|
|
Post by mannmade on Aug 10, 2015 12:49:45 GMT -5
I sent Matt a message last week that I didn't post with some of my comments and suggestions. He and Haken both responded separately and very professionally regarding an idea to give to the Joint committee. I did not comment or post the suggestion or their reply as I thought it a reply that should be keep privately. Sometimes we should not tell everything we know or hear as the Shorty's hear it to and use it against MannKind. So I can see why Management responds like they do to the public.
My take of today's call is that they are very busy working on Afrezza, new ideas and running the company for the future. I think that the resolution of the notes will be very interesting as the are issuing Non-registered shares to the new selected note holders. My suspicion is when the BA shares come back to MannKind into the treasury . Then these newly returned treasury shares will be reissued to the holders of the Non-registered shares and we will see Buy In? Yes! Buy In. Matt said that they will soon make an announcement on the debt resolution and the current shares-to-notes conversion, the period for which ends tomorrow (August 11). I thought Matt's comment interesting, especially when he stated that they did not want to convert below $4.60/share.
As far as buy in... well, I've posted my thoughts on that possibility. If SNY was a note holder and has been converting notes plus buying MNKD shares off the market or through fund managers during this period, they have until August 21 to file a 13D with the SEC, announcing that they have taken an equity interest in MannKind Corporation, assuming they only reach the reporting threshold today or tomorrow.
I can see Sanofi taking an equity stake for two reasons:
- buying an equity interest would send a message to Wall Street to demonstrate their support for MannKind and its shareholders and, more importantly, its product Afrezza;
- buying a percentages of MNKD shares at these prices would lower Sanofi's future average $/share in the event of an acquisition of product/company.
mnholdem, I have been saying the same thing for quite some time but also have another reason they might want to do this which has nothing to do with buying Afrezza and/or mnkd. While I agree with both I also think if they truly believe in Afrezza, as the "ultimate insider" Sanofi knows what to expect in the future for the success of Afrezza which they are helping to create. By purchasing say 4.5% (16,360,000 shs out of 409,000,000 shs) of outstanding shares at this price (say $4.10) they could use the increase in share value to help offset the milestone payments that will be coming due with the growing sales success of Afrezza. Let's say that mnkd gets to $25.00 pps as some predict in the next 3 years. Those 16,360,000 shares bought at $4.10 pps today will be worth $409,000,000 or roughly half of all milestone payments due. In effect Sanofi would be able to cut the cost of the actual milestone payments by almost half with such an investment. And as I said they are the "ultimate insider" and so should have enough information to know if this is an investment that makes sense. |
|
|
|
Post by mannmade on Aug 10, 2015 13:05:27 GMT -5
Probably the single biggest factor immediately impacting scripts right now. NVO has no doubt "bought" the insurance companies via the oldest marketing ploy there is with a lesser product, drop/undercut and mass market to try and gain as much market share as possible...this was evident back a while ago when I posted that a hospital pharmacist I know told me they replaced Lantus with Levemir strictly from a cost standpoint. This has been Novo's modus operandi and strategy probably since the Adcom vote...obviously in the last year you've seen the DTC advertising for their "pens", Novolog, and most recently Levemir come out like never seen before. Personally, I think it's flattering that they felt it necessary to take such aggressive measures as obviously it speaks a different tune then the one from the individual that was questioned about Afrezza at the ADA convention. To me it's their swan song, so apropos if you will: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swan_song because you better believe those "french" are not going to take it lying down so to speak  Thus, the insulin wars have begun and as Matt stated, "they have some strategic efforts being worked on" when asked about the formulary issues. We all know the inter-relationships that are connected in the investment/government/BP arena and perhaps the longer term investors have battle wounds through an educational process that was incurred via good yet idealistic intentions. I thoroughly admit having paid a tuition for this real world schooling that it has been one helluva an eye opening experience. I also get where Matt is coming from on the shares lent out situation and how that may have impacted his strategies regarding the convertibles over the last couple of quarters. It must have been something for him to see how many in unison were joining in to lend out the shares thus making inventory more widely available. I imagine in the beginning it wasn't playing too big a role but as more and more joined in it must of most certainly caused some consternation on managements part when looking to implement different strategies for retiring the convertible. Bottom line the CC confirmed what my