|
|
Post by rrtzmd on Nov 12, 2015 10:22:40 GMT -5
Sounds like a mystery novel in the making - "The Israeli Gambit". One thing about "The Israeli Gambit" is the potential for "blowback." Reading several articles on "calcalist" suggests quite a few people are upset at MNKD taking advantage of an Israaeli rule mandating ETF purchases of new listings. One article was about biotechs there getting their share prices knocked down in order to accommodate MNKD. Another resented a US company pillaging Israel for millions of dollars. Another discussed the effects on retirement accounts. Per the story that led to the "rumor," regulators are already taking some sort of actions regarding future offerings. There's an old saying about "an ill wind that blows nobody good." |
|
|
|
Post by cretin11 on Nov 12, 2015 10:25:13 GMT -5
Sounds like a mystery novel in the making - "The Israeli Gambit". One thing about "The Israeli Gambit" is the potential for "blowback." Reading several articles on "calcalist" suggests quite a few people are upset at MNKD taking advantage of an Israaeli rule mandating ETF purchases of new listings. One article was about biotechs there getting their share prices knocked down in order to accommodate MNKD. Another resented a US company pillaging Israel for millions of dollars. Another discussed the effects on retirement accounts. Per the story that led to the "rumor," regulators are already taking some sort of actions regarding future offerings. There's an old saying about "an ill wind that blows nobody good." They'll get over it, don't ya think? |
|
|
|
Post by BlueCat on Nov 12, 2015 10:48:54 GMT -5
One thing about "The Israeli Gambit" is the potential for "blowback." Reading several articles on "calcalist" suggests quite a few people are upset at MNKD taking advantage of an Israaeli rule mandating ETF purchases of new listings. One article was about biotechs there getting their share prices knocked down in order to accommodate MNKD. Another resented a US company pillaging Israel for millions of dollars. Another discussed the effects on retirement accounts. Per the story that led to the "rumor," regulators are already taking some sort of actions regarding future offerings. There's an old saying about "an ill wind that blows nobody good." They'll get over it, don't ya think? If they make bank on it. Or an Israeli company picks it up (ala Teva) |
|
|
|
Post by kc on Nov 12, 2015 11:50:32 GMT -5
Sounds like a mystery novel in the making - "The Israeli Gambit". One thing about "The Israeli Gambit" is the potential for "blowback." Reading several articles on "calcalist" suggests quite a few people are upset at MNKD taking advantage of an Israaeli rule mandating ETF purchases of new listings. One article was about biotechs there getting their share prices knocked down in order to accommodate MNKD. Another resented a US company pillaging Israel for millions of dollars. Another discussed the effects on retirement accounts. Per the story that led to the "rumor," regulators are already taking some sort of actions regarding future offerings. There's an old saying about "an ill wind that blows nobody good." My 91 year old dad always says it the following. "an ill wind that blows somebody some good." And I have seen that happen. |
|
|
|
Post by mikec on Nov 12, 2015 12:52:55 GMT -5
I could not disagree more. For one thing, the SEC is widely known to be ineffectual. For another, the TASE ETF event was an event of high significance to investors who have good reasons to be concerned about the company's survival. A patently false but very believable story was published in the morning of the event and caused massive selling. The company has an obligation to its stockholders; we are part-owners of the company and our spending has a direct impact on their compensation from stock. MannKind was negligent in not quickly setting the record straight. I sold part of my position and I am outraged that I was left to twist in the wind for hours before the truth came out. This was a flat-out failure on the part of management; indeed, it was a betrayal.
|
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Nov 12, 2015 13:05:38 GMT -5
mikec, I don't believe the story was inaccurate, MannKind had to get around the issue raised therein and did so, whether they did it on the fly or whether they had anticipated the subject of the article as an issue. Either way, they had to work it out with the ISA, and understandably needed to get confirmation that their "fix" would work, once that was done, they should have immediately issued a release. Whether that release came as soon as it should have, only MNKD and the ISA would know.
Of course, MNKD could have come out with an immediate NR, saying we understand the problem and we believe we can address it quickly, but if it turned out they neither could address it quickly or successfully, well, problems could ensue. It was a tough, tough situation.
