|
Post by cjm18 on Dec 13, 2016 11:44:53 GMT -5
I think you have no idea what you're talking about ... Hakan retired one year ago after being with Mannkind for 15 years. Is it really so hard to believe that he would have gotten a severance or deferred compensation package that would run for a certain time period. It's pretty standard practice. Just because it's standard practice Mannkind should do it too, right? Because Mankind's situation is standard, right? I would think a company that's struggling and severely underperforming and knocking on the doors of bankruptcy should behave in ways that are definitely NOT standard. Doubt that would be a contributing factor to bankruptcy. It's a drop in the bucket. Sometimes it's a waste to spend time arguing about things that only have to do with principle. Especially if it's water under the bridge. So dict..Why are you long this stock?
|
|
|
Post by LosingMyBullishness on Dec 13, 2016 11:48:40 GMT -5
(warning - if you're looking for blind optimism, move on and no need to read my post.) lol....I guess I must be a short - again. No insult intended but I don't flower up my posts either. It's all my opinion and imo all longs don't know the story or the details from the last 10+ years. Many new folks here who are long aren't aware of the details (beyond how great afrezza is), the history, and the context of where mnkd sits today in the big picture. Others are just investing novices hoping to find the pot of gold. Nate is not relevant. Neither is spencer or AF or me or you when it comes to mnkd and sales of afrezza and insurance coverage and endo perspectives and diabetics who live with this disease every day. We can say and do all we want as investors but its not going to move the needle. Social media is wonderful but over two years now, how much impact has tweeting had on script counts? What's relevant is mnkd management, afrezza sales, cash position, and how long mnkd can last at this pace. That's the truth. IMO, matt hasn't done well. Frankly, other than keeping the lights on, his efforts haven't produced fruit yet at all. To spend billions over 10 plus years and only yield in the low double digit millions in revs does not make a successful venture. Investors are not part of the management team and any seasoned investor knows this all too well. As an investor you have the right to lose all your money or ride the wave to greatness. You are an investor (I'm assuming you are holding shares long) and to think you have any other role in mnkd's success is that bubble thing I mentioned. I'd hate to see a newbie come on board here and read the fantasy that's posted daily as fact or actual points of hope for mnkd. The best xmas gift I can think of is to help new investors to avoid mnkd till things turn around, not encourage them to go long on mnkd at this stage. There's no boat to miss here. If mnkd pops to five, investors haven't "missed" anything because if mnkd does take off, 5 bucks a share is a pittance for what they will be worth longer term. No need to risk hard earned money at these levels and for the longs that are underwater, why fool new investors down that rabbit hole with you? Many posts here make connections that don't exists, theorize on how big money is just under the covers, or how there's some big pharma just dying to get their hands on mnkd or how some evil group is out there keeping mnkd down for their own benefit. It's a lack of sales that's killing mnkd, not the shorts. Shorts don't make the blood, they simply smell it and come running. Longs do the same thing just a different side of the trade. And brotherm1 , risk assessment isn't living under a rock. I'm glad you take a no guts no glory approach with your money. If that works for you - wonderful. Some others, like myself, prefer a different approach. IMO, guts and glory have nothing to do with it. davinci, you can analyse and express your thoughts all you want. But those who have made up their minds don't care to read the facts and face reality. You'll be called a short, a FUDster and all kind of ridiculous labels. But I know you don't really care what you're referred to as. You mentioned the issue with sales. Initially we were told there were 70 reps, then that number was dropped to 60, then it was dropped to 42 temps basically hired straight from mall booths that sell cell phone covers and dead-sea facial salt. Do you have exact numbers of how many actual reps they had? Why did it take them 6 months of failure before they decided to hire legal sales reps planned for Jan 2017? Where did you get the information that the sales reps sold cell phone covers and salt? If not, why the heck do you come up with such a bs?
|
|
|
Post by art606a on Dec 13, 2016 12:07:22 GMT -5
davinci, you can analyse and express your thoughts all you want. But those who have made up their minds don't care to read the facts and face reality. You'll be called a short, a FUDster and all kind of ridiculous labels. But I know you don't really care what you're referred to as. You mentioned the issue with sales. Initially we were told there were 70 reps, then that number was dropped to 60, then it was dropped to 42 temps basically hired straight from mall booths that sell cell phone covers and dead-sea facial salt. Do you have exact numbers of how many actual reps they had? Why did it take them 6 months of failure before they decided to hire legal sales reps planned for Jan 2017? Where did you get the information that the sales reps sold cell phone covers and salt? If not, why the heck do you come up with such a bs? I suspect his "basically hired straight from mall booths that sell cell phone covers and dead-sea facial salt" was more a sarcastic reference to the quality of sales crew apparently enlisted by Publicis.