conversations have been with the SNY rep. and that is they continue to have a methodical plan in place both in dealing with the formulary issues and concurrently working within the medical professional arena to establish Afrezza for what it is and now has been endorsed by most of those using it... as a second to none best in class RAA insulin. I hear the swan song loud and clear and looking forward to the swan resting in peace as I smile now when I see those ads touting the inferior product Maybe Novo is taking a play out of GM's book - sell at a loss and make it up on volume! Sarc off. If the only strategy is to cut prices then it implies the product is a commodity and in a world where innovation is critical to the health of a company, cutting price is hardly a viable long term strategy. So if health insurer A signs a deal with Novo and then is bought by health insurer B can the acquiring company demand the better price without any of the commitments made by Co A to Novo - hypothetical question and fun to ask. Taking the value out of a product and turning it into a commodity has never worked. Look at all the problems with Airline, Television, Telecom, Music Industry, Auto (Rebates) and now oil as it is not working for the Saudi's who have had to run their first deficit in years to keep up volume production as they try to force others out of production. It only hurts the entire industry or category sector in the end. The good news is that Afrezza is not an RAA and is really a new "first in class drug" so we should be fine no mater what... imho |
|
|
|
Post by mannmade on Aug 10, 2015 13:13:20 GMT -5
Haha- if only Matt said management and board can't lend. As much as one would find it hard to believe Dr. Mann would loan shares, unless posted, it can be speculated. Or is there really a 200m share "actual" float- of which 120m are short? Hard to imagine but possible. Maybe Matt is chumming the waters to attract bigger traders. 20 funds buy 10m each- shares go to $20- sell 5m each and shorts still have to cover. If that happens- would I be guilty of collusion? Anyway, to blame loan programs for share price is ludicrous. When this company has quarterly PROFITS and a PE under 10, maybe there is manipulation. I mostly deal in options so have not loaned shares. Maybe he will blame the options market next quarter. If we bust with 50m short or 200m, we- being shareholders( or calls)are still bust. If we take off with 50m, not as sweet as 200m short. We need scripts- not stock loaners witch hunts . I don't think Matt is blaming those longs who loan their shares for the share price and power of the shorts. Rather I think he was trying to say to those longs who complain about the shorts is that you are helping them by doing this and you can't have it both ways. And at least in the short term there is an opportunity cost to mnkd when they go to seek financing on items such as the note currently due. |
|
|
|
Post by bradleysbest on Aug 10, 2015 13:48:58 GMT -5
I have not listened to the CC yet. Any news on TS & I thought there was to be an announcement soon in regards to a TS deal?
|
|
|
|
Post by brentie on Aug 10, 2015 13:49:59 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by newmnkdinvestor on Aug 10, 2015 13:50:07 GMT -5
Yea I guess I am not following. When I first opened my Fidelity account. I opened it with cash. I bought and sold stock before the settlement date and received a good faith violation. It was explained to me that I could add the margin feature to my cash account to off set what hasn't funded. Later on when I learned this allowed for shorted shares I turned it off. I was hoping someone would call me for my shares but no one ever did.
I own more shares in my ira then my cash account. My cash is my long position. There is no way I would turn margin off. I make a lot of trades using it. I would never tell someone to stop lending shares.
|
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Aug 10, 2015 13:56:33 GMT -5
Matt put to rest the FUD being spread on DaZoo (and briefly discussed here) that management is lending out shares, stating that MannKind employees are not allowed to keep their shares in any account that permits lending. Thanks for clearing that up, Matt! Employees. Is Al Mann considered an employee? Does he fall under that? I am a cynic so I was thinking both ways about the comment I can't imagine Al lending his shares even if not prohibited... and, I can't imagine the rate being so high if all of Al's shares were available for loan. |
|
|
|
Post by nugjuice on Aug 10, 2015 13:59:00 GMT -5
At least where I work - a top 5 full service brokerage firm - you can absolutely have a margin account and have a specific stock held in cash. I can't speak for discount brokerages though.
Here, there are two components to margin:
1) The account must be approved for margin. This is its own step with its own paperwork - this is likely what you agreed to, and they added 'margin' to your account, meaning you have the ability to trade on margin if you so desire.
2) Then, positions are moved into the type 'margin' which is a fancy way of saying they are being counted as collateral for your ability to borrow. They take the value of the position, and then give you a % of the value as borrowing ability based on the perceived risk of the position. In return, they are able to borrow your shares and do whatever they want with them.
