|
|
Post by liane on Feb 8, 2017 10:18:58 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by cjm18 on Feb 8, 2017 10:22:51 GMT -5
I will vote to block this with all my assets. If he does this it will only create many law suits Tone it down a bit. Matt is speaking to you in the letter. I don't think Matt explained why the proxy had to be sent out so soon. Funny Matt on proboards did. Ceo Matt should have gone into detail about the nasdaq laws. The possible extension etc. retail investors are not familiar with these rules. |
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Feb 8, 2017 11:17:28 GMT -5
The provision for the R/S is a must, it's not even worth discussing anymore. What is worth discussing is the reason the company was forced to do this (which sucks), and how (or if, or how likely it is that) we're going to turn things around, which, admittedly, is what most of the discussions on this board are about.
|
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Feb 8, 2017 11:50:13 GMT -5
I do not like it when somebody tries to take the letter or email that was between two parties and put it on the Internet. We all have to understand that is perhaps the main reason why we get very little written correspondence from MannKind. People complain all the time about the company transparency but when somebody writes to Matt and then post that directly to the Internet he will probably not respond again to anybody else. Matt properly responded with only what he can say..... name, rank, serial number. While mostly agreeing with your post kc, I do appreciate the insight from the correspondence in the current situation of relative information vacuum. As for Matt's question in the correspondence that would be a pretty simple one for me to have answered... "The potential of a RS troubles me because historically it has emboldened shorts to pound down even harder. MNKD is certainly a target of shorts. The situation is unlikely to change in that regard until such time that the cash flow issue is addressed. Management may have stated that they are in a position of strength, but clearly that is not the way the market interprets it. As long as dilutive financing appears a real possibility, it appears that management is in a losing battle with shorts relative to keeping the share price at a level that makes that feasible, and rational or irrational, a RS likely gives more ammo to the shorts." It actually bothers me a bit that Matt asks that question. Does he not realize the perils that a RS poses if markets must be accessed to raise capital? Does he not realize that shareholders have been left with needing to assume that a dilutive capital raise is highly likely if not inevitable? If something is in the works for a partnership, management may well not be able to say anything about it (and there could be nothing in the works, or it could fall through), but not understanding shareholder concern over RS in the apparent situation (from our view) we are in is baffling to me. |
|
|
|
Post by madog365 on Feb 8, 2017 12:28:02 GMT -5
The Mannkind team is obviously pursuing all avenues that would alleviate the need for the R/S to actually happen. Regardless the vote is now necessary. They are applying for the 180 day extension and if one is to be granted, will not need to R/S for the foreseeable future. The announcement of the extension will once again increase PPS back to pre-call levels and improved sales will do the rest to get the stock above a dollar.
|
|
|
|
Post by mikesmilitaria on Feb 8, 2017 12:31:33 GMT -5
MNKD wants the outstanding shares to be far, far less than 500mm and this is the path to achieve that goal.
|
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Feb 8, 2017 12:57:56 GMT -5
The Mannkind team is obviously pursuing all avenues that would alleviate the need for the R/S to actually happen. Regardless the vote is now necessary. They are applying for the 180 day extension and if one is to be granted, will not need to R/S for the foreseeable future. The announcement of the extension will once again increase PPS back to pre-call levels and improved sales will do the rest to get the stock above a dollar. May get some increase with an extension, but I feel part of the damage is baked in already. The mere need to get shareholder approval and then the overhang that it could be done at anytime I believe will continue to embolden shorts and discourage longs. Of course if meaningful sales occur in time to save MNKD from a damagingly dilutive capital raise, it really won't matter whether they've done the RS or not. The problem arises if they are forced to do RS and that allows shorts to pound down even more to the point the market cap simply doesn't support raising the level of money needed to avoid bankruptcy while sales are still ramping to a level that attracts institutional investors. |
|
|
|
Post by cretin11 on Feb 8, 2017 12:58:04 GMT -5
I agree with DBC and am also bothered that Matt asked the question (why a R/S is so troubling). Is any investor ever happy about a R/S? DBC's post above answers it well with specific concerns, but surely Matt understands investors will generally be upset about a R/S and with good reason. Especially when it's for the express purpose of avoiding delisting. Wrapped up in our concern over R/S is the angst over the fact that share price has plummeted to the point where R/S is needed. C'mon Matt, i'm pulling hard for you but that comment/question seems tone deaf.
