|
Post by nylefty on Nov 28, 2015 14:04:34 GMT -5
You're not the first to accuse MannKind management of "deceit" and "lies," but I don't remember seeing any examples. Care to cite some? If you go back through -------- posts/threads you will see 2 or 3 prime examples of times he emailed Matt with a question or concern hoping to clear things up, Matt each and everytime sent back an ambiguous misleading response which convinced -------- (bless his heart) that the issue was resolved satisfactorily. The latest was having to do with the dilutive TASE financing scheme in which Matt parsed words and wrote back something along the lines of "no, listing on the TASE does not increase the number of shares and lead to dilution". I'm sure if you choose to evaluate this example reasonably (as a skeptic), you could see Matt intended to give the answer which the questioner was looking for knowing perfectly well this was misleading and out of the context of the question. Another prime example - $2.08 - don't really need to add anything else to this one. Edit: I removed the OPs name as to not cause trouble with that individual as he likes to get into it, I'm sure you can look back and find his posts if he hasn't deleted them. In the words of (among others) Toby Keith, Is That All You Got? And you can't delete your own posts after one hour.
|
|
|
Post by jeremg on Nov 28, 2015 14:33:05 GMT -5
If you go back through -------- posts/threads you will see 2 or 3 prime examples of times he emailed Matt with a question or concern hoping to clear things up, Matt each and everytime sent back an ambiguous misleading response which convinced -------- (bless his heart) that the issue was resolved satisfactorily. The latest was having to do with the dilutive TASE financing scheme in which Matt parsed words and wrote back something along the lines of "no, listing on the TASE does not increase the number of shares and lead to dilution". I'm sure if you choose to evaluate this example reasonably (as a skeptic), you could see Matt intended to give the answer which the questioner was looking for knowing perfectly well this was misleading and out of the context of the question. Another prime example - $2.08 - don't really need to add anything else to this one. Edit: I removed the OPs name as to not cause trouble with that individual as he likes to get into it, I'm sure you can look back and find his posts if he hasn't deleted them. In the words of (among others) Toby Keith, Is That All You Got? And you can't delete your own posts after one hour. Why is this is a game to some of you? Do you believe if we all keep quiet and speak no ill they'll throw us a bone? Or when the rapture comes only the "true believers" will be welcomed into the arms of Al and his "embarrassment of riches"? I wish I held the same superstitions, I would probably sleep better at night if I could simply deny realities which I find unpleasant. Ok, back to wishing I had never bought into this mess. Good luck to both believers and non-believers alike.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2015 15:44:07 GMT -5
Shareholders need to understand that either mnkd is an investment of a lifetime or a bust. Reading complaints of longs and shorts is getting old, either sell or please stop posting hypothetical complaints unless you have data to back up your complaint.
|
|
|
Post by bill on Nov 28, 2015 16:00:11 GMT -5
Shareholders need to understand that either mnkd is an investment of a lifetime or a bust. Reading complaints of longs and shorts is getting old, either sell or please stop posting hypothetical complaints unless you have data to back up your complaint. I agree wholeheartedly. We're essentially playing a binary options game. We either lose everything, or win big. Investing isn't supposed to work like this, but with MNKD anything is possible... All that said, it does seem somewhat ridiculous that MNKD's market cap is less than $1b again. TS by itself is worth more than that. Sigh... One of the points overlooked by many is that the only company that can effectively buy MNKD is SNY because if anyone else were to buy them, SNY could still retain the rights to Afrezza and the MNKD acquirer would only reap MNKD's 35% of the profits. That fact substantially decreases MNKD's appeal to another BP. I believe MNKD's best shot to stay in the Afrezza poker game is to close a TS partnership with a substantial up-front payment. I believe their next best shot is for the SEC to stop playing Rip Van Winkle, wake up, and take action against the illegal stock price manipulation that's been going on for years. If those two options fail then I suspect we'll face some massive dilution as MNKD sells 100M shares at a dollar and change per share to raise enough cash to hang in for an extra year. I hope for one of the first two options, but fully expect that we'll see option three. Very sad! I just hope that whatever happens, that it happens sooner rather than later.
