|
|
Post by sweedee79 on Feb 3, 2017 16:19:43 GMT -5
Sweedee, Sorry you don't like my style. I'm just trying to help. I don't keep track of who says what but I did a quick look at your recent posts and you are one of the people who thinks that the upside potential is worse after a RS so I can see why you might not like what I said. OK.... Ive been through a couple of reverse splits... it isn't the RS by itself that is negative.. I understand the simplicity of an RS and that basically you are getting fewer shares yet the investment is worth the same value .. and that in itself isn't a bad thing.. however I believe the issue is far more complicated than that in the grand scheme of things... for one the market perceives an RS as negative... the company is short on money and it doesn't look like they are going to find funding any time soon... so dilution comes next... for sure the near term is going to be rough ..
Management is also losing credibility with investors.. In November they said they didn't think the RS would be needed (to ease our fears). I have been one of those who has defended them fiercely ...... I suppose they have to do this... they are in a difficult position and doing their best with little money... I think they have done very good things in the last year... yet it isn't enough because they don't have the money to do the big things... when I talk about less upside potential I'm talking about market psychology .. It doesn't matter what is logical ... the market isn't always logical... especially when you have shorts who prey on this type of situation... say for instance we do a 1 for 10 and the price is beaten down to a buck once again... only now we have way fewer shares... some companies end up doing a 2nd RS ..
If this ship can be set right we have hope... we will have to do DTC advertising nationwide.... TV commercials... they have had plenty of time to lay the ground work .. and that takes money... will dilution be enough??? I don't believe I'm being negative... I think I'm being real... I'm always honest.. Even though Ive been referred to as a "fool" by some on this board ... I still believe in Mike and Matt.. I think they have what it takes to get this done... but at present they don't have the money.... and I totally and completely believe in Afrezza ... I didn't invest in this stock simply because I'm sappy and I care... I invested in this stock because it was an investment.... however it became personal to me because I saw how much it helped my dad and others.... and it doesn't help anything when someone tells you what you "should" be doing... no one likes that... and I would also say that most people on this board are not at all stupid...
Last of all you will not hear me blaming someone else for my investment choices or the money Ive lost.... we are all adults and have to take responsibility for our own choices..... unless of course someone has blatantly lied and I haven't seen that... we have all known the circumstances and knew that the RS was possible... and with some research we would have known that they had to announce their intentions within a certain time frame and yet it seems we were all taken by surprise... I was in shock...
I understand that you were trying to help.... I also understand that people don't always mean things the way they say them... its ok ..
|
|
|
|
Post by mango on Feb 3, 2017 16:46:29 GMT -5
• Criteria to be Used for Decision to Apply the Reverse Split —In the event that approval for the Reverse Split is obtained, our board of directors will be authorized to proceed with the Reverse Split. If our stock closes at a bid price equal to or greater than $1.00 for the ten business days prior to the Special Meeting, our board of directors may delay its decision to execute the Reverse Split indefinitely. In that case, if at any time during the 12 month period following the Special Meeting the stock price falls below $1.00 for a 30 day period and therefore fails to comply with the applicable NASDAQ Global Market minimum listing requirements, then the Reverse Split may be executed as a cure for this condition. investors.mannkindcorp.com/secfiling.cfm?filingID=1193125-17-27562&CIK=899460If I am reading this correctly, it appears that if by the date of the Special Meeting the stock price closes below $1.00, then the reverse split will be executed. Nothing can entice the share price equal to or greater than $1.00 by that date except an act by the Divine Greatness. No such greatness exists that I am aware of. I sure hope Mr. Kent Kresa has a Plan for MannKind that remains to be seen. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2017 16:50:32 GMT -5