So, you can absolutely have a margin account that's approved for margin, where you move a position from the "type" margin to cash. This would have the effect of lowering the amount you're allowed to borrow, because you're backing it with less collateral. If you have 9 other stocks in the account, you could leave all of these in margin and still be able to borrow based on their value. You could theoretically have a margin account, have 0 positions on margin, and have an available borrow of 0. But margin is still on the account so you can use it in the future.
I would imagine they have to have a way to do this - but you'd likely have to call a representative, and if they don't know what you're talking about, you might get bounced around for awhile.
|
|
|
|
Post by newmnkdinvestor on Aug 10, 2015 14:07:27 GMT -5
I am pretty sure Fidelity told me if margin is added to the account then they can lend those shares.
|
|
|
|
Post by ashiwi on Aug 10, 2015 14:43:48 GMT -5
I think if insiders bought some shares for a change, instead of selling every time they get their options, it would send a better picture than a bunch of retail shareholders asking for their loaned shares back.
|
|
|
|
Post by mannmade on Aug 10, 2015 14:55:37 GMT -5
Most "insiders" own quite a bit and still get as options. There is a certain cost even to exercise the options and so many sell for tax purposes, divorce, extraordinary need such as child's education and other such personal things we are not aware of. I realy only know of two insiders who sold for other reasons that would not necessarily qualify as an immediate need by those concerned with such matters. One is no longer with the company and the other has publically declared that they are no longer doing such. So imho this is no longer an issue. I do believe, also imho, that the stock is a good buy here as it should go up significantly over next 18 months. We shall see...
|
|
|
|
Post by mannmade on Aug 10, 2015 15:16:40 GMT -5
One thing that also caught my attention today on the call, that I have not yet seen discussed, was said by Matt almost as an aside comment, but I found it very interesting. To para-phase Matt, he said the SEC is very aware of the short situation and allegations of manipulation regarding Mankind Stock. Got me to wondering what the conversation might be that may be on-going at this point. Hopefully they are watching, waiting and collecting evidence of what many believe are the, if not illegal then, immoral practices of a few very greedy and large opportunists...
|
|
|
|
Post by BlueCat on Aug 10, 2015 15:43:47 GMT -5
IMHO - Matt was crystal clear and direct and also tried to be politic about it.
MNKD management (and I include Old Mann in this. Why would he need that interest money anyway?) are not shorting or lending shares.
He said stop lending shares. It must be making an impact or he wouldn't have gone out of the way to state it. And he was making it clear that he's not asking for something that he (and the others) are themselves not willing (or already) doing.
Or more to the point - "look guys. It is impacting your share price. So put up or shut up. We already have."
I generally have been of the opinion that its a bad idea. But with the longer-than-planned horizon and financial realities, I've been tempted. All of my shares are a cash position in the cash account of my overall brokerage account that does have a 'margin' account as well. I'm not certain if there was some loophole in the writing that my current brokerage could work around to grab those shares. I'm still trying to ascertain whether I'll be moving the shares to Fidelity anyway, though it would be to an IRA, which sounds like it would resolve this questions. hmrph.
If the real float is actually pretty small - with that high a short interest, shah. Retail portion of float - especially as someone noted - the larger retail investors who are more likely to be loaning out for interest - could make a difference.
|
|
|
|
Post by kball on Aug 10, 2015 15:50:59 GMT -5
I think if insiders bought some shares for a change, instead of selling every time they get their options, it would send a better picture than a bunch of retail shareholders asking for their loaned shares back. Ha. Matt-1 ashiwi-1 |
|
|
|
Post by BlueCat on Aug 10, 2015 16:54:50 GMT -5
I think if insiders bought some shares for a change, instead of selling every time they get their options, it would send a better picture than a bunch of retail shareholders asking for their loaned shares back. Ha. Matt-1 ashiwi-1 Heh. Fair enough. but for anyone receiving both paycheck and stock for compensation from one company knows, common wisdom is to diversify. In fact, exercise options as u get them. In good faith, they actually cut that nonsense out finally this spring. They have a lot more tied up in this than most of us. And Old Mann already went all in. |
|
Thus, the insulin wars have begun and as Matt stated, "they have some strategic efforts being worked on" when asked about the formulary issues. 
