|
|
Post by mnholdem on Aug 10, 2015 18:17:41 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... I think that the SEC is always willing to prosecute a few, but not if they're large. Whatever they do will be token. I sound jaded but I believe what a SEC whistle-blower told a court a few years ago, that his manager at the SEC told him that there certain big firms that the SEC will never go after. He tried to go after them anyway...and was fired. He sued the SEC, won the trial and was awarded around $800k if memory serves. |
|
|
|
Post by cjc04 on Aug 10, 2015 18:20:27 GMT -5
Just something interesting I heard Matt say this morning, that I haven't seen mentioned yet.....
When asked about the amount of debt converted to shares so far, he ended his answer with ..... "I wouldn't want to jinx it"
Sounded a little to me like he was 8 for 8 and didn't want to "jinx" days 9 & 10. Just a thought.
|
|
|
|
Post by longstocking on Aug 10, 2015 18:36:45 GMT -5
Just something interesting I heard Matt say this morning, that I haven't seen mentioned yet..... When asked about the amount of debt converted to shares so far, he ended his answer with ..... "I wouldn't want to jinx it" Sounded a little to me like he was 8 for 8 and didn't want to "jinx" days 9 & 10. Just a thought. I was thinking the same thing! Jinx what?  ?? |
|
|
|
Post by morfu on Aug 10, 2015 18:47:31 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. Well, I think that this is something he got wrong! How often can my lend out shares be used to short? Just once and it happened a while ago, when I started my lending program.. Ever since I collect my about 2% interest per month and keep buying mnkd at this incredible low prices.. Who cares that it is not a good idea to sell at these prices.. I dont I am long, and neither should he.. Now you or him should explain to me how this is anything but helping the company!? Half the stock price and I buy more! And I will never sell as long as there is one promising product left on the market or in the pipe. The pressure is on the shorts from the moment they shortened the stock and I increase my long position every month! Actually, I think Mannkind would be a safer if we had MORE shorts bleeding into long portfolios! Also, maybe he should put the debt conversion on the open market than trying to sell cheap shares to his friends! |
|
|
|
Post by monger on Aug 10, 2015 18:56:55 GMT -5
Nice, they can't borrow the shares in your IRA though. No margin on retirement accounts. Those are nice 'n safe You are correct. I made sure of this on Fidleity. They have limited margin so that you can avoid the settled cash dates but you cannot borrow more then what the account has available Sorry guys, this is some misinformation. First, I have an IRA with Fidelity, but I do not loan my shares. However, I was curious how this worked so I called them last month. Their reps IMO are always very good, and almost always have the answer at their fingertips. This time the rep had to talk to the guys who actually borrow shares for shorts, and call me back, so I realized this wasn't a common situation, even though it's discussed frequently on this board, although usually in re margin accounts. He told me that in a regular IRA--I'm not talking about margin here--their policy is that they WILL loan shares if the IRA owner wants, but they have two conditions. First, their position in the stock, in this case, obviously, MNKD, must be large enough to meet a threshold. I believe their cutoff was about $100,000. So for a $4 stock, that means you need to hold more than 25,000 shares. Second, your overall IRA needs to be a certain size. Again, I don't remember the actual number, but I want to say it was perhaps around $300,000. If you meet those two criteria, they MAY ask you if you want to loan your shares. They will never just loan them out. However, if they have enough shares in their pool to meet demand, they won't ask, even if you meet their two criteria in an IRA. I also asked them if volunteering to loan shares would make any difference, and the answer was "not really". I got the impression that in the unlikely event that they didn't quite have enough shares from all the margin accounts where it was easy for them to gather shares, that they might start looking deeper into IRA accounts, and MAYBE they would give some consideration to someone who volunteered. Of course this is just one data point, but the rep did have to go to the right department to get the information, so I would think it's reasonably accurate. I would also suggest that at least with Fidelity, you call them when you have a question and not reply on posters, well, like me. :-) Edit: Barrons has an article on this from 2010 that specifically mentions Fidelity as well as other brokers. The idea of lending shares is something that is considered more suitable for "sophisticated" investors, and that seems to be defined by the dollars in the portfolio. In this article they mention having accounts with minimum amounts of $500,000 or even $1,000,000 in some cases. online.barrons.com/articles/SB50001424052970203296004575363182077590688 |
|
|
|
Post by monger on Aug 10, 2015 19:22:47 GMT -5
