|
Post by radgray68 on Nov 4, 2017 12:36:15 GMT -5
Brutal is the correct word. Sell sell sell! TS is to far out. Afrezza isn’t selling. Management has let us down. Couldn’t have been any worse. IMO. I really had hoped no one would call in until next year. But it is what is is. I’ll all work out. We will prove him wrong! I’m thinking if Mike waits 4-6 months so we are clearly in the turn around mode Cramer will have him on just to talk about that. Then he can expand on Afrezza and the label change and everything else:-) I’ve seen this a hundred times... if we have a hit on Monday it’ll wear off in a couple weeks. And it works the other way. If he pushes a stock, says buy buy buy, or gives a price target, it’s good for a couple bucks. I’ve seen it real time move the stock going by on the ticker. Exactly right. In the end, he's just one voice in an auditorium. I think, to any one watching, it was obvious he didn't do the homework we have done. Im actually hoping for more than 6 months before our secrets are apparent to Wall Street. We've already completed a 50% Fibonacci retracement, so I think I'm safe to start averaging in with my newfound option winnings. Cramer is a temporary thing. Brazil, Greenhill's deal, pediatric approval and accelerated revenue growth will be more permanent. At least we know the shorts haven't quit. We also know that, in addition to fake news, we can have fake short squeezes. From $1 to $6.50 in a couple months with no covering makes me laugh at the extent of the games. I won't sell my shares until they leave for good. However, might as well make some money in options playing the upcoming swings.GLTA
|
|
|
Post by joeypotsandpans on Nov 4, 2017 14:48:52 GMT -5
tunein.com/radio/CNBCs-Mad-Money-with-Jim-Cramer-p124772/?topicId=117794759 he starts talking about it at the 39 min. mark so you can spare yourself the rest lol. It seemed unusual to me for him to just pull this one out of the hat and his rant of how it bothers him when he doesn't know the answer to a question. If he truly did his own research he would have mentioned the history with the label and gone into further detail about what transpired regarding the issues regarding insurance coverage and important change of leadership. If he actually did his due diligence then he would have noted why the stock jumped recently instead of focusing on the price drop after approval. This has smells of his connection with "The Street" and timing wise using two minutes of his segment right before the earnings call, maybe a coincidence or maybe not but either way he should have mentioned that they are reporting and having their call in a couple of days so why not wait to give his opinion after the report and call? Lets think about that for a minute
|
|
|
Post by mnkdfann on Nov 4, 2017 15:28:25 GMT -5
Thanks, that's a good link to remember. (I mean, the link to Mad Money ... not to Cramer's comments on MNKD specifically.)
|
|
|
Post by reality on Nov 4, 2017 15:37:45 GMT -5
Disappointing that he only thinks in such narrow sense and doesn't really think about the diabetics that Afrezza can help. Yes Cramer, it is a helpful drug for mankind! It is sure a hell of a lot better than many of the opioid drugs that drug companies have peddled for years causing rampant addition.
|
|
|
Post by radgray68 on Nov 4, 2017 15:43:42 GMT -5
Timing IS perfect to be covered by plausible deniability.("They're selling cuz o' the quarterly report, they didn't like the numbers, I swear, your honor.") Perhaps it is a signal to the cabal for an upcoming short attack. If that's the case, they're covering at $1 this time. File that for future reference.
Frankly, I've been expecting something big for a while. The shorts HAVE to know, after the ferocity of the recent pop and the favorable type of refinancing, that our debt could be wiped out very quickly by conversion, destroying the bankruptcy thesis.
Guys, I'm enjoying some very good success with my other investments like BAC, AAPL, FCX, and FMC. I follow about 50 others very closely. It's just what I enjoy. However, NONE of them excite me as much and NONE of them give me the potential upside that Mannkind gives me.
