Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 18, 2017 4:15:37 GMT -5
"Perhaps someone that interacts with Michael Kovoacy can point him to this piece. Readers and investors are not well served when analysts are in a banter such as this. With this, I want to set some of the record straight and hopefully get to a point where readers are better served. Michael Kovacocy and I look at this company in different ways. That is fine. It is healthy. It gives readers various perspectives." seekingalpha.com/instablog/175233-spencer-osborne/5087294-mannkind-michael-kovacocy-spencer-osborne |
|
|
|
Post by sportsrancho on Dec 18, 2017 6:54:26 GMT -5
"Perhaps someone that interacts with Michael Kovoacy can point him to this piece. Readers and investors are not well served when analysts are in a banter such as this. With this, I want to set some of the record straight and hopefully get to a point where readers are better served. Michael Kovacocy and I look at this company in different ways. That is fine. It is healthy. It gives readers various perspectives." seekingalpha.com/instablog/175233-spencer-osborne/5087294-mannkind-michael-kovacocy-spencer-osborne Michael K has strong opinions, as he does about all his stocks. Spencer is very emotionally involved, enough so that he blocks myself, Nate, and many other people that give info about how Afrezza works. That’s my take on it:-) |
|
|
|
Post by compound26 on Dec 18, 2017 9:57:49 GMT -5
"Perhaps someone that interacts with Michael Kovoacy can point him to this piece. Readers and investors are not well served when analysts are in a banter such as this. With this, I want to set some of the record straight and hopefully get to a point where readers are better served. Michael Kovacocy and I look at this company in different ways. That is fine. It is healthy. It gives readers various perspectives." seekingalpha.com/instablog/175233-spencer-osborne/5087294-mannkind-michael-kovacocy-spencer-osborne Michael K has strong opinions, as he does about all his stocks. Spencer is very emotionally involved, enough so that he blocks myself, Nate, and many other people that give info about how Afrezza works. That’s my take on it:-) Yes, S.O. is very opinionated. He has many problems. My issues with S.O. are: 1. He basically only sees the bearish side of the Mannkind story (he is very biased to the short side, yet he acts like he is always balanced);
2. His timing on trading often times is terrible, yet he acts like he knows everything and does not admit any mistakes in his predictions.
Here is what he wrote on his article published on SA on April 25, 2017, when Mannkind shares were trading at $0.9: “ I have stated this many times. MannKind is losing leverage every day. That means that long term shareholders are losing leverage every day. If you find yourself stretching any situation to find a positive light, you will likely be left in the dark.” seekingalpha.com/article/4065089-mannkind-may-go-bankruptWe all know what happened next: Mike took over as the new CEOin May, we did a label update in Sept. and raised money at $6 in October. |
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Dec 18, 2017 10:14:02 GMT -5
Michael K has strong opinions, as he does about all his stocks. Spencer is very emotionally involved, enough so that he blocks myself, Nate, and many other people that give info about how Afrezza works. That’s my take on it:-) Yes, S.O. is very opinionated. He has many problems. My issues with S.O. are: 1. He basically only sees the bearish side of the Mannkind story (he is very biased to the short side, yet he acts like he is always balanced);
2. His timing on trading often times is terrible, yet acts like he knows everything and does not admit any mistakes in his predictions.
Here is what he wrote on his article published on SA on April 25, 2017, when Mannkind shares were trading at $0.9: “ I have stated this many times. MannKind is losing leverage every day. That means that long term shareholders are losing leverage every day. If you find yourself stretching any situation to find a positive light, you will likely be left in the dark.” seekingalpha.com/article/4065089-mannkind-may-go-bankruptWe all know what happened next: Mike take over in May, we did a label update in Sept. and raised money at $6 in October. reminds me of Matt. |
|
|
|
Post by brotherm1 on Dec 18, 2017 10:38:42 GMT -5
S.O. “Seeking Alpha payment terms are posted right on the site. It is quite modest. I write because I like to write. An average per article is between $50 and $65 bucks. Take out taxes, and it is even more modest than that.”
M.K. “And are you just making money from Seeking Alpha, or from other sources?"
S.O. “With regard to what I write about equities, I only make money from Seeking Alpha. I maker a living doing business unrelated to equities. It is my hope that you were not trying to insinuate that what I write makes any money outside of what Seeking Alpha pays. To be crystal clear, the only income from what I write is from Seeking Alpha.”