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. Well, I think that this is something he got wrong! How often can my lend out shares be used to short? Just once and it happened a while ago, when I started my lending program.. Ever since I collect my about 2% interest per month and keep buying mnkd at this incredible low prices.. Who cares that it is not a good idea to sell at these prices.. I dont I am long, and neither should he.. Now you or him should explain to me how this is anything but helping the company!? Half the stock price and I buy more! And I will never sell as long as there is one promising product left on the market or in the pipe. The pressure is on the shorts from the moment they shortened the stock and I increase my long position every month! Actually, I think Mannkind would be a safer if we had MORE shorts bleeding into long portfolios! Also, maybe he should put the debt conversion on the open market than trying to sell cheap shares to his friends! I think this is a very interesting point, and obviously both views are prevalent on this board. It seems to me that from Matt's view today, he's looking at the depressed share price and the fact that it's costing the company more money to borrow, so I think we have to respect that view, and I believe that's not an arguable point. (Also, he's saying if you're doing this than STFU about shorts.) However, for longs who are in this for a much longer period of time, I think the argument above makes a lot of sense. You make some interest from the shorts, and you buy more shares with that money (assuming you actually do that instead of buying, I dunno, GILD maybe), thus removing a few more shares from the pool. Eventually, if this continues long enough, clearly the shorts will have paid 100 times the value of the stock in interest, and 100% of the available shares will be locked up by perma-longs. Obviously that point will never be reached, but it's an interesting macro argument. Of course MNKD has to survive in the meantime and grow to the point that eventually shorts have to give up, or this argument doesn't work. If the company goes out of business because they can't get financing, then of course loaning shares would be a terrible decision. I don't think anyone expects that will or can happen. While I'm not loaning my shares, I might if I were offered enough interest (temptation!), so even respecting Matt's request that longs not do this, I don't have a problem with anyone who chooses to loan their shares. It's probably bad for the company in the short run (in a very small way), but perhaps good for the company in the long run (also in a very small way) if it helps cost shorts money now in interest, and make it harder to cover, and possibly help exacerbate a short squeeze. So I think loaning shares cuts both ways. And further, I don't see a moral argument that as a shareholder we're not entitled to buy and sell when we want, trying to buy low and sell high, and make a profit. There's nothing wrong in that. So making more money by loaning out shares? I don't see the moral argument there...in the long term, anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by ashiwi on Aug 10, 2015 19:33:47 GMT -5
If all the readers/members of this and Yahoo board who currently participate in the lending program with Fidelity and Schwab decided to call back their shares today.
Would it add up to a million shares ? Two million shares? With over 100 million shares currently shorted, this 1-2% recall would make a minuscule dent.
But on the other hand, if insiders decided to buy a million shares... Could you imagine what that would do to the share price?
Other than a surprise upside script #, only a SNY buy in would help the stock price more.
Actions speak loader than words.
|
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Aug 10, 2015 19:53:54 GMT -5
MannKind had $5.9 million in deferred product sales of Afrezza, and there was no recognized revenue. The first quarter had $7.1 million in deferred product sales.
In the question and answer period, paraphrasing, "the higher sales in the first quarter had to do with filling the pipeline."
|
|
|
|
Post by cjc04 on Aug 10, 2015 19:54:51 GMT -5
I really feel like Matt isn't concerned with this issue of lending shares. It sounded to me like he addressed the issue in response to what he hears from shareholders who don't get their voices heard during the Q&A.
|
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Aug 10, 2015 21:05:23 GMT -5
Matt's comments came shortly after discussion the company emphasizing that the August 15 Notes be converted in a way that would not enable shorting. His exact words (if I am to accept verbatim the transcript from that hack who writes transcripts for SA) were, "Here’s what I can say the company has done regarding shorting of MannKind stock: Within MannKind, employees are not allowed to hold shares in an account where they can be lent, which certainly means shares must be held in a cash account, not a margin account. If any non-employee shareholders are unhappy about the fact shorting on MannKind’s share price, I strongly encourage you to make sure you’re not enabling the practice. Talk to your broker and make sure your shares are held in an account that doesn’t support lending. This is particularly important right now, as we swap stock for bonds. I believe the effects on your stock price this may cause will be worth much more to you than whatever you might get in the near-term for stock lending."
