|
|
Post by matt on Dec 9, 2015 17:37:39 GMT -5
Taking it private is indeed a buyout of sorts and if he manages to get to 90%, the last 10% can be forced out against their will. But $3.00 is only about a 100% premium to market, not 200%, although most deals go off at 35-50% premia. The problem with ANYBODY acquiring this company is the number of shareholders that have convinced themselves the stock is worth $10, $25, or $50 per share and will refuse to sell for less even if the price offered was a good deal by market standards. Remember that the executives of the buyer have shareholders too, and if they overpay they will be the ones out of a job (which is why you see 35-50% premia and rarely more).
As for bankruptcy, don't confuse market cap with cash. When the company runs low on cash, BK court is not far away regardless of the equity value. The first guys in line to get paid will be Deerfield Partners and they are not shy about forcing companies into court to get their pound of flesh. Research what happened to Dendreon starting around August 1 of 2014. They had about the same market cap as MNKD, higher price per share, sales of nearly $300 million, much more cash on the balance sheet, and Deerfield as their major creditor. BK law is not what you think; do your homework and understand how the process can very quickly get out of hand. I am not saying it will happen, but I am saying that it is more than plausible at this point. Study the history then decide for yourself.
|
|
|
|
Post by purge on Dec 9, 2015 17:44:09 GMT -5
I forget the details, but didn't Michael Dell do something just like we are all afraid Al is going to do to us?
|
|
|
|
Post by jeremg on Dec 9, 2015 17:47:38 GMT -5
I haven't done any "googling" on the topic but I was under the impression that Al taking the company private would be no different than another company putting in a bid which a majority vote could allow to go through(?). Also, $3 is a 200% premium from today's price, if someone offered me $3 today to end this nightmare I would gladly take it. Being offered $3 today considering where we are and what the trajectory looks like is VERY different from MNKD achieving a $3 price tag again on progress and positive material news; $3 today would be a gift. What about the institutions, jeremg? They hold a lot more shares than you. Your 0.0000000001% of shares, and your vote is meaningless. I know that, that was my whole point... whatever Al and the majority shareholders want to do with the company is completely within their power to do. Retail holdings [including mine] are meaningless. If Al wants to sell the company for $3/share, Al will sell the company for $3/share, all I was saying is if that was the case tomorrow I would be happy with it considering the circumstances. |
|
|
|
Post by bradleysbest on Dec 9, 2015 17:50:56 GMT -5
I would not be a happy camper..... Hell to the no!
|
|
|
|
Post by jeremg on Dec 9, 2015 17:50:58 GMT -5
matt, if that is you, can you just tell us what's going on!?  also, I corrected myself $3 is 100% from todays closing. Otherwise, I agree with your reasoning.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2015 19:23:41 GMT -5
If anyone knows Alfred Mann's history, then one would know how silly this thread is.
|
|
|
|
Post by cathode on Dec 9, 2015 19:41:59 GMT -5
Silly thread indeed. The TASE listing should be evidence enough that the company is not going private.
|
|
|
|
Post by rch51 on Dec 9, 2015 19:59:44 GMT -5
What about the institutions, jeremg? They hold a lot more shares than you. Your 0.0000000001% of shares, and your vote is meaningless. I know that, that was my whole point... whatever Al and the majority shareholders want to do with the company is completely within their power to do. Retail holdings [including mine] are meaningless. If Al wants to sell the company for $3/share, Al will sell the company for $3/share, all I was saying is if that was the case tomorrow I would be happy with it considering the circumstances. Jeremg: What "circumstances" are you referring to exactly? Today's share price is irrelevant to the true value of Afrezza and TS. Listen, has it occurred to any of you that Afrezza and MNKD could very easily be in play as I write this? To my eye everything we have seen and are experiencing is a direct result of a very focused (call it pilot if you like) attempt by Sanofi to verify the real world efficacy of Afrezza BEFORE leaning into a full blown launch. The perceived failure to sell Afrezza has resulted in gross miscalculation and a seriously artificially diminished PPS. Further, I think MNKD doesn't give a fig about today's pps because it is irrelevant to the deal they are engaged in. I believe the BO has already been agreed to and the number is far different than our friend Jeremg would like you to believe. Call me crazy but I think within 4 months we will have an Afrezza BO on the table and longs will be very pleased. I'm putting my $ where my mouth is by adding to my position as quickly as I can free up cash. I'm at 75k shares now and hope to be holding close to 100k shares when it happens. And if it takes 2 more years, that's fine too. Man, there's a lot of negativity here these days! |
|
|
|
Post by stevil on Dec 9, 2015 21:13:33 GMT -5
I would fully be in accordance with you, except that SNY has not shown any type of commitment to Afrezza as of yet. At best, they have dipped their toe in the water to check the temperature before jumping in. Their feet are still on the pool deck.
