|
Post by slugworth008 on Mar 1, 2017 10:52:57 GMT -5
MNKD has actually requested a 6 month extension. Forgive me if this has already been posted.
|
|
|
Post by madog365 on Mar 1, 2017 10:56:02 GMT -5
I don't know if they have yet but the request is definitely in the plans since they did not regain compliance organically. They need the R/S approval first in order to to receive the extension though.
|
|
|
Post by matt on Mar 1, 2017 12:04:05 GMT -5
If the stock reverse splits today, the company will have enough time to regain compliance before delisting. If that occurs there is no need to request an extension because the company will already be in compliance.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2017 12:05:34 GMT -5
If the stock reverse splits today, the company will have enough time to regain compliance before delisting. If that occurs there is no need to request an extension because the company will already be in compliance. What if the RS gets a thumbs up vote. Is it possible NASDAQ gives MNKD an additional 180 days without actually doing the RS?
|
|
|
Post by promann on Mar 1, 2017 12:08:15 GMT -5
If the stock reverse splits today, the company will have enough time to regain compliance before delisting. If that occurs there is no need to request an extension because the company will already be in compliance. What if the RS gets a thumbs up vote. Is it possible NASDAQ gives MNKD an additional 180 days with actually doing the RS? scotta. I think you meant without actually doing the RS?
|
|
|
Post by BlueCat on Mar 1, 2017 12:12:06 GMT -5
I thought someone else posted in another thread that, in order to be given an extension, there has to be a plan to come into compliance within 180 days - e.g. the R/S has to be approved as an option, but not necessarily completed. That basically gives MNKD additional runway to get into compliance without actually exercising the R/S.
But - if the extension has been granted, for that, I would expect to see a PR.
|
|
|
Post by derek2 on Mar 1, 2017 12:53:00 GMT -5
I thought someone else posted in another thread that, in order to be given an extension, there has to be a plan to come into compliance within 180 days - e.g. the R/S has to be approved as an option, but not necessarily completed. That basically gives MNKD additional runway to get into compliance without actually exercising the R/S. But - if the extension has been granted, for that, I would expect to see a PR. More importantly, in order to be given an extension, MNKD would have to show how, within 180 days, they would go from (-$200M) shareholder equity to positive shareholder equity. According to Matt, an extension isn't likely.
|
|
|
Post by n8 on Mar 1, 2017 13:01:23 GMT -5
In terms of "Show how" would that mean that they would have to divulge any prospects of partnership, mergers, acquisitions, and achievements that would not normally be privy to the public?
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Mar 1, 2017 13:10:42 GMT -5
Would be nice if management actually cleared up some of this and set expectations. I realize that this is something they likely can't address with certainty, but they could at least clarify the rules as they think they would apply and state something like "we are hopeful that we will get an extension with the positive RS vote and believe that events during that period may well put us above $1" or "according to the shareholder equity rule we would need a special exception. While we have applied for that, if it is not granted we will need to utilize the now approved RS". Of course it may be clarified with an imminent PR stating that a RS is being done.
Oh well... transparency was short lived.
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Mar 1, 2017 13:15:20 GMT -5
derek2 - that is incorrect. MannKind does NOT have to achieve positive shareholder equity, which they confirmed in an email from MannKind's Investor Relations Department which I posted a few weeks ago.
|
|
|
Post by derek2 on Mar 1, 2017 13:58:15 GMT -5
derek2 - that is incorrect. MannKind does NOT have to achieve positive shareholder equity, which they confirmed in an email from MannKind's Investor Relations Department which I posted a few weeks ago. I'll search for that post, mnholdem. Truth is precious and if I'm saying something that's incorrect, I'll correct myself.
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Mar 1, 2017 14:03:57 GMT -5
I'll save you the time. This was the post.
Well, here is something new. I received an emailed reply this morning from the IR Dept of MannKind Corporation:
"MannKind does not meet the equity standard requirement for Nasdaq Capital Markets, therefore, the Company does not have the option to phase down to that exchange."
---
What I posted yesterday may be accurate: "...according to Nasdaq Listing Rule 5810(c)(3)(A)(i), The Company may also request a hearing to remain on The Nasdaq Global Market pursuant to the Rule 5800 Series."
In that event, MNKD needs only get approval from NASDAQ of a plan to remedy their non-compliance related to share price. The reverse-split is very likely a key part of the plan presented by MannKind to regain compliance.
