|
|
Post by rockstarrick on May 14, 2016 16:07:41 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by rockstarrick on May 14, 2016 16:14:07 GMT -5
Hopefully someone can explain this SEC filing, it sure looks like 14 million to me. Thanks in advance. |
|
|
|
Post by peppy on May 14, 2016 16:24:46 GMT -5
Hopefully someone can explain this SEC filing, it sure looks like 14 million to me. Thanks in advance. GS analyst has a 75 cent price target on MNKD. MNKD hit .64 on January 6, 2016. Short covering is my explanation.
added: GS makes a market in this stock.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 14, 2016 16:30:46 GMT -5
in your dreams i guess.. I see 9 mil around + puts , calls
also this is total position in GS - not necessarily by GS -
high rollers have accounts with GS just like we have with TD ameritrade, Robinhood and can buy MNKD through GS
1 028-00687 GOLDMAN SACHS & CO 0000769993
2 028-10981 GOLDMAN SACHS ASSET MANAGEMENT, L.P. 0001229262
3 028-05109 GOLDMAN SACHS INTERNATIONAL 0000908777
4 028-05111 GOLDMAN SACHS BANK AG 0001098457
5 028-06738 AYCO CO L P 0001055957
6 028-12021 Goldman Sachs Trust Company, N.A. 0001379383
7 028-14253 Goldman Sachs Financial Markets, L.P. 0001512546
8 028-10292 GOLDMAN SACHS EXECUTION & CLEARING, L.P. 0001166257
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 14, 2016 16:45:36 GMT -5
Rock I remember when I first repeated your thoughts on this. Probably like a year ago. My cousin owns an index fund and explained to me how this really works. It's not as black and white as them owning stock.
I really don't understand why mods allow this to go on. It causes a lot of people to invest in Mnkd based on incorrect information.
I never understood why Nate has never cleared this up being he has a following from the Mnkd community.
|
|
|
|
Post by rockstarrick on May 14, 2016 17:30:05 GMT -5
Rock I remember when I first repeated your thoughts on this. Probably like a year ago. My cousin owns an index fund and explained to me how this really works. It's not as black and white as them owning stock. I really don't understand why mods allow this to go on. It causes a lot of people to invest in Mnkd based on incorrect information. I never understood why Nate has never cleared this up being he has a following from the Mnkd community. Didn't share to mislead, I shared so someone with knoweledge on these documents could explain it for people like me that don't know how to read it. 350 43,310 SH - DFND 1 43,310 0 0 MANNKIND CORP CMN 56400P201 14,984 9,306,548 SH - DFND 1 9,306,548 0 0 MANNKIND CORP CMN 56400P201 2,549 1,583,200 SH Put DFND 1 1,583,200 0 0 MANNKIND CORP CMN 56400P201 976 606,400 SH Call DFND 1 606,400 0 0 MANNKIND CORP CMN 56400P201 805 500,000 I guess the thing that caught my attention was the fact that they didn't unload everything after the first of the year like many were claiming. just for the record, if anybody needs a Bass Guitar lesson, I'm your guy, if you need investment advice, run as far away from me as you can !!! Thanks to both for explaining this, appreciate it. |
|
|
|
Post by rockstarrick on May 14, 2016 18:23:55 GMT -5
Hopefully someone can explain this SEC filing, it sure looks like 14 million to me. Thanks in advance. GS analyst has a 75 cent price target on MNKD. MNKD hit .64 on January 6, 2016. Short covering is my explanation.
added: GS makes a market in this stock.
