|
|
Post by akemp3000 on Nov 7, 2017 19:39:00 GMT -5
Keep in mind that one of the investors that recently bought at $6 was the Chairman of the Board. He obviously knows everything that's going on behind the scenes and the future implications of such. It's doubtful it's simply a large dilution as some suggest just to raise more funds. The Chairman would have never made this investment knowing this was in the immediate strategic plans. It's more likely there's something else in the works, possibly another party involved in some way. I wish we knew. I look forward to an announcement and explanation that might come between December 13th, the date of the shareholder vote, and the start of the new year. I'm hoping this board can share other possible reasons for doubling the shares.
|
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 7, 2017 21:29:09 GMT -5
Keep in mind that one of the investors that recently bought at $6 was the Chairman of the Board. He obviously knows everything that's going on behind the scenes and the future implications of such. It's doubtful it's simply a large dilution as some suggest just to raise more funds. The Chairman would have never made this investment knowing this was in the immediate strategic plans. It's more likely there's something else in the works, possibly another party involved in some way. I wish we knew. I look forward to an announcement and explanation that might come between December 13th, the date of the shareholder vote, and the start of the new year. I'm hoping this board can share other possible reasons for doubling the shares. Yes yes... Apple and Google and Amgen and Bill Gates are forming a partnership to invest $1 Billion dollars in MNKD... that has to be the answer this time. Do we really have to start another thread to speculate about companies willing to step in and invest at orders of magnitude over what they could buy out the entire company at this point? I'm sure management has built some buffer into how many shares they think they will need to sell, but the bottom line is that it is very likely that significant dilution is going to occur. It seems you're merely wishing to hear about some scenario where someone pays way more than they would need to in order to acquire those shares. Who knows, maybe Kent immediately shorted the shares and just pocketed the discount. I'm sure if they hadn't announced any new share creation there'd be people here citing that as meaning there was a partnership about to happen. We KNOW NOTHING because management has chosen to share nothing other than throwing the dilemma of voting to double the shares into our lap. I guess you're the perfect shareholder for management if you blindly assume that this means something great is happening before Christmas. Let's all vote for it so Santa comes down our chimney. [yes, I'm upset this little 50% dilution was glossed over as if nothing] |
|
|
|
Post by sportsrancho on Nov 7, 2017 21:32:41 GMT -5
Akemp, You guys know a lot more about this stuff than I do. But along with your thoughts, I also was wondering if it was to have them just in case. The street kept bitching away that we didn’t have a long enough runway. Many even said the stock wouldn’t move until we did?
|
|
|
|
Post by joeypotsandpans on Nov 7, 2017 21:48:34 GMT -5
Keep in mind that one of the investors that recently bought at $6 was the Chairman of the Board. He obviously knows everything that's going on behind the scenes and the future implications of such. It's doubtful it's simply a large dilution as some suggest just to raise more funds. The Chairman would have never made this investment knowing this was in the immediate strategic plans. It's more likely there's something else in the works, possibly another party involved in some way. I wish we knew. I look forward to an announcement and explanation that might come between December 13th, the date of the shareholder vote, and the start of the new year. I'm hoping this board can share other possible reasons for doubling the shares. Yes yes... Apple and Google and Amgen and Bill Gates are forming a partnership to invest $1 Billion dollars in MNKD... that has to be the answer this time. Do we really have to start another thread to speculate about companies willing to step in and invest at orders of magnitude over what they could buy out the entire company at this point? I'm sure management has built some buffer into how many shares they think they will need to sell, but the bottom line is that it is very likely that significant dilution is going to occur. It seems you're merely wishing to hear about some scenario where someone pays way more than they would need to in order to acquire those shares. Who knows, maybe Kent immediately shorted the shares and just pocketed the discount. I'm sure if they hadn't announced any new share creation there'd be people here citing that as meaning there was a partnership about to happen. We KNOW NOTHING because management has chosen to share nothing other than throwing the dilemma of voting to double the shares into our lap. I guess you're the perfect shareholder for management if you blindly assume that this means something great is happening before Christmas. Let's all vote for it so Santa comes down our chimney. [yes, I'm upset this little 50% dilution was glossed over as if nothing]DBC, it remains to be seen if it just gets glossed over, if in fact price is truth and price reacts (not just short term) in stride then it would be telling there is most likely more to the story of just a capital raise for DTC purposes, servicing debt, etc.....Mike mentioned about the monthly interest carry like it was a thorn in his side and used the term optionality with respect to having the additional shares available...how about raising enough capital when advantageous (higher price levels and when appropriate) as opposed to what many felt that prior management was not on the ball with previously which would have alleviated the worst of times regarding needs for R/S etc. Wouldn't it be nice to retire most if not all debt while becoming more cash flow positive within a reasonable amount of time? Mike and Binder seem to want to accelerate the growth and seem confident they can and if it means raising more capital or there are other reasons I wouldn't get upset just yet, after all, no one imagined he would have raised the 57M on roughly 10M shares two mos. ago. Mike seems to adapt his colors well, just like a chameleon  |