• Criteria to be Used for Decision to Apply the Reverse Split —In the event that approval for the Reverse Split is obtained, our board of directors will be authorized to proceed with the Reverse Split. If our stock closes at a bid price equal to or greater than $1.00 for the ten business days prior to the Special Meeting, our board of directors may delay its decision to execute the Reverse Split indefinitely. In that case, if at any time during the 12 month period following the Special Meeting the stock price falls below $1.00 for a 30 day period and therefore fails to comply with the applicable NASDAQ Global Market minimum listing requirements, then the Reverse Split may be executed as a cure for this condition. investors.mannkindcorp.com/secfiling.cfm?filingID=1193125-17-27562&CIK=899460If I am reading this correctly, it appears that if by the date of the Special Meeting the stock price closes below $1.00, then the reverse split will be executed. Nothing can entice the share price equal to or greater than $1.00 by that date except an act by the Divine Greatness. No such greatness exists that I am aware of. I sure hope Mr. Kent Kresa has a Plan for MannKind that remains to be seen. Perhaps Amgen would step in @ 3.59 pm on that date through Kent Kresa. Last I have checked, KK has collected his options/paycheck and the only work I have seen is his contributing statement in the news article of hiring Matt as CEO. That was just one expensive endorsement of Matt for MNKD. |
|
|
|
Post by mango on Feb 3, 2017 16:57:50 GMT -5
• Criteria to be Used for Decision to Apply the Reverse Split —In the event that approval for the Reverse Split is obtained, our board of directors will be authorized to proceed with the Reverse Split. If our stock closes at a bid price equal to or greater than $1.00 for the ten business days prior to the Special Meeting, our board of directors may delay its decision to execute the Reverse Split indefinitely. In that case, if at any time during the 12 month period following the Special Meeting the stock price falls below $1.00 for a 30 day period and therefore fails to comply with the applicable NASDAQ Global Market minimum listing requirements, then the Reverse Split may be executed as a cure for this condition. investors.mannkindcorp.com/secfiling.cfm?filingID=1193125-17-27562&CIK=899460If I am reading this correctly, it appears that if by the date of the Special Meeting the stock price closes below $1.00, then the reverse split will be executed. Nothing can entice the share price equal to or greater than $1.00 by that date except an act by the Divine Greatness. No such greatness exists that I am aware of. I sure hope Mr. Kent Kresa has a Plan for MannKind that remains to be seen. Perhaps Amgen would step in @ 3.59 pm on that date through Kent Kresa. Last I have checked, KK has collected his options/paycheck and the only work I have seen is his contributing statement in the news article of hiring Matt as CEO. That was just one expensive endorsement of Matt for MNKD. I don't think I have endorsed the "Amgen Theory". Not sure why you feel the need to include that part in your response. Mr. Kresa was once described as a 'shadow CEO'. Considering his background, I doubt you would be revealed much at all. Just my opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by surplusvalue on Feb 3, 2017 17:09:56 GMT -5
• Criteria to be Used for Decision to Apply the Reverse Split —In the event that approval for the Reverse Split is obtained, our board of directors will be authorized to proceed with the Reverse Split. If our stock closes at a bid price equal to or greater than $1.00 for the ten business days prior to the Special Meeting, our board of directors may delay its decision to execute the Reverse Split indefinitely. In that case, if at any time during the 12 month period following the Special Meeting the stock price falls below $1.00 for a 30 day period and therefore fails to comply with the applicable NASDAQ Global Market minimum listing requirements, then the Reverse Split may be executed as a cure for this condition. investors.mannkindcorp.com/secfiling.cfm?filingID=1193125-17-27562&CIK=899460If I am reading this correctly, it appears that if by the date of the Special Meeting the stock price closes below $1.00, then the reverse split will be executed. Nothing can entice the share price equal to or greater than $1.00 by that date except an act by the Divine Greatness. No such greatness exists that I am aware of.