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Dec 13, 2016 12:30:16 GMT -5
Many are wondering if in the last few weeks if the shorts have been covering. I would like to share some thoughts and would also like to hear yours. First I think there may be some shorts that are covering but very few I think there are more shares being sold short then shorts covering here is why. A. The last reported short interest has rose when the share price was at the all time lows so if they are willing to risk at them lows then they are are certainly willing to now at our slight increase. B. Interest rate on lending shares has recently this week gone up indicating a higher interest to borrow shares. C. Brokers are sending emails and calling share holders this week indicating that shares are getting harder to find to lend. D. Ask your self this if shorts are covering then why have we not heard of shares being returned to longs? If you have had your shares returned please let us know that would be a great indication of shorts covering. That's all I have for now but I would like to close by saying the shorts are taking a huge risk because once MNKD starts getting great traction or some surprise news or multiple good news at once this stock is going to take off and never look back and then the shorts margin calls kick in and look out the stampede for the doors begins. GLTATL There is, of course, the argument that the vast majority of the 105,128,630 short shares are held by institutions and funds as a hedge against long positions in MNKD. You can go to any site like Morningstar or Whale Wisdom to confirm that several institutions hold multiple funds, some of which are shorting MNKD.
It all makes sense when you consider that financial institutions have $millions at stake. Hedging could be the primary reason why short interest increases during periods in which the 'tutes are accumulating MNKD.
Some shareholders may believe that the high short interest in MNKD indicates some kind of negative sentiment toward the company by Wall Street, but I think a better explanation is simply that the high short interest in MNKD indicates that Wall Street sees MNKD stock as being high risk. It's why these kinds of large institutional investments get hedged, especially for biotech stocks.
|
|
|
Post by buyitonsale on Dec 13, 2016 13:56:08 GMT -5
Many are wondering if in the last few weeks if the shorts have been covering. I would like to share some thoughts and would also like to hear yours. First I think there may be some shorts that are covering but very few I think there are more shares being sold short then shorts covering here is why. A. The last reported short interest has rose when the share price was at the all time lows so if they are willing to risk at them lows then they are are certainly willing to now at our slight increase. B. Interest rate on lending shares has recently this week gone up indicating a higher interest to borrow shares. C. Brokers are sending emails and calling share holders this week indicating that shares are getting harder to find to lend. D. Ask your self this if shorts are covering then why have we not heard of shares being returned to longs? If you have had your shares returned please let us know that would be a great indication of shorts covering. That's all I have for now but I would like to close by saying the shorts are taking a huge risk because once MNKD starts getting great traction or some surprise news or multiple good news at once this stock is going to take off and never look back and then the shorts margin calls kick in and look out the stampede for the doors begins. GLTATL There is, of course, the argument that the vast majority of the 105,128,630 short shares are held by institutions and funds as a hedge against long positions in MNKD. You can go to any site like Morningstar or Whale Wisdom to confirm that several institutions hold multiple funds, some of which are shorting MNKD.
It all makes sense when you consider that financial institutions have $millions at stake. Hedging could be the primary reason why short interest increases during periods in which the 'tutes are accumulating MNKD.
Some shareholders may believe that the high short interest in MNKD indicates some kind of negative sentiment toward the company by Wall Street, but I think a better explanation is simply that the high short interest in MNKD indicates that Wall Street sees MNKD stock as being high risk. It's why these kinds of large institutional investments get hedged, especially for biotech stocks.
Does the short interest of 105M include derivatives or actual shares shorted only? Longs are more interested in the affect of the unwinding the short position of this size... Are you saying that it would be easy to find 105M shares to cover if this turns out to be mostly institutional held hedge position?
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Dec 13, 2016 16:53:09 GMT -5
From Holdem: "It all makes sense when you consider that financial institutions have $millions at stake. Hedging could be the primary reason why short interest increases during periods in which the 'tutes are accumulating MNKD. Some shareholders may believe that the high short interest in MNKD indicates some kind of negative sentiment toward the company by Wall Street, but I think a better explanation is simply that the high short interest in MNKD indicates that Wall Street sees MNKD stock as being high risk. It's why these kinds of large institutional investments get hedged, especially for biotech stocks." You practicing for a career in politics, MN?
