|
|
Post by avogadro on Mar 7, 2016 8:10:30 GMT -5
Ho much are those dozen or so class action law suits expected to slow MNKD's recovery?
|
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Mar 7, 2016 8:21:52 GMT -5
Ho much are those dozen or so class action law suits expected to slow MNKD's recovery? Not at all. First there can only be one class action and not dozens, and second companies carry insurance for this. |
|
|
|
Post by uvula on Mar 7, 2016 9:38:50 GMT -5
Just as you shouldn't take medical advice or investing advice from unknown people on Internet message boards, you shouldn't take legal advice either.
I hope mnkd has insurance for this type of think.
|
|
|
|
Post by garrett on Mar 7, 2016 9:58:48 GMT -5
Just as you shouldn't take medical advice or investing advice from unknown people on Internet message boards, you shouldn't take legal advice either. I hope mnkd has insurance for this type of think. uvula - they do have insurance which Matt mentioned on the last investor's call a few weeks ago. However, it appears that several lawfirms are "trolling" for a lead plaintiff and no one seems to be stepping forward. |
|
|
|
Post by uvula on Mar 7, 2016 10:12:46 GMT -5
I'm glad they have insurance. Thank you.
I'm curious. Is there any advantage to being the lead plantiff? I would doubt a rich person wants to advertise the fact they they lost a ton of money unless there was a good reason for doing so.
|
|
|
|
Post by avogadro on Mar 7, 2016 10:45:50 GMT -5
Just as you shouldn't take medical advice or investing advice from unknown people on Internet message boards, you shouldn't take legal advice either. I hope mnkd has insurance for this type of think. I was not seeking legal advice, per se, since I have no plans for taking part in the suits just what factors to consider. I am surprised that a company like MNKD, that has absolutely no regard for their share holders, can find a company that would insure them against law suits. Talk about a pre-existing condition. |
|
|
|
Post by matt on Mar 7, 2016 11:01:18 GMT -5
The previous posters are correct; there are many potential members in the class but only one can be the lead plaintiff. The reason you see multiple firms advertising for clients is because if they find the lead plaintiff then they get to be the lead law firm and get most of the legal work. It used to be a lot more unstructured, but now the court anoints the lead plaintiff based on rules set into law. When the law was passed, it was done to reduce abuses of certain notorious attorneys in the hope that more institutional investors would become lead plaintiffs, but few institutions want to devote the time and effort so that hasn't happened. Most of the time the lead plaintiff is the individual investor with the largest loss.
The lead plaintiff has to devote a significant amount of time to the case as they are the class representative, and that person is compensated for their time if the case is settled or if it is successful at trial. Beyond that, there is no financial incentive for being the lead plaintiff due to restrictions in the law. In the bad old days there was plenty of room for attorney-plaintiff mischief, but those days are over.
Short of outright fraud (which is not insurable) these cases are more of an annoyance than anything. However, when you have a small company with a single executive playing both the CEO and CFO roles, dwindling cash, and about to have the sole product returned by the former marketing partner, Matt does not need to be dealing with the lawsuit. While it is true that lawyers will handle much of it, Matt will have to be heavily involved and that is time he simply does not have.
|
|
|
|
Post by uvula on Mar 7, 2016 11:24:58 GMT -5
Matt does not need to be dealing with the lawsuit. While it is true that lawyers will handle much of it, Matt will have to be heavily involved and that is time he simply does not have. Thank you Matt  |
|
|
|
Post by kc on Mar 7, 2016 11:52:58 GMT -5
ONE class action with multiple attorneys trying to chase clients down so they get a piece of the action in the event the case is successful. Now pay attention to my next comment. Nobody needs to sign up to be represented in the class action suit. if the case is accepted by the court and certified then anybody who purchased shares on the dates they are questioning as being critical to the suit would be covered in the event that MannKind was to be found guilty of the charges the class action was seeking. So there is no need to run and get representation on the suit. The attorneys need to show the court that they even have a substantial number of clients (shares) that were harmed by the alleged actions of the company on the dates covered in the lawsuit petition.
Only winner in a class action suit is the attorneys. |
|
|
|
Post by kc on Mar 7, 2016 11:54:29 GMT -5
Just as you shouldn't take medical advice or investing advice from unknown people on Internet message boards, you shouldn't take legal advice either. I hope mnkd has insurance for this type of think. uvula - they do have insurance which Matt mentioned on the last investor's call a few weeks ago. However, it appears that several lawfirms are "trolling" for a lead plaintiff and no one seems to be stepping forward.They probably have many lead plaintiff's they just need to show how big the potential class might be. |
|
|
|
Post by nylefty on Mar 7, 2016 12:14:18 GMT -5
Just as you shouldn't take medical advice or investing advice from unknown people on Internet message boards, you shouldn't take legal advice either. I hope mnkd has insurance for this type of think. I was not seeking legal advice, per se, since I have no plans for taking part in the suits just what factors to consider. I am surprised that a company like MNKD, that has absolutely no regard for their share holders, can find a company that would insure them against law suits. Talk about a pre-existing condition. Absolutely no regard for their shareholders? What are you talking about? The officers and board members of MNKD are shareholders and I suspect have far more shares than you have. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2016 12:23:00 GMT -5
I was not seeking legal advice, per se, since I have no plans for taking part in the suits just what factors to consider. I am surprised that a company like MNKD, that has absolutely no regard for their share holders, can find a company that would insure them against law suits. Talk about a pre-existing condition. Absolutely no regard for their shareholders? What are you talking about? The officers and board members of MNKD are shareholders and I suspect have far more shares than you have. Difference is the majority of those shares were given to them as options on the share holders dime and were not open market purchases |
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Mar 7, 2016 12:28:30 GMT -5
IMHO, it won't matter whether a lead plaintiff can be secured. This lawsuit is going to be thrown out of court.
|
|
|
|
Post by nylefty on Mar 7, 2016 12:38:44 GMT -5
Absolutely no regard for their shareholders? What are you talking about? The officers and board members of MNKD are shareholders and I suspect have far more shares than you have. Difference is the majority of those shares were given to them as options on the share holders dime and were not open market purchases So what? They're still shareholders and profit when the value of those shares goes up. What is the basis for saying they have "absolutely no regard for their shareholders?" |
|
|
|
Post by mindovermatter on Mar 7, 2016 12:42:37 GMT -5
Difference is the majority of those shares were given to them as options on the share holders dime and were not open market purchases So what? They're still shareholders and profit when the value of those shares goes up. What is the basis for saying they have "absolutely no regard for their shareholders?" option grants do not show actual confidence in the company compared to significant open market purchases. But I am guessing you do understand that. |
|
