|
Post by mrv on Aug 27, 2015 21:21:25 GMT -5
Thanks again BD and Liane.
I think I have the ability to defend myself too.
To set the record straight, I am long MNKD for many years now. MNKD has the lion's share in my portfolio.
I have been following this Board since its inception, and prior to that its predecessor Board, if we can call that.
My postings are very rare, since I don't have much to add when I read all the postings of knowledgeable posters on this Board. Sometimes, I would post an article when I see that it is not posted. The article may be positive or negative. Sometimes I would make a comment, positive, or negative out of furstration. The reason I posted this article was because I noted that it was not posted. As simple as that.
However, it is unprofessional to call names. I am as pissed off and frustrated with the pps just like any other MNKD long is. I read most of the threads, sometimes I agree with the opinions expressed, and sometimes not. But I do not give myself the right to call people names.
Wishing everyone a good evening, and hoping for a bright day tomorrow with positive news from MNKD.
|
|
|
Post by Chris-C on Aug 28, 2015 0:21:36 GMT -5
The problem I have with LFD is that he denies an agenda, yet his articles consistently bash Mannkind in a way that appears to be thoughtful but is never quite balanced, often incorrect factually, and frequently silent on important points that cast doubt on his assertions. It is a shill's game to appear to be factual while omitting key facts, failing to acknowledge important contexts, or making comparisons that are illogical or patently absurd. When these weaknesses are pointed out, the author becomes defensive or combative.
The larger issue, to me, is the SA disclaimer. It has more holes than Swiss cheese and therefore provides no assurance whatsoever that an author is writing without bias. It has the appearance, however, of suggesting that no conflict or interest or hidden agenda exists.
Human behavior is motivated, not random or aimless. So I ask myself, why would someone go to such great lengths to repeatedly bash a pharmaceutical stock with such potential for helping humankind as a charitable public service?
Some may suggest that page click reimbursements and notoriety are the reward LFD seeks. Perhaps so; but the chorus of criticism that typically follows his pieces must leave him feeling unappreciated. I, for one, would respect him more if he'd just acknowledge that he holds a short position or writes for people that do.
Since he apparently visits this board, I'd love it if he'd post his reason for choosing the pen name (Looking for Diogenes) he uses. Personally, I find the name somewhat ironic based on his writings, his denial of bias, and his combative nature.
|
|
|
Post by jpg on Aug 28, 2015 1:52:30 GMT -5
The problem I have with LFD is that he denies an agenda, yet his articles consistently bash Mannkind in a way that appears to be thoughtful but is never quite balanced, often incorrect factually, and frequently silent on important points that cast doubt on his assertions. It is a shill's game to appear to be factual while omitting key facts, failing to acknowledge important contexts, or making comparisons that are illogical or patently absurd. When these weaknesses are pointed out, the author becomes defensive or combative. The larger issue, to me, is the SA disclaimer. It has more holes than Swiss cheese and therefore provides no assurance whatsoever that an author is writing without bias. It has the appearance, however, of suggesting that no conflict or interest or hidden agenda exists. Human behavior is motivated, not random or aimless. So I ask myself, why would someone go to such great lengths to repeatedly bash a pharmaceutical stock with such potential for helping humankind as a charitable public service? Some may suggest that page click reimbursements and notoriety are the reward LFD seeks. Perhaps so; but the chorus of criticism that typically follows his pieces must leave him feeling unappreciated. I, for one, would respect him more if he'd just acknowledge that he holds a short position or writes for people that do. Since he apparently visits this board, I'd love it if he'd post his reason for choosing the pen name (Looking for Diogenes) he uses. Personally, I find the name somewhat ironic based on his writings, his denial of bias, and his combative nature. Anyone writing without using his or her real name should raise numerous red flags. For all we know he or she could, and probably is, using multiple different IDs at the same time. Who would believe stuff written by an anonymous scientific writer? And we are supposed to seriously consider it when dealing with finances? You only have one reputation. With these pseudonymes you can have as many as you want! When you burn one fake name you simply have the luxury to move on. Kliff is burning his reputation on Mannkind. He probably knows it but is still doing it. Does anyone now seriously take Kliff seriously? At least he won't have the luxury of changing his name after his 'all in' against Mannkind and Afrezza if and when he is proven to be wrong. Guess what LFD will do...