|
|
|
Post by rockstarrick on Nov 28, 2015 17:50:32 GMT -5
In the words of (among others) Toby Keith, Is That All You Got? And you can't delete your own posts after one hour. Why is this is a game to some of you? Do you believe if we all keep quiet and speak no ill they'll throw us a bone? Or when the rapture comes only the "true believers" will be welcomed into the arms of Al and his "embarrassment of riches"? I wish I held the same superstitions, I would probably sleep better at night if I could simply deny realities which I find unpleasant. Ok, back to wishing I had never bought into this mess. Good luck to both believers and non-believers alike. I don't think this is a game to any of us !! There are some that think we should be a little further into the launch, and that MNKD and Sanofi are moving in different directions, or Sanofi is sandbagging the launch of afrezza. I have watched this theory start as pure speculated fud, and evolve into pure fact without anything to support it being factual !! Nobody knows if Sanofi is really sandbagging the launch, or if MNKD and Sanofi are at the end of the partnership road, it is all pure speculation. In my opinion, the linear consistency of the rx numbers suggest that Sanofi is test driving afrezza to see if it really is as good as Al believes it is. The 65/35 split may be a temporary agreement until the test drive is complete, hopefully 2016, but possibly not until 2017. So no, this isn't a game, there are just some of us that don't buy into the theory that you do. Time will tell who was right, I hope it's me. Good Luck
|
|
|
Post by EveningOfTheDay on Nov 28, 2015 18:06:24 GMT -5
Shareholders need to understand that either mnkd is an investment of a lifetime or a bust. Reading complaints of longs and shorts is getting old, either sell or please stop posting hypothetical complaints unless you have data to back up your complaint. To use one of the quotes flying around in the top bar, "Doubt is an uncomfortable position, but certainty is an absurd position." -Voltaire
|
|
|
Post by fedakd on Nov 28, 2015 18:17:11 GMT -5
It's important to mention, that after January 2015, MNKD could theoretically negotiate the sale of Afrezza to any BP. That BP would then have 100% of Afrezza profits. Of course, MNKD would still be on the hook for the line of credit with Sanofi. Agree on the investment of a lifetime or bust though! Never in my wildest dreams did I think we would be at $2.08/share over a year after approval. Absolutely unreal. Still long, though
|
|
|
Post by jeremg on Nov 28, 2015 18:45:48 GMT -5
rockstarrick I can't even address what you've written as we must be looking at two different drug launches. I hold no theories, I only use what is reality to assess the situation and what is reality currently is a company with less than a few months cash left, a market cap below $1bil, script numbers stagnant almost a year into launch (<600nRx/week over the entire continental US!), and turmoil internally with the CEO's "resignation" [termination(?)]. These are the indisputable "facts". You are squarely in the "faith" camp so it is of no use debating with you as your reality is based on what you believe will happen in the future* while mine is based on what is currently happening in the present* [reality]. Future Speculation vs. Present Reality. I don't know where this "hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil" nonsense came from but it does us no good and it allows things to keep going the way they are without any pushback against management. I for one will be exploring a class action if this ends the way I expect based on current trajectory.
|
|
|
Post by trenddiver on Nov 28, 2015 19:07:00 GMT -5
It's important to mention, that after January 2015, MNKD could theoretically negotiate the sale of Afrezza to any BP. That BP would then have 100% of Afrezza profits. Of course, MNKD would still be on the hook for the line of credit with Sanofi. Agree on the investment of a lifetime or bust though! Never in my wildest dreams did I think we would be at $2.08/share over a year after approval. Absolutely unreal. Still long, though Fedakd, There is no such ability for Mannkind to sell Afrezza to some othe BP entity. I suggest you read the Agreement between a Mannkind and Sanofi and after you have done so, post the paragraph in the Agreement which permits this action. Trend
|
|
|
Post by stevil on Nov 28, 2015 19:07:32 GMT -5
rockstarrick I can't even address what you've written as we must be looking at two different drug launches. I hold no theories, I only use what is reality to assess the situation and what is reality currently is a company with less than a few months cash left, a market cap below $1bil, script numbers stagnant almost a year into launch (<600nRx/week over the entire continental US!), and turmoil internally with the CEO's "resignation" [termination(?)]. These are the indisputable "facts". You are squarely in the "faith" camp so it is of no use debating with you as your reality is based on what you believe will happen in the future* while mine is based on what is currently happening in the present* [reality]. Future Speculation vs. Present Reality. I don't know where this "hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil" nonsense came from but it does us no good and it allows things to keep going the way they are without any pushback against management. I for one will be exploring a class action if this ends the way I expect based on current trajectory. Jeremg, Please hear me when I say this- I'm just as guilty as anyone for speaking in absolutes. With that said, no one on this board knows exactly what's going on. Therefore, no one should speak in absolutes. I think you lose people (as I probably did as well) when you refuse to admit that another side is possible. You and I seem to be in agreement on a lot of things, and while that may seem the most logical conclusion, we don't have the whole story to form a complete picture. We're given fragments of pieces and we're left to put them on a canvas and connect the dots. The problem with this is that our canvas is 2 dimensional, while the actual playing field may truly be 3 dimensional with things going on behind the scenes. Even though we both agree that the evidence is weaker to support that claim, it's still a possibility and must be considered as such.