MannKind is taking steps to ensure that the retirement of the August 15 Notes is done in a way that ensures minimal dilution and does not result in further shorting of MNKD stock, but Matt Pfeffer's comment was addressed to shareholders who are unhappy about the shorting. I don't see his words as judgmental, so much as sharing his belief that the action of not lending shares may result in a greater return than current interest paid for loaning now that the Aug 2015 Notes are being retired.
|
|
|
|
Post by afrizzle on Aug 10, 2015 21:50:48 GMT -5
Have never will never lend my shares
|
|
|
|
Post by kball on Aug 11, 2015 5:54:11 GMT -5
I'm honestly torn about the lending.
It was thru this forum i became aware of the opportunity.
Shareholder for about 1 year now.
Lender for about 4 months.
Maybe once i see significantly more push from sanofi (insurance acceptance, pricing etc) and prescribing by doctors, along with Mannkind gaining ground on next techno drug, i will call my shares back.
|
|
|
|
Post by tayl5 on Aug 11, 2015 8:07:17 GMT -5
See if I'm missing something here: I understood from Matt's comments on the call that Mannkind would not sell shares for conversion below $4.60 and would cover any non-conversions from existing cash. Since the shares currently trade well below $4.60, this would seem to present the acquirer(s) three options. 1) They could go buy shares on the open market and pay less than they will receive in cash, but doing so would presumably drive up the share price and possibly trigger a short squeeze; 2) They could take the conversion at $4.60, 3) or they can take the cash. If they believe (or know) that the stock price is artificially suppressed for the occasion, I have to think option 2 would be preferred, or maybe having a go with option 1. I expect the playaz (if they are investment bank pirates or PE) will skip option 3 as too boring.
|
|
|
|
Post by morfu on Aug 11, 2015 8:12:26 GMT -5
Matt's comments came shortly after discussion the company emphasizing that the August 15 Notes be converted in a way that would not enable shorting. His exact words (if I am to accept verbatim the transcript from that hack who writes transcripts for SA) were, "Here’s what I can say the company has done regarding shorting of MannKind stock: Within MannKind, employees are not allowed to hold shares in an account where they can be lent, which certainly means shares must be held in a cash account, not a margin account. If any non-employee shareholders are unhappy about the fact shorting on MannKind’s share price, I strongly encourage you to make sure you’re not enabling the practice. Talk to your broker and make sure your shares are held in an account that doesn’t support lending. This is particularly important right now, as we swap stock for bonds. I believe the effects on your stock price this may cause will be worth much more to you than whatever you might get in the near-term for stock lending."
MannKind is taking steps to ensure that the retirement of the August 15 Notes is done in a way that ensures minimal dilution and does not result in further shorting of MNKD stock, but Matt Pfeffer's comment was addressed to shareholders who are unhappy about the shorting. I don't see his words as judgmental, so much as sharing his belief that the action of not lending shares may result in a greater return than current interest paid for loaning now that the Aug 2015 Notes are being retired. "I believe the effects on your stock price this may cause will be worth much more to you than whatever you might get in the near-term for stock lending." Well.. I am quite certain his believe is admirable, but it is also quite wrong! In only one month you can increase your position by 1.5-2%, by investing the money you got from lending out shares, so you piece of the cake gets bigger, plus you helped the shorties digging their hole a little deeper.. this beats any devaluation by dilution.. And as I said, I my opinion not the lender or the shorts, but the management is to be blamed for the August dilution for not offering the debt on the free market, but throwing out cheap shares instead! |
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Aug 11, 2015 8:18:51 GMT -5
tayl5,
I don't understand your #1. The Aug 2015 notes must be converted in one of three ways: exchange for 2018 Notes, MNKD Shares-for-Notes or Cash. #2 & #3 are among those choices, but how does the note holder buying shares in the open market result in a return of their notes, which expire August 15? |
|
??