|
|
|
Post by patryn on Aug 28, 2015 2:48:05 GMT -5
"Eudaimonian lifestyle" won't find many people walking that walk on these stock message boards, patryn! But more so here, than on others. I think this message board more than others tends to attract those for whom investing may lead to a higher good and of course a profit and ensuing well being. I can't say the same for anyone holding short shares or a short position in MNKD. They may have a profit motive or just frankly be amoral, which judging by the name LFD, I would not be surprised. I certainly would hate to live life as a cynic,whether my opinions ultimately prove right or wrong.
|
|
|
Post by patryn on Aug 28, 2015 2:54:23 GMT -5
The problem I have with LFD is that he denies an agenda, yet his articles consistently bash Mannkind in a way that appears to be thoughtful but is never quite balanced, often incorrect factually, and frequently silent on important points that cast doubt on his assertions. It is a shill's game to appear to be factual while omitting key facts, failing to acknowledge important contexts, or making comparisons that are illogical or patently absurd. When these weaknesses are pointed out, the author becomes defensive or combative. The larger issue, to me, is the SA disclaimer. It has more holes than Swiss cheese and therefore provides no assurance whatsoever that an author is writing without bias. It has the appearance, however, of suggesting that no conflict or interest or hidden agenda exists. Human behavior is motivated, not random or aimless. So I ask myself, why would someone go to such great lengths to repeatedly bash a pharmaceutical stock with such potential for helping humankind as a charitable public service? Some may suggest that page click reimbursements and notoriety are the reward LFD seeks. Perhaps so; but the chorus of criticism that typically follows his pieces must leave him feeling unappreciated. I, for one, would respect him more if he'd just acknowledge that he holds a short position or writes for people that do. Since he apparently visits this board, I'd love it if he'd post his reason for choosing the pen name (Looking for Diogenes) he uses. Personally, I find the name somewhat ironic based on his writings, his denial of bias, and his combative nature. Anyone writing without using his or her real name should raise numerous red flags. For all we know he or she could, and probably is, using multiple different IDs at the same time. Who would believe stuff written by an anonymous scientific writer? And we are supposed to seriously consider it when dealing with finances? You only have one reputation. With these pseudonymes you can have as many as you want! When you burn one fake name you simply have the luxury to move on. Kliff is burning his reputation on Mannkind. He probably knows it but is still doing it. Does anyone now seriously take Kliff seriously? At least he won't have the luxury of changing his name after his 'all in' against Mannkind and Afrezza if and when he is proven to be wrong. Guess what LFD will do... I believe based on the same pedantic tone and air of condescension that LFD also goes by PyschoAnalyst and Jenny on various other corners of the Internet. I assume that both she and Kliff believe they are doing a public service because they want to save investors money. While I admire their need to befuddle us with circular and tautological arguments, I am of the school of thought that intelligent adults should be able to exercise their own free will to make investment decisions consistent with their risk tolerance and general beliefs without being derided and belittled by these self proclaimed experts and protectors of innocent investors.
|
|
|
Post by patryn on Aug 28, 2015 2:56:00 GMT -5
I think we should all just relax a bit. I know that the stock price is not where any investor wants it to be, but let's not abrogate our responsibilities for being civil to each other even if we disagree with the opinions expressed. Posting a negative article without comment probably won't lead to much one way or another. The stock price will fix itself when sales gains traction which is a near inevitability at this point. Whether someone is here to genuinely interact with others or sow discord and doubt, they will reap exactly what they sow. Eris may have thrown the golden apple with mischievous glee, but her reveling in Schadenfreude didn't win her any popularity points either. Are you a Packer's fan? No I am afraid not. Did something in my post give you that impression? I don't really follow professional football, but I am a huge fan of my alma mater- the Texas Longhorns.