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 7, 2017 21:57:02 GMT -5
Yes yes... Apple and Google and Amgen and Bill Gates are forming a partnership to invest $1 Billion dollars in MNKD... that has to be the answer this time. Do we really have to start another thread to speculate about companies willing to step in and invest at orders of magnitude over what they could buy out the entire company at this point? I'm sure management has built some buffer into how many shares they think they will need to sell, but the bottom line is that it is very likely that significant dilution is going to occur. It seems you're merely wishing to hear about some scenario where someone pays way more than they would need to in order to acquire those shares. Who knows, maybe Kent immediately shorted the shares and just pocketed the discount. I'm sure if they hadn't announced any new share creation there'd be people here citing that as meaning there was a partnership about to happen. We KNOW NOTHING because management has chosen to share nothing other than throwing the dilemma of voting to double the shares into our lap. I guess you're the perfect shareholder for management if you blindly assume that this means something great is happening before Christmas. Let's all vote for it so Santa comes down our chimney. [yes, I'm upset this little 50% dilution was glossed over as if nothing]DBC, it remains to be seen if it just gets glossed over, if in fact price is truth and price reacts (not just short term) in stride then it would be telling there is most likely more to the story of just a capital raise for DTC purposes, servicing debt, etc.....Mike mentioned about the monthly interest carry like it was a thorn in his side and used the term optionality with respect to having the additional shares available...how about raising enough capital when advantageous (higher price levels and when appropriate) as opposed to what many felt that prior management was not on the ball with previously which would have alleviated the worst of times regarding needs for R/S etc. Wouldn't it be nice to retire most if not all debt while becoming more cash flow positive within a reasonable amount of time? Mike and Binder seem to want to accelerate the growth and seem confident they can and if it means raising more capital or there are other reasons I wouldn't get upset just yet, after all, no one imagined he would have raised the 57M on roughly 10M shares two mos. ago. Mike seems to adapt his colors well, just like a chameleon I absolutely would have LOVED if they'd tapped the ATM when we were above $5. And you certainly miss my point about glossing over... i.e. management. It sucks to be left reading the market volatile swirling tea leaves for signs. I suspect that if the share price is strong you'll assume something great and if share price is weak I'd be willing to bet you'll blame it on shorts/manipulation and still wish to believe something great. So you tell me how the price represents truth. What was the truth that took us below a dollar... that cut the price by more than half after the run up? |
|
|
|
Post by joeypotsandpans on Nov 7, 2017 22:28:58 GMT -5
DBC, it remains to be seen if it just gets glossed over, if in fact price is truth and price reacts (not just short term) in stride then it would be telling there is most likely more to the story of just a capital raise for DTC purposes, servicing debt, etc.....Mike mentioned about the monthly interest carry like it was a thorn in his side and used the term optionality with respect to having the additional shares available...how about raising enough capital when advantageous (higher price levels and when appropriate) as opposed to what many felt that prior management was not on the ball with previously which would have alleviated the worst of times regarding needs for R/S etc. Wouldn't it be nice to retire most if not all debt while becoming more cash flow positive within a reasonable amount of time? Mike and Binder seem to want to accelerate the growth and seem confident they can and if it means raising more capital or there are other reasons I wouldn't get upset just yet, after all, no one imagined he would have raised the 57M on roughly 10M shares two mos. ago. Mike seems to adapt his colors well, just like a chameleon I absolutely would have LOVED if they'd tapped the ATM when we were above $5. And you certainly miss my point about glossing over... i.e. management. It sucks to be left reading the market volatile swirling tea leaves for signs. I suspect that if the share price is strong you'll assume something great and if share price is weak I'd be willing to bet you'll blame it on shorts/manipulation and still wish to believe something great. So you tell me how the price represents truth. What was the truth that took us below a dollar... that cut the price by more than half after the run up? DBC, this company was essentially left for dead and the price at the time was truth at under a buck...the prior management were in over their heads regarding the PBM's and a proper game plan to execute on with respect to the upcoming financial hurdles. For those of us that have run businesses or have