|
|
Post by mango on May 2, 2024 14:35:46 GMT -5
Having a great inhalation powder is only half the equation. If the inhaler is subpar then the results will be mediocre and issues will arise. This is the case for Liquidia and other similar companies that may have a good powder, but have crap inhalers. At MannKind, we have bridged the issue and solved the problem. The result? Synergy.
MannKind’s inhalation devices utilize the concept of flow resistance. MannKind delivers their dry powders slower than anyone else in the world. The inhaler utilizes high resistance. This requires very little inspiratory force (patient effort). This enables the dry powder to properly navigate the anatomical airways down to the deep lung with minimal deposition on the back of the throat. The powder fully traverses from the cartridge to the deep lung in the first 500 milliseconds of inhalation and only requires about 350-500mL of air. The inhalation device and powder creates synergy. This explains some of why they are so effective and successful together.
At least 70% of the inhalation powder is delivered to the deep lungs. That’s very good.
To compare, probably half of that percentage makes it with the Liquidia inhaler as evidenced by the Liquidia clinical data that United presented in some conferences not long ago comparing Tyvaso DPI to Yutrepia. Low resistance inhalers (Liquidia inhaler) requires significantly more inspiratory force (patient effort). The powder moves through the inhalation device in a fast, chaotic fashion, with a significant amount depositing in the upper airway and a little amount ever making it to the deep lungs.
Mike talks more and more about this all the time. I was re reading the recent earnings call and he describes this nicely. I actually wish Mike would spend even more time discussing how MannKind’s dry powder formulation and inhaler are different and why they are better. He usually does touch on this subject but it needs to be a higher priority, IMO.
|
|
|
|
Post by BD on May 2, 2024 14:46:19 GMT -5
So, at this point I think people understand what a neural net is? It's a system that learns. We all have a natural one, the brain, and now there are unnatural ones, so to speak. Anyway, the one in my skull has learned through some serious pain and self-flagellation (mostly mental) that putting anything more than play money into MNKD at this point is like you-know-whating it into the wind. I left a token amount in so I'd be a shareholder, and now that position has actually risen to the role of a legitimate "stinker" ... I love that term, it was taught me by a member of one of the previous boards I admin-ed, and nothing fits the moniker as well (or probably ever will) as MNKD does. And I continue to enjoy the fact I in no way rely on my MNKD position ever again having any salient effect on my net worth. Interesting view. I wonder if Blackrock and Vanguard agree. My memory is during the depths of depression (MannKind’s, not yours), the stock was mostly held by retail investors and that as prospects improved, that changed to MNKD being mostly held by institutional investors. If MannKind is able to successfully bring nintedanib to market, it should be shortly (a year or so) after bringing clofazimine to market. At that point, MannKind will have 4 significant revenue streams instead of 2. In that same space of time, the Pediatric trial will have completed and presumably the label changed to permit prescription of Afrezza to children on-label. And Cipla will be selling Afrezza too. Finally, the $230M in convertible bond debt should be retired too, potentially with no dilution whatsoever. That improving outlook should help improve your outlook. I hope it does. So the thing I tried to convey, and I'm not sure it got across, is that the fundamentals and future prospects don't figure any longer into my personal take on MKND as an investment. Yes, it looks good now, but it looked pretty damn good before and still crashed and burned. This thing is a total enigma. After all these years, my instinct is to expect that some other shoe is going to drop and keep MNKD from making long investors money. Maybe it'll be a lowball buyout; maybe it'll be some new sort of scandal; maybe it'll be competition. I don't know what it will be, but I am not going to be blindsided by it again. At least not for anywhere as much money as I was in the past. Once bitten, twice shy, third time I just run the other way. |
|
|
|
Post by centralcoastinvestor on May 2, 2024 15:35:42 GMT -5
Interesting view. I wonder if Blackrock and Vanguard agree. My memory is during the depths of depression (MannKind’s, not yours), the stock was mostly held by retail investors and that as prospects improved, that changed to MNKD being mostly held by institutional investors. If MannKind is able to successfully bring nintedanib to market, it should be shortly (a year or so) after bringing clofazimine to market. At that point, MannKind will have 4 significant revenue streams instead of 2. In that same space of time, the Pediatric trial will have completed and presumably the label changed to permit prescription of Afrezza to children on-label. And Cipla will be selling Afrezza too. Finally, the $230M in convertible bond debt should be retired too, potentially with no dilution whatsoever. That improving outlook should help improve your outlook. I hope it does. So the thing I tried to convey, and I'm not sure it got across, is that the fundamentals and future prospects don't figure any longer into my personal take on MKND as an investment. Yes, it looks good now, but it looked pretty damn good before and still crashed and burned. This thing is a total enigma. After all these years, my instinct is to expect that some other shoe is going to drop and keep MNKD from making long investors money. Maybe it'll be a lowball buyout; maybe it'll be some new sort of scandal; maybe it'll be competition. I don't know what it will be, but I am not going to be blindsided by it again. At least not for anywhere as much money as I was in the past. Once bitten, twice shy, third time I just run the other way. It is kind of interesting that you are an Administrator of the Mnkd ProBoards with such a bleak view of MannKind. Kinda sad really. Why help run the Board if you think so little of MannKind? |
