kyle
Newbie
Posts: 14 
|
Post by kyle on Oct 27, 2015 10:54:41 GMT -5
The Sanofi License Agreement will remain in effect unless either party terminates the Sanofi License Agreement in accordance with its terms. Either party may terminate the Sanofi License Agreement for a material breach the other party if such breach remains uncured for 90 days, or 45 days in the case of a non-payment breach; provided that if Sanofi breaches the Sanofi License Agreement for failure to comply with its obligation to use commercially reasonable efforts to file for, obtain and maintain regulatory approval for AFREZZA in certain major markets and countries and to market, promote and commercialize AFREZZA in countries where regulatory approval has been received, as set forth in the Sanofi License Agreement, with respect to (i) the United States, we may terminate the Sanofi License Agreement in its entirety, and (ii) certain major markets or countries, we may terminate the Sanofi License Agreement only with respect to such markets or countries and not in its entirety. Either party may also terminate the Sanofi License Agreement upon written notice to the other party in the event of the other party’s insolvency. Sanofi may terminate the Sanofi License Agreement at any time on or after January 1, 2016 (a) upon 90 days’ written notice if Sanofi determines in good faith that the commercialization of AFREZZA is no longer economically viable in the United States, and (b) without cause upon six months’ written notice in its entirety or on a country-by-country basis other than with respect to the United States, subject to certain exceptions. In addition, Sanofi may terminate the Sanofi License Agreement on a country-by-country basis upon 30 days’ written notice for certain safety or regulatory reasons.
To me this suggests that if Sanofi was indeed trying to get out of this agreement notice would have already been given to Mannkind at the end of September (90 days notice allowing for holidays) to be out on January 1st which the agreement allows for. Correct me if I'm wrong but this would be considered a material event and a press release would be issued. Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Oct 27, 2015 11:04:08 GMT -5
Could have been written more clearly with regard to Jan 1 being date of earliest termination or earliest date of notice, but I would think your reading is correct. Yes, I would think VERY material. Just because it didn't happen ASAP isn't going to keep shorts from claiming its coming.
Why would SNY walk away from 65% of profits on something that works as well as Afrezza?
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris-C on Oct 27, 2015 11:51:54 GMT -5
... Why would SNY walk away from 65% of profits on something that works as well as Afrezza? DBC That's a logical point. However, thinking logically has never been a recognized strength among the general public. This general weakness is the fuel that keeps the FUD engine running. Emotions (fear and anxiety) are generally the culprits that gum up the "logicworks". One of the things I like about this board is the number of members who are serious about due diligence, weigh the objective evidence, and then resolutely press on with their convictions, fully aware and accepting that there are unpredictable factors that can cause outcomes that are inconsistent with the expected results. These members are skillful at parsing out inconsistencies and the spinning that goes on incessantly, often with intentionally misused statistics. Seeking Alpha is often an amusing stage for this practice. The persistent assertion that Sanofi will walk away from the agreement in January 2016 is logically inconsistent with everything that Sanofi has said and done, yet it endures. This is understandable, since digital soundbites immerse people in sensation seeking rhetoric; while exposure to reasoning and logical problem solving has largely been relegated to courses in graduate school. This might be one area where reform-minded educators can devote useful attention. Chris C |
|
|
|
Post by EveningOfTheDay on Oct 27, 2015 13:13:26 GMT -5
That's a logical point. However, thinking logically has never been a recognized strength among the general public. This general weakness is the fuel that keeps the FUD engine running. Emotions (fear and anxiety) are generally the culprits that gum up the "logicworks". One of the things I like about this board is the number of members who are serious about due diligence, weigh the objective evidence, and then resolutely press on with their convictions, fully aware and accepting that there are unpredictable factors that can cause outcomes that are inconsistent with the expected results. These members are skillful at parsing out inconsistencies and the spinning that goes on incessantly, often with intentionally misused statistics. Seeking Alpha is often an amusing stage for this practice. The persistent assertion that Sanofi will walk away from the agreement in January 2016 is logically inconsistent with everything that Sanofi has said and done, yet it endures. This is understandable, since digital soundbites immerse people in sensation seeking rhetoric; while exposure to reasoning and logical problem solving has largely been relegated to courses in graduate school. This might be one area where reform-minded educators can devote useful attention. Chris C Bravo, Chris, when I grow up I want to be like you... or more specifically write like you. Impeccably said, really. |
|
|
|
Post by kball on Oct 27, 2015 14:22:05 GMT -5
Pretty sure w/o this board, I would have sold my position already.
