|
|
Post by trenddiver on Jan 7, 2016 14:41:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by dictatorsaurus on Jan 7, 2016 14:55:59 GMT -5
"Reuters reported that a Sanofi "spokesman says Afrezza decided to end Afrezza deal with MannKind" Afrezza decided to end Afrezza?  LOL!!! Those guys can't even proof read. Wouldn't trust them with a lawsuit! |
|
|
|
Post by factspls88 on Jan 7, 2016 16:46:12 GMT -5
"Reuters reported that a Sanofi "spokesman says Afrezza decided to end Afrezza deal with MannKind" Afrezza decided to end Afrezza? LOL!!! Those guys can't even proof read. Wouldn't trust them with a lawsuit! Saw that too  |
|
|
|
Post by alcc on Jan 7, 2016 16:59:25 GMT -5
Dumbass suit. The point of these class action nonsense is to extort a settlement payment out of the company. Why go after nearly empty pockets?
|
|
|
|
Post by wmdhunt on Jan 8, 2016 11:30:38 GMT -5
I see all these "investigations" by law firms. Sorry, I don't see that MNKD has been anything but a victim here, not a perp.
|
|
|
|
Post by cjc04 on Jan 8, 2016 12:12:09 GMT -5
I see all these "investigations" by law firms. Sorry, I don't see that MNKD has been anything but a victim here, not a perp. Totally agree,,,,, and what better way for BP to finish MNKD off than to help facilitate these law suits, get their own shareholders against them...... Sorry, I trust no one anymore. |
|
|
|
Post by cjc04 on Jan 8, 2016 15:02:26 GMT -5
I'm having trouble understanding what, supposed, violations were made by MNKD on 1/6/2016, and the purpose of quoting an article stating that SNY ended the agreement. They're laying it out as if MNKD is responsible for SNY's actions.
The only connection I can see is if they're trying to say that MNKD knew it was coming and didn't tell share holders.
|
|
|
|
Post by avogadro on Jan 8, 2016 15:03:04 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by matt on Jan 8, 2016 15:26:26 GMT -5
I see all these "investigations" by law firms. Sorry, I don't see that MNKD has been anything but a victim here, not a perp. You, as a shareholder, do not have the right to sue any party other than MNKD, and even then your rights are limited to claims under Rule 10(b), part of federal securities law. The lawyers are conducting "investigations" looking for a smoking gun they can use to bring a suit under 10(b) because that is an easy pay day for them if they can find a materially false or misleading statement by the company. Only really stupid companies with really bad lawyers make such errors in their filings. Most of the time absolutely nothing happens.
SNY expended reasonable efforts to market Afrezza, maybe they didn't take the actions you would have liked, but what they did was not commercially unreasonable, and with the slow uptake in prescriptions they had a good faith basis to discontinue the contract. Even if Sanofi didn't, they are not liable for any damages to MNKD because the possibility of damages was explicitly waived in the license agreement. Nothing to see here folks, move along.
|
|
|
|
Post by novafett on Jan 8, 2016 15:32:52 GMT -5
Got some serious spin doctor skills there matt.
|
|
|
|
Post by liane on Jan 8, 2016 16:20:22 GMT -5
I merged several lawsuit threads in to this one.
|
|
|
|
Post by joeypotsandpans on Jan 8, 2016 17:46:58 GMT -5
I see all these "investigations" by law firms. Sorry, I don't see that MNKD has been anything but a victim here, not a perp. You, as a shareholder, do not have the right to sue any party other than MNKD, and even then your rights are limited to claims under Rule 10(b), part of federal securities law. The lawyers are conducting "investigations" looking for a smoking gun they can use to bring a suit under 10(b) because that is an easy pay day for them if they can find a materially false or misleading statement by the company. Only really stupid companies with really bad lawyers make such errors in their filings. Most of the time absolutely nothing happens.
SNY expended reasonable efforts to market Afrezza, maybe they didn't take the actions you would have liked, but what they did was not commercially unreasonable, and with the slow uptake in prescriptions they had a good faith basis to discontinue the contract. Even if Sanofi didn't, they are not liable for any damages to MNKD because the possibility of damages was explicitly waived in the license agreement. Nothing to see here folks, move along.
Your definition of reasonable is vastly different than mine and quite a few others...have you read a physicians point of view like the one quoted in the LA Times or many of the current users etc. Have you interviewed the reps and gotten their opinion...point being there is quite a bit of discovery to take place before you can label "reasonable" effort...remains to be seen...this epic story is long from over  |
|
|
|
Post by yash on Jan 8, 2016 23:10:45 GMT -5
Why the agreement termination news by MNKD is a misleading information to investors and there are lawsuits? Unless termination is only the half news and rest of the half news is not released e.g. BO (May be my stupid guess...). Goldberg Law PC (http://www.Goldberglawpc.com) announces that it is investigating claims of potential misrepresentations by MannKind Corp. (“MannKind” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: MNKD). The investigation focuses on whether the Company and its officers violated securities laws by issuing misleading information to investors. finance.yahoo.com/news/investor-alert-goldberg-law-pc-033900601.html |
|
|
|
Post by mnkdfann on Jan 8, 2016 23:37:55 GMT -5
"Goldberg Law PC (http://www.Goldberglawpc.com) announces that it is investigating claims of potential misrepresentations by MannKind Corp. (“MannKind” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: MNKD). The investigation focuses on whether the Company and its officers violated securities laws by issuing misleading information to investors."
Perhaps because of some points raised in the termination notice that were significantly more downbeat than what MNKD had been saying?
|
|
|
|
Post by thekindaguyiyam on Jan 8, 2016 23:45:04 GMT -5
The Ambulance Chasers are out there putting out PR news. All about the money by scumgbags who don't know squat other than how to line their own pockets.
I'd vote for this thread to be closed; self promoting interests will always prevail as given evidence by Sonofi who has negated original intention of their agreement with Mannkind.
Before ponder this BS; I'll wait to hear from Alfred and our new CEO before thinking about ambulance chasers.
|
|
LOL!!!