So S.O. only makes $50-$65 for his articles and does not profit from the articles or from MNKD stock in any other way?
|
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Dec 18, 2017 12:04:10 GMT -5
Michael K and SO are two sides of the same coin (bitcoin?). Both love to hear themselves talk. And both full of crap.
|
|
|
|
Post by thekindaguyiyam on Dec 18, 2017 12:12:45 GMT -5
S.O. “Seeking Alpha payment terms are posted right on the site. It is quite modest. I write because I like to write. An average per article is between $50 and $65 bucks. Take out taxes, and it is even more modest than that.” M.K. “And are you just making money from Seeking Alpha, or from other sources?" S.O. “With regard to what I write about equities, I only make money from Seeking Alpha. I maker a living doing business unrelated to equities. It is my hope that you were not trying to insinuate that what I write makes any money outside of what Seeking Alpha pays. To be crystal clear, the only income from what I write is from Seeking Alpha.” So S.O. only makes $50-$65 for his articles and does not profit from the articles or from MNKD stock in any other way? my conspiracy theory answer is yes they are getting money from big pharma who use short interest as one of their attack strategies to oppress MNKD on a very regular basis... sometimes nearly every day. If this is such an insignificant company and drug why is it hit multiple times weekly. |
|
|
|
Post by alethea on Dec 18, 2017 12:56:35 GMT -5
S.O. “Seeking Alpha payment terms are posted right on the site. It is quite modest. I write because I like to write. An average per article is between $50 and $65 bucks. Take out taxes, and it is even more modest than that.” M.K. “And are you just making money from Seeking Alpha, or from other sources?" S.O. “With regard to what I write about equities, I only make money from Seeking Alpha. I maker a living doing business unrelated to equities. It is my hope that you were not trying to insinuate that what I write makes any money outside of what Seeking Alpha pays. To be crystal clear, the only income from what I write is from Seeking Alpha.” So S.O. only makes $50-$65 for his articles and does not profit from the articles or from MNKD stock in any other way? my conspiracy theory answer is yes they are getting money from big pharma who use short interest as one of their attack strategies to oppress MNKD on a very regular basis... sometimes nearly every day. If this is such an insignificant company and drug why is it hit multiple times weekly.Exactly. Garbage di Spens Or had 4 articles in 4 days last week. He's a puke with ulterior motives dispensing FUD on a continuous basis and he is definitely being paid - much more than his $50 per article that he says he does for the enjoyment. He is a font of FUD - much like a few posters we have seen on this Board. |
|
|
|
Post by joeypotsandpans on Dec 18, 2017 13:58:14 GMT -5
I think it is plain as day, one only has to ask themselves what purpose does it serve to write 5 articles on one company in 7 days from someone that states they have no financial interest? Then to top it off, he states "Michael Kovacocy and I look at this company in different ways. That is fine. It is healthy. It gives readers various perspectives." Yet if you call him out with facts that are not in line with his opinion he gets your views and statements countering his deleted like a child that cries to their mother, he cries to the SA editors. Again, it is blatantly obvious that he and his pilot fish (pilot fish are the little fish that host off of the shark and swim in and around it's mouth and teeth eating the bacteria) are there for more than just "a writing hobby". He went so far as to state I was stalking and black mailing him LOLOL!!! because I was questioning his objectivity while he holds a long position in a competing pharma. IMO he is out of control at this point....5 articles in 7 days from him and now the laughable one from LFD smacks of desperation IMO. Perspective, the selloff today is on volume of what 1/20th the amt. when we had the big run up days, think about that for a minute  |
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Dec 18, 2017 14:05:20 GMT -5
Joey, I can only imagine the conversation you and Spiro must have had. But I know there was more than koolaid being imbibed. |
|
|
|
Post by sportsrancho on Dec 18, 2017 14:07:35 GMT -5
There is a huge difference between Michael K., Nate, and Spencer! Michael K and Nate make their living in the market. Spencer is just a paid SA author and makes his living doing something else. ( The big-time shorts and the little time shorts follow him. Otherwise Michael K wouldn’t even acknowledge him.)
Nate and Michael have seen this play out hundreds of times before in the biotech industry. They are in a better position to know.