Instead of consistently adding over the past year as my thinking was better articulated and researched by many others here.
|
|
|
|
Post by robsacher on Oct 27, 2015 14:28:23 GMT -5
... Why would SNY walk away from 65% of profits on something that works as well as Afrezza? DBC That's a logical point. However, thinking logically has never been a recognized strength among the general public. This general weakness is the fuel that keeps the FUD engine running. Emotions (fear and anxiety) are generally the culprits that gum up the "logicworks". One of the things I like about this board is the number of members who are serious about due diligence, weigh the objective evidence, and then resolutely press on with their convictions, fully aware and accepting that there are unpredictable factors that can cause outcomes that are inconsistent with the expected results. These members are skillful at parsing out inconsistencies and the spinning that goes on incessantly, often with intentionally misused statistics. Seeking Alpha is often an amusing stage for this practice. The persistent assertion that Sanofi will walk away from the agreement in January 2016 is logically inconsistent with everything that Sanofi has said and done, yet it endures. This is understandable, since digital soundbites immerse people in sensation seeking rhetoric; while exposure to reasoning and logical problem solving has largely been relegated to courses in graduate school. This might be one area where reform-minded educators can devote useful attention. Chris C I wish there was some way to follow retail investor buying and selling of MNKD. I know we can follow institutional and fund positions but if we could follow total retail buy/sell numbers on a daily basis then we could know how many shares are actually sold and how many shares are simply shorted. My gut feeling is that fewer retail investors exited than we might assume but there is no way to know for sure... |
|
|
|
Post by BlueCat on Oct 27, 2015 14:30:56 GMT -5
... Why would SNY walk away from 65% of profits on something that works as well as Afrezza? DBC That's a logical point. However, thinking logically has never been a recognized strength among the general public. This general weakness is the fuel that keeps the FUD engine running. Emotions (fear and anxiety) are generally the culprits that gum up the "logicworks". One of the things I like about this board is the number of members who are serious about due diligence, weigh the objective evidence, and then resolutely press on with their convictions, fully aware and accepting that there are unpredictable factors that can cause outcomes that are inconsistent with the expected results. These members are skillful at parsing out inconsistencies and the spinning that goes on incessantly, often with intentionally misused statistics. Seeking Alpha is often an amusing stage for this practice. The persistent assertion that Sanofi will walk away from the agreement in January 2016 is logically inconsistent with everything that Sanofi has said and done, yet it endures. This is understandable, since digital soundbites immerse people in sensation seeking rhetoric; while exposure to reasoning and logical problem solving has largely been relegated to courses in graduate school. This might be one area where reform-minded educators can devote useful attention. Chris C The one caveat I would put to this is that business is run by humans, who frequently make illogical choices. We've pointed out that a fair amount of the short interest may in fact, believe this will fail and go to 0. Which from my vantage, would be highly illogical. By the same token, we've seen business leaders make astronomically bad decisions. How does one do DD on the potential of illogical decisions? Hidden, or illegal actions, for that matter? Trend the history of the business, and its leaders, choices? Kinda like an earnings whisper? At end of day, with my limited knowledge and even more limited visibility, this still all comes down to a probability gamble, and best guess. |
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Oct 27, 2015 15:35:22 GMT -5
Pretty sure w/o this board, I would have sold my position already. Instead of consistently adding over the past year as my thinking was better articulated and researched by many others here. So are you praising or damning the board?  |
|
|
|
Post by EveningOfTheDay on Oct 27, 2015 15:41:32 GMT -5
Q2U,
what you are saying could, certainly, still be true; however, the logical part in me finds the amounting competing evidence that Afrezza is all Alfred Mann thought it would be, possibly more, impossible to bypass when assessing the current situation and future perspective of MNKD. Every day that goes by without a user reporting a credible serious flaw in the product, and every user report exulting the wonderful consequences to their lives after only a few brief months of being on Afrezza is another day I feel validated in the real gamble that I took sometime ago. I assume most of the long time posters in this board feel fairly similar, regardless of what it seems a perpetually discouraging share price, or otherwise we would not be here anymore.
