Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2018 10:02:28 GMT -5
The requirement is back to $25 million. I expect to read how the $10 million debt payment is made and a relaxing of the $25 million covenant again by week's end.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2018 14:05:17 GMT -5
A quick summary of debt, interest, and insulin purchase requirements are:
They owe $2.5 million per quarter to Amphastar, 3 million per quarter interest, 10 million on Jan 15 for principal, 5 million in May for principal, 15 million in July for principal
|
|
|
Post by golfeveryday on Jan 1, 2018 15:48:27 GMT -5
A quick summary of debt, interest, and insulin purchase requirements are: They owe $2.5 million per quarter to Amphastar, 3 million per quarter interest, 10 million on Jan 15 for principal, 5 million in May for principal, 15 million in July for principal either a partner is coming in and dropping some cash or we dilute with newly authorized shares. Can’t imagine they dilute at this level. With all the hiring and tv ads, I have to believe a partner stake is being negotiated. Anyone else think the same?
|
|
|
Post by drman7 on Jan 1, 2018 17:16:09 GMT -5
A quick summary of debt, interest, and insulin purchase requirements are: They owe $2.5 million per quarter to Amphastar, 3 million per quarter interest, 10 million on Jan 15 for principal, 5 million in May for principal, 15 million in July for principal either a partner is coming in and dropping some cash or we dilute with newly authorized shares. Can’t imagine they dilute at this level. With all the hiring and tv ads, I have to believe a partner stake is being negotiated. Anyone else think the same? I agree with your analysis. I hope they announce a partner first thing tomorrow morning.
|
|
|
Post by drman7 on Jan 1, 2018 17:17:16 GMT -5
either a partner is coming in and dropping some cash or we dilute with newly authorized shares. Can’t imagine they dilute at this level. With all the hiring and tv ads, I have to believe a partner stake is being negotiated. Anyone else think the same? I agree with your analysis. I hope they announce a partner first thing tomorrow morning. My gut tells me is either Amgen or Novartis.
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Jan 2, 2018 8:46:34 GMT -5
I agree with your analysis. I hope they announce a partner first thing tomorrow morning. My gut tells me is either Amgen or Novartis. No chance at all. Amgen isn't in this market, and Novartis is committed to a different approach.
|
|
|
Post by drman7 on Jan 2, 2018 9:33:01 GMT -5
My gut tells me is either Amgen or Novartis. No chance at all. Amgen isn't in this market, and Novartis is committed to a different approach. So what are your pick(s). You and I know they have to ink a deal for international sales. It is inevitable.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Jan 2, 2018 13:42:54 GMT -5
No chance at all. Amgen isn't in this market, and Novartis is committed to a different approach. So what are your pick(s). You and I know they have to ink a deal for international sales. It is inevitable. Taking management at face value they are pursuing a regional approach to international partners. In the absence of other info I give benefit of the doubt that management is not being misleading.
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Jan 2, 2018 14:16:29 GMT -5
No chance at all. Amgen isn't in this market, and Novartis is committed to a different approach. So what are your pick(s). You and I know they have to ink a deal for international sales. It is inevitable. There are not going to be any partners in the near future and I am fine with that for the same reason I would rather they didn't sell stock. Sales need to take off seriously for us to get a good deal from a partner, or for selling stock.
|
|
|
Post by cjm18 on Jan 2, 2018 15:24:53 GMT -5
So what are your pick(s). You and I know they have to ink a deal for international sales. It is inevitable. There are not going to be any partners in the near future and I am fine with that for the same reason I would rather they didn't sell stock. Sales need to take off seriously for us to get a good deal from a partner, or for selling stock. Ouch. Even international partners? Castagna was quoted as saying they will be filed in half the world this year.
|
|
|
Post by golfeveryday on Jan 3, 2018 19:22:04 GMT -5
So what are your pick(s). You and I know they have to ink a deal for international sales. It is inevitable. There are not going to be any partners in the near future and I am fine with that for the same reason I would rather they didn't sell stock. Sales need to take off seriously for us to get a good deal from a partner, or for selling stock. How do you figure there is ‘no chance’ when Mike presented near term milestones that included ‘International Expansion Announcements’.
|
|
|
Post by akemp3000 on Jan 3, 2018 21:51:05 GMT -5
Agreed. Mike C specifically said he desired partnerships. He knows Mannkind can't get to where he wants to go without them. To say, there are not going to be any partners in the near future, is clearly a false assumption. Positive results of the STAT study would be sufficient to launch partnerships. Mike has a plan that has not been disclosed...YET!
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Jan 3, 2018 22:28:25 GMT -5
Agreed. Mike C specifically said he desired partnerships. He knows Mannkind can't get to where he wants to go without them. To say, there are not going to be any partners in the near future, is clearly a false assumption. Positive results of the STAT study would be sufficient to launch partnerships. Mike has a plan that has not been disclosed...YET! Either side of that is a pure guess. No matter which one prevails, I don't think either is a "false assumption"... none of us have actual evidence, so they are just competing guesses. IMO I certainly would assume Mike desires partnerships. Desiring things, however, doesn't guarantee obtaining them. And taking Mike at face value, he seems to have thresholds for the deals such that ones available to him, possibly ones that would have been concluded by his predecessor, are rejected as options.
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Jan 4, 2018 5:52:53 GMT -5
There are not going to be any partners in the near future and I am fine with that for the same reason I would rather they didn't sell stock. Sales need to take off seriously for us to get a good deal from a partner, or for selling stock. How do you figure there is ‘no chance’ when Mike presented near term milestones that included ‘International Expansion Announcements’. Agreed. Mike C specifically said he desired partnerships. He knows Mannkind can't get to where he wants to go without them. To say, there are not going to be any partners in the near future, is clearly a false assumption. Positive results of the STAT study would be sufficient to launch partnerships. Mike has a plan that has not been disclosed...YET! Bundling these two together. I am sure that Mike would love good international partnerships (the operative word is good, not like that Brazilian partnership). At this point though you have a company three years after launch with miserable sales, deeply in debt, and losing money hand over fist. This is not a compelling story. We can afford to take a longer view on this, a partner however would have to explain to their shareholders why they made the deal and the only argument they can make is that it's a lowball offer. We don't want lowball offers. Is it all doom and gloom? No. When sales pick up then partners will be interested and we will get a far better deal than we would now. What can we get now? Well look at the Brazil deal - no upfront money, no sales commitments, not exactly a well capitalized company. Is that what we want? I would rather wait until we can strike deals worth having, and that is not going to be this side of substantially improved results which I think are a year off. So am I making assumptions? Absolutely. However it can only be clearly false if you have hard evidence to the contrary, otherwise in turn you are simply making an assumption yourself. The key to assumptions is the assessment you make to reach the assumption and that is subjective.
|
|
|
Post by sayhey24 on Jan 4, 2018 19:23:36 GMT -5
Is this really the case? - "a partner however would have to explain to their shareholders why they made the deal and the only argument they can make is that it's a lowball offer" I don't thing so. If I remember correctly when Brandicourt dumped MNKD he was quoted as saying something like it would take till 2020 for afrezza to become a viable product. However 2017 turned out to be a banner year for the supporting technology to demonstrate afrezza's value and to push treating diabetes beyond A1c. Articles like this don't hurt and when the architect of the Onduo protocol Steve Edleman says when talking about staying in a tight range "Afrezza might help!" that pretty much makes the argument when the exclamation point is used. diatribe.org/cgm-and-time-range-what-do-diabetes-experts-think-about-goals
|
|