|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Apr 13, 2017 15:39:01 GMT -5
Send your question to Google, since we all know that is who is buying MNKD I hope you are right, dreamboat. The shoe fits. If this ship sinks, I will be very surprised. But, at the same time, I am way too invested to throw any more money at it. I am thinking that I want to hold on until we get verification that the ship is not going to sink. But, I'm afraid that when the news is released, the next day the SP will be SSSOOOO much higher that it will be prohibitive to all of us to invest more then (LOL, i guess you could say we MISSED that boat ). Just imagine how much the PPS will go up if it were announced at 5:00pm that Google is buying and pairing with its cgm. The way things have been going with continued spending and hiring and cool collect management, and other indicators, I just have believed right along that Matt & Mike have this ship under control. I believe they have had the partnership plans mapped out and it will all come together in some kind of big announcement. If Amgen made the announcement, it would be big. If Google made it, it would be huuge. The price would jump to whatever it is that Google offers per share. If you wanted to do some googling you might find how much Google has in the past paid as a premium over what a company is trading at... 2x perhaps? However, I think very, very little chance Google would be interested in buying any pharma company.
|
|
|
Post by MnkdWASmyRtrmntPlan on Apr 14, 2017 10:13:47 GMT -5
I hope you are right, dreamboat. The shoe fits. If this ship sinks, I will be very surprised. But, at the same time, I am way too invested to throw any more money at it. I am thinking that I want to hold on until we get verification that the ship is not going to sink. But, I'm afraid that when the news is released, the next day the SP will be SSSOOOO much higher that it will be prohibitive to all of us to invest more then (LOL, i guess you could say we MISSED that boat ). Just imagine how much the PPS will go up if it were announced at 5:00pm that Google is buying and pairing with its cgm. The way things have been going with continued spending and hiring and cool collect management, and other indicators, I just have believed right along that Matt & Mike have this ship under control. I believe they have had the partnership plans mapped out and it will all come together in some kind of big announcement. If Amgen made the announcement, it would be big. If Google made it, it would be huuge. The price would jump to whatever it is that Google offers per share. If you wanted to do some googling you might find how much Google has in the past paid as a premium over what a company is trading at... 2x perhaps? However, I think very, very little chance Google would be interested in buying any pharma company. Why? I don't think it would be like Google to not look at such a very large potential source of relatively easy money for them. Albeit, still risky, but Google is not averse to risk. For Google to continue its aggressive sales trajectory, they have to think outside the box. Years ago, who would have thought they would get into the driverless car business. Eh, but, the more I think of it, driverless cars are still very technical. Pharmaceuticals ... not so much ... WAY outside the box. Although it may pair nicely with their new CGM, it is completely unfamiliar territory, competing with other huge giants that have established competitive tactics - just look at how well they have managed to keep their thumbs on Mannkind already. Would IBM also not consider it? This is tormenting not knowing what the pending news is, or when we will get it. Meanwhile, Ripano is not feeding us today's sales numbers - ouch. Is anyone's crystal ball working? Ouiga board even?
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Apr 14, 2017 10:23:08 GMT -5
Why? I don't think it would be like Google to not look at such a very large potential source of relatively easy money for them. Albeit, still risky, but Google is not averse to risk. For Google to continue its aggressive sales trajectory, they have to think outside the box. Years ago, who would have thought they would get into the driverless car business. Eh, but, the more I think of it, driverless cars are still very technical. Pharmaceuticals ... not so much ... WAY outside the box. Although it may pair nicely with their new CGM, it is completely unfamiliar territory, competing with other huge giants that have established competitive tactics - just look at how well they have managed to keep their thumbs on Mannkind already. Would IBM also not consider it? This is tormenting not knowing what the pending news is, or when we will get it. Meanwhile, Ripano is not feeding us today's sales numbers - ouch. Is anyone's crystal ball working? Ouiga board even? And that is presupposing there is some pending news.