Read more: mnkd.proboards.com/thread/7262/nasdaq-grant-extension#ixzz4a6PhPnZh
|
|
|
Post by silentknight on Mar 1, 2017 14:12:11 GMT -5
I'll save you the time. This was the post.
Well, here is something new. I received an emailed reply this morning from the IR Dept of MannKind Corporation:
"MannKind does not meet the equity standard requirement for Nasdaq Capital Markets, therefore, the Company does not have the option to phase down to that exchange."
---
What I posted yesterday may be accurate: "...according to Nasdaq Listing Rule 5810(c)(3)(A)(i), The Company may also request a hearing to remain on The Nasdaq Global Market pursuant to the Rule 5800 Series."
In that event, MNKD needs only get approval from NASDAQ of a plan to remedy their non-compliance related to share price. The reverse-split is very likely a key part of the plan presented by MannKind to regain compliance.
Read more: mnkd.proboards.com/thread/7262/nasdaq-grant-extension#ixzz4a6PhPnZh
We've been through this before, but I think it's open to interpretation. In the email you recieved, quoted above, MNKD didn't say they weren't required to meet the standard. They said they didn't meet it. Those are very different things. As you pointed out, Nasdaq can certainly provide MNKD more time to remedy the share price deficiency if they chose, assuming MNKD can present a plan to do it if given more time. Simply having authorization for a R/S, in my opinion, will not be sufficient to obtain said extra time. If MNKD says to Nasdaq "We are prepared to R/S if necessary to maintain compliance.", Nasdaq will likely return with "Ok, great. Then do it before March 13 when your delisting window closes."
|
|
|
Post by oldfishtowner on Mar 1, 2017 14:20:04 GMT -5
I'll save you the time. This was the post.
Well, here is something new. I received an emailed reply this morning from the IR Dept of MannKind Corporation:
"MannKind does not meet the equity standard requirement for Nasdaq Capital Markets, therefore, the Company does not have the option to phase down to that exchange."
---
What I posted yesterday may be accurate: "...according to Nasdaq Listing Rule 5810(c)(3)(A)(i), The Company may also request a hearing to remain on The Nasdaq Global Market pursuant to the Rule 5800 Series."
In that event, MNKD needs only get approval from NASDAQ of a plan to remedy their non-compliance related to share price. The reverse-split is very likely a key part of the plan presented by MannKind to regain compliance.
Read more: mnkd.proboards.com/thread/7262/nasdaq-grant-extension#ixzz4a6PhPnZh
We've been through this before, but I think it's open to interpretation. In the email you recieved, quoted above, MNKD didn't say they weren't required to meet the standard. They said they didn't meet it. Those are very different things. As you pointed out, Nasdaq can certainly provide MNKD more time to remedy the share price deficiency if they chose, assuming MNKD can present a plan to do it if given more time. Simply having authorization for a R/S, in my opinion, will not be sufficient to obtain said extra time. If MNKD says to Nasdaq "We are prepared to R/S if necessary to maintain compliance.", Nasdaq will likely return with "Ok, great. Then do it before March 13 when your delisting window closes." What good would that do? Even if MNKD executed the R/S today there are not 10 business days remaining between now and March 13. So either way, MNKD technically needs an extension.
|
|
|
Post by silentknight on Mar 1, 2017 14:23:14 GMT -5
We've been through this before, but I think it's open to interpretation. In the email you recieved, quoted above, MNKD didn't say they weren't required to meet the standard. They said they didn't meet it. Those are very different things. As you pointed out, Nasdaq can certainly provide MNKD more time to remedy the share price deficiency if they chose, assuming MNKD can present a plan to do it if given more time. Simply having authorization for a R/S, in my opinion, will not be sufficient to obtain said extra time. If MNKD says to Nasdaq "We are prepared to R/S if necessary to maintain compliance.", Nasdaq will likely return with "Ok, great. Then do it before March 13 when your delisting window closes." What good would that do? Even if MNKD executed the R/S today there are not 10 business days remaining between now and March 13. So either way, MNKD technically needs an extension. You make a good point. It appears that by waiting until March 1, the company has already passed the threshold of self-correction assuming a R/S is implemented if 10 trading days above $1 is required. Another bungle by management? Who would have thought?
|
|