Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2015 20:34:02 GMT -5
Excellent points Laker. MNKD needs to be super-protective from BP competition. Keeping the ex-CEO around until 07/17 is a brilliant strategy, and you can bet for sure that MNKD/Sanofi, had a discussion about this prior to the news being released.
|
|
|
Post by jeremg on Nov 25, 2015 20:35:38 GMT -5
As I had said previously, before it mysteriously disappeared, I think Hakan was let go for fiddling while Rome burns. It does not surprise me that they would offer him a 2yrs salary + bonus severance package as this would be necessary if he was terminated in order to have an amicable parting of ways. The clever wording in the Press Release "Hakan will stay on staff" was likely arranged to justify paying $2-3mil(?) over the next two years while the company is already struggling with cash. What bothers me the most is the fact that future financing and subsequent shareholder dilution will include money to be paid to this very "silly" man who in my opinion did the company a great injustice in his many public (and private) blunders as CEO. It seems to me that MNKD should have announced simply that they felt it was time to find a new quarterback, and then bought Hakan out while giving him a plane ticket back to Sweden. As it is, investors are left with uncertainty while trying to figure out what, if any, role he is supposed to play through July of 2017. The image of him still being associated with MNKD can't be very encouraging to investors. On the contrary many investors seem to love him( ), but I think it is likely Hakan will not be stepping foot into MNKD HQ after his "resignation". I don't think he will play any further role, he's done quite enough as it is. I'm glad Al shared my view as well as many others that Hakan needed to be escorted out, hopefully with Al at the helm there will be a tinge more hope and confidence among WS than their was previously. I think Al knows full well he will have to finance MNKDs ongoing survival one way or another from here on it, so he'd be foolish not to take the captains seat and steer his own money.
|
|
|
8-K
Nov 25, 2015 20:36:43 GMT -5
jeremg likes this
Post by nylefty on Nov 25, 2015 20:36:43 GMT -5
IMO, there is nothing all that strange going on. People who find it strange only find it so because the facts do not match with what they imagined. I think my explanation (Hakan simply retired at a normal retirement age as there was nothing at MNKD to hold him there any longer) is perfectly sensible and fits the facts. Like many people who retire, he is easing himself out. Stepping down from the C-suite, but still participating on a lesser, part-time, basis. If he's still going to participate, why was the press release devoid of anything positive to say about him? Seems to me they bought out his contract by keeping him on the payroll for another year and a half, with the understanding that he will do or say nothing that could harm the company.
|
|
|
Post by doodyfree on Nov 25, 2015 20:37:37 GMT -5
All that matters is 1) Hakan isn't making strategic decisions any longer, nor does he have any authority on how MNKD should be run. 2) MNKD has Al's full attention, and the urgency is clear. 3) Hakan stays to help transition, shut his trap until 2017, and make sure MNKD doesn't fall apart operationally in the short-term.
|
|
|
8-K
Nov 25, 2015 20:46:16 GMT -5
liane likes this
Post by james on Nov 25, 2015 20:46:16 GMT -5
It rather looks to me that there is a mutual agreement among the parties on this. The BOD probably felt that new energy and vision are in strong need at present and possibly had concerns whether Mr. Edstrom would contribute that. As for Mr. Edstrom likewise considering the future effort required to put the company on the right footing, and possibly pressed by the BOD, decided he would rather wind down than wind up. The separation is largely amicable in that regard.
There is also the consideration that the stopgap CEO at this point is 90, so keeping the prior executive on retainer to 'provide transition and other services' is a requirement. Once a new CEO can be lined up, I'm sure his role will be quickly eliminated.
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Nov 25, 2015 20:53:46 GMT -5
Hakan quit. Pure and simple. Speculate all you want about why. Perhaps the BofD didn't approve a deal he negotiated. Perhaps Hakan was simply tired of being puppet to Al. Perhaps Hakan actually wanted to revamp the company with a strong, communicative Investor Relations department, which we know Al simply will NOT allow.
The reason doesn't matter. Hakan was not fired. Hakan quit and the BofD realized the big hole his departure would leave within the company. I tire of people trashing Hakan Edstrom, a brilliant man in his own right who chose to work under a tyrant. I respect Al Mann as much as any businessman alive, but that is what he is...a tyrant. Please understand that I'm not ripping Al here. Frankly, Steve Jobs was a tyrant, too. Typically these types of visionary leaders can be very loyal, but they are extremely difficult to work for.
Those who have gone overboard paying their disrespects to Hakan Edstrom today likely have no clue what he has done and still does for MannKind Corporation. But the board knows and they scrambled to keep him on board until he can successful transfer his many responsibilities. If you think for one minute that Hakan was ever free to run this company the way he wanted, then you need to wake up and smell what you're shoveling.
|
|
|
8-K
Nov 25, 2015 20:54:01 GMT -5
jpg likes this
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 25, 2015 20:54:01 GMT -5
It rather looks to me that there is a mutual agreement among the parties on this. The BOD probably felt that new energy and vision are in strong need at present and possibly had concerns whether Mr. Edstrom would contribute that. As for Mr. Edstrom likewise considering the future effort required to put the company on the right footing, and possibly pressed by the BOD, decided he would rather wind down than wind up. The separation is largely amicable in that regard. There is also the consideration that the stopgap CEO at this point is 90, so keeping the prior executive on retainer to 'provide transition and other services' is a requirement. Once a new CEO can be lined up, I'm sure his role will be quickly eliminated. In my estimate... If Hakan were really still working to help with transition they would have done it behind closed doors and then announced his retirement when they had found a replacement, not having an interim step in.