P.S. Our little-known company fits into a more honestly successful Peter Lynch style of investing ANYWAY. Take that Cramer.
|
|
|
Post by lennymnkd on Nov 4, 2017 16:04:54 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by thekindaguyiyam on Nov 4, 2017 16:07:46 GMT -5
This is a clip of JC talking about Mannkind a few weeks back: youtu.be/DmaGVrxXYukDoes anyone know where I can find his recent follow-up? If you have a link, please post it. Hopefully a link that works outside of the U.S., for we outsiders. With so many articles from the street, motley fool and seeking alpha Cramer needs to know more? Utter Bullshit from him.
|
|
|
Post by nylefty on Nov 4, 2017 19:06:49 GMT -5
I posted the following in 2015 (the Hulbert Financial Digest is no longer being published):
Jul 1, 2015 22:46:39 GMT -4 nylefty said:
Cramer's stock picks (in his Action Alerts Plus newsletter) were up a whopping 1.1% last year, according to the Hulbert Financial Digest.
Meanwhile, Nate Pile's picks were up 44.9% (Nate's Notes Model Portfolio) and 83.1% (Aggressive Portfolio).
Even over 5 years, Cramer's stocks are up an average of 8.4% a year while Nate's are up 19.3% and 28.2%.
Cramer bashes MNKD and Nate Pile strongly recommends it.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 4, 2017 19:38:38 GMT -5
This is not at all surprising. I can't think of a single stock he's recommended this early in a turn around. I doubt it would do much good for Mike to go on the show until a significant change in script growth could be talked about. You're average retail investors isn't going to appreciate the science in light of the poor script performance to date. I too wish it hadn't made it onto the show at all at this point.
|
|
|
Post by mnkdfann on Nov 4, 2017 20:16:08 GMT -5
I posted the following in 2015 (the Hulbert Financial Digest is no longer being published): Jul 1, 2015 22:46:39 GMT -4 nylefty said:
Cramer's stock picks (in his Action Alerts Plus newsletter) were up a whopping 1.1% last year, according to the Hulbert Financial Digest.
Meanwhile, Nate Pile's picks were up 44.9% (Nate's Notes Model Portfolio) and 83.1% (Aggressive Portfolio).
Even over 5 years, Cramer's stocks are up an average of 8.4% a year while Nate's are up 19.3% and 28.2%.
Cramer bashes MNKD and Nate Pile strongly recommends it.
Actually, the Hulbert Financial Digest ceased, but was then reborn in a new form. hulbertratings.com/Nate's real money 'The Wagmore Advisory Letter' portfolio (real dollars being traded, not imaginary ones) is down by over 26% this past year. The very WORST of all the portfolios Hulbert tracks. I don't know how Jimmy C's picks are doing, probably bad, but I would be surprised if they are down as much as Nate's picks in his Wagmore Advisory Letter. (BTW, I am well aware that the imaginary portfolios in Nate's Notes are doing better than Nate's real money portfolio. But MNKD sure isn't the reason. When it comes down to it, so far, Cramer's calls on MNKD have been much better than Nate's.)
|
|
|
Post by xanet on Nov 4, 2017 20:29:26 GMT -5
I posted the following in 2015 (the Hulbert Financial Digest is no longer being published): Jul 1, 2015 22:46:39 GMT -4 nylefty said:
Cramer's stock picks (in his Action Alerts Plus newsletter) were up a whopping 1.1% last year, according to the Hulbert Financial Digest.
Meanwhile, Nate Pile's picks were up 44.9% (Nate's Notes Model Portfolio) and 83.1% (Aggressive Portfolio).
Even over 5 years, Cramer's stocks are up an average of 8.4% a year while Nate's are up 19.3% and 28.2%.
Cramer bashes MNKD and Nate Pile strongly recommends it.
Actually, the Hulbert Financial Digest ceased, but was then reborn in a new form. hulbertratings.com/Nate's real money 'The Wagmore Advisory Letter' portfolio (real dollars being traded, not imaginary ones) is down by over 26% this past year. The very WORST of all the portfolios Hulbert tracks. I don't know how Jimmy C's picks are doing, probably bad, but I would be surprised if they are down as much as Nate's picks in his Wagmore Advisory Letter. (BTW, I am well aware that the imaginary portfolios in Nate's Notes are doing better than Nate's real money portfolio. But MNKD sure isn't the reason. When it comes down to it, so far, Cramer's calls on MNKD have been much better than Nate's.) That's a little incomplete. Wagmore is down only because it's currently made up entirely of MNKD shares and some cash. It's pretty much on hold until MNKD recovers, and then it will resume in the form originally intended. An all-in kind of gamble, which hopefully will pay off longer term.