I sure hope Mr. Kent Kresa has a Plan for MannKind that remains to be seen. Mango: Why..I am shocked. Here I thought you were a "believer". But please, shush, tone it down...more statements like this and you'll start making me look like I'm pumping in my posts. And besides, not from me, but you're possibly inviting some religious outrage too.  |
|
|
|
Post by mnkdfann on Feb 3, 2017 17:29:43 GMT -5
For the record I am not happy about the RS but I guess it had to be done to remove the threat of delisting. I've been assuming the RS would be nothing but bad and that the new price would likely go down after the RS, but I did find examples of successful RS's. Here's a link. www.cnbc.com/id/42212417Interesting. Of course, many (most?) of those situations are nothing like MNKD's. For instance, Tyco was having a good year and trading above $30 when its shareholders approved a 1-for-4 reverse stock split ahead of the conglomerate's planned break-up into three publicly traded companies. Looks like it wanted to consolidate its shares prior to splitting the company. Priceline is another interesting one. Then-CEO Jeffery Boyd said in a press release accompanying the reverse split that the move "enhances our position by expanding investor interest, reducing transaction costs for trading our stock, making our results more comparable to peer companies with far fewer outstanding shares, and allowing priceline.com's earnings per share on a post-split basis to more precisely reflect the company's operating results." Wish our guy was as inspirational. And also that we had earnings per share.  |
|
|
|
Post by mango on Feb 3, 2017 17:44:44 GMT -5
• Criteria to be Used for Decision to Apply the Reverse Split —In the event that approval for the Reverse Split is obtained, our board of directors will be authorized to proceed with the Reverse Split. If our stock closes at a bid price equal to or greater than $1.00 for the ten business days prior to the Special Meeting, our board of directors may delay its decision to execute the Reverse Split indefinitely. In that case, if at any time during the 12 month period following the Special Meeting the stock price falls below $1.00 for a 30 day period and therefore fails to comply with the applicable NASDAQ Global Market minimum listing requirements, then the Reverse Split may be executed as a cure for this condition. investors.mannkindcorp.com/secfiling.cfm?filingID=1193125-17-27562&CIK=899460If I am reading this correctly, it appears that if by the date of the Special Meeting the stock price closes below $1.00, then the reverse split will be executed. Nothing can entice the share price equal to or greater than $1.00 by that date except an act by the Divine Greatness. No such greatness exists that I am aware of.
I sure hope Mr. Kent Kresa has a Plan for MannKind that remains to be seen. Mango: Why..I am shocked. Here I thought you were a "believer". But please, shush, tone it down...more statements like this and you'll start making me look like I'm pumping in my posts. And besides, not from me, but you're possibly inviting some religious outrage too. I am a believer that there is an ineffable entanglement of mysteries from MannKind Corp. |
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Feb 3, 2017 19:21:09 GMT -5
The issue for us is that Mannkind is that contrary to Matt P's comment we are splitting from a position of weakness - because we cannot get the share price back over $1. Matt is a nice guy but he is not a wartime CEO and that is what is needed. If Mannkind was nicely established in the market and everything was rosy then Matt is the CEO to keep the ship sailing along. Unfortunately this is wartime and you need far more aggression and charisma than Matt has shown and that lack can get us killed.
Google peacetime wartime CEO if you want to see what I mean. Ben Horowitz is the original source of most of this.
|
|
|
|
Post by mbseeking on Feb 3, 2017 20:01:18 GMT -5
MN great post, as always.. Couple of spins.
1. RS. Needs to be done and the 2/1 meeting added certainty on this, which IMHO is always good. Second it should be 1/10 not 1/3. 1/10 is a a real shot across the bows of the shorts. The shorts only win if MNKD is destroyed. I regard delisting as a proxy, or shortcut, to that destruction. Lift the share price to $6 (from 0.60 today) makes the path to that destruction is much harder than $1.80.
I believe this is necessary because with the new sales team we are likely to get incremental script growth this year . It will be meaningful but not earth shattering . That inflection point, earth shattering , is not likely until 2018 with new label and improved medicare coverage. Hence we have one more year left to battle the shorts and need as much gun powder as we can produce. I posit at 1/10 more shorts will abandon their MNKD play than 1/3.
2. T2. We must see traction in this specific diabetic market. We know Afrezza largely solves diabetes. But for now its doing it with disproportionately T1s. The money shot for Afrezza/MNKD are T2s.Believe we've started to see Mike C's recognition of this but we need more proof points.. if these materialise across 2017 then 2018 really could be the year MNKD comes home.
|
|
|
|
Post by falconquest on Feb 3, 2017 20:23:30 GMT -5
Sweedee, Sorry you don't like my style. I'm just trying to help. I don't keep track of who says what but I did a quick look at your recent posts and you are one of the people who thinks that the upside potential is worse after a RS so I can see why you might not like what I said. OK.... Ive been through a couple of reverse splits... it isn't the RS by itself that is negative.. I understand the simplicity of an RS and that basically you are getting fewer shares yet the investment is worth the same value .. and that in itself isn't a bad thing.. however I believe the issue is far more complicated than that in the grand scheme of things... for one the market perceives an RS as negative... the company is short on money and it doesn't look like they are going to find funding any time soon... so dilution comes next... for sure the near term is going to be rough ..
