|
Post by matt on Nov 27, 2017 11:45:56 GMT -5
It possible with the Mann Group selling out over 13M shares (http://investors.mannkindcorp.com/ownership-profile.cfm) they may have given shorts even more opportunity to bring the SP down. That could explain the sharp drop from the $6 range. Mann group may be continuing to sell out just as they did with $EYES - we won't know until they have to file again. The proxy statement contains ownership by the Mann entities as of the proxy date. While the company is primarily responsible only to report amounts that have been reported on Form 13, most companies also cross-check the figures with their transfer agent. Assuming the Mann entities hold shares in registered form and not street name, the entities still held title to those shares as of November 17. However, like any holder the Mann entities could loan shares, buy puts, or engage in other actions that would tend to project their value at the risk of reducing the market price, none of which shows up in any SEC disclosure, now or later.
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Nov 27, 2017 12:47:35 GMT -5
It possible with the Mann Group selling out over 13M shares (http://investors.mannkindcorp.com/ownership-profile.cfm) they may have given shorts even more opportunity to bring the SP down. That could explain the sharp drop from the $6 range. Mann group may be continuing to sell out just as they did with $EYES - we won't know until they have to file again. I suspect that sale came from back in late June when the Mann Group was raising the money for the loan. The price was ranging around the $1.50 mark for most of that month and there was at least one high volume day. They probably had to sell a lot of their holding to make the loan. I think the $6 spike was manipulation and that was why it collapsed - the need for a high price went away so there was no need to spend money keeping the price inflated. I got caught by a similar spike a couple of years back where I thought the price was real and even added to my Calls at the top of the spike, so this time I sold my Calls into the rising price and did very nicely.
|
|
|
Post by slugworth008 on Nov 27, 2017 22:00:19 GMT -5
It possible with the Mann Group selling out over 13M shares (http://investors.mannkindcorp.com/ownership-profile.cfm) they may have given shorts even more opportunity to bring the SP down. That could explain the sharp drop from the $6 range. Mann group may be continuing to sell out just as they did with $EYES - we won't know until they have to file again. Out with the MANN Group - In with a partner?? Who knows - Right?
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Nov 28, 2017 2:00:36 GMT -5
It possible with the Mann Group selling out over 13M shares (http://investors.mannkindcorp.com/ownership-profile.cfm) they may have given shorts even more opportunity to bring the SP down. That could explain the sharp drop from the $6 range. Mann group may be continuing to sell out just as they did with $EYES - we won't know until they have to file again. I suspect that sale came from back in late June when the Mann Group was raising the money for the loan. The price was ranging around the $1.50 mark for most of that month and there was at least one high volume day. They probably had to sell a lot of their holding to make the loan. I think the $6 spike was manipulation and that was why it collapsed - the need for a high price went away so there was no need to spend money keeping the price inflated. I got caught by a similar spike a couple of years back where I thought the price was real and even added to my Calls at the top of the spike, so this time I sold my Calls into the rising price and did very nicely. Manipulation? In US markets? C'mon, agedhippie, that just doesn't happen here. We're a government of laws!
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Nov 28, 2017 11:08:14 GMT -5
It possible with the Mann Group selling out over 13M shares (http://investors.mannkindcorp.com/ownership-profile.cfm) they may have given shorts even more opportunity to bring the SP down. That could explain the sharp drop from the $6 range. Mann group may be continuing to sell out just as they did with $EYES - we won't know until they have to file again. Out with the MANN Group - In with a partner?? Who knows - Right? Unlikely as a result of that sale or they would have had to file a 13D/G by now because they would be over the limit.
|
|
|
Post by akemp3000 on Nov 28, 2017 13:20:49 GMT -5
No longer trending down and at least one analyst, Kovacocy is telling shorts to cover now before the vote on Dec 13.
|
|
|
Post by LosingMyBullishness on Nov 28, 2017 13:41:08 GMT -5
I'm getting the sense that DBC is not in favor of the authorization of this many shares, but I'm still not really sure, cuz it says so much of what he thinks of Mike that how could he still be invested in MNKD? Apparently, he and stinkypete think somewhat alike - bedfellows? Not exactly alike, mind you, but enough alike that I worry about DBC, being akin to stinkypete, and I really have enough to worry about already. DBC, if Mike does as you fear, well, okay, but there are so many other ways he can sink the share price, that he does not need this in his arsenal. And if you're concerned that he just wants to raise money to make sure he has a good paying job for as long as possible, well, he could raise money privately, or sell the company for a sweetheart price in exchange for some financial assurances, etc. I don't believe in the false choice that shareholders must either sell their shares or agree with anything and everything management asks for. If that were good corporate governance, states and SEC would simply allow BoD to have full control of companies without any need for shareholder approval. I urge other shareholders to use their own judgement and exercise the control they have over corporate actions through the power of their vote. I'll leave you guessing which way I plan to vote I don't think I've shared a bed with anyone named stinkypete recently. It is the timing, that I find annoying. I agree that MNKD needs a stockpile of authorized shares to be flexible. It would be fine with me if they do this when they have delivered based on earnings etc. Right now MNKD has little to show in regard to key metrics of shareholders. The FDA Label change is only a tool with the potential to create value. That's all. Authorizing shares is giving management a pass and a tool to survive without performing. I do not like that.
