|
|
Post by doodyfree on Nov 24, 2015 16:09:43 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by bill on Nov 24, 2015 16:14:36 GMT -5
Why do you think there was any capitulation? If yes, by whom--shorts or longs? I'm just not seeing anything in these numbers. The days to cover is just the result of the math of dividing the short interest by the average daily volume. The TASE indices buy-in increased the volume during this two-week period so the days to cover was much lower than normal. I don't think is means much at all. |
|
|
|
Post by doodyfree on Nov 24, 2015 16:18:50 GMT -5
Why do you think there was any capitulation? If yes, by whom--shorts or longs? I'm just not seeing anything in these numbers. The days to cover is just the result of the math of dividing the short interest by the average daily volume. The TASE indices buy-in increased the volume during this two-week period so the days to cover was much lower than normal. I don't think is means much at all. I'm inferring capitulation with short interest saying roughly the same and large percentage drop in sp. Don't know how else to explain that. Also I'm not sure whether this report covers the TASE buy in. |
|
|
|
Post by benyiju on Nov 24, 2015 16:18:38 GMT -5
It's virtually unchanged, increased a little actually. Bleh.
|
|
|
|
Post by alethea on Nov 24, 2015 16:44:44 GMT -5
Why do you think there was any capitulation? If yes, by whom--shorts or longs? I'm just not seeing anything in these numbers. The days to cover is just the result of the math of dividing the short interest by the average daily volume. The TASE indices buy-in increased the volume during this two-week period so the days to cover was much lower than normal. I don't think is means much at all. I'm inferring capitulation with short interest saying roughly the same and large percentage drop in sp. Don't know how else to explain that. Also I'm not sure whether this report covers the TASE buy in. Pretty sure it does not cover the TASE buy in. The Nov 13 Short Interest includes shares SETTLED thru the 13th which means shares TRADED on Nov 10th are the last ones included. On Nov 11, the Crooks dropped the PPS to 1.76 aided and abetted by the lies from Adumb Fraudstein. On Nov 11, about 24 million shares were traded. On Nov 12, the last day of trading in Israel on the TASE before the required Nov 15 Purchase Date, nearly 42 Million shares were traded. TASE funds were likely acquiring that day. AND no doubts millions of short shares were covered by Wall Street crooks and very likely RE-shorted the same day.Now we must wait until Dec 9th to see what the effect of 64 million shares traded on Nov 11 and Nov 12 really had on Short Interest. My guess is that as of this minute, Short Interest has increased considerably from the 120 million shares reported today. |
|
|
|
Post by benyiju on Nov 24, 2015 17:19:56 GMT -5
While I'm hoping this will at some point come back to hurt them, I agree Alethea that short interest has probably only increased since then. After the failure of the TASE gambit became clear, and then the Hakansack, I would guess shorts have been salivating uncontrollably at the sight of MNKD's hot mess, especially when you throw in the added spice of year-end tax loss selling. The big question for me is whether some are going to start covering in late December in anticipation of possible early 2016 improvements. I'm trying to time another buy between the expected SP decrease over next few weeks from tax loss harvesting and what I hope will be a SP rise from short covering, improved script numbers, new CEO news, etc that we might see in January. It seems to me the tax loss selling will probably peak mid-December, I would guess we're already beginning to see some of it. Anyone have thoughts about this?
|
|
|
|
Post by jeremg on Nov 24, 2015 17:53:30 GMT -5
While I'm hoping this will at some point come back to hurt them, I agree Alethea that short interest has probably only increased since then. After the failure of the TASE gambit became clear, and then the Hakansack, I would guess shorts have been salivating uncontrollably at the sight of MNKD's hot mess, especially when you throw in the added spice of year-end tax loss selling. The big question for me is whether some are going to start covering in late December in anticipation of possible early 2016 improvements. I'm trying to time another buy between the expected SP decrease over next few weeks from tax loss harvesting and what I hope will be a SP rise from short covering, improved script numbers, new CEO news, etc that we might see in January. It seems to me the tax loss selling will probably peak mid-December, I would guess we're already beginning to see some of it. Anyone have thoughts about this? I fear at this point they have no reason to cover, they are probably convinced BK is a natural progression based on where MNKD is heading. It's like a game of poker between the "shorts" and Al, unfortunately we cannot see Al's hand despite the fact his hand is our hand, so it's hard to guess whether one or both sides is bluffing. The other possibility is the "shorts" believe this will culminate in a sale of the company (Al's forced hand) at or around where the current price sits. Alternatively, they think this will turn around but are making a killing collecting options premiums, lending shares held, and trading the manufactured dips/peaks which they create, the Net amount they make must be more than interest paid(?) in the same time period. I can only see the PPS going down in the next few weeks but will foolishly hold "just in case", that is my official position going forward... |
|
|
|
Post by mssciguy on Dec 2, 2015 9:52:29 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by trenddiver on Dec 2, 2015 11:36:37 GMT -5
Could shorts have gotten wind of the big surprise coming their way?