They could just as easily have locked MNKD up from the grips of their competitors whilst giving Afrezza a test drive. Again, I would feel much more at ease if they showed one iota of commitment to Afrezza, but they're just as easily to toss us aside as they are to stick with us.
|
|
|
|
Post by mssciguy on Dec 9, 2015 21:21:55 GMT -5
I would fully be in accordance with you, except that SNY has not shown any type of commitment to Afrezza as of yet. At best, they have dipped their toe in the water to check the temperature before jumping in. Their feet are still on the pool deck. They could just as easily have locked MNKD up from the grips of their competitors whilst giving Afrezza a test drive. Again, I would feel much more at ease if they showed one iota of commitment to Afrezza, but they're just as easily to toss us aside as they are to stick with us. Beg to differ stevil ... I would say no outward commitment. Yet, the clinical studies are in progress, funded, updated publicly as of 12/7 (the pediatric trial, or at least one of them). With several dozen clinical studies, Afrezza is one of the most studied drugs ever, maybe thanks to FDA admin Hamburg (husband a hedgie), also Martin Shrkeli (said to be most hated man in America), also GSCO (most hated investment bank globally). In short, a perfect storm. Diabetics know Mannkind has the best goods, so do many endos, but the overcautious approach may yield great dividends, if for example, the recent MNKD patent for an inhaled flu vaccine comes to pass. If MNKD could do it with insulin, many other biologics are a shoo in, and the short peptides are a serious no-brainer. Looking forward to Technosphere 1mg melatonin with 100 ug delta sleep inducing peptide.... in a DREAMBOAT OTC, if possible. |
|
|
|
Post by stevil on Dec 9, 2015 21:33:04 GMT -5
ugh had a response but then I hit backspace and apparently the cursor wasn't in the text box... Grrr wish this had a draft feature.
Anyway,
I was going to say that I was unaware of the pediatric trials- that's actually great news. But would you say any of the trials are proof of SNY's commitment outside of being a barometer? I'm just wondering if SNY is giving Afrezza a test run in some of these trials with few participants. They can't be used for anything that I'm aware of. Then, is SNY going to stick with Afrezza the way Al did after the CRL's? That's what I want to know/see. Unfortunately, as you've stated, all of those things are being done behind the scenes. So time is our only ally here. We're just gonna have to wait it out because SNY will not show an outward commitment...
|
|
|
|
Post by rockstarrick on Dec 10, 2015 9:31:12 GMT -5
ugh had a response but then I hit backspace and apparently the cursor wasn't in the text box... Grrr wish this had a draft feature. Anyway, I was going to say that I was unaware of the pediatric trials- that's actually great news. But would you say any of the trials are proof of SNY's commitment outside of being a barometer? I'm just wondering if SNY is giving Afrezza a test run in some of these trials with few participants. They can't be used for anything that I'm aware of. Then, is SNY going to stick with Afrezza the way Al did after the CRL's? That's what I want to know/see. Unfortunately, as you've stated, all of those things are being done behind the scenes. So time is our only ally here. We're just gonna have to wait it out because SNY will not show an outward commitment... Stevil Why do you think they required the CGM's for the pediatric trial, but not the other trials ?? Do think it has anything to do with all the social media chatter claiming Afrezza + CGM = ?? Thanks |
|
|
|
Post by mssciguy on Dec 10, 2015 9:34:49 GMT -5
It is far more likely that GSCO has created some kind of artificial intelligence to cause us to create conspiracy theories, while swindling us out of our positions. These are not nice people.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 10, 2015 9:56:24 GMT -5
As a long-term MNKD investor, the only answer I am seeking for is whether or not Al will choose to wipe out common shares in order to save the company with his name on it. It will be really nice if Al can say a few words to assure us as we are heading to the holiday season so we can at least a peaceful mind even we did not have "good year" as MNKD investor.