Thanks peppy !! |
|
|
|
Post by garrett on May 14, 2016 21:24:20 GMT -5
From the NASDAQ WebSite - Institutional Holdings as of 03/21/16 Owner Name Date Shared Held Change (Shares) Change (%) Value (in 1,000s) VANGUARD GROUP INC 03/31/2016 19,541,916 976,449 5.26 18,272 BLACKROCK FUND ADVISORS 03/31/2016 11,641,028 673,881 6.15 10,884 GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC 03/31/2016 9,806,548 41,034 .42 9,169 Read more: www.nasdaq.com/symbol/mnkd/institutional-holdings#ixzz48gfGNVrD |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 14, 2016 21:39:44 GMT -5
Rock I remember when I first repeated your thoughts on this. Probably like a year ago. My cousin owns an index fund and explained to me how this really works. It's not as black and white as them owning stock. I really don't understand why mods allow this to go on. It causes a lot of people to invest in Mnkd based on incorrect information. I never understood why Nate has never cleared this up being he has a following from the Mnkd community. Didn't share to mislead, I shared so someone with knoweledge on these documents could explain it for people like me that don't know how to read it. 350 43,310 SH - DFND 1 43,310 0 0 MANNKIND CORP CMN 56400P201 14,984 9,306,548 SH - DFND 1 9,306,548 0 0 MANNKIND CORP CMN 56400P201 2,549 1,583,200 SH Put DFND 1 1,583,200 0 0 MANNKIND CORP CMN 56400P201 976 606,400 SH Call DFND 1 606,400 0 0 MANNKIND CORP CMN 56400P201 805 500,000 I guess the thing that caught my attention was the fact that they didn't unload everything after the first of the year like many were claiming. just for the record, if anybody needs a Bass Guitar lesson, I'm your guy, if you need investment advice, run as far away from me as you can !!! Thanks to both for explaining this, appreciate it. Don't mean to come off like I'm pointing fingers. I know you want the best for other Mnkd longs. I'm a bottle of wine deep at diner but will relay what was explained to me tomorrow I have two family members in finance. One own index fund managed 10 billion and other is a vp. |
|
|
|
Post by matt on May 15, 2016 8:26:50 GMT -5
The so-called "institutional investment" numbers can be extremely misleading if you don't understand the regulatory framework. Any company that falls under the Investment Act of 1940 has to file quarterly reports detailing their holdings, and that includes a whole host of mutual funds, insurance companies, brokerages, and other financial intermediaries. A company, like Goldman, who has many different funds and subsidiaries is allowed to aggregate their numbers for reporting purposes.
As someone noted above, some individuals maintain brokerage accounts with Goldman and, while all investment decisions are taken by the individuals. if the securities are held in street name Goldman must report the holding as their own. Similarly, Goldman manages pension funds for some corporations and maintains index funds for investors. So long as MNKD is part of any of the indicies, then Goldman must hold the number of shares that corresponds to MNKD's relative value (i.e. if there is a NASDAQ fund where MNKD is 0.05% of the total NASDAQ capitalization, then every NASDAQ index fund will hold 0.05% of their assets in MNKD stock). Most of what you see as institutional ownership is driven by index funds where the fund manager is just mimicking the asset allocations seen in the market. A computer decides on all the trades following an algorithm with no human input whatsoever.
There are of course strategic investment funds where somebody with deep expertise in the field makes conscious decisions to invest. Actively managed biotech funds will often employ physicians and PhD scientists to dig into the technology and market dynamics (much like a venture capital firm), and those investments might be indicative of where the "smart money" is headed. However, to understand that dynamic you need to learn the investment criteria, track record, and professional staffing of each fund and that is a huge task. Suffice it to say that any of the major funds (Goldman, Fidelity (FMR), Blackstone, State Street, etc.) are all a very mixed bag of investment vehicles with very different strategies and investors. It is worse than comparing apples and oranges; it is more like comparing apples to a fruit cocktail.
Also keep in mind that 13F filings look backwards; they are a snapshot of the holdings on the last day of the quarter and the reports are not due until 45 days after quarter end. Until this last batch of 13F filings, the institutional ownership numbers were those of December 31. So depending on the calendar the reports are always out of date by least 6 weeks and can be as much as 19 weeks old; that is a long time in a fast moving biotech market. You don't drive your car down the highway looking into the rearview mirror and you shouldn't take investment cues from stale institutional data either.
