is more appropriate than exchange-based. That’s been some years but going from memory the BP sector average is higher than the exchange average, but in either case I didn’t dig into the exact math and just took it at face value assuming the math was generally accepted. Going from a memory which is too full of arcane crap to remember investment stuff as well as I would like, the market-average at that time was around 24 (a few points higher than now in a depressed economic time with higher interest rates and higher inflation) and the BP sector average was 40. Just as ktim says there were outlier P/E values as high as 70, but they were few. Given MNKDs persistent overhead on share price, my assumption is MNKD will track closer to and possibly below the sector P/E which I assume is now in the mid to upper 30s. If we can assume 36 as the average BP sector P/E, than an EPS of .83 will yield a share price of $29.88. It’s back-o-the-napkin. Caveat emptor. |
|
|
|
Post by Clement on Aug 8, 2023 6:54:48 GMT -5
|
|