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Dec 13, 2016 18:07:59 GMT -5
Many are wondering if in the last few weeks if the shorts have been covering. I would like to share some thoughts and would also like to hear yours. First I think there may be some shorts that are covering but very few I think there are more shares being sold short then shorts covering here is why. A. The last reported short interest has rose when the share price was at the all time lows so if they are willing to risk at them lows then they are are certainly willing to now at our slight increase. B. Interest rate on lending shares has recently this week gone up indicating a higher interest to borrow shares. C. Brokers are sending emails and calling share holders this week indicating that shares are getting harder to find to lend. D. Ask your self this if shorts are covering then why have we not heard of shares being returned to longs? If you have had your shares returned please let us know that would be a great indication of shorts covering. That's all I have for now but I would like to close by saying the shorts are taking a huge risk because once MNKD starts getting great traction or some surprise news or multiple good news at once this stock is going to take off and never look back and then the shorts margin calls kick in and look out the stampede for the doors begins. GLTATL There is, of course, the argument that the vast majority of the 105,128,630 short shares are held by institutions and funds as a hedge against long positions in MNKD. You can go to any site like Morningstar or Whale Wisdom to confirm that several institutions hold multiple funds, some of which are shorting MNKD.
It all makes sense when you consider that financial institutions have $millions at stake. Hedging could be the primary reason why short interest increases during periods in which the 'tutes are accumulating MNKD.
Some shareholders may believe that the high short interest in MNKD indicates some kind of negative sentiment toward the company by Wall Street, but I think a better explanation is simply that the high short interest in MNKD indicates that Wall Street sees MNKD stock as being high risk. It's why these kinds of large institutional investments get hedged, especially for biotech stocks.
That doesn't quite add up if I understand what you are saying. If a company owned 100 shares and then also shorted 100 shares, they'd be paying interest on the borrowed shares... and have no way of making money since their net position would be zero shares.
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Dec 13, 2016 22:25:18 GMT -5
You'd be correct if they were bought/sold at the same price. It doesn't work that way. For example, an institution can buy shares, but then hedge with options (PUTS) at a fraction of the price. If the share price rises, they let the PUTS expire and are only out the premium. Same in reverse for funds that borrow shares to short. They can hedge by buying options (CALLS). If the pps drops, they make $$$ on the short position and lose a smaller $ in premium when the options expire. On the other hand, were the pps to explode, they'd exercise their CALL options in order to offset losses incurred by their short position.
So hedging can limit their gains but, more importantly, the fund managers reduce/eliminate any chance of catastrophic losses.
|
|
|
Post by buyitonsale on Dec 14, 2016 0:30:10 GMT -5
Beautifull, let them offset losses with options... in the meantime what happens to share price as 100M are not easy to find...
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Dec 14, 2016 7:23:03 GMT -5
Beautifull, let them offset losses with options... in the meantime what happens to share price as 100M are not easy to find... You are making the assumption that anyone will have to find 100M. A better question would be how much are held in trackers because you have to subtract that from the outstanding shorts because unless Mannkind falls out of an index (like NBI) those shares will never be recalled. Roughly from memory about 200M are held by institutions with the bulk in trackers.
|
|
|
Post by akemp3000 on Dec 14, 2016 8:12:43 GMT -5
Beautifull, let them offset losses with options... in the meantime what happens to share price as 100M are not easy to find... You are making the assumption that anyone will have to find 100M. A better question would be how much are held in trackers because you have to subtract that from the outstanding shorts because unless Mannkind falls out of an index (like NBI) those shares will never be recalled. Roughly from memory about 200M are held by institutions with the bulk in trackers. Could you elaborate please?
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Dec 14, 2016 8:53:59 GMT -5
You are making the assumption that anyone will have to find 100M. A better question would be how much are held in trackers because you have to subtract that from the outstanding shorts because unless Mannkind falls out of an index (like NBI) those shares will never be recalled. Roughly from memory about 200M are held by institutions with the bulk in trackers. Could you elaborate please? Sure. Anyone who tracks an index that contains Mannkind must hold shares so those shares areeffectively locked up and will not be sold It is fairly standard for those trackers, for example Vanguard, to lend out shares they hold as it helps cover their trading costs and expenses. Strictly they should not do it since it deviates from being a pure tracker but since it's always a benefit they do it. Now look at the institutional ownership of Mannkind - 42% of the float is held by institutions (21 million held by Vanguard alone). 27% of the total equity is held by institutions and funds which gives around 120 million.
|
|
|
Post by buyitonsale on Dec 14, 2016 10:55:46 GMT -5
To close 100M short position 100M shares will have to be bought...
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Dec 14, 2016 12:23:57 GMT -5
To close 100M short position 100M shares will have to be bought. True, however there are a few ways to achieve that. I expect a lot of shorts are waiting for the next round of dilution. That round will drop the price again since the shares will be sold at a discount and it will provide a big pool to go fishing in. The point is that nobody is going to force a squeeze by recalling shares.
|
|