Someone did get Spencer to say that the stock could go down to $2 or spike to $5:-)
|
|
|
|
Post by akemp3000 on Dec 18, 2017 14:12:12 GMT -5
I think it is plain as day, one only has to ask themselves what purpose does it serve to write 5 articles on one company in 7 days from someone that states they have no financial interest? Then to top it off, he states "Michael Kovacocy and I look at this company in different ways. That is fine. It is healthy. It gives readers various perspectives." Yet if you call him out with facts that are not in line with his opinion he gets your views and statements countering his deleted like a child that cries to their mother, he cries to the SA editors. Again, it is blatantly obvious that he and his pilot fish (pilot fish are the little fish that host off of the shark and swim in and around it's mouth and teeth eating the bacteria) are there for more than just "a writing hobby". He went so far as to state I was stalking and black mailing him LOLOL!!! because I was questioning his objectivity while he holds a long position in a competing pharma. IMO he is out of control at this point....5 articles in 7 days from him and now the laughable one from LFD smacks of desperation IMO. Perspective, the selloff today is on volume of what 1/20th the amt. when we had the big run up days, think about that for a minute Yes. The timing of the flurry of SO articles and comments along with the LFD hit piece that only looks backward is a reminder of the phrase, "Methinks thou does protest too much". This might just be the end-of-the-year, grand finale attempted take down only to be followed by the expected big rise in scripts and some good partnership and international announcements. May the best team win! |
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Dec 18, 2017 14:24:23 GMT -5
There is a huge difference between Michael K., Nate, and Spencer! Michael K and Nate make their living in the market. Spencer is just a paid SA author and makes his living doing something else. ( The big-time shorts and the little time shorts follow him. Otherwise Michael K wouldn’t even acknowledge him.) Nate and Michael have seen this play out hundreds of times before in the biotech industry. They are in a better position to know. Someone did get Spencer to say that the stock could go down to $2 or spike to $5:-) Sports, you know the regard in which I hold you and the respect I have for all the hard work and time you put in for the benefit of all longs and for PWD. But, as between MK's call for $10 by end of the year and SO call of $2, which is more likely to come true? I will admit to being in a giant haze of disgust with the share price over the last two trading days. |
|
|
|
Post by joeypotsandpans on Dec 18, 2017 14:29:35 GMT -5
I think it is plain as day, one only has to ask themselves what purpose does it serve to write 5 articles on one company in 7 days from someone that states they have no financial interest? Then to top it off, he states "Michael Kovacocy and I look at this company in different ways. That is fine. It is healthy. It gives readers various perspectives." Yet if you call him out with facts that are not in line with his opinion he gets your views and statements countering his deleted like a child that cries to their mother, he cries to the SA editors. Again, it is blatantly obvious that he and his pilot fish (pilot fish are the little fish that host off of the shark and swim in and around it's mouth and teeth eating the bacteria) are there for more than just "a writing hobby". He went so far as to state I was stalking and black mailing him LOLOL!!! because I was questioning his objectivity while he holds a long position in a competing pharma. IMO he is out of control at this point....5 articles in 7 days from him and now the laughable one from LFD smacks of desperation IMO. Perspective, the selloff today is on volume of what 1/20th the amt. when we had the big run up days, think about that for a minute Yes. The timing of the flurry of SO articles and comments along with the LFD hit piece that only looks backward is a reminder of the phrase, "Methinks thou does protest too much". This might just be the end-of-the-year, grand finale attempted take down only to be followed by the expected big rise in scripts and some good partnership and international announcements. May the best team win! Yes akemp, it "wreaks" of desperation with a vengeance!! Perhaps they feel they have been wronged by MC and his stepping in and executing, especially the equity raise in October, seems like there is an unhappy contingent along with that record short interest that was hanging out there at the end of November, yeah just a coincidence you see 5 count them 5 articles in one week, deletions of truthful posts, etc. wreak rēk/Submit verb 3rd person present: wreaks cause (a large amount of damage or harm). "torrential rainstorms wreaked havoc yesterday" synonyms: inflict, bestow, mete out, administer, deliver, impose, exact, create, cause, result in, effect, engender, bring about, perpetrate, unleash, let loose, vent; formaleffectuate "the damage this storm has wreaked is inestimable" inflict (vengeance). "he was determined to wreak his revenge on the girl who had rejected him" archaic avenge (someone who has been wronged). "grant me some knight to wreak me for my son" |
|
|
|
Post by joeypotsandpans on Dec 18, 2017 14:38:20 GMT -5
There is a huge difference between Michael K., Nate, and Spencer! Michael K and Nate make their living in the market. Spencer is just a paid SA author and makes his living doing something else. ( The big-time shorts and the little time shorts follow him. Otherwise Michael K wouldn’t even acknowledge him.) Nate and Michael have seen this play out hundreds of times before in the biotech industry. They are in a better position to know. Someone did get Spencer to say that the stock could go down to $2 or spike to $5:-) Sports, you know the regard in which I hold you and the respect I have for all the hard work and time you put in for the benefit of all longs and for PWD. But, as between MK's call for $10 by end of the year and SO call of $2, which is more likely to come true? I will admit to being in a giant haze of disgust with the share price over the last two trading days. I was not in disgust when I purchased shares in Aug. at $1.19 nor will I be now, the first lot was very profitable, the second one I expect to as well....disgust to some, opportunity to others it's all in which perspective you look at it. If Kovacocy's timing is off by say 30 days does it really matter (other than those holding 1/15 options of course which should understand the risk of investing in options)? Personally, I would be thrilled with a retracement back to the Oct. highs as a first step towards his $10 target, think how disgusted you would feel buying here and having that retracement happen...again we will hear the "should of bought back then" statements and I will remind those again if and when the time comes. All in perspective my friend ....kind of reminds me of kicking myself not taking the Panthers yesterday when Rogers came back for his first game...in hindsight it was a no brainer...I'm sure an ole good buddy from Chicago had them though |
|