been in management for years, you know leadership when you hear it and actions that speak volumes. You have to agree that it is night and day to listen to this management team compared to the past. As I stated in a prior post, I'm not sure how Mike ended up on our shores (maybe via KK? Matt? or divine intervention but I thank the lord not just as an investor but more importantly for those PWD (and potentially other diseases) that have an increased chance of experiencing the benefits of continued innovations via this great technology. Regarding the price coming back a half or more from the run up, nothing more than the pendulum over-swinging the opposite way prematurely and having a natural retracement from short term extreme overbought conditions....yes I still believe the technicals do come into play and interestingly enough why we have been sitting right on the 50d sma for a few days awaiting this fundamental event (CC) |
|
|
|
Post by madog365 on Nov 7, 2017 22:49:50 GMT -5
Here is the text direct from today's filing, with bolded areas to answer your question: The additional common stock to be authorized by adoption of the amendment would have rights identical to the currently outstanding common stock of the Company. Although at present the Board of Directors has not approved any plans or proposals to issue any of the additional shares of our common stock that would become authorized for issuance if this proposal is approved, the Board of Directors desires to have the shares available to provide
additional flexibility to use our common stock for financing and business purposes in the future. Adoption of the proposed amendment and issuance of the common stock would not affect the rights of the holders of currently outstanding common stock of the Company, except for, with respect to the issuance of additional shares, effects incidental to increasing the number of shares of our common stock outstanding, such as dilution of the earnings per share, if any, and voting rights of current holders of our common stock. If the amendment is adopted, it will become effective upon filing of a Certificate of Amendment of the Company’s Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation with the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware. Unless further stockholder approval is required for a proposed issuance of additional shares by the rules of The Nasdaq Stock Market or other applicable laws or regulations, the additional shares may be used for various purposes without further stockholder approval. These purposes may include:
raising capital; providing equity incentives to employees, officers and directors; establishing strategic relationships with other companies; expanding
business or product lines through the acquisition of other businesses or products; and other purposes.
The additional shares of common stock that would become available for issuance if the proposal is adopted could also be used by the Company to
oppose a hostile takeover attempt or to delay or prevent changes in control or management of the Company. For example, without further stockholder
approval, the Board could strategically sell shares of common stock in a private transaction to purchasers who would oppose a takeover or favor the current
Board. Although this proposal to increase the authorized common stock has been prompted by business and financial considerations and not by the threat of
any hostile takeover attempt (nor is the Board currently aware of any such attempts directed at the Company), stockholders should be aware that approval of the proposal could facilitate future efforts by the Company to deter or prevent changes in control of the Company, including transactions in which the stockholders might otherwise receive a premium for their shares over then current market prices. --- As far as to why this amount, you can read my speculation here; mnkd.proboards.com/post/129382 |
|
|
|
Post by kc on Nov 7, 2017 22:49:57 GMT -5
Basically I believe it’s to sell more treasury stock like they did with the $61 million offering. It will give the company the ability to sell 25 to 50% of the company to friendly party will be investors in the future of MannKind. This is the way the MannKind Can ensure equity to stay in business and grow the business worldwide.
There must be a plan and a big investor for international expansion.
|
|
Tinkerbell
Researcher
Watcher of the Skies
Posts: 143
|
Post by Tinkerbell on Nov 7, 2017 23:13:25 GMT -5
Keep in mind that one of the investors that recently bought at $6 was the Chairman of the Board. He obviously knows everything that's going on behind the scenes and the future implications of such. It's doubtful it's simply a large dilution as some suggest just to raise more funds. The Chairman would have never made this investment knowing this was in the immediate strategic plans. It's more likely there's something else in the works, possibly another party involved in some way. I wish we knew. I look forward to an announcement and explanation that might come between December 13th, the date of the shareholder vote, and the start of the new year. I'm hoping this board can share other possible reasons for doubling the shares. Yes yes... Apple and Google and Amgen and Bill Gates are forming a partnership to invest $1 Billion dollars in MNKD... that has to be the answer this time. Do we really have to start another thread to speculate about companies willing to step in and invest at orders of magnitude over what they could buy out the entire company at this point? I'm sure management has built some buffer into how many shares they think they will need to sell, but the bottom line is that it is very likely that significant dilution is going to occur. It seems you're merely wishing to hear about some scenario where someone pays way more than