My bet is he will not but I would like hear some analysis about the chance for this to happen. I need this kind of information for me to come up with some protection plan. MNKD's shares can be bought by anyone. So, al or anyone could take the company private, do a buyout/merger, or a hostile takeover. While there's other differences, the process of a hostile takeover and a buyout is centered on "agreement". In the hostile takeover there is no agreement on price so the buyer accumulates shares until they can take control of the company. To my point - most of the time the buyer negotiates a price for large blocks of shares by getting an agreement from the holders to sell at an agreed price, even if that price isn't what you would sell your shares for. When a buyer gets enough deals in place with enough shares, then the transaction can be completed. So how this would work is that al has a bunch of shares he already owns and he would likely need to negotiate a buyout price with other shareholders with large blocks of mnkd shares to sell. Once that's done al takes it private and pays shareholders the price for their shares. Retailers have no say because we don't own enough shares. Mike Dell recently did this with his company. My wife worked with a company, lucent, that spun off avaya and avaya was then taken private. Then she worked for another company that was private when she started, went public, then went private again all within 5 yrs. It all boils down to getting agreement with the largest shareholders until you have enough shares to do what you are trying to do. Then it's just attorney's and paperwork. As far as pricing, buyout pricing wouldn't be 1000% higher than the trading price. Maybe a double or triple but what's more typical is a 25% premium give or take a bit. As far as cash, a few comments made suggesting that al can go back to the equity markets for more cash. Bad news there as the august convertible showed a lack of interest in investors wanting mnkd shares followed by the same with the tase debacle. Another takeaway though is the thought process - MNKD was hoping to secure enough cash to make it through 2017 or thereabouts with the tase listing. The august convertible disaster forced mnkd to give up two quarters of cash (60 mil or thereabouts) and the tase debacle reduced mnkd's cash takeaway by another 3 quarters (they were looking for over 100 million but ended up with much less, like 36 million). Clearly mnkd isn't interested in taking the company private, at least not prior to these two events. But they will need cash and the equity markets are snubbing their noses to mnkd now. Where's it going to come from? Either they sell product, sell shares, sell a deal, win the alfred lottery, or sell the company. |
|
|
|
Post by stevil on Dec 10, 2015 11:24:30 GMT -5
ugh had a response but then I hit backspace and apparently the cursor wasn't in the text box... Grrr wish this had a draft feature. Anyway, I was going to say that I was unaware of the pediatric trials- that's actually great news. But would you say any of the trials are proof of SNY's commitment outside of being a barometer? I'm just wondering if SNY is giving Afrezza a test run in some of these trials with few participants. They can't be used for anything that I'm aware of. Then, is SNY going to stick with Afrezza the way Al did after the CRL's? That's what I want to know/see. Unfortunately, as you've stated, all of those things are being done behind the scenes. So time is our only ally here. We're just gonna have to wait it out because SNY will not show an outward commitment... Stevil Why do you think they required the CGM's for the pediatric trial, but not the other trials ?? Do think it has anything to do with all the social media chatter claiming Afrezza + CGM = ?? Thanks I don't really know, maybe it's a compliance thing... Children are less apt to follow protocols because they are less responsible. It eliminates the need to remember supplies and if they ever miss a dose, it's recorded for them. Takes out much of the error in recording and monitoring. CGMs should be used for every trial, regardless, for the same reasons. Surely it would add on a significant cost, but at least you'd know your data was accurate. Diabetics are notorious for being lackadaisical about their health/health maintenance. |
|
also, I corrected myself $3 is 100% from todays closing. Otherwise, I agree with your reasoning.
