|
|
Post by surplusvalue on Feb 8, 2017 16:57:24 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. In my thread on reverse options, I indicated that even in this situation management's transparency is non existent. Why do we not know if the RS is being considered for delisting issues only or if they are considering it for the purposes of establishing conditions for dilution as well given the range of 1 for 3 to 1 for 10. The correspondence provided Matt with a perfect opportunity to reach out and clarify the situation. Instead he plays dumb. |
|
|
|
Post by nylefty on Feb 8, 2017 16:59:58 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. ?? Huh? If most of us feel he's "done pretty good," how does that "beg the question why doesn't the BOD fire him?" Don't follow your logic. |
|
|
|
Post by surplusvalue on Feb 8, 2017 17:07:35 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.The more I examine the situation and the CEO's inane remarks the more I am struck by the fact that even a 1 for 10 may not provide a feasible basis for financing if the stock continues to fall prior to the vote and if it subsequently it gets pounded down before an actual RS and additionally so after a RS takes place. I keep reminding everyone that this is a targeted stock, and those who would like to see MNKD fail may be waiting just for this opportunity to do some more serious damage to the stock. Unless they have something to back up and support the RS then MNKD may be setting itself up for a situation that brings them back to a delisting situation sooner than expected especially if sales only percolate slowly as has been the case. |
|
|
|
Post by qwertqwert on Feb 8, 2017 17:44:18 GMT -5
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.The more I examine the situation and the CEO's inane remarks the more I am struck by the fact that even a 1 for 10 may not provide a feasible basis for financing if the stock continues to fall prior to the vote and if it subsequently it gets pounded down before an actual RS and additionally so after a RS takes place. I keep reminding everyone that this is a targeted stock, and those who would like to see MNKD fail may be waiting just for this opportunity to do some more serious damage to the stock. Unless they have something to back up and support the RS then MNKD may be setting itself up for a situation that brings them back to a delisting situation sooner than expected especially if sales only percolate slowly as has been the case. I agree, they'll walk it down like they've been doing the past few years... we are head to doomsville. |
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Feb 8, 2017 18:04:41 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:-) At the 3Q16 Earnings Call, Matt stated that he will be giving guidance at the 4Q16 Earnings Call. Here is the excerpt from the transcript of that call:
"Now that we have launched Afrezza and established our infrastructure, we expect to increase our investments to grow Afrezza sales faster. Based on everything we have planned, we expect our current financial resources to last into Q3 of 2017. I will provide further updates including revenue guidance for 2017 during our Q4 earnings call."
A company's quarterly/annual revenue guidance is key data that Wall Street analysts typically use for determining 1-Yr Price Targets for any stock. Even if the new sales teams were to hit their territories next week and show immediate results, Matt will have only 2-3 weeks of preliminary sales data, so there will be no traction there for him to base his estimate from. Regardless, I am quite eager to hear what guidance he does provide at the earnings call.
Analyst will consider what Matt says and some may upgrade their calls from Sell to Hold, but I would expect it will take a few months of evaluating Afrezza sales growth before many analysts upgrade from Hold to Buy... dare I suggest "Strong Buy"?
I think shareholders should expect that the CEO will keep his word on his promise to provide guidance in March. Personally, I think he will. 
|
|
|
|
Post by gamblerjag on Feb 8, 2017 18:54:34 GMT -5
Hey NY.. I meant to say I think many longs appreciate what Matt has done with what he has dealt with.. also said that the BOD could fire Matt if they thought that he has been doing a terrible job... but they haven't... I'm sure the Board knows what MNKD has coming hence, keep Matt in charge!!! that's what I was eluding to.
|
|
|
|
Post by hawaiiguy42 on Feb 8, 2017 19:21:14 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. ?? Are you continuing to pump this stock? It is what it is! Fire him, keep him... fact is, dam if you do and dammed if you don't. Your just as bad as you were on the YMB! Touche my friend!!! See you at .32 if not sooner, than later. |
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Feb 8, 2017 19:51:41 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. ?? Maybe it's that the board is at ease because they were given their shares and didn't invest a huge chunk of their own retirement savings into MNKD? Maybe they aren't at ease, and just know it would be hard to attract a top notch CEO in the financial situation MNKD is in? Maybe we don't have enough information to draw any conclusions about the state of mind of the board, much less what it would mean? Reading something into a BoD not firing a CEO as part of an investment thesis is probably not useful. Many companies have filed for bankruptcy with the same CEO they had for years. I'm actually not one to criticize Matt to harshly. SNY deal was obviously BAD mistake, but that isn't on Matt. We don't know whether Matt advocated for raising capital when we were at $10. Not doing so, now certainly seems a mistake, but Matt would only get partial blame for that. He gets credit from me for a better than I expected settlement with SNY and Amphastar. But I still wouldn't say lack of firing equates to a happy BoD... we have no way of knowing. |
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Feb 8, 2017 19:58:23 GMT -5
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.The more I examine the situation and the CEO's inane remarks the more I am struck by the fact that even a 1 for 10 may not provide a feasible basis for financing if the stock continues to fall prior to the vote and if it subsequently it gets pounded down before an actual RS and additionally so after a RS takes place. I keep reminding everyone that this is a targeted stock, and those who would like to see MNKD fail may be waiting just for this opportunity to do some more serious damage to the stock. Unless they have something to back up and support the RS then MNKD may be setting itself up for a situation that brings them back to a delisting situation sooner than expected especially if sales only percolate slowly as has been the case. What's your issue with the particular ratio... that it would be harder to do equity offering if share price is below $5 (limit for some funds to invest)? |
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Feb 8, 2017 20:19:35 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. I think it is more like $11M now... and that is a drop in the bucket for Vanguard funds. Those holdings are likely in funds that simply invest in the overall market (Wilshire 5000, etc.). I suspect they aren't keeping tabs on MNKD management, nor had any input in promoting Matt to CEO when that happened. I'm sure it would be easy to find evidence of Vanguard holding stakes of that size in companies that have filed bankruptcy. Not predicting that for MNKD, but the fact Vanguard is listed as having $11M in holdings isn't something that has much value in assessing the condition of MNKD. Sorry. |
|
|
|
Post by roguesuerte on Feb 8, 2017 22:29:37 GMT -5
I don't think any of the R/S stuff would even matter if we started seeing spikes in script numbers. It definitely looks like insurance coverage has improved but there is no exposure, whatsoever, other than from posts and efforts by user/advocates. SNY totally botched the launch with sample packs,lack of understanding with titration, sprirometry,etc... but at least they put out some print ads in major publications. Lets face it, word of mouth recommendations aren't going to get this company where it needs to be in the near-term. If script number stay stagnant after we have a reverse split, the shorts will walk it back down till they don't need to cover. Location, location, location, translates to exposure , exposure, exposure in the pharmacy space, and we have none. Gild isn't the best one to reference these days but early on they had very little insurance coverage but they advertised in every media outlet they could find. I would rather have mgmt. say wtf, like in risky business, and promote they hell out of Afrezza than continue with the slow painful death play. Just my two cents,thats all I have left.
