|
|
Post by BD on Jun 26, 2024 9:07:11 GMT -5
uvula, not true. Password cracking does not require interacting with the UI as long as the encryption mechanism is known and cyphertext (output of the encryption) is known, and that's what is typically revealed through cybersecurity breaches. That applies to both quantum-based and ordinary brute-force approaches when they can be performed "offline", unhindered by timeout protection.
|
|
|
|
Post by uvula on Jun 26, 2024 9:17:37 GMT -5
uvula, not true. Password cracking does not require interacting with the UI as long as the encryption mechanism is known, and that applies to both quantum-based and ordinary brute-force approaches when they can be performed "offline", unhindered by timeout protection. You are correct if you are trying to crack a password protected file and the bad actor has a copy of my file. But if you are trying to guess my banking password at my bank, all the bank has to do is limit how frequently the hacker can guess. I am even less of an expert at this than I am at investing. Why is my simplistic way of looking at this wrong? |
|
|
|
Post by BD on Jun 26, 2024 9:20:29 GMT -5
Sorry, I added the need for the cyphertext after you replied. But yeah, a cybersecurity breach is where it would have to begin, so the bad actor can get the results of the encryption process so they can apply whatever cracking approach they're using. But again, login timeouts wouldn't help in that case.
|
|
|
|
Post by prcgorman2 on Jun 26, 2024 9:20:42 GMT -5
uvula, not true. Password cracking does not require interacting with the UI as long as the encryption mechanism is known, and that applies to both quantum-based and ordinary brute-force approaches when they can be performed "offline", unhindered by timeout protection. Good point and I think you're specifically referring to having stolen data-at-rest. e.g., a password-protected spreadsheet. The same basic concept can apply to cryptographically-protected passwords in a password file stolen from a service provider of some sort. e.g., a bank.
I agree with uvula that we're way off topic (of MNKD) so I apologize for my contributions to that wandering. If there is sufficient interest to continue this Internet-based-fraud discussion, we're probably better off moving it to a new off-topic thread.
|
|
|
|
Post by BD on Jun 26, 2024 9:21:57 GMT -5
Haha, prc, you sound like a mod!
|
|
|
|
Post by ktim on Jun 26, 2024 14:51:34 GMT -5
w/r/t quantum computing defeating encryption, I've been told (by a friend who'd know) that the gov't has been working on that issue for a while and it's a fixable problem. In the meantime, machines don't have enough qubits yet to effectively break strong encryption, and may not for a long time. Even a decade or more ago DoD was requiring contractors to switch over to quantum resistant encryption... mainly just increasing the key sizes. The algorithms are highly asymmetrical, requiring far far more compute power to hack than to encrypt, so in practice conventional computers should be able to stay ahead of even quantum hacking (which isn't likely to be used for hacking by any but the largest state actors). Many of the cloud service providers (AWS, Azure) offer cloud computing at DoD approved levels. But there are always the human beings in the loop that tend to be the weak link. |
|
|
|
Post by porkini on Jun 26, 2024 21:15:24 GMT -5
w/r/t quantum computing defeating encryption, I've been told (by a friend who'd know) that the gov't has been working on that issue for a while and it's a fixable problem. In the meantime, machines don't have enough qubits yet to effectively break strong encryption, and may not for a long time. Even a decade or more ago DoD was requiring contractors to switch over to quantum resistant encryption... mainly just increasing the key sizes. The algorithms are highly asymmetrical, requiring far far more compute power to hack than to encrypt, so in practice conventional computers should be able to stay ahead of even quantum hacking (which isn't likely to be used for hacking by any but the largest state actors). Many of the cloud service providers (AWS, Azure) offer cloud computing at DoD approved levels. But there are always the human beings in the loop that tend to be the weak link.Just to emphasize your point. |
|
|
|
Post by prcgorman2 on Jun 28, 2024 14:19:54 GMT -5
Will MNKD manage 20 out of 30 days above the convertible bond call price before the next earnings call? Probably not. Will they manage it after the next earnings call? Inquiring minds can't wait to find out! A debt free MannKind may be just around the corner.
|
|
|
|
Post by uvula on Jun 29, 2024 8:07:32 GMT -5
What's going on? Don't have a clue.