I'm hoping that nothing further will interfere with the deal closing (but who knows), and that this deal will be MannKind's El Alamein.
|
|
|
|
Post by longinvstr on Nov 12, 2015 13:53:34 GMT -5
I could not disagree more. For one thing, the SEC is widely known to be ineffectual. For another, the TASE ETF event was an event of high significance to investors who have good reasons to be concerned about the company's survival. A patently false but very believable story was published in the morning of the event and caused massive selling. The company has an obligation to its stockholders; we are part-owners of the company and our spending has a direct impact on their compensation from stock. MannKind was negligent in not quickly setting the record straight. I sold part of my position and I am outraged that I was left to twist in the wind for hours before the truth came out. This was a flat-out failure on the part of management; indeed, it was a betrayal. I empathize and sympathize with your plight. But the wrong was not committed by the article. The wrong was committed by a shady character with an agenda. To expect that management divert resources to counteract deeds of shady characters is unrealistic, unproductive, and lends power to shady characters. It is parallel to negotiating with terrorists |
|
|
|
Post by stevil on Nov 12, 2015 15:33:47 GMT -5
I could not disagree more. For one thing, the SEC is widely known to be ineffectual. For another, the TASE ETF event was an event of high significance to investors who have good reasons to be concerned about the company's survival. A patently false but very believable story was published in the morning of the event and caused massive selling. The company has an obligation to its stockholders; we are part-owners of the company and our spending has a direct impact on their compensation from stock. MannKind was negligent in not quickly setting the record straight. I sold part of my position and I am outraged that I was left to twist in the wind for hours before the truth came out. This was a flat-out failure on the part of management; indeed, it was a betrayal. I empathize and sympathize with your plight. But the wrong was not committed by the article. The wrong was committed by a shady character with an agenda. To expect that management divert resources to counteract deeds of shady characters is unrealistic, unproductive, and lends power to shady characters. It is parallel to negotiating with terrorists Ya, but we shoot missiles and drop bombs on terrorists... Why not prosecute him and set a GOOD precedent? Fry him so badly that no one else dare mess with us... |
|
|
|
Post by trenddiver on Nov 12, 2015 15:50:10 GMT -5
Legally Mannkind can attempt to terminate the relationships with Sanofi for lack of good faith effort. Realistically, it won't happen. Sanofi can drag the termination process out in a way which Mannkind cannot afford. Sanofi does not want Afrezza in the hands of another player. Kind of like when you really don't like the girl a lot and then you find out your friend is going on a date with her and then you become jealous. How can Mannkind get rid of Sanofi? Easy, with a repressed share price, another suitor comes in and throws down a bid for Mannkind. Sanofi can match the bid or not. In the process, the price gets bid up to a point where Sanofi cannot make a multi-billion dollar investment and maintain the lax approach to marketing Afrezza. No company is going to buy out Mannkind you say, OK then maybe TS rights for a specific therapeutic category can be sold. Any Rx products with annual sales above $2B going off patent in the next 2-4 years? They might be interested in a drug delivery system that allows them to keep their sales and margin strong. I have not read in detail the agreement Mannkind has with Sanofi and there is much that has been redacted but as detailed as the agreement is, nothing is air tight and their is likely enough ambiguity that gives Mannkind some room for innovative solutions to the current challenges. Keep in mind, Al Mann did not get to where he is by being a shrinking violet. He is smart, driven and scrappy. He may not be involved in the day to day, but he can still pick up a phone. Before you and others spout out a bunch of misinformation, I suggest you read the Licence and Collaberation Agreement with Sanofi. There is no easy way out of this agreement. In fact even if some other company decided to purchase Mannkind and Sanofi chose not to exercise any rights of first refusal, the License and Collaberation Agreement for Afrezza would remain in Sanofi's hands. Trend |
|
|
|
Post by mbseeking on Nov 12, 2015 21:46:03 GMT -5