they would need to in order to acquire those shares. Who knows, maybe Kent immediately shorted the shares and just pocketed the discount. I'm sure if they hadn't announced any new share creation there'd be people here citing that as meaning there was a partnership about to happen. We KNOW NOTHING because management has chosen to share nothing other than throwing the dilemma of voting to double the shares into our lap. I guess you're the perfect shareholder for management if you blindly assume that this means something great is happening before Christmas. Let's all vote for it so Santa comes down our chimney. [yes, I'm upset this little 50% dilution was glossed over as if nothing]I get that you're upset. Actually I was upset in June of this year and decided I would write a second letter addressed to the Board, CEO and Claude Mann. I sent the first in February 2016 to Matt, the Board and Claude which resulted in a case study at Harvard Business School. In June, I could not see anyway where a significant raise would not be required and especially as there were a minimum of 3 full years of the intial 5 year launch to get through. I trusted that Mike could turn the company around but, without a significant amount of money, he was not going to be able to do it. No way, no how. With that said, I did not mince my words about who deserved to be FIRST in line to purchase any new offering. I said, that as a long term investor that I want the offering of shares to be made to me first - and through a rights offering. Yes. I was very clear in my wording about this. I said I wanted the right to purchase 2 shares at a discount for every share I owned because it was MY money (and every other long term investor's money) that had paid for Afrezza through approval. Secondly, I said that if there was any notion of a buy out, that I would expect to own no less than 1 share of the purchasing company for every 2 shares I'd have to relinquish. End of Quote. Here is how I ended my letter: "My long-term investment in MannKind provided support for the company to arrive to this point in time and in return, you must offer new shares to me first OR let any potential buyer of the company know what I expect in terms of a share swap especially if I am to provide them with Afrezza and Technosphere not only gift-wrapped, but adorned with shiny purple ribbons and bows. For the record, have I made myself abundantly clear? I believe I have." So then, what is unclear about the fact that MannKind needs to offer the number of shares Mike presented at the quarterly? He MUST raise the money, pay off the debt owed in January and clear the slate for the next two years (24 months). There is no other way for him to succeed for MannKind or for us as shareholders. However, if they need to raise money then ask to be first in line to purchase more at a discount and at a ratio of 2:1. At least then, you'll share more equitably in any dilution instead of just being exposed to it. You may decide you don't want to purchase more shares and that's entirely up to you but the point is, ask and don't sit around feeling like you can't do something when you can. |
|
|
|
Post by roseylv on Nov 7, 2017 23:52:21 GMT -5
Wait wait wait
I thought Kent Kresa was awarded those shares @ $6 for his work as chairman?
|
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 8, 2017 0:30:41 GMT -5
I get that you're upset. Actually I was upset in June of this year and decided I would write a second letter addressed to the Board, CEO and Claude Mann. I sent the first in February 2016 to Matt, the Board and Claude which resulted in a case study at Harvard Business School. In June, I could not see anyway where a significant raise would not be required and especially as there were a minimum of 3 full years of the intial 5 year launch to get through. I trusted that Mike could turn the company around but, without a significant amount of money, he was not going to be able to do it. No way, no how. With that said, I did not mince my words about who deserved to be FIRST in line to purchase any new offering. I said, that as a long term investor that I want the offering of shares to be made to me first - and through a rights offering. Yes. I was very clear in my wording about this. I said I wanted the right to purchase 2 shares at a discount for every share I owned because it was MY money (and every other long term investor's money) that had paid for Afrezza through approval. Secondly, I said that if there was any notion of a buy out, that I would expect to own no less than 1 share of the purchasing company for every 2 shares I'd have to relinquish. End of Quote. Here is how I ended my letter: "My long-term investment in MannKind provided support for the company to arrive to this point in time and in return, you must offer new shares to me first OR let any potential buyer of the company know what I expect in terms of a share swap especially if I am to provide them with Afrezza and Technosphere not only gift-wrapped, but adorned with shiny purple ribbons and bows. For the record, have I made myself abundantly clear? I believe I have." So then, what is unclear about the fact that MannKind needs to offer the number of shares Mike presented at the quarterly? He MUST raise the money, pay off the debt owed in January and clear the slate for the next two years (24 months). There is no other way for him to succeed for MannKind or for us as shareholders. However, if they need to raise money then ask to be first in line to purchase more at a discount and at a ratio of 2:1. At least then, you'll share more equitably in any dilution instead of just being exposed to it. You may decide you don't want to purchase more shares and that's entirely up to you but the point is, ask and don't sit around feeling like you can't do something when you can.