|
|
|
Post by jeremg on Nov 28, 2015 19:28:30 GMT -5
stevil I understand what you're saying but the point of what I said to rock was that I'm not speaking of theories, absolutes, or speculation; I am assessing things based on what I know (Rx numbers, Market Cap/PPS, recent management change) and none of it is good no matter how you spin it. There is no spin where the current PPS or script numbers are "good" despite the wild speculation and theories circulating through the "faith" camp claiming "it's all part of the plan". These wild and absurd claims that what we know is happening (once again, Rx #s, PPS spiraling etc.) is somehow part of a master plan is what I'm refuting. Like I've said before, no absolutes BUT when I hear hoofbeats I think horses; even when I'm hoping and praying for zebras, I still keep my wits about me and expect/prepare for horses!
|
|
|
Post by rockstarrick on Nov 28, 2015 19:31:28 GMT -5
rockstarrick I can't even address what you've written as we must be looking at two different drug launches. I hold no theories, I only use what is reality to assess the situation and what is reality currently is a company with less than a few months cash left, a market cap below $1bil, script numbers stagnant almost a year into launch (<600nRx/week over the entire continental US!), and turmoil internally with the CEO's "resignation" [termination(?)]. These are the indisputable "facts". You are squarely in the "faith" camp so it is of no use debating with you as your reality is based on what you believe will happen in the future* while mine is based on what is currently happening in the present* [reality]. Future Speculation vs. Present Reality. I don't know where this "hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil" nonsense came from but it does us no good and it allows things to keep going the way they are without any pushback against management. I for one will be exploring a class action if this ends the way I expect based on current trajectory. I don't expect you to address what I have written, there are investors that simply disagree with you, it's that simple, nothing to do with "see no evil, hear no evil" or faith. You bring up valid points, but you don't bring up how afrezza has literally changed the lives of everybody using it, no speculation or faith involved. The Diabetics love it, what more do I need to see a future for afrezza. We focus on two totally different sides of the story. Sanofi knows how well afrezza works, they won't let it fail IMO. I enjoy reading your point of view. Time will pass, soon we will know. Good Luck to you
|
|
|
Post by jeremg on Nov 28, 2015 19:57:29 GMT -5
rockstarrick that's just it, no one can or would dispute "how afrezza has literally changed the lives of everybody using it", but this has absolutely nothing to do with current issues/obstacles. Not even AF and his cronies are claiming Afrezza doesn't work; so let me try and understand your view, you believe that Afrezza works SO well that if all else fails, it'll sell itself because (once again) it is SO good? Well I have disappointing news for you, Afrezza would have been selling like hot cakes if this were the case, instead we see <600nRx/week (and this is despite the concerted effort you actually believe SNY is/has made). So given the fact that despite how great Afrezza works it has not been able to sell itself (even with SNY's supposed arduous effort), how can you continue to hang your hat on the "Afrezza has literally changed the lives of everybody using it" rack as an optimistic "if all else fails" fallback? So what do we disagree on? You are wholly focused on the non-investment side of the equation (Afrezza's efficacy) but Afrezza is merely a drug, it NEEDS a company to commercialize it, to negotiate its insurance coverage, to run ongoing safety studies etc-etc-etc., that company NEEDS a competent management team to execute AND investors/financing to supply money for operation. This is about so much more than Afrezza, yet you have decided Afrezza (a product) will make up for every other aspect of this [unbalanced] equation because it works SO WELL. I think you are a genuine person judging by your thoughts, so I wish you luck in your pursuits, but I believe your method and investment rationale in this case is deeply flawed.