|
|
|
Post by boca1girl on Nov 28, 2017 13:45:57 GMT -5
I don't believe in the false choice that shareholders must either sell their shares or agree with anything and everything management asks for. If that were good corporate governance, states and SEC would simply allow BoD to have full control of companies without any need for shareholder approval. I urge other shareholders to use their own judgement and exercise the control they have over corporate actions through the power of their vote. I'll leave you guessing which way I plan to vote I don't think I've shared a bed with anyone named stinkypete recently. It is the timing, that I find annoying. I agree that MNKD needs some a stockpile of shares authorized to be flexible. It would be fine if they do this when they have delivered based on earnings etc. Right now MNKD has not delivered based on a key metric of shareholders. The FDA Label change is not a tool with the potential to create value. That's all. Authorizing shares now is giving management a pass and a tool to survive without performing. I do not like that. I somewhat agree. I wish they would have waited until 1Q18, after we see the sales from 4Q, but they may need the shares for some strategic partnering before then, who knows.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 28, 2017 14:02:11 GMT -5
It is the timing, that I find annoying. I agree that MNKD needs some a stockpile of shares authorized to be flexible. It would be fine if they do this when they have delivered based on earnings etc. Right now MNKD has not delivered based on a key metric of shareholders. The FDA Label change is not a tool with the potential to create value. That's all. Authorizing shares now is giving management a pass and a tool to survive without performing. I do not like that. I somewhat agree. I wish they would have waited until 1Q18, after we see the sales from 4Q, but they may need the shares for some strategic partnering before then, who knows. I know some like to always believe there is a great "deal" lurking in the background. Setting aside the likelihood of that, which is purely an emotional/philosophical exercise... my opinion is that if some shares are needed now, it should not need to be 140M of them. I don't think I'd like any "partnering" if it involves giving anywhere near half the company to the "partner".
|
|
|
Post by cretin11 on Nov 28, 2017 14:08:21 GMT -5
No longer trending down and at least one analyst, Kovacocy is telling shorts to cover now before the vote on Dec 13. Can you share a link? Is this analyst followed heavily?
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 28, 2017 14:23:19 GMT -5
No longer trending down and at least one analyst, Kovacocy is telling shorts to cover now before the vote on Dec 13. I don't think I'd take one day as having broken a trend. Of course Kovacocy is telling shorts to cover. He has predicted $10 share price by end of year. I think this share authorization is helping shorts not hurting them, and that the generally assumed "yes" vote on this is already being reflected in the share price weakness. That said, I think management has set themselves up with a bit of a lose-lose scenario as MNKD detractors will beat up on MNKD either way... i.e. "management thinks they need to dilute by 50% before reaching profitability and based on history they probably will" if yes vote and "look, shareholders don't have confidence in management" if no vote. So I don't anticipate share price strength in either case. It will now take some real good news to get us back on strong share price appreciation path, IMO.
|
|
|
Post by porkini on Nov 28, 2017 15:14:32 GMT -5
No longer trending down and at least one analyst, Kovacocy is telling shorts to cover now before the vote on Dec 13. I don't think I'd take one day as having broken a trend.Of course Kovacocy is telling shorts to cover. He has predicted $10 share price by end of year. I think this share authorization is helping shorts not hurting them, and that the generally assumed "yes" vote on this is already being reflected in the share price weakness. That said, I think management has set themselves up with a bit of a lose-lose scenario as MNKD detractors will beat up on MNKD either way... i.e. "management thinks they need to dilute by 50% before reaching profitability and based on history they probably will" if yes vote and "look, shareholders don't have confidence in management" if no vote. So I don't anticipate share price strength in either case. It will now take some real good news to get us back on strong share price appreciation path, IMO. How about one week? No? Didn't think so either. However, OOG's new comparison of competing scripts is interesting compared to prior week ( mnkd.proboards.com/post/131442/thread). Maybe there is a downtrend, somewhere...?
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 28, 2017 16:32:21 GMT -5
I don't think I'd take one day as having broken a trend.Of course Kovacocy is telling shorts to cover. He has predicted $10 share price by end of year. I think this share authorization is helping shorts not hurting them, and that the generally assumed "yes" vote on this is already being reflected in the share price weakness. That said, I think management has set themselves up with a bit of a lose-lose scenario as MNKD detractors will beat up on MNKD either way... i.e. "management thinks they need to dilute by 50% before reaching profitability and based on history they probably will" if yes vote and "look, shareholders don't have confidence in management" if no vote. So I don't anticipate share price strength in either case. It will now take some real good news to get us back on strong share price appreciation path, IMO. How about one week? No? Didn't think so either. However, OOG's new comparison of competing scripts is interesting compared to prior week ( mnkd.proboards.com/post/131442/thread). Maybe there is a downtrend, somewhere...? Well, I don't see any up "trend" over a one week period... looks like a lot of sound and furry amounting to nothing for a month now. Though taken over 6 months we're up... so I'll chalk that up as a win for management.
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Nov 28, 2017 16:52:53 GMT -5
DBC, nice typo! "furry"
Nonetheless, excellent use of the famous phrase, and you know what Will said in the same quote - "tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow" and that does sound a lot like MNKD, so kudos to you!
|
|
|
Post by porkini on Nov 28, 2017 17:20:31 GMT -5
How about one week? No? Didn't think so either. However, OOG's new comparison of competing scripts is interesting compared to prior week ( mnkd.proboards.com/post/131442/thread). Maybe there is a downtrend, somewhere...? Well, I don't see any up "trend" over a one week period... looks like a lot of sound and furry amounting to nothing for a month now. Though taken over 6 months we're up... so I'll chalk that up as a win for management. Suppose if you were to look at the competing scripts and saw less this week than past week(s)? Probably doesn't mean anything.
|
|