|
|
|
|
Post by careful2invest on Feb 9, 2017 1:40:47 GMT -5
I don't think any of the R/S stuff would even matter if we started seeing spikes in script numbers. It definitely looks like insurance coverage has improved but there is no exposure, whatsoever, other than from posts and efforts by user/advocates. SNY totally botched the launch with sample packs,lack of understanding with titration, sprirometry,etc... but at least they put out some print ads in major publications. Lets face it, word of mouth recommendations aren't going to get this company where it needs to be in the near-term. If script number stay stagnant after we have a reverse split, the shorts will walk it back down till they don't need to cover. Location, location, location, translates to exposure , exposure, exposure in the pharmacy space, and we have none. Gild isn't the best one to reference these days but early on they had very little insurance coverage but they advertised in every media outlet they could find. I would rather have mgmt. say wtf, like in risky business, and promote they hell out of Afrezza than continue with the slow painful death play. Just my two cents,thats all I have left. Roques, You are spot on! Bottom line is MNKD needs to advertise AFREZZA!We need the exposure! Everyone that I have ever talked to about AFREZZA and how it performs, is interested in it! MNKD needs to spark the interest in AFREZZA! ADVERTISE!!R/S could possibly be avoided if they move on this asap. If they don't, It just does not make sense! Two plus years after FDA Approval and no advertisement...No wonder we are facing delisting, r/s, after dilution, after dilution. It just does not make sense! GLTA TRUE LONGS! |
|
|
|
Post by promann on Feb 9, 2017 6:34:35 GMT -5
I don't think any of the R/S stuff would even matter if we started seeing spikes in script numbers. It definitely looks like insurance coverage has improved but there is no exposure, whatsoever, other than from posts and efforts by user/advocates. SNY totally botched the launch with sample packs,lack of understanding with titration, sprirometry,etc... but at least they put out some print ads in major publications. Lets face it, word of mouth recommendations aren't going to get this company where it needs to be in the near-term. If script number stay stagnant after we have a reverse split, the shorts will walk it back down till they don't need to cover. Location, location, location, translates to exposure , exposure, exposure in the pharmacy space, and we have none. Gild isn't the best one to reference these days but early on they had very little insurance coverage but they advertised in every media outlet they could find. I would rather have mgmt. say wtf, like in risky business, and promote they hell out of Afrezza than continue with the slow painful death play. Just my two cents,thats all I have left. Roques, You are spot on! Bottom line is MNKD needs to advertise AFREZZA!We need the exposure! Everyone that I have ever talked to about AFREZZA and how it performs, is interested in it! MNKD needs to spark the interest in AFREZZA! ADVERTISE!!R/S could possibly be avoided if they move on this asap. If they don't, It just does not make sense! Two plus years after FDA Approval and no advertisement...No wonder we are facing delisting, r/s, after dilution, after dilution. It just does not make sense! GLTA TRUE LONGS! With all do respect Carefull we really need to give MNKD some credit. The first year sanofi owned the marketing aspect of Afrezza and MNKDs hands were tied. Its been a little more then a year Since Sanofi termination notice and Sanofi still had its grip and the official termination wasn't until July maybe 7 months. So since then MNKD was strapped for cash. Im sure MNKD wants advertisement and commercials also and they have been working on them for as far as we know at least 3 months now and are in the process of FDA approval. They are coming.. |
|
|
|
Post by sportsrancho on Feb 9, 2017 7:02:57 GMT -5
They can't come to soon! A friend of mine who had told a T2 about Afrezza told him she came back from asking for a script and said she couldn't get one. The Endo said no, they stopped making that.
|
|
|
|
Post by promann on Feb 9, 2017 7:52:20 GMT -5
They can't come to soon! A friend of mine who had told a T2 about Afrezza told him she came back from asking for a script and said she couldn't get one. The Endo said no, they stopped making that. I hope she set the endo straight and demanded it. But I know what your saying.. If it's being advertised they will understand that it's going to still be available.. |
|