|
|
|
Post by MnkdWASmyRtrmntPlan on Apr 15, 2017 19:54:19 GMT -5
Why? I don't think it would be like Google to not look at such a very large potential source of relatively easy money for them. Albeit, still risky, but Google is not averse to risk. For Google to continue its aggressive sales trajectory, they have to think outside the box. Years ago, who would have thought they would get into the driverless car business. Eh, but, the more I think of it, driverless cars are still very technical. Pharmaceuticals ... not so much ... WAY outside the box. Although it may pair nicely with their new CGM, it is completely unfamiliar territory, competing with other huge giants that have established competitive tactics - just look at how well they have managed to keep their thumbs on Mannkind already. Would IBM also not consider it? This is tormenting not knowing what the pending news is, or when we will get it. Meanwhile, Ripano is not feeding us today's sales numbers - ouch. Is anyone's crystal ball working? Ouiga board even? And that is presupposing there is some pending news. There MUST be pending news. We are running out of cash soon and sales are going nowhere. If there is no BP news, then there will be BK news
|
|
|
Post by MnkdWASmyRtrmntPlan on Apr 15, 2017 20:17:37 GMT -5
I hope you are right, dreamboat. The shoe fits. If this ship sinks, I will be very surprised. But, at the same time, I am way too invested to throw any more money at it. I am thinking that I want to hold on until we get verification that the ship is not going to sink. But, I'm afraid that when the news is released, the next day the SP will be SSSOOOO much higher that it will be prohibitive to all of us to invest more then (LOL, i guess you could say we MISSED that boat ). Just imagine how much the PPS will go up if it were announced at 5:00pm that Google is buying and pairing with its cgm. The way things have been going with continued spending and hiring and cool collect management, and other indicators, I just have believed right along that Matt & Mike have this ship under control. I believe they have had the partnership plans mapped out and it will all come together in some kind of big announcement. If Amgen made the announcement, it would be big. If Google made it, it would be huuge. The price would jump to whatever it is that Google offers per share. If you wanted to do some googling you might find how much Google has in the past paid as a premium over what a company is trading at... 2x perhaps? However, I think very, very little chance Google would be interested in buying any pharma company.Yeah, you're probably right about Google not wanting to buy a pharma company. But, maybe just some BP deal to assist Mannkind financially and help get them going. Considering that Google, Apple and all the others that are in process of bringing new CGM's to market, and since Afrezza is the best (maybe only) insulin to pair with their new CGM's, that means that all those huge corporations are relying on Afrezza staying around. And with pockets as deep as the ocean, if Google or Apple gave Mannkind $10 mil/month for a couple years to get them going, to them, that would be like buying them lunch. What better friends could you ask for?
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Apr 16, 2017 15:15:41 GMT -5
The price would jump to whatever it is that Google offers per share. If you wanted to do some googling you might find how much Google has in the past paid as a premium over what a company is trading at... 2x perhaps? However, I think very, very little chance Google would be interested in buying any pharma company.Yeah, you're probably right about Google not wanting to buy a pharma company. But, maybe just some BP deal to assist Mannkind financially and help get them going. Considering that Google, Apple and all the others that are in process of bringing new CGM's to market, and since Afrezza is the best (maybe only) insulin to pair with their new CGM's, that means that all those huge corporations are relying on Afrezza staying around. And with pockets as deep as the ocean, if Google or Apple gave Mannkind $10 mil/month for a couple years to get them going, to them, that would be like buying them lunch. What better friends could you ask for? Still don't get why you feel they are reliant on Afrezza. Let's say Afrezza disappears... then there is no market for CGMs or a smaller market?
|
|
|
Post by compound26 on Apr 16, 2017 18:37:28 GMT -5
The Change of Control 8K filing clearly indicates a long term financial resolution is near. BoD know that they need a long term financial solution for A to succeed commercially and they have been searching for a long time. From the "Form 10-Q, For the quarterly period ended June 30, 2014"
From "INFORMATION REQUIRED IN PROXY STATEMENT SCHEDULE 14A INFORMATION"
Change of Control Agreements
We have entered into change of control agreements with Messrs. Edstrom and Pfeffer, and Drs. Martens and Thomson. Each agreement is for a period of two years and will be automatically renewed for additional one-year periods unless either party gives notice to terminate the agreement at least 90 days prior to the end of its initial term or any subsequent term.
Under the agreements, a change of control will be deemed to occur upon:
• any transaction that results in a person or group acquiring beneficial ownership of 50% or more of our voting stock, other than us, one of our employee benefit plans, Mr. Mann or any other entity in which Mr. Mann holds a majority of the beneficial interests;
• any merger, consolidation or reorganization of us in which our stockholders immediately prior to the transaction hold less than 50% of the voting power of the surviving entity following the transaction, subject to certain limitations;
• any transaction in which we sell all or substantially all of our assets, subject to certain limitations;
• our liquidation; or
• any reorganization of our Board of Directors in which our incumbent directors (as defined in the agreements) cease for any reason to constitute a majority of the members of our Board.
