|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 8, 2017 19:48:31 GMT -5
Read what I write. I said it is being revealed that they think all the money as yet sunk into MNKD is only roughly half the value of a successful MNKD. And if you view doubling the number of shares as increasing the value, that means you believe that all existing shares are currently worth less than half of a successful MNKD. I don't view that the billions sunk into developing Afrezza are only worth half of it's future success. I think they could have raised more money with less dilution if they'd done it in a way more respectful of their precarious situation. The market will not react well as we are seeing, and now they'll end up having to use more shares because they'll be raising money at prices that are depressed. They probably could have announced 50M share issuance and raised just as much money as for 140M shares because the share price could have regained strength, while now we're going in the opposite direction. As much as I praised Mike for wrangle the $6 capital raise, I think this misstep will more than offset that success. So perhaps looking at it another way... you would have been equally happy or more so if they'd announced issuance of a billion shares... to make yours worth more of course? DBC, you continue to post from a place that is, I don't know, I'll say incorrect. Let's see, we gave away 65% of Afrezza revenues when we did the deal with Sanofi. Not sure that the rest of the company, including technosphere is valued at all that much currently. So for half the company, it we could get commercial success, well, I'm far from ready to diss that sort of deal. What's the difference how many billions were sunk into the company for developing Afrezza, no one cares about that. The market and potential partners/investors only care what the value and prospects of this company are now! MNKD has spend billions, so? We've got something we think is great, but not enough people agree with that for now. The market is not going to take our word for it. Then you say, "I think they could have raised more money with less dilution if they'd done it in a way more respectful of their precarious situation." Huh, explanation of that please? Gosh, they raised money at 6 bucks!!!! Someone was disrespected, that's for sure. (Ha, you know I don't believe that, those buyers sold short beforehand, but just in case they didn't.) Restating... I think when you are a company that has blown through all previously authorized shares and massively diluted shareholders consistently for years that company should not assume that investors and wall street will have an appetite for additional shares with the overhang of potentially further rounds of devastating dilution. I'd be willing to say we have very different perspectives. I'm curious what I'm incorrect about. I wouldn't call you incorrect despite certainly not sharing your view on this. It is an issue of opinion about proper governance and wise financial moves, not facts... or at least I'm not aware of any facts we're debating. It does seem you are in majority here in not caring about the authorization vote. At times it seems to me many people here must have nearly unlimited money where no matter how much share dilution they will forever continue throwing more money in "averaging down" thus in effect cancelling out the dilution... if one is willing to pretend that the ultimate potential market cap of MNKD is elastic and always absorbs the additional shares. Alas even if I ignored the second point, I do not have unlimited money to forever buy more shares. There are some that are stuck with having purchased shares above $20 or $50... and doubling the number of shares will mean twice as much profitability will be needed to justify getting to those levels. If it were unlikely those people will ever be whole now it may well become twice as unlikely. If only we all had unlimited discretionary money so that dilution didn't matter.
|
|
|
Post by awesomo on Nov 8, 2017 19:58:29 GMT -5
Whether we like it or not, doubling the number of authorized shares gives the management team a lot more flexibility. What they do with that flexibility and whether you trust them to make good decisions is another story.
Were you expecting no more dilution ever? Yeah, dilution sucks for shareholders, but I'd rather be diluted with a billion+ market cap than having no dilution and filing for bankruptcy.
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Nov 8, 2017 20:06:37 GMT -5
DBC, you ignore the realities of the situation - there is only one other thing they can do if they are going to run out of money and not provide for a means to get more, which is something I've been hoping for for a long time - sell the company!!!
Is that what your espousing? If so, go ahead and say it, like I say, that's what I want to, but even then, you want a potential purchaser to know you have other options available, like raising more cash by selling stock.
You did write this, did you not: "I think they could have raised more money with less dilution if they'd done it in a way more respectful of their precarious situation."
What does it mean? Please, I really don't know what you mean, but it sounds as if I ought to know.
What is your problem with 140 million more authorized shares - they don't know how much they will need and they don't know how much they can get per share, so why go with a number that may prove either too low or force the company to do this incrementally? They may never need to issue ten more shares, much less 140 million. Why not be ready for various contingencies? Do you think their business has much certainty to it? If you don't think the company can turn this whole thing around into a profitable venture, then no amount of money raised by selling more stock will help. But I'm not going to tell you to sell your shares if you believe that - I want you to keep them and go down the drain with the rest of us (or will you be cashing out when you finally cover)!! And, after all, FOMO is a bitch!!
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Nov 8, 2017 20:44:33 GMT -5
Whether we like it or not, doubling the number of authorized shares gives the management team a lot more flexibility. What they do with that flexibility and whether you trust them to make good decisions is another story. Were you expecting no more dilution ever? Yeah, dilution sucks for shareholders, but I'd rather be diluted with a billion+ market cap than having no dilution and filing for bankruptcy. You get it, awsomo!! Wish I could say something like that so succinctly, however, I'm a lawyer, sooooo, not gonna happen! Sure, would have been great to hear Mike say, "well, we're at a point where we can tell you we don't need to authorize a greater number of shares, cuz we're never going to need to sell another share." But back in the real world, that was never gonna happen!
|
|
|
Post by mango on Nov 8, 2017 20:53:19 GMT -5
All opinions (pro and con) are welcomed on ProBoards. silentknight made a call that the market would push share price down in trading hours/days following the CC. So what? I see nothing here to get so defensive about. Just my opinion, of course... There is nothing wrong with being negative or short on MNKD and i respect those that do it while stating their intent, i only have a problem with those that purposefully mislead. He is not neutral on Mannkind and you can't tell me that he's ever been neutral on mannkind. Every post from that account has been negative yet claims that he is a long. I am not the only one that notices this. "There is nothing wrong with being negative or short on MNKD and i respect those that do it while stating their intent" reply: I don't respect anyone that deliberately does not want the best for others and for them to be able to free themselves from a burden that they cannot control. MannKind has the solution to a very major world-wide epidemic that is killing people and putting chains on their freedom—something that no one should be deliberately hindered from. People have a natural born universal right to enjoy their life in freedom.
|
|
|
Post by dejude42 on Nov 8, 2017 22:44:58 GMT -5
I am going to ASK a few question? What happen to Tase shares from the Tase Market closure? Tase stated before they closed their site, traders could use nasdaq site to continue trading. Did Tase control around 140 Million shares? If this is true they would carry value with their return. Would not these shares be inserted at current ASK PPS. MNKD on American market carries a float 72,434,600 as reported November 8 2017 on Short Squeeze. Tase traded very light and their float could hold a greater share level. MNKD may with Tase shares hold a float over 150 million shares.
|
|