|
|
|
Post by akemp3000 on May 2, 2024 15:41:00 GMT -5
The market throughout its history has been filled with companies that have suddenly skyrocketed, those that have stalled for years before skyrocketing, and those who have continued to flat line or fail. This is especially true in the biotech sector. I've been with MNKD for a very long time and have never been more enthused about the near term future. I have invested a lot, intend to invest more and sleep well at night. IMO, this moment in time is a really good place to be and its difficult to imagine why past disappoints have any connection to the future. In addition to the science, the pipeline expansion and improved financial position are reasons for optimism. The past couple of years have been good to this company. It's time for the market and pps to soon catch up. GLTA
|
|
|
|
Post by BD on May 2, 2024 15:55:03 GMT -5
So the thing I tried to convey, and I'm not sure it got across, is that the fundamentals and future prospects don't figure any longer into my personal take on MKND as an investment. Yes, it looks good now, but it looked pretty damn good before and still crashed and burned. This thing is a total enigma. After all these years, my instinct is to expect that some other shoe is going to drop and keep MNKD from making long investors money. Maybe it'll be a lowball buyout; maybe it'll be some new sort of scandal; maybe it'll be competition. I don't know what it will be, but I am not going to be blindsided by it again. At least not for anywhere as much money as I was in the past. Once bitten, twice shy, third time I just run the other way. It is kind of interesting that you are an Administrator of the Mnkd ProBoards with such a bleak view of MannKind. Kinda sad really. Why help run the Board if you think so little of MannKind? Again, it's not that I "think so little of MannKind." I don't know how many times and in how many different ways I need to say it: It's the personal repeated thrashings I've taken as an investor that have trained me to have a very defensive posture toward MNKD as an investment. This is a personal attitude, I have nothing to say about the fundamentals or technicals (well, aside from feeling that TA just doesn't work on MNKD in any useful way). I'm mostly here to help my friend liane administer the board. And to be honest about my position and feelings about the stock. If I weren't an administrator, I'd probably feel it was less relevant for the membership to understand where I'm at. |
|
|
|
Post by prcgorman2 on May 2, 2024 16:05:44 GMT -5
Interesting view. I wonder if Blackrock and Vanguard agree. My memory is during the depths of depression (MannKind’s, not yours), the stock was mostly held by retail investors and that as prospects improved, that changed to MNKD being mostly held by institutional investors. If MannKind is able to successfully bring nintedanib to market, it should be shortly (a year or so) after bringing clofazimine to market. At that point, MannKind will have 4 significant revenue streams instead of 2. In that same space of time, the Pediatric trial will have completed and presumably the label changed to permit prescription of Afrezza to children on-label. And Cipla will be selling Afrezza too. Finally, the $230M in convertible bond debt should be retired too, potentially with no dilution whatsoever. That improving outlook should help improve your outlook. I hope it does. So the thing I tried to convey, and I'm not sure it got across, is that the fundamentals and future prospects don't figure any longer into my personal take on MKND as an investment. Yes, it looks good now, but it looked pretty damn good before and still crashed and burned. This thing is a total enigma. After all these years, my instinct is to expect that some other shoe is going to drop and keep MNKD from making long investors money. Maybe it'll be a lowball buyout; maybe it'll be some new sort of scandal; maybe it'll be competition. I don't know what it will be, but I am not going to be blindsided by it again. At least not for anywhere as much money as I was in the past. Once bitten, twice shy, third time I just run the other way. I think I'm beginning to understand. Most of my investing has been 401K, ESPP, and my "gambling" with my investment account. MNKD dominates my gambling portfolio which has done horrible, but not my overall investing which has been basically all managed and has roughly tracked the markets (big surprise - probably could have just done ETFs). Anyway, I can understand being cautious especially after your experience. Glad to hear you're optimistic enough to risk a little and follow along with the rest of the longs here. Good luck to you, and all MNKD investors! |
|
|
|
Post by BD on May 2, 2024 17:01:46 GMT -5
Thank you, prc, that's correct.