Well, the only meaningful thing I could do would be to vote against it and try to convince others to. Once they are authorized you have lost any control over the shares. Letters will only make you feel as if you are doing something. I'm not yet sure how I will vote. I'm just upset that this is dumped on us and then we run out of time on conference call with this having been glossed over and with people still queued up with questions, after wasting time rehashing lots of known stuff and trivial data. I assume that they have enough friendly shareholders already on board with this and don't need my vote, or it sure seems they would have done this filing and conference call differently if they were wanting to bring retail investors on board. |
|
|
|
Post by me on Nov 8, 2017 9:48:38 GMT -5
[yes, I'm upset this little 50% dilution was glossed over as if nothing] Are you really assuming that approval of the authorization of an additional 140 million shares means that 100% of those newly authorized shares will be flipped in a raise?! |
|
Tinkerbell
Researcher
Watcher of the Skies
Posts: 143
|
Post by Tinkerbell on Nov 8, 2017 10:40:33 GMT -5
[yes, I'm upset this little 50% dilution was glossed over as if nothing] Are you really assuming that approval of the authorization of an additional 140 million shares means that 100% of those newly authorized shares will be flipped in a raise?!Actually, I hope at a minimum 100M will be flipped in a raise. Yes I do. At a 23M burn per quarter and to get through years 3 and 4 of this launch, they will need 200M. Why have the agita associated with having to ask shareholders every 3-6 months to authorize more shares? This is pure distraction and one which shorts will take advantage of each and everytime. If the management team is not living up to expectations, get rid of them and hire new and make it sooner rather than later. That's all. Hard launch has commenced and to take advantage of it, they need more people in the field, more approvals around the world. There is no way they can focus on this if every three months they are faced with the spectre of what? Having to lay off good people or getting approval for another raise? Geesh. I just as soon get on with it. If they don't use all of the monies raised how about a forward split where I receive 5 shares for every 1 owned. You know? There's got to be a better way to ensure Afrezza's success. Finally, in my view, if you are going to feast on a pig, you don't start by cutting off one leg at a time, cook it and then cut of another do you? Slaughter it and cook it - ONCE. Sorry but that's how I think this should be done. |
|
|
|
Post by joeypotsandpans on Nov 8, 2017 10:50:22 GMT -5
Are you really assuming that approval of the authorization of an additional 140 million shares means that 100% of those newly authorized shares will be flipped in a raise?!Actually, I hope at a minimum 100M will be flipped in a raise. Yes I do. At a 23M burn per quarter and to get through years 3 and 4 of this launch, they will need 200M. Why have the agita associated with having to ask shareholders every 3-6 months to authorize more shares? This is pure distraction and one which shorts will take advantage of each and everytime. If the management team is not living up to expectations, get rid of them and hire new and make it sooner rather than later. That's all. Hard launch has commenced and to take advantage of it, they need more people in the field, more approvals around the world. There is no way they can focus on this if every three months they are faced with the spectre of what? Having to lay off good people or getting approval for another raise? Geesh. I just as soon get on with it. If they don't use all of the monies raised how about a forward split where I receive 5 shares for every 1 owned. You know? There's got to be a better way to ensure Afrezza's success. Finally, in my view, if you are going to feast on a pig, you don't start by cutting off one leg at a time, cook it and then cut of another do you? Slaughter it and cook it - ONCE. Sorry but that's how I think this should be done. Exactly!! In other words "quit pussy footing around!!!" you can never make anyone happy, they either say why didn't they do a bigger raise when they had the opportunity so we would not be in this position...authorize the shares and when opportunity presents for strategically raising the capital GO FOR IT!! Volume is nothing on today's forced selloff and there is still no supply available to be borrowed at the largest DTC...this was very much expected this morning, it too shall pass IMO |
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 8, 2017 11:18:43 GMT -5
[yes, I'm upset this little 50% dilution was glossed over as if nothing] Are you really assuming that approval of the authorization of an additional 140 million shares means that 100% of those newly authorized shares will be flipped in a raise?! I, and most others, will assume that they wouldn't have picked that number unless they thought they might need that many, and sadly it is probably a self fulfilling prophecy with the mere spectra of 50% dilution driving the share price down and then requiring them to actually sell many more shares to raise the same amount of money. They should have gone for much less issued at this time and proved that all these things that supposedly will enable the turn around are actually going to be successful... label change, insurance improvement, TV advertising, etc. A company with successful track record can easily go to shareholders and request lots of new shares because wall street will trust them. MNKD, sadly, has a track record of quite the opposite... investment decimating dilution. Granted some here have blind faith and wouldn't think issuing a billion more shares bad, but that isn't the way most are going to look at this in light of MNKD's past and in light of the current ongoing operating losses. So how many of these authorized shares are you assuming will end up being issued? And why do you suppose they would have issued 140M, which is bringing down the stock, if your assumption is significantly less than 140M? Is management not bright? |
|