|
|
|
|
Post by EveningOfTheDay on Oct 27, 2015 15:44:40 GMT -5
Pretty sure w/o this board, I would have sold my position already. Instead of consistently adding over the past year as my thinking was better articulated and researched by many others here. So are you praising or damning the board? Baba, with Kball's permission, I think the jury is still out on that one... not only for him, but for all of us. |
|
|
|
Post by BlueCat on Oct 27, 2015 15:45:38 GMT -5
Q2U, what you are saying could, certainly, still be true; however, the logical part in me finds the amounting competing evidence that Afrezza is all Alfred Mann thought it would be, possibly more, impossible to bypass when assessing the current situation and future perspective of MNKD. Every day that goes by without a user reporting a credible serious flaw in the product, and every user report exulting the wonderful consequences to their lives after only a few brief months of being on Afrezza is another day I feel validated in the real gamble that I took sometime ago. I assume most of the long time posters in this board feel fairly similar, regardless of what it seems a perpetually discouraging share price, or otherwise we would not be here anymore. 8ball says: Outlook Good |
|
|
|
Post by jurystillout on Oct 27, 2015 17:25:50 GMT -5
Could have been written more clearly with regard to Jan 1 being date of earliest termination or earliest date of notice, but I would think your reading is correct. Yes, I would think VERY material. Just because it didn't happen ASAP isn't going to keep shorts from claiming its coming. Why would SNY walk away from 65% of profits on something that works as well as Afrezza? Remember you asked the question, don't get mad at me for the answer! One reason sny would walk away is because they get afrezza and technshere for the price of their milestone payments that have been made and the amount of the loan that mnkd defaults on. Mnkd is borrowing money from sny and using their 2+billion dollars worth of R&D and patents as collateral on the loan, the only means mnkd has for possibly generating cash to pay this loan rest solely on the shoulders of afrezza sales which are controlled completely by sny. As I've stated before this is just like coal miners taking credit at the company store. I don't believe sny will blindside mnkd like this however I just can't understand how such a fundamental business mistakes can be overlooked by mnkd management. There is absolutely no reason for management to put this company at such risk and give the shorts such good reason to bet on failure. If mnkd has resources capable of paying this loan off, that is the resource they should be borrowing from now, not from a source that benefits more from afrezza failure than it does by being successful. I'm absolutely confident that I will get completely abused for my comment and I'm sure there will be plenty of childish, personal insults because I'm critical of mnkd management. I used to dabble in buying race horses and there was a term that was often used, the term was "barn blind". Barn Blind is when an owner or trainer could not see the deficits of there own horse, they were smart people however they just couldn't bring themselves to see that a horse didn't have the right stuff to win. This barn blind phenomena is also very apparent while investing in stocks, shareholders need to take a critical eye of management and eventually demand the removal of these incompetent people. |
|
|
|
Post by od on Oct 27, 2015 17:33:25 GMT -5
Q2U, what you are saying could, certainly, still be true; however, the logical part in me finds the amounting competing evidence that Afrezza is all Alfred Mann thought it would be, possibly more, impossible to bypass when assessing the current situation and future perspective of MNKD. Every day that goes by without a user reporting a credible serious flaw in the product, and every user report exulting the wonderful consequences to their lives after only a few brief months of being on Afrezza is another day I feel validated in the real gamble that I took sometime ago. I assume most of the long time posters in this board feel fairly similar, regardless of what it seems a perpetually discouraging share price, or otherwise we would not be here anymore. You know I share your enthusiasm for Afrezza and MNKD (and am otherwise of like mind), but your comment without a user reporting a credible serious flaw in the product, to me, is a bit much. I hope there are no ADRs (reported or otherwise), but why should we expect if there are that they would be reported to us...and if there are public complaints/reports, who decides 'credible'? |
|
|
|
Post by EveningOfTheDay on Oct 27, 2015 17:49:14 GMT -5
You know I share your enthusiasm for Afrezza and MNKD (and am otherwise of like mind), but your comment without a user reporting a credible serious flaw in the product, to me, is a bit much. I hope there are no ADRs (reported or otherwise), but why should we expect if there are that they would be reported to us...and if there are public complaints/reports, who decides 'credible'? Perhaps a poor choice of words. Of course I am talking about what users are voluntarily offering on the net. I have no way to know if Sanofi is getting an ear full from angry customers, but somehow I doubt it. Afrezza is such a polarizing drug I have a feeling that if a serious flaw had presented for someone using it we would have already heard about it. As to who decides what is credible... well, I guess we all have individual criteria as to what and who we consider credible. In my case I would like to see a well documented case and not just a gossip or a partial statement thrown semi-anonymously to the masses. I always try to keep in mind I could be fatally wrong about anything I do, but ultimately one has to make decisions based on the information one has, even if that information could be insufficient. In essence, I decide who is credible to me, just as others will do the same for themselves. I find this a pretty reasonable proposition, generally speaking. |
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Oct 27, 2015 18:02:37 GMT -5
@jurystillout... At least it's a new twist on the FUD... Afrezza is so GREAT that MNKD will obviously be bankrupt. Seems like we've got things all wrapped up then... MNKD is screwed if Afrezza is bad and screwed if it's good. Sounds like you should be shorting like crazy. Schwab's paying me 32% to borrow my shares... I'm willing to take higher bids.
I don't think SNY would derail the roll-out for such nonsense, and I don't think they would assume Al would hand over his namesake company.
Of your winning horses, any names I'd recognize?
|
|