|
|
|
|
Post by ktim on May 2, 2024 18:26:27 GMT -5
So, at this point I think people understand what a neural net is? It's a system that learns. We all have a natural one, the brain, and now there are unnatural ones, so to speak. Anyway, the one in my skull has learned through some serious pain and self-flagellation (mostly mental) that putting anything more than play money into MNKD at this point is like you-know-whating it into the wind. I left a token amount in so I'd be a shareholder, and now that position has actually risen to the role of a legitimate "stinker" ... I love that term, it was taught me by a member of one of the previous boards I admin-ed, and nothing fits the moniker as well (or probably ever will) as MNKD does. And I continue to enjoy the fact I in no way rely on my MNKD position ever again having any salient effect on my net worth. Interesting view. I wonder if Blackrock and Vanguard agree. My memory is during the depths of depression (MannKind’s, not yours), the stock was mostly held by retail investors and that as prospects improved, that changed to MNKD being mostly held by institutional investors. If MannKind is able to successfully bring nintedanib to market, it should be shortly (a year or so) after bringing clofazimine to market. At that point, MannKind will have 4 significant revenue streams instead of 2. In that same space of time, the Pediatric trial will have completed and presumably the label changed to permit prescription of Afrezza to children on-label. And Cipla will be selling Afrezza too. Finally, the $230M in convertible bond debt should be retired too, potentially with no dilution whatsoever. That improving outlook should help improve your outlook. I hope it does. Not sure that having the convertible debt retired without dilution would be a good sign. That would mean the stock has basically gone sideways or down in the next 2 1/2 years. I would certainly hope that isn't the case, and if 1) Tyvaso growth performs as UTHR expects and 2) MNKD pipeline progresses without significant setback, I see no reason why share price should be under the conversion price by end of 2026. |
|
|
|
Post by ktim on May 2, 2024 18:57:31 GMT -5
Interesting view. I wonder if Blackrock and Vanguard agree. My memory is during the depths of depression (MannKind’s, not yours), the stock was mostly held by retail investors and that as prospects improved, that changed to MNKD being mostly held by institutional investors. If MannKind is able to successfully bring nintedanib to market, it should be shortly (a year or so) after bringing clofazimine to market. At that point, MannKind will have 4 significant revenue streams instead of 2. In that same space of time, the Pediatric trial will have completed and presumably the label changed to permit prescription of Afrezza to children on-label. And Cipla will be selling Afrezza too. Finally, the $230M in convertible bond debt should be retired too, potentially with no dilution whatsoever. That improving outlook should help improve your outlook. I hope it does. So the thing I tried to convey, and I'm not sure it got across, is that the fundamentals and future prospects don't figure any longer into my personal take on MKND as an investment. Yes, it looks good now, but it looked pretty damn good before and still crashed and burned. This thing is a total enigma. After all these years, my instinct is to expect that some other shoe is going to drop and keep MNKD from making long investors money. Maybe it'll be a lowball buyout; maybe it'll be some new sort of scandal; maybe it'll be competition. I don't know what it will be, but I am not going to be blindsided by it again. At least not for anywhere as much money as I was in the past. Once bitten, twice shy, third time I just run the other way. As an investment it really didn't look good, even before SNY bailed the adoption rate for Afrezza was sending alarm bells. SNY exiting was an air raid siren going off. Earnings calls and filings almost spelled out the future of dilution if anyone cared to pay attention. I also got burned back then, because I ignored all of that. The echo chamber here, and pitch forks out for anyone with a realistic view, I think contributed to a lot of people thinking it looked like a good investment back then. To me MNKD isn't at all an enigma. Mannkind did not do a good job in Afrezza trials and dealing with FDA. There were forces arrayed against MNKD... yes, including short sellers (but the issues with Afrezza weren't created by the shorts). It was inevitable that massive dilution would occur... and that has lasting effect. Now we're in a pretty enviable position, basically back to being a pipeline biotech, but with source of funding for that pipeline that seems to be assured (Tyvaso royalties). I don't think Afrezza is going to get anyone excited, despite noble/relentless attempts here on proboards. Even the "non-risk adjusted" revenue projections for Afrezza from management are lackluster. If pipeline progresses MNKD will be a really good investment going forward. If pipeline fails... that's the risk. |
|
|
|
Post by akemp3000 on May 2, 2024 20:04:51 GMT -5
I'm so grateful I don't have the same pessimistic, or at least lackluster, perspective of some here though I do believe they're now in the overwhelming minority. Guess we'll find out soon enough who had the more accurate perspective.