What's not going on? The price went up nicely and AFAIK, there were no hit pieces. Very unusual.
|
|
|
|
Post by letitride on Jun 29, 2024 13:23:36 GMT -5
I love this topic. Lets start with the past three profitable Quarterly reports and they just kept getting better. Then there was UTHRs last 1st Qtr report where starting at the 12 min mark in the call Martine tells us TDPI growth is no longer linear its curving up. With the follow up that TDPI will be garnering 70% of the tyvasso sales going forward. And while all that was going on Mike announces our NDA for Clofazimine and queuing up ICON1. Then came the ADA and you know all those top endocrinologist from around the country talking about how effective Afrezza is. There's more like Nintedanib DPI moving into phase 1, and our new labs courtesy our Pulmatrix partnership. So the answerer to whats going on is a lot. The typical hit piece of Mike sucks and there was a reverse split just isnt going to get it. Mike is busy writing the book of how to get it done and my bet is there's more plenty more coming. Lets Go!
|
|
|
|
Post by veritasfiliatemporis on Jun 30, 2024 1:59:09 GMT -5
News from Cipla coming....
|
|
|
|
Post by prcgorman2 on Jun 30, 2024 11:40:28 GMT -5
I did some sunny day back o’ the napkin calculations for which I’d like some criticism.
I went back to 1Q 2024 results to review work in progress to try to better remember the current revenue and future revenue opportunity and the sequence and timing of events leading to the revenue by 2030.
The short story is MNKD should enjoy annual revenue in 2024 between $250 and $300 million and estimates here on the board have been believably a little north of $275M, and the long-term outlook by 2030 is maybe 10x the 2024 revenue, give or take. I’m guessing somewhere between $2.5B and $3B. If shares outstanding don’t change much, that could mean more than $10 EPS and with a P/E of 17 (which I think is conservative) the share price could be $170/share in 2030.
Calculating revenue CAGR using CAGR = (Ending Value / Starting Value)^(1 / Number of Years) – 1 and multiplying the result by 100 yields an unbelievable 46.8% CAGR.
While the result of the calculation is unbelievable, the development path is believable. What are the assumptions leading to this conclusion? We’ve already assumed ~$275M in annual revenue for 2024, so the assumptions are based on answering the question, what will the current and future revenue streams contribute that result in a 10x increase in revenue in 6 years?
Afrezza net revenue in 1Q was >16% YoY versus 1Q23. We know price is perceived as a barrier to uptake but we can assume INHALE-3 results were influential and that INHALE-1 results should be no less so and usefully improve the marketability of Afrezza. I will assume a conservative 10% growth YoY between 2024 and 2030 based on improvements in marketability such as INHALE-1 and INHALE-3 results and improvements in price, insurance coverage, and intl sales. Starting with ~$72M in net revenue for 2024, 10% more each year yields about $140M in 2030. This is very conservative and ignores significant revenue from Cipla which may not be a good assumption.
Tyvaso DPI is harder to estimate. Manufacturing revenue was supposed to plateau but didn’t because of funding capacity improvements. UTHR is building their own capacity and the revenue to MNKD from operating UTHRs plant is difficult to estimate. If we assume the original $2B in sales for Tyvaso DPI based on prescriptions for PAH, the royalties would plateau around $200M, but because of the work to expand the market with additional indications, the sales and related plateau may be $400M to $600M or more. I’ll use $500M by 2030.
MannKind estimated revenue of $217M for clofazimine in 2030.
Slide 11 of the 1Q results slides seems to indicate that sales of Ofev for IPF will top $5B in 2024 and begin declining after that but without an explanation for why. I assume the reason is nintedanib DPI will do to Ofev what Tyvaso DPI has done to Tyvaso, and that MannKind is assuming they may own most of the Ofev market for IPF by 2030 with an estimated market of $7.5B in 2030.
So there it is. Revenue from Afrezza, Tyvaso DPI royalties and manufacturing, and clofazimine could account for $850M+ by 2030. That means MannKind’s nintedanib DPI needs to account for ~$2.5B+ in revenue to yield a $10 EPS in 2030.
Given the existing and assumed increased market size for nintedanib and the uptake of nintedanib DPI versus Ofev, it doesn’t seem like an unreasonable set of assumptions.
|
|
|
|
Post by awesomo on Jun 30, 2024 12:42:55 GMT -5
That’s great and all, but you don’t consider rising costs at all in your calculation which makes your earnings numbers wildly overestimated.
|
|
|
|
Post by uvula on Jun 30, 2024 12:50:07 GMT -5
$170/share in 2030 would be a market cap of 34B. Sounds ridiculous at first glance. But it is less than 10% of the current market cap of novo nordisk and in 2030 the market cap of novo will probably be much higher than today. Also, 34B is around the current market cap of dexcom which is basically a 1 product company. I'd be happy with $30/share in 2030 but 170 might not be crazy.
|
|
|
|
Post by prcgorman2 on Jun 30, 2024 12:53:47 GMT -5
That’s great and all, but you don’t consider rising costs at all in your calculation which makes your earnings numbers wildly overestimated. How do you figure? |
|
