|
Post by me on Mar 27, 2015 14:29:39 GMT -5
2nd the 2nd note - Both think they know more than they do about Afrezza.
So many things, including the "truth" or "falsity" of any number of things, depends so much on the perspective of the person making the decision. Actually, truth is objective, and therefore is never dependent upon one's "perspective." When "truth" can vary based upon someone's "perspective," then that is a subjective view. One stating that there are 6 sides to a pentagon, regardless of how emphatically one believes that, does not change the objective reality that there are only 5 sides. Subjective views are rather useless to argue about, except for the entertainment factor. It is important, however, to argue about objective truths when two individuals find themselves on opposite sides (of course, both can have views conflicting with one another and both of their views could be false!).
|
|
|
Post by me on Mar 27, 2015 15:00:19 GMT -5
A quick stylometry review of a half-dozen of PA's writing samples alongside a half-dozen of Jenny's writing samples provides stunning results. The function word, lexical and punctuation analysis all point to the same author!
|
|
|
Post by liane on Mar 27, 2015 15:04:12 GMT -5
How do you do that kind of analysis?
|
|
|
Post by me on Mar 27, 2015 15:08:04 GMT -5
You can use Signature, JGAAP or JStylo. Signature offers a free v.1.0. These programs are used frequently to remove the cloak of anonymity of authorship. I think in the case of PA/Jenny, no detailed writing style analysis was required.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Who is PA?
Mar 27, 2015 15:11:11 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2015 15:11:11 GMT -5
You can use Signature, JGAAP or JStylo. Signature offers a free v.1.0. These programs are used frequently to remove the cloak of anonymity of authorship. I think in the case of PA/Jenny, no detailed writing style analysis was required. Did you use any of the above? I'd love to see the results
|
|
|
Post by jpg on Mar 27, 2015 15:24:50 GMT -5
I don't know if the average Jenny fan/follower would be as shocked as we are by these kind of 'Wall Street like" cons or frauds? How often has she done this before? I can't imagine anyone who does grasp the depth of this misrepresentation/fraud to be supportive but she does seem to have a lot of supporters even amongst those with more understanding of the 'financial scam/fraud world'. A bit like Goldman selling to clients securities it knew were going to blow up in a few days or weeks. Diabetics are right to be cautious about anyone with a conflicting financial interest. That would now seem to include Jenny?
I also would be curious as how to use these programs for writing style. I wouldn't be surprised if we found some very interesting patterns if we automated these tools to scan the wider financial literature... It could actually make for a fascinating scientific study of the financial world!
|
|
|
Post by alethea on Mar 27, 2015 17:19:24 GMT -5
From Tu posted by her on 3-25-15: When I was invested in the company, I read all their SEC documents including the quarterly and annual statements and what is publicly revealed about their contract with Sanofi--much of which was kept secret from investors and replaced with asterisks in the documents. What I found in these documents was quite different from what bullish supposedly professional analysts writing for pennies a click had been telling investors. The latest annual report doesn't even have a clean Auditor's signoff. This is a huge red flag to anyone who has actually learned anything about reading these kinds of statements. Is it true that the 12-31-14 financial statements of Mannkind really did not get a clean opinion from the auditors??? I must admit when I read that on Tu that it scared me significantly. It is rare indeed for auditors to not issue a clean opinion on the financial statements of the Company that pays them to conduct their audit. If things are really bad, auditors are more likely to withdraw from the engagement than to issue a a "bad" opinion.
|
|
|
Post by liane on Mar 27, 2015 17:32:28 GMT -5
Here is the statement from the accounting firm. It is word for word the same as for the previous year, just change the dates. Since MNKD still has no real income yet, of course all they can say is they doubt the company's ability to continue as a going concern. PA is again spinning words to facilitate her own reality,
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of MannKind Corporation
Valencia, California
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of MannKind Corporation and subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2014 and 2013 and the related consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive loss, stockholders’ deficit, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2014. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the financial statements based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, such consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of MannKind Corporation and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2014, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared assuming that the Company will continue as a going concern. As discussed in Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements, the Company’s existing cash resources and its operating losses since inception raise substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern. Management’s plans concerning these matters are also described in Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements. The consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of these uncertainties.
We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2014, based on the criteria established in Internal Control — Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission and our report dated March 2, 2015 expressed an unqualified opinion on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.
/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
Los Angeles, California
March 2, 2015
|
|
|
Post by james on Mar 27, 2015 17:56:25 GMT -5
I completely agree. That is a clean audit. It means that the auditors did not uncover any reason to believe MNKD is hiding their financial situation and that all statements were prepared in proper accordance to GAAP.
MNKD will have no problem raising additional capital (supposing it is necessary) so long as sales are even modestly promising and there is no difficulty in the ongoing REMS. If they are not promising, there will be a reckoning in 12 to 18 months.
|
|
|
Post by james on Mar 27, 2015 18:07:49 GMT -5
Can we start the "Who is EffBarbie" investigation? Jeepers - that chick is out of her mind.
|
|
|
Post by jpg on Mar 27, 2015 18:14:58 GMT -5
Jenny and/or PsychoAnalyst is a dangerous person for Afrezza, Mannkind, diabetic innovation and for the diabetic community at large. Her ramblings about Mannkind can scare investors and more importantly scare potential patients who could benefit from Afrezza.
I for one am much more fearful of the damages she can do then what AF and even what Goldman can do. Jenny/ PA has the trust (for now anyway) of the diabetic community. No one in the diabetic community would take medical advice from Goldman or AF...
|
|
|
Post by lynn on Mar 27, 2015 19:49:12 GMT -5
James, , That Effbarbie character on twitter is so out there that I'm sure most can see right thru her ( I'm not certain she's female but her pic is ). I blocked her after reading one of her tweets & haven't looked back . I'm more concerned that she claims to be a Nurse . Doesn't add up . She reminds me of the many crazy's that I've blocked on YMB.
Jenny does concern me but no need to repeat myself . JPG sums it up just fine .
Lynn
|
|
|
Post by BlueCat on Mar 27, 2015 21:57:30 GMT -5
Interesting thread about PA/Jenny if the same person. I had to check back and consider what's been proposed here!
IMHO - All are entitled to opinion, and one can be both a financial analyst and a diabetic. And express that opinion. And it could be an honest, negative opinion - even if misinformed.
However: If getting paid for that opinion or holds a conflict of interest in the stock or through some income, and expresses, intentionally dishonest opinions with the outcome/goal of financial gain without disclosing said position - that would seem fraudulent and should be exposed. It would be the same in the flip - pumping a medical treatment while holding a stock, without believing in or understanding the medical treatment.
It seems it would take some factual, provable DD to expose. And the question remains whether (if intentionally bashing), its for personal reasons, or funded by a HF or other BP. In either case, it would seem especially bad for diabetics.
We do have at least one lawyer in the house, n'est-ce pas?
|
|
|
Post by mnkdorbust on Mar 29, 2015 23:34:58 GMT -5
Can we start the "Who is EffBarbie" investigation? Jeepers - that chick is out of her mind. Here you go: EffBarbie Arrest Record here: Arrest Record
Anyone have the over/under on her being unemployed within the next 30 days?
|
|
|
Post by james on Mar 30, 2015 1:32:57 GMT -5
Can we start the "Who is EffBarbie" investigation? Jeepers - that chick is out of her mind. Here you go: EffBarbie Arrest Record here: Arrest Record
Anyone have the over/under on her being unemployed within the next 30 days? You've got to be kidding me. Do you see that her photo on twitter has suddenly disappeared. What a hoot!
|
|