|
|
|
|
Post by prcgorman2 on May 3, 2024 7:12:10 GMT -5
Interesting view. I wonder if Blackrock and Vanguard agree. My memory is during the depths of depression (MannKind’s, not yours), the stock was mostly held by retail investors and that as prospects improved, that changed to MNKD being mostly held by institutional investors. If MannKind is able to successfully bring nintedanib to market, it should be shortly (a year or so) after bringing clofazimine to market. At that point, MannKind will have 4 significant revenue streams instead of 2. In that same space of time, the Pediatric trial will have completed and presumably the label changed to permit prescription of Afrezza to children on-label. And Cipla will be selling Afrezza too. Finally, the $230M in convertible bond debt should be retired too, potentially with no dilution whatsoever. That improving outlook should help improve your outlook. I hope it does. Not sure that having the convertible debt retired without dilution would be a good sign. That would mean the stock has basically gone sideways or down in the next 2 1/2 years. I would certainly hope that isn't the case, and if 1) Tyvaso growth performs as UTHR expects and 2) MNKD pipeline progresses without significant setback, I see no reason why share price should be under the conversion price by end of 2026. Sorry ktim, you’re going to have to help me out. I don’t know how you arrived at the conclusion that becoming debt-free (a very rare thing in the corporate world) without dilution could imply poor share price performance. We’ve all seen how the share price takes a beating with every dilution, and constant complaining about it, even when it is relatively miniscule and is only used as a form of executive compensation. In any case, dilution bad, debt-free good. What is your logic? |
|
|
|
Post by BD on May 3, 2024 8:36:56 GMT -5
I'm so grateful I don't have the same pessimistic, or at least lackluster, perspective of some here though I do believe they're now in the overwhelming minority. Guess we'll find out soon enough who had the more accurate perspective. At this point in life I've discovered that over-optimism gets you into more trouble than pessimism. I'm a very optimistic person about most things, most of the time. And that's exactly how I got myself into trouble with MNKD. At this point I'm totally optimistic about my future with a large MNKD investment not being a part of it. |
|
|
|
Post by ktim on May 3, 2024 21:37:47 GMT -5
Not sure that having the convertible debt retired without dilution would be a good sign. That would mean the stock has basically gone sideways or down in the next 2 1/2 years. I would certainly hope that isn't the case, and if 1) Tyvaso growth performs as UTHR expects and 2) MNKD pipeline progresses without significant setback, I see no reason why share price should be under the conversion price by end of 2026. Sorry ktim, you’re going to have to help me out. I don’t know how you arrived at the conclusion that becoming debt-free (a very rare thing in the corporate world) without dilution could imply poor share price performance. We’ve all seen how the share price takes a beating with every dilution, and constant complaining about it, even when it is relatively miniscule and is only used as a form of executive compensation. In any case, dilution bad, debt-free good. What is your logic? It is only going to be without dilution if we are still under the conversion price. But that dilution has basically already been factored in, and will save a lot of cash if we're above the conversion price. I don't think in and of itself it would be horrible to be under the conversion price so that there isn't dilution, other than the fact that it will mean we're still under $5.20 at the end of 2026. I'm hoping and believing that we'll be considerably higher than that, even with the dilution that will be triggered by it. |
|
|
|
Post by prcgorman2 on May 3, 2024 21:45:32 GMT -5
Sorry ktim, you’re going to have to help me out. I don’t know how you arrived at the conclusion that becoming debt-free (a very rare thing in the corporate world) without dilution could imply poor share price performance. We’ve all seen how the share price takes a beating with every dilution, and constant complaining about it, even when it is relatively miniscule and is only used as a form of executive compensation. In any case, dilution bad, debt-free good. What is your logic? It is only going to be without dilution if we are still under the conversion price. But that dilution has basically already been factored in, and will save a lot of cash if we're above the conversion price. I don't think in and of itself it would be horrible to be under the conversion price so that there isn't dilution, other than the fact that it will mean were still under $5.20 at the end of 2026. I'm hoping and believing that we'll be considerably higher than that, even with the dilution that will be triggered by it. Excellent explanation. Thank you so much. I understand and you bring up an interesting point (at least to me). Is there more value in using treasury stock (1 cent per par is my guess) to eliminate the bond debt, or is there more value in avoding dilution which may very much please investors? I don’t know the answer. I can only say that for myself I would prefer avoidance of further dilution. |
|
|
|
Post by ktim on May 3, 2024 21:53:15 GMT -5
It is only going to be without dilution if we are still under the conversion price. But that dilution has basically already been factored in, and will save a lot of cash if we're above the conversion price. I don't think in and of itself it would be horrible to be under the conversion price so that there isn't dilution, other than the fact that it will mean were still under $5.20 at the end of 2026. I'm hoping and believing that we'll be considerably higher than that, even with the dilution that will be triggered by it. Excellent explanation. Thank you so much. I understand and you bring up an interesting point (at least to me). Is there more value in using treasury stock (1 cent per par is my guess) to eliminate the bond debt, or is there more value in avoding dilution which may very much please investors? I don’t know the answer. I can only say that for myself I would prefer avoidance of further dilution. If the time comes and the shares go out because we're over the conversion price, that leaves MNKD with the money, and if there aren't enough opportunities to put that money to use expanding the pipeline, they could always institute a share buyback program. Though I'd hope they find growth oriented uses for the cash. |
|