|
|
|
|
Post by suebeeee1 on Dec 2, 2015 14:06:51 GMT -5
Why shouldn't they cover at $1.76? There were millions of shares being wildly sold off on the FUD presented. This was a tailor made opportunity to take cover. If a short did not do so on that day, I sincerely expect that they are going to get caught in the upswing.
I haven't been so sure something is about to happen in a very long time!
|
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Dec 2, 2015 14:20:56 GMT -5
Why shouldn't they cover at $1.76? There were millions of shares being wildly sold off on the FUD presented. This was a tailor made opportunity to take cover. If a short did not do so on that day, I sincerely expect that they are going to get caught in the upswing. I haven't been so sure something is about to happen in a very long time! Whereas I've been sure something was about to happen FOR a very long time... and wrong about it. But heck... I'll keep on being sure until I'm right. Just hope it's something good. |
|
|
|
Post by cathode on Dec 2, 2015 14:23:09 GMT -5
Why shouldn't they cover at $1.76? There were millions of shares being wildly sold off on the FUD presented. This was a tailor made opportunity to take cover. If a short did not do so on that day, I sincerely expect that they are going to get caught in the upswing. I haven't been so sure something is about to happen in a very long time! $1.76 was the bottom. If the shorts were trying to buy lots of shares at that bottom, what would have been happening to the share price during that time? The increased buying pressure would cause the PPS to rise. Did we see that? Yes! The price shot up to $3 within 24 hours. There was other buying pressure at that time as well, most likely from TASE managers. |
|
|
|
Post by suebeeee1 on Dec 2, 2015 14:29:25 GMT -5
$1.76 was the bottom. If the shorts were trying to buy lots of shares at that bottom, what would have been happening to the share price during that time? The increased buying pressure would cause the PPS to rise. Did we see that? Yes! The price shot up to $3 within 24 hours. There was other buying pressure at that time as well, most likely from TASE managers. Of course, it wasn't just shorts trying to buy at that price. I was able to snatch a few tens of thousands at those prices to reduce the cost of my holding by more than half! |
|
|
|
Post by cjc04 on Dec 2, 2015 14:30:25 GMT -5
Why shouldn't they cover at $1.76? There were millions of shares being wildly sold off on the FUD presented. This was a tailor made opportunity to take cover. If a short did not do so on that day, I sincerely expect that they are going to get caught in the upswing. I haven't been so sure something is about to happen in a very long time! Whereas I've been sure something was about to happen FOR a very long time... and wrong about it. But heck... I'll keep on being sure until I'm right. Just hope it's something good. Ditto! |
|
|
|
Post by mssciguy on Dec 2, 2015 14:31:29 GMT -5
Why shouldn't they cover at $1.76? There were millions of shares being wildly sold off on the FUD presented. This was a tailor made opportunity to take cover. If a short did not do so on that day, I sincerely expect that they are going to get caught in the upswing. I haven't been so sure something is about to happen in a very long time! The TASE shares can't be shorted, right? And my shares can't be shorted  And I'll bet the 2+ million shares purchased by the ETF yesterday can't be shorted (or only under very strict rules). And the interest rate for lending shares is dropping. Not to mention all of the study completion, rumors about better coverage, Sanofi internal and external reaching out about Afrezza, peer reviewed publications by prescribing physicians, funding for MNKD through 2017 with no problem.... just what are the shorts thinking? Will Jason lose a fortune on his put options like so many other hedge funds are losing money lately? |
|
And I'll bet the 2+ million shares purchased by the ETF yesterday can't be shorted (or only under very strict rules). And the interest rate for lending shares is dropping.