Management is also losing credibility with investors.. In November they said they didn't think the RS would be needed (to ease our fears). I have been one of those who has defended them fiercely ...... I suppose they have to do this... they are in a difficult position and doing their best with little money... I think they have done very good things in the last year... yet it isn't enough because they don't have the money to do the big things... when I talk about less upside potential I'm talking about market psychology .. It doesn't matter what is logical ... the market isn't always logical... especially when you have shorts who prey on this type of situation... say for instance we do a 1 for 10 and the price is beaten down to a buck once again... only now we have way fewer shares... some companies end up doing a 2nd RS ..
If this ship can be set right we have hope... we will have to do DTC advertising nationwide.... TV commercials... they have had plenty of time to lay the ground work .. and that takes money... will dilution be enough??? I don't believe I'm being negative... I think I'm being real... I'm always honest.. Even though Ive been referred to as a "fool" by some on this board ... I still believe in Mike and Matt.. I think they have what it takes to get this done... but at present they don't have the money.... and I totally and completely believe in Afrezza ... I didn't invest in this stock simply because I'm sappy and I care... I invested in this stock because it was an investment.... however it became personal to me because I saw how much it helped my dad and others.... and it doesn't help anything when someone tells you what you "should" be doing... no one likes that... and I would also say that most people on this board are not at all stupid...
Last of all you will not hear me blaming someone else for my investment choices or the money Ive lost.... we are all adults and have to take responsibility for our own choices..... unless of course someone has blatantly lied and I haven't seen that... we have all known the circumstances and knew that the RS was possible... and with some research we would have known that they had to announce their intentions within a certain time frame and yet it seems we were all taken by surprise... I was in shock...
I understand that you were trying to help.... I also understand that people don't always mean things the way they say them... its ok ..
I couldn't have stated it better Sweedee. It seems to me that Matt suffers from cognitive dissonance when it comes to the share price of Mannkind stock. He seemed convinced at the end of 2016 that the settlement with Sanofi and cleaning up of the balance sheet would surely "go a long way" toward getting the share price near the one dollar threshhold.....he wasn't really concerned. Wonder if he's concerned now? For cripes sake the market is waiting for Mannkind to sell product. All the refinancing, stock splitting, re-negotiating is just noise. Mannkind needs to prove that Afrezza is for real. THEN, and only then will the stock price improve. |
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Feb 3, 2017 20:41:03 GMT -5
MN great post, as always.. Couple of spins. 1. RS. Needs to be done and the 2/1 meeting added certainty on this, which IMHO is always good. Second it should be 1/10 not 1/3. 1/10 is a a real shot across the bows of the shorts. The shorts only win if MNKD is destroyed. I regard delisting as a proxy, or shortcut, to that destruction. Lift the share price to $6 (from 0.60 today) makes the path to that destruction is much harder than $1.80. I believe this is necessary because with the new sales team we are likely to get incremental script growth this year . It will be meaningful but not earth shattering . That inflection point, earth shattering , is not likely until 2018 with new label and improved medicare coverage. Hence we have one more year left to battle the shorts and need as much gun powder as we can produce. I posit at 1/10 more shorts will abandon their MNKD play than 1/3. 2. T2. We must see traction in this specific diabetic market. We know Afrezza largely solves diabetes. But for now its doing it with disproportionately T1s. The money shot for Afrezza/MNKD are T2s.Believe we've started to see Mike C's recognition of this but we need more proof points.. if these materialise across 2017 then 2018 really could be the year MNKD comes home. It could be 1/100 and that wouldn't have any impact on shorts. Would not at all change their belief that massive dilution or bankruptcy is in store. More often than not any RS emboldens shorts rather than curtailing them. |
|
|
|
Post by lennymnkd on Feb 4, 2017 13:45:47 GMT -5
What was meant by " FROM A POSITION of strenth?  ? By MATT ... in regards to the R/S |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2017 14:17:51 GMT -5
What was meant by " FROM A POSITION of strenth? ? By MATT ... in regards to the R/S email him and if you get a response, let us know. there's been a lot of discussion here and you can put an end to the speculation. |
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Feb 4, 2017 14:32:27 GMT -5
What was meant by " FROM A POSITION of strenth? ? By MATT ... in regards to the R/S What do you expect him to say? That we are doing the split from a position of weakness? It would have been better not to say anything at all but given that he felt the need to justify himself he had to say that. |
|
|
|
Post by lennymnkd on Feb 4, 2017 14:47:18 GMT -5
Ok fair enough... let's see if those two last responses play out .
|
|
? By MATT ... in regards to the R/S