Legally Mannkind can attempt to terminate the relationships with Sanofi for lack of good faith effort. Realistically, it won't happen. Sanofi can drag the termination process out in a way which Mannkind cannot afford. Sanofi does not want Afrezza in the hands of another player. Kind of like when you really don't like the girl a lot and then you find out your friend is going on a date with her and then you become jealous. How can Mannkind get rid of Sanofi? Easy, with a repressed share price, another suitor comes in and throws down a bid for Mannkind. Sanofi can match the bid or not. In the process, the price gets bid up to a point where Sanofi cannot make a multi-billion dollar investment and maintain the lax approach to marketing Afrezza. No company is going to buy out Mannkind you say, OK then maybe TS rights for a specific therapeutic category can be sold. Any Rx products with annual sales above $2B going off patent in the next 2-4 years? They might be interested in a drug delivery system that allows them to keep their sales and margin strong. I have not read in detail the agreement Mannkind has with Sanofi and there is much that has been redacted but as detailed as the agreement is, nothing is air tight and their is likely enough ambiguity that gives Mannkind some room for innovative solutions to the current challenges. Keep in mind, Al Mann did not get to where he is by being a shrinking violet. He is smart, driven and scrappy. He may not be involved in the day to day, but he can still pick up a phone. Before you and others spout out a bunch of misinformation, I suggest you read the Licence and Collaberation Agreement with Sanofi. There is no easy way out of this agreement. In fact even if some other company decided to purchase Mannkind and Sanofi chose not to exercise any rights of first refusal, the License and Collaberation Agreement for Afrezza would remain in Sanofi's hands. Trend Trend.. I believe you quite correct that this would be quite difficult to get out. Not to recant what I've said, but I feel the gist is simply that MNKD is now in a position where it could consider getting out if it wanted , whereas before TASE it was not. Personally, Im a believer that such small changes can make a massive difference in outcomes. I believe there is a potential now for a huge change in the relationship with SNY , for the positive, because of this. I have been negative on SNY longer than most on this board , was alarmed at their Meet Management meeting but frankly astonished at how quickly and effectively MNKD may have corralled them. (I did read the exhibits as you suggested and another thing that stuck out were the numerous references to bankruptcy.. This must have been factoring into SNY thinking from the getgo). Nothing has been said by anyone from MNKD to damage the relationship. They have just moved some chess pieces. On balance I'd say in 6 months we will still be with SNY. But now because of Hakan , Matt and Al.. we may well start to see some serious action by them. |
|
|
|
Post by trenddiver on Nov 12, 2015 22:26:59 GMT -5
Before you and others spout out a bunch of misinformation, I suggest you read the Licence and Collaberation Agreement with Sanofi. There is no easy way out of this agreement. In fact even if some other company decided to purchase Mannkind and Sanofi chose not to exercise any rights of first refusal, the License and Collaberation Agreement for Afrezza would remain in Sanofi's hands. Trend Trend.. I believe you quite correct that this would be quite difficult to get out. Not to recant what I've said, but I feel the gist is simply that MNKD is now in a position where it could consider getting out if it wanted , whereas before TASE it was not. Personally, Im a believer that such small changes can make a massive difference in outcomes. I believe there is a potential now for a huge change in the relationship with SNY , for the positive, because of this. I have been negative on SNY longer than most on this board , was alarmed at their Meet Management meeting but frankly astonished at how quickly and effectively MNKD may have corralled them. (I did read the exhibits as you suggested and another thing that stuck out were the numerous references to bankruptcy.. This must have been factoring into SNY thinking from the getgo). Nothing has been said by anyone from MNKD to damage the relationship. They have just moved some chess pieces. On balance I'd say in 6 months we will still with SNY. But now because of Hakan , Matt and Al.. we have started to see some serious action by them. MB, it's good that you spent some time reading the agreement. The bankruptcy clauses you refer to are pretty much boiler plate clauses. I don't think that any of Sanofi's action (or lack of action) has anything to with Mannkind's financial condition. Many people (including Adam Feuerstein and the rest of the FUDmeisters) seem to forget that Al Mann owns over 40% of the the shares and in my opinion the financial stability of Mannkind is not in question. Al is a multi billionaire and will do whatever is necessary to make sure that the promise of Afrezza is realized by patients and shareholders. We have all seen Al step up when it really mattered at a time when there was real uncertainty about the future of Afrezza and Mannkind. This TASE offering has no effect in any way, shape or form in what Sanofi is planning to do. As I have said many times, it's all about improving the insurance coverage and the effect that the improved coverage will have on doctor and patient interest in Afrezza. So far, we have seen NO evidence that Sanofi is not proceeding in a Commercially Reaonable manner in tackling that problem. Don't forget that although Sanofi and Mannkind have different responsibilities under the Collaberation Agreement, the Agreement provides that the overall Afrezza project is jointly managed by both Sanofi and Mannkind and all decisions require unanimity of the parties. In conclusion we have seen NO evidence that Mannkind is dissatisfied with Sanofi's carrying out its responsibilities under the Agreement. Trend |
|