Read more: mnkd.proboards.com/thread/2190/change-control-agreements-bo-opportunities#ixzz4dgQvmcpsIn my view the new change of control is something more than house keeping. I do not think such a filing means Mannkind already received an offer or anything. However, it appears Mannkind does not have a change of control agreement in place for all of its top executives all the time. As nylefty has noted, the last time Mannkind filed a change of control, it was for period ending June 30, 2014. And less than two months later (August 11, 2014), Mannkind entered into a partnership agreement with Sanofi. So it appears when Mannkind entered into the change of control in 2014, they were nearing entering into a partnership agreement with Sanofi. Additionally, the 2014 change of control agreement covers Messrs. Edstrom and Pfeffer, and Drs. Martens and Thomson. Edstrom and Martens are no longer in the executives team. And Pfeffer was CFO under the 2014 change of control agreement. So basically, before the entering into of the 2017 change of control agreement, the 2014 change of control agreement still protects Thomson in his current position, but not the other executives in their current positions. So it is a fact that for quite sometime, the executives of Mannkind actually were not covered by a change of control agreement protecting their incumbent positions.
Then why Mannkind chooses to enter into the new change of control agreement on April 6, 2017? Only time will tell. We probably will have much better idea of this by this year's annual shareholders meeting.
|
|
|
Post by Cowgirl on Apr 16, 2017 19:03:17 GMT -5
Because they want to make it APPEAR as if there are interested parties out there and that some financial buyout is going to occur. But next conference call we will hear management take a page from Hakkan and start asking if there are any buyers on the call to please call them and show their interest. Al Mann has lost all his money (just about). It was his arrogance and it's spreading influence on all management that has lead them down a rat hole. Here we are trying to fund an operation at market caps lows and trying to find partners and lifelines at the bottom of the barrel. It's embarrassing.
|
|
|
Post by kuka on Apr 16, 2017 19:03:43 GMT -5
the timing is the most significant in my opinion ....same day as article from Billionaire HF talking about eminent buy out .... we will know in a few more weeks or less
|
|
|
Post by sportsrancho on Apr 16, 2017 20:43:12 GMT -5
From the "Form 10-Q, For the quarterly period ended June 30, 2014"
From "INFORMATION REQUIRED IN PROXY STATEMENT SCHEDULE 14A INFORMATION"
Change of Control Agreements
We have entered into change of control agreements with Messrs. Edstrom and Pfeffer, and Drs. Martens and Thomson. Each agreement is for a period of two years and will be automatically renewed for additional one-year periods unless either party gives notice to terminate the agreement at least 90 days prior to the end of its initial term or any subsequent term.
Under the agreements, a change of control will be deemed to occur upon:
• any transaction that results in a person or group acquiring beneficial ownership of 50% or more of our voting stock, other than us, one of our employee benefit plans, Mr. Mann or any other entity in which Mr. Mann holds a majority of the beneficial interests;
• any merger, consolidation or reorganization of us in which our stockholders immediately prior to the transaction hold less than 50% of the voting power of the surviving entity following the transaction, subject to certain limitations;
• any transaction in which we sell all or substantially all of our assets, subject to certain limitations;
• our liquidation; or
• any reorganization of our Board of Directors in which our incumbent directors (as defined in the agreements) cease for any reason to constitute a majority of the members of our Board.
Read more: mnkd.proboards.com/thread/2190/change-control-agreements-bo-opportunities#ixzz4dgQvmcps In my view the new change of control is something more than house keeping. I do not think such a filing means Mannkind already received an offer or anything. However, it appears Mannkind does not have a change of control agreement in place for all of its top executives all the time. As nylefty has noted, the last time Mannkind filed a change of control, it was for period ending June 30, 2014. And less than two months later (August 11, 2014), Mannkind entered into a partnership agreement with Sanofi. So it appears when Mannkind entered into the change of control in 2014, they were nearing entering into a partnership agreement with Sanofi. Additionally, the 2014 change of control agreement covers Messrs. Edstrom and Pfeffer, and Drs. Martens and Thomson. Edstrom and Martens are no longer in the executives team. And Pfeffer was CFO under the 2014 change of control agreement. So basically, before the entering into of the 2017 change of control agreement, the 2014 change of control agreement still protects Thomson in his current position, but not the other executives in their current positions. So it is a fact that for quite sometime, the executives of Mannkind actually were not covered by a change of control agreement protecting their incumbent positions.
Then why Mannkind chooses to enter into the new change of control agreement on April 6, 2017? Only time will tell. We probably will have much better idea of this by this year's annual shareholders meeting. Yes! I was thinking about this the other day and was going to look it up. Because after approval Al was going to sell or partner. So it was put in place in-between that time. Just in case. Bingo:-)
|
|
|
Post by sportsrancho on Apr 17, 2017 11:04:31 GMT -5
|
|