|
|
|
|
Post by cretin11 on Feb 8, 2017 12:59:44 GMT -5
MNKD wants the outstanding shares to be far, far less than 500mm and this is the path to achieve that goal. I don't think that's the reason at all. If it were, then R/S would've been done long ago, correct? There's only one reason (delisting concern) the R/S path is being considered. |
|
|
|
Post by sportsrancho on Feb 8, 2017 14:10:16 GMT -5
I agree with DBC and am also bothered that Matt asked the question (why a R/S is so troubling). Is any investor ever happy about a R/S? DBC's post above answers it well with specific concerns, but surely Matt understands investors will generally be upset about a R/S and with good reason. Especially when it's for the express purpose of avoiding delisting. Wrapped up in our concern over R/S is the angst over the fact that share price has plummeted to the point where R/S is needed. C'mon Matt, i'm pulling hard for you but that comment/question seems tone deaf. I don't believe he understands stocks or trading stocks. Or what moves a stock up or down. I think he thought the stock was going to move up on the money from SNY news. He may have never gone through personally a investment that had a RS. I remember hearing that they thought the stock would go to $20+ on FDA approval. |
|
|
|
Post by silentknight on Feb 8, 2017 14:23:47 GMT -5
I agree with DBC and am also bothered that Matt asked the question (why a R/S is so troubling). Is any investor ever happy about a R/S? DBC's post above answers it well with specific concerns, but surely Matt understands investors will generally be upset about a R/S and with good reason. Especially when it's for the express purpose of avoiding delisting. Wrapped up in our concern over R/S is the angst over the fact that share price has plummeted to the point where R/S is needed. C'mon Matt, i'm pulling hard for you but that comment/question seems tone deaf. I don't believe he understands stocks or trading stocks. Or what moves a stock up or down. I think he thought the stock was going to move up on the money from SNY news. He may have never gone through personally a investment that had a RS. I remember hearing that they thought the stock would go to $20+ on FDA approval. I tend to agree with you sports. I don't think Matt understands it at all. But that begs the question, does the company need someone at the helm with so little understanding of the financial world, stock movements, financial catalysts and the effect of earnings/profit on the price of the stock? I would say no. I don't question Matt's expertise with the accounting and skills required to be a CFO. Barring not raising capital after Afrezza was approved, he's done an admirable job as CFO. But as CEO, he simply hasn't been able to get the job done. Neither did Hakan, and MNKD is arguably in worse shape because of it. It's becoming hard to take Matt seriously when he makes comments, positive or negative, since he's been wrong so often. His credibility is seriously shaken as a result of the R/S issue and his comments at the quarterly when he said he wasn't worried about a R/S and that he expected it to take care of itself. Matt was dealt a bad hand when he assumed the CEO position, that isn't lost on me. But at the end of the day, the stock needs to move upwards, not downwards and sales need to occur. Merely hanging on or limping along for months on end as the share price bleeds is simply not good enough, no matter who is sitting in the CEO chair. The company needs outside help at the CEO position, preferably with proven experience in drug sales and disruptive technology. I'm not sure who that would be, but I'd be willing to wager that even Desisto wouldn't be willing to come over anymore given MNKD's precarious position. They nabbed some recent former Amgen hires. Are any former CEOs available? |
|
|
|
Post by sportsrancho on Feb 8, 2017 16:10:00 GMT -5
I hear what you are saying!
I like Matt. And he may be the only one that has the passion for Afrezza and Al's dream to turn this around.
I'm hoping he's had some talks with Nate about the market.
It's hard to explain market sentiment to a logical or analytical person. Because it doesn't make sense. Why do people jump into a stock that splits. Because they expect it to trade back up to where it was. Sometimes it doesn't move at all. But you never know. It's greed and fear.
Once they have some sales Matt can give guidance. Step up and defend the stock price. And give the market a clear path to look forward! Crossing my fingers:-)
|
|
|
|
Post by slugworth008 on Feb 8, 2017 16:28:35 GMT -5
I don't believe he understands stocks or trading stocks. Or what moves a stock up or down. I think he thought the stock was going to move up on the money from SNY news. He may have never gone through personally a investment that had a RS. I remember hearing that they thought the stock would go to $20+ on FDA approval. I tend to agree with you sports. I don't think Matt understands it at all. But that begs the question, does the company need someone at the helm with so little understanding of the financial world, stock movements, financial catalysts and the effect of earnings/profit on the price of the stock? I would say no. I don't question Matt's expertise with the accounting and skills required to be a CFO. Barring not raising capital after Afrezza was approved, he's done an admirable job as CFO. But as CEO, he simply hasn't been able to get the job done. Neither did Hakan, and MNKD is arguably in worse shape because of it. It's becoming hard to take Matt seriously when he makes comments, positive or negative, since he's been wrong so often. His credibility is seriously shaken as a result of the R/S issue and his comments at the quarterly when he said he wasn't worried about a R/S and that he expected it to take care of itself. Matt was dealt a bad hand when he assumed the CEO position, that isn't lost on me. But at the end of the day, the stock needs to move upwards, not downwards and sales need to occur. Merely hanging on or limping along for months on end as the share price bleeds is simply not good enough, no matter who is sitting in the CEO chair. The company needs outside help at the CEO position, preferably with proven experience in drug sales and disruptive technology. I'm not sure who that would be, but I'd be willing to wager that even Desisto wouldn't be willing to come over anymore given MNKD's precarious position. They nabbed some recent former Amgen hires. Are any former CEOs available? "I tend to agree with you sports. I don't think Matt understands it at all. But that begs the question, does the company need someone at the helm with so little understanding of the financial world, stock movements, financial catalysts and the effect of earnings/profit on the price of the stock? I would say no. BINGO !!! Silent One !!! |
|
|
|
Post by gamblerjag on Feb 8, 2017 16:45:13 GMT -5
So, we agree most of us like Matt and feel he has done pretty good since SNY out of the picture. ... some still have reservations ...but doesn't that beg the question why doesn't the BOD fire him as CEO? Maybe it's because they know what he is working with/on/and expectations that put the BOD at ease. ??
|
|
|
|
Post by mikesmilitaria on Feb 8, 2017 16:47:28 GMT -5
Any CFO has a CPA with other financial credentials....certainly Matt understands the entire market and how it works.
He knows the ramifications of a R/S and tried to soften the matter by stating that MNKD is coming from a position of strength.
Keep in mind that he is NOT making these decisions alone and that is what the BOD is for....councilors in critical matters that will impact the company.
They know what they are doing but they sure the hell aren't telling us anything....if they did, they would be telling the world and that is not in their agenda until the time is EXACTLY right.
You know that all this "noise" including the R/S impacts their key holders including Vanguard who originally purchased at $14 and more and now hold collectively in the $34-36mm range. I have to believe Vanguard knows the capability of MNKD's management as they do their DD much better than you or me.
|
|