|
|
|
Post by trenddiver on Nov 28, 2015 20:23:04 GMT -5
rockstarrick that's just it, no one can or would dispute "how afrezza has literally changed the lives of everybody using it", but this has absolutely nothing to do with current issues/obstacles. Not even AF and his cronies are claiming Afrezza doesn't work; so let me try and understand your view, you believe that Afrezza works SO well that if all else fails, it'll sell itself because (once again) it is SO good? Well I have disappointing news for you, Afrezza would have been selling like hot cakes if this were the case, instead we see <600nRx/week (and this is despite the concerted effort you actually believe SNY is/has made). So given the fact that despite how great Afrezza works it has not been able to sell itself (even with SNY's supposed arduous effort), how can you continue to hang your hat on the "Afrezza has literally changed the lives of everybody using it" rack as an optimistic "if all else fails" fallback? So what do we disagree on? You are wholly focused on the non-investment side of the equation (Afrezza's efficacy) but Afrezza is merely a drug, it NEEDS a company to commercialize it, to negotiate its insurance coverage, to run ongoing safety studies etc-etc-etc., that company NEEDS a competent management team to execute AND investors/financing to supply money for operation. This is about so much more than Afrezza, yet you have decided Afrezza (a product) will make up for every other aspect of this [unbalanced] equation because it works SO WELL. I think you are a genuine person judging by your thoughts, so I wish you luck in your pursuits, but I believe your method and investment rationale in this case is deeply flawed. In the battle of speculation vs reality, jeremg's posts are most convincing. Being a bean counter we used to say "it's the bottom line that matters". There is so much speculation on this board obviously because Mannkind's management has a policy of keeping its investors in the dark. The reasons for this have all been thoroughly discussed on this board. However it is my prediction that this policy is about to change and we will soon get some answers to the many questions and theories proffered on this board. Trend
|
|
|
Post by bill on Nov 28, 2015 20:30:35 GMT -5
rockstarrick that's just it, no one can or would dispute "how afrezza has literally changed the lives of everybody using it", but this has absolutely nothing to do with current issues/obstacles. Not even AF and his cronies are claiming Afrezza doesn't work; so let me try and understand your view, you believe that Afrezza works SO well that if all else fails, it'll sell itself because (once again) it is SO good? Well I have disappointing news for you, Afrezza would have been selling like hot cakes if this were the case, instead we see <600nRx/week (and this is despite the concerted effort you actually believe SNY is/has made). So given the fact that despite how great Afrezza works it has not been able to sell itself (even with SNY's supposed arduous effort), how can you continue to hang your hat on the "Afrezza has literally changed the lives of everybody using it" rack as an optimistic "if all else fails" fallback? So what do we disagree on? You are wholly focused on the non-investment side of the equation (Afrezza's efficacy) but Afrezza is merely a drug, it NEEDS a company to commercialize it, to negotiate its insurance coverage, to run ongoing safety studies etc-etc-etc., that company NEEDS a competent management team to execute AND investors/financing to supply money for operation. This is about so much more than Afrezza, yet you have decided Afrezza (a product) will make up for every other aspect of this [unbalanced] equation because it works SO WELL. I think you are a genuine person judging by your thoughts, so I wish you luck in your pursuits, but I believe your method and investment rationale in this case is deeply flawed. Interesting discussion. Here's my different point of view... Suppose that the primary script blocker is price. Too high a price inhibits tier 2 pricing and exacerbates restrictions. If SNY now chooses to price Afrezza only slightly above injectables then perhaps tier 2 coverage will ensue and restrictions removed. Maybe SNY deliberately priced it high when a lower price earlier in the year wouldn't get tier 2 coverage. MNKD might have even endorsed that approach. i think it's just as likely that the flat scripts has been primarily driven by price as any other explanation. if true, then we may see a renegotiated price concurrent with tier 2 pricing and fewer restrictions now that there is more real world positive experience for SNY and insurers to draw on.
|
|