|
|
|
Post by mannmade on Aug 28, 2015 10:46:22 GMT -5
In the immortal words of Aaron Rodgers... "Just Relax People..."
|
|
|
Post by notamnkdmillionaire on Aug 28, 2015 10:50:06 GMT -5
In the immortal words of Aaron Rodgers... "Just Relax People..." Or just sing along to this
|
|
|
Post by _neil on Aug 28, 2015 16:11:56 GMT -5
LFD's bias is clear as day. But one question he raised still lingers with me. Assuming the launch was deliberately slow and went as expected, what is the explanation for the petering out of the refill rate in prescriptions? One other thing I didn't know earlier was the 25% drop off in the test subjects in the initial study (I'll assume this is a made up/misinterpreted number since it's LFD's claim but). Is there an official explanation for this?
|
|
|
Post by greg on Aug 29, 2015 8:28:46 GMT -5
LFD's bias is clear as day. But one question he raised still lingers with me. Assuming the launch was deliberately slow and went as expected, what is the explanation for the petering out of the refill rate in prescriptions? One other thing I didn't know earlier was the 25% drop off in the test subjects in the initial study (I'll assume this is a made up/misinterpreted number since it's LFD's claim but). Is there an official explanation for this? LFD has published eight articles on MNKD and posted literally hundreds (24 pages) of comments on the company. I haven't read every single word he's gone to the trouble to post but I doubt he's said two positive words. Almost everything he says is half-lies, outright lies, and misinformation. He doesn't know business, economics, finance, or accounting. He claims to have no position in the stock so one is left to wonder about his motivations. Getting clicks doesn't explain it for two reasons. 1. SA doesn't pay enough to justify the amount of time it takes to put together his long long articles. 2. If you look at his many many comments trashing MNKD, they tend to be extremely long, and he doesn't get paid for them. That leaves two other possibilities. 1. He's a retired lonely masochist who enjoys the insults that go his way. 2. More likely, he gets paid both to write his hit pieces and spend his days trashing the stock. He probably trashes the stock not only on SA but on other forums too. Just to confirm what Chris-C said above, SA's disclaimers are a complete joke. Also, there are people that troll SA to find folks who will write their hit pieces. Given the indisputable fact that LFD writes trash, I also echo the questions raised about spreading his word on this forum. This tread has generated 680 views thus far, sure seems like a waste of a lot of time. Some people say, know the enemy, know the other side. My questions would be: is there any value in reading complete nonsense coming from a known liar? have you learned anything worthwhile from reading LFD's articles and comments? I think that old saying, fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me, is appropriate here. I mean, we've let this guy fool us for more than two years, reading and discussing his nonstop nonsense.
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Aug 29, 2015 9:08:18 GMT -5
LFD's bias is clear as day. But one question he raised still lingers with me. Assuming the launch was deliberately slow and went as expected, what is the explanation for the petering out of the refill rate in prescriptions? One other thing I didn't know earlier was the 25% drop off in the test subjects in the initial study (I'll assume this is a made up/misinterpreted number since it's LFD's claim but). Is there an official explanation for this? mnkd.proboards.com/thread/3187/tried-afrezza-use
this user told us.
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Aug 29, 2015 9:24:27 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by newmnkdinvestor on Aug 31, 2015 12:46:53 GMT -5
In the immortal words of Aaron Rodgers... "Just Relax People..." That slogan isnt going to work for this season!!!!
|
|
|
Post by mannmade on Aug 31, 2015 12:54:37 GMT -5
Fortunately I am a 49er Fan...
|
|
|
Post by newmnkdinvestor on Aug 31, 2015 12:57:16 GMT -5
Fortunately I am a 49er Fan... Might be worse!!! I havent caught a preseason game of them yet. Is Kap looking ok in new system? I am a Giants fan/ I have a better chance predicting the stock price of MNKD then what there record will be but I am not expecting a super bowl!
|
|