|
|
|
Post by mnkdfann on Nov 4, 2017 20:35:53 GMT -5
That's a little incomplete. Wagmore is down only because it's currently made up entirely of MNKD shares and some cash. It's pretty much on hold until MNKD recovers, and then it will resume in the form originally intended. An all-in kind of gamble, which hopefully will pay off longer term. I don't subscribe to it, so I had no idea what Nate's Wagmore letter recommended. Is that really what its portfolio consists of? Only MNKD and cash? Wow.
|
|
|
Post by nylefty on Nov 4, 2017 20:40:59 GMT -5
I posted the following in 2015 (the Hulbert Financial Digest is no longer being published): Jul 1, 2015 22:46:39 GMT -4 nylefty said:
Cramer's stock picks (in his Action Alerts Plus newsletter) were up a whopping 1.1% last year, according to the Hulbert Financial Digest.
Meanwhile, Nate Pile's picks were up 44.9% (Nate's Notes Model Portfolio) and 83.1% (Aggressive Portfolio).
Even over 5 years, Cramer's stocks are up an average of 8.4% a year while Nate's are up 19.3% and 28.2%.
Cramer bashes MNKD and Nate Pile strongly recommends it.
Actually, the Hulbert Financial Digest ceased, but was then reborn in a new form. hulbertratings.com/Nate's real money 'The Wagmore Advisory Letter' portfolio (real dollars being traded, not imaginary ones) is down by over 26% this past year. The very WORST of all the portfolios Hulbert tracks. I don't know how Jimmy C's picks are doing, probably bad, but I would be surprised if they are down as much as Nate's picks in his Wagmore Advisory Letter. (BTW, I am well aware that the imaginary portfolios in Nate's Notes are doing better than Nate's real money portfolio. But MNKD sure isn't the reason. When it comes down to it, so far, Cramer's calls on MNKD have been much better than Nate's.) As I've pointed out when you've bashed Nate in the past, the portfolio you love to bash has been in "hibernation" for more than two years. Here's what Nate says about it on his website: PLEASE NOTE: Though we had hoped to have The Wagmore Advisory Letter (TWAL) back up and running by now (especially given the surge in interest thanks to the success the two Portfolios in Nate’s Notes have been experiencing lately), it should be noted that TWAL has actually been “in hibernation” for the past two years and has not made any trades in its real world portfolio during that time period. We hope to have the service up and running later this year (2017), so please check back regularly if you are interested in what you see below!
www.notwallstreet.com/wagmore-advisory-letter/
|
|
|
Post by sportsrancho on Nov 4, 2017 20:42:40 GMT -5
Nov. 2 at 6:36 PM rooksleanne $MNKD 👍🏻😂
@natesnotes
Dic - how do u think I feel getting to buy $MNKD for 1/10th that price w/ 1,000% more confidence I'm right? ;-)
|
|
|
Post by mnkdfann on Nov 4, 2017 20:44:48 GMT -5
As I've pointed out when you've bashed Nate in the past, the portfolio you love to bash has been in "hibernation" for more than two years. Here's what Nate says about it on his website: PLEASE NOTE: Though we had hoped to have The Wagmore Advisory Letter (TWAL) back up and running by now (especially given the surge in interest thanks to the success the two Portfolios in Nate’s Notes have been experiencing lately), it should be noted that TWAL has actually been “in hibernation” for the past two years and has not made any trades in its real world portfolio during that time period. We hope to have the service up and running later this year (2017), so please check back regularly if you are interested in what you see below!I honestly don't recall you ever mentioning to me that Wagmore was in 'hibernation'. If you did, perhaps I missed your post. Thanks for the tip. (I guess I don't really understand why Nate's Wagmore being in 'hibernation' matters. Does that excuse Nate's bad calls? Would Jimmy C. get the same sort of pass if he did something like that?) In any case, thus far, Cramer has sadly made much better investment calls regarding MNKD than Nate has.
|
|