|
|
|
|
Post by rockstarrick on May 15, 2016 11:45:30 GMT -5
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is the reason I shared this here on proboards !! This topic was being discussed in the dungeons @ymb, but any comments were being deleted as fast as they were posted. Very clear and concise explanation Matt !! Thank You |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2016 9:00:24 GMT -5
The so-called "institutional investment" numbers can be extremely misleading if you don't understand the regulatory framework. Any company that falls under the Investment Act of 1940 has to file quarterly reports detailing their holdings, and that includes a whole host of mutual funds, insurance companies, brokerages, and other financial intermediaries. A company, like Goldman, who has many different funds and subsidiaries is allowed to aggregate their numbers for reporting purposes. As someone noted above, some individuals maintain brokerage accounts with Goldman and, while all investment decisions are taken by the individuals. if the securities are held in street name Goldman must report the holding as their own. Similarly, Goldman manages pension funds for some corporations and maintains index funds for investors. So long as MNKD is part of any of the indicies, then Goldman must hold the number of shares that corresponds to MNKD's relative value (i.e. if there is a NASDAQ fund where MNKD is 0.05% of the total NASDAQ capitalization, then every NASDAQ index fund will hold 0.05% of their assets in MNKD stock). Most of what you see as institutional ownership is driven by index funds where the fund manager is just mimicking the asset allocations seen in the market. A computer decides on all the trades following an algorithm with no human input whatsoever. There are of course strategic investment funds where somebody with deep expertise in the field makes conscious decisions to invest. Actively managed biotech funds will often employ physicians and PhD scientists to dig into the technology and market dynamics (much like a venture capital firm), and those investments might be indicative of where the "smart money" is headed. However, to understand that dynamic you need to learn the investment criteria, track record, and professional staffing of each fund and that is a huge task. Suffice it to say that any of the major funds (Goldman, Fidelity (FMR), Blackstone, State Street, etc.) are all a very mixed bag of investment vehicles with very different strategies and investors. It is worse than comparing apples and oranges; it is more like comparing apples to a fruit cocktail. Also keep in mind that 13F filings look backwards; they are a snapshot of the holdings on the last day of the quarter and the reports are not due until 45 days after quarter end. Until this last batch of 13F filings, the institutional ownership numbers were those of December 31. So depending on the calendar the reports are always out of date by least 6 weeks and can be as much as 19 weeks old; that is a long time in a fast moving biotech market. You don't drive your car down the highway looking into the rearview mirror and you shouldn't take investment cues from stale institutional data either. And this is why the big boys went short when the drug was approved by the FDA. While inexperienced investors (myself included) were celebrating the big boys knew there would be difficulty penetrating the market. I am sure they never thought it would get as good as it did for them. From what I have learned, because of the ability to get clobbered in a short position funds put a great deal of effort and resources into their short position. I am sure surveying multiple endos was apart of the strategy. |
|
|
|
Post by brotherm1 on May 16, 2016 15:01:44 GMT -5
Matt stated above in reference to index funds, "...individuals maintain brokerage accounts with Goldman and, while all investment decisions are taken by the individuals. if the securities are held in street name Goldman must report the holding as their own. Similarly, Goldman manages pension funds for some corporations and maintains index funds for investors. So long as MNKD is part of any of the indicies, then Goldman must hold the number of shares that corresponds to MNKD's relative value (i.e. if there is a NASDAQ fund where MNKD is 0.05% of the total NASDAQ capitalization, then every NASDAQ index fund will hold 0.05% of their assets in MNKD stock). Most of what you see as institutional ownership is driven by index funds where the fund manager is just mimicking the asset allocations seen in the market. A computer decides on all the trades following an algorithm with no human input whatsoever." ]If understand this correctly, If Goldman Sachs, for example, buys a stock and causes the price of it to rise, then other investment companies that have that stock in their index funds will automatically sell it because its relative value to their index fund of which it is parcel to has increased? |
|
|
|
Post by liane on May 16, 2016 15:08:51 GMT -5
You are able to edit / delete your own post for up to 1 hour after posting it. After that, a moderator can do it if warranted.
|
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on May 16, 2016 15:46:41 GMT -5
Matt stated above in reference to index funds, "...individuals maintain brokerage accounts with Goldman and, while all investment decisions are taken by the individuals. if the securities are held in street name Goldman must report the holding as their own. Similarly, Goldman manages pension funds for some corporations and maintains index funds for investors. So long as MNKD is part of any of the indicies, then Goldman must hold the number of shares that corresponds to MNKD's relative value (i.e. if there is a NASDAQ fund where MNKD is 0.05% of the total NASDAQ capitalization, then every NASDAQ index fund will hold 0.05% of their assets in MNKD stock). Most of what you see as institutional ownership is driven by index funds where the fund manager is just mimicking the asset allocations seen in the market. A computer decides on all the trades following an algorithm with no human input whatsoever." ]If understand this correctly, If Goldman Sachs, for example, buys a stock and causes the price of it to rise, then other investment companies that have that stock in their index funds will automatically sell it because its relative value to their index fund of which it is parcel to has increased? Trackers are recalculated periodically depending on the tracker policy. Mostly it's every few months, more often and you get killed by the trading costs. |
|