|
|
|
8-K
Nov 25, 2015 21:09:33 GMT -5
fedakd likes this
Post by jeremg on Nov 25, 2015 21:09:33 GMT -5
mnholdem , unless you are Hakan himself or have insider information, there's no way for you to substantiate your claims especially when the evidence points to the exact opposite. Your view that "Hakan quit" is just as much speculation as anyone else's view on what transpired. As far as you putting the blame on Al for Hakan's departure, I think that is a sorry excuse for the way Hakan performed as CEO. I saw my investment value halve under his rule and as the saying goes "the buck stops here [with CEO]". If Hakan truly was as magnificent as you make him out to be, then I would expect him to hold the opposite view as you and take responsibility for what happened to the company under his tenure. "then you need to wake up and smell what you're shoveling." - I take offense to this just as you seem to take offense to the "disrespect" you see from some here towards this man, as a shareholder I don't need to wake up and smell anything, I need to do my DD and place my money in the hands of a competent management team and BoD who has a fiduciary responsible to protect my interests. Hakan failed and he failed miserably, MNKD will hopefully see a brighter day now that he is gone.
|
|
|
Post by stevil on Nov 25, 2015 21:10:39 GMT -5
Pretty strong words from a careful, well-researched poster.
I know you were responsible for the nice "Thank you Hakan" thread.
I was wondering if you had personal knowledge of the situation? Is there anything more you're at liberty to share?
|
|
|
Post by ezrasfund on Nov 25, 2015 21:13:39 GMT -5
Hakan didn't make his embarrassing "let's talk" plea because he planned to quit the next day. We are all familiar with the Peter Principle, and Hakan was a good COO but not a good CEO. He did a good job running the factory, but a poor job charting a strategy for the company and negotiating deals. Also he was probably trying to do fill both rolls, as there was a new CTO but no COO to replace him. I believe Hakan is committed to MannKind's success and the BOD knows he is important in the operations of the company and has done a good job over more than 10 years. So now he is back to running the day to day operations of the company until a replacement can step in, and Al is back trying to close the technosphere deals and keep Sanofi on task.
|
|
|
Post by kc on Nov 25, 2015 21:17:34 GMT -5
Still begs the question, why was his successor not prepared beforehand? Or are those here of the impression Al wanted to take back control of the company to get us through this period? You know that's what I think:-) Sounds to me the know the deal is done and now it's waiting time for it to be announced. Hakan is included to reap his share of it.
|
|
|
8-K
Nov 25, 2015 21:31:46 GMT -5
Post by cathode on Nov 25, 2015 21:31:46 GMT -5
Hakan didn't make his embarrassing "let's talk" plea because he planned to quit the next day. We are all familiar with the Peter Principle, and Hakan was a good COO but not a good CEO. He did a good job running the factory, but a poor job charting a strategy for the company and negotiating deals. Also he was probably trying to do fill both rolls, as there was a new CTO but no COO to replace him. I believe Hakan is committed to MannKind's success and the BOD knows he is important in the operations of the company and has done a good job over more than 10 years. So now he is back to running the day to day operations of the company until a replacement can step in, and Al is back trying to close the technosphere deals and keep Sanofi on task. I think this is the most likely case. Good post.
|
|
|
8-K
Nov 25, 2015 21:48:04 GMT -5
Post by ezrasfund on Nov 25, 2015 21:48:04 GMT -5
To put it another way, Hakan is the guy who says "my door is always open," not someone who keeps his cards close to his vest and always plays hardball. He was just not CEO material, especially at a critical deal making time like this.
|
|
|
8-K
Nov 25, 2015 21:51:10 GMT -5
jeremg likes this
Post by fedakd on Nov 25, 2015 21:51:10 GMT -5
Hakan quit. Pure and simple. Speculate all you want about why. Perhaps the BofD didn't approve a deal he negotiated. Perhaps Hakan was simply tired of being puppet to Al. Perhaps Hakan actually wanted to revamp the company with a strong, communicative Investor Relations department, which we know Al simply will NOT allow. The reason doesn't matter. Hakan was not fired. Hakan quit and the BofD realized the big hole his departure would leave within the company. I tire of people trashing Hakan Edstrom, a brilliant man in his own right who chose to work under a tyrant. I respect Al Mann as much as any businessman alive, but that is what he is...a tyrant. Please understand that I'm not ripping Al here. Frankly, Steve Jobs was a tyrant, too. Typically these types of visionary leaders can be very loyal, but they are extremely difficult to work for. Those who have gone overboard paying their disrespects to Hakan Edstrom today likely have no clue what he has done and still does for MannKind Corporation. But the board knows and they scrambled to keep him on board until he can successful transfer his many responsibilities. If you think for one minute that Hakan was ever free to run this company the way he wanted, then you need to wake up and smell what you're shoveling. Hakan was nothing more than a babbling bafoon. I'm very happy he's no longer CEO. His performance on the last conference call was atrocious.
|
|
|
8-K
Nov 25, 2015 22:15:17 GMT -5
jpg likes this
Post by trenddiver on Nov 25, 2015 22:15:17 GMT -5
It rather looks to me that there is a mutual agreement among the parties on this. The BOD probably felt that new energy and vision are in strong need at present and possibly had concerns whether Mr. Edstrom would contribute that. As for Mr. Edstrom likewise considering the future effort required to put the company on the right footing, and possibly pressed by the BOD, decided he would rather wind down than wind up. The separation is largely amicable in that regard. There is also the consideration that the stopgap CEO at this point is 90, so keeping the prior executive on retainer to 'provide transition and other services' is a requirement. Once a new CEO can be lined up, I'm sure his role will be quickly eliminated. Lets get this straight, the BOD was handpicked by Al and you can be sure every Board member votes lock, stock and barrel along with Al's wishes.
|
|