|
|
Post by mnholdem on May 18, 2018 7:56:20 GMT -5
Sorry, just couldn't help myself   Come on... even with the most amazing product launch you have to tilt the hockey stick as if a player is holding it Though if we hit that 5000 script week Mike was talking about tomorrow... repost this. Is this better?
|
|
|
|
Post by Clement on May 18, 2018 8:21:01 GMT -5
Today, I hope we can cross the 50 day MA (2.03) in spite of options expiration.
|
|
|
|
Post by centralcoastinvestor on May 18, 2018 8:50:40 GMT -5
Looks like the dark forces are going to pin this at $2.00 today. Today’s end price will probably be $1.99. That always amazes me that the share price can be manipulated like that.
|
|
|
|
Post by gamblerjag on May 18, 2018 9:42:45 GMT -5
Look on the bright side.. soon they will be pinning it at $15.00  |
|
|
|
Post by #NoMoreNeedles on May 18, 2018 10:02:49 GMT -5
Guess who is holding this down below $2.38 and why!
|
|
|
|
Post by kite on May 18, 2018 10:38:12 GMT -5
Look on the bright side.. soon they will be pinning it at $15.00 Another bright side is the buying opportunity below $2 before it springs up to $15! |
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on May 18, 2018 10:49:37 GMT -5
An exact pin of $2.00 will have both the $2.00 calls and $2.00 puts expire worthless. About 1.67 Million shares of puts will expire in the money and be exercised as new shorts tomorrow, a little more if the price goes below 2.00. Almost 900K are $5.00 puts, so I would expect to see either those rolled forward to keep the tax man away, or sold to close tomorrow so they are not taking a new short position. I was unaware of that. There is a roll forward provision for options? Good lordy we pamper the rich with our tax laws [where is my eye roll emoji]. There aren't any roll forwards for most peoples' losses in life. If I'm understanding the above correctly, I don't think rolling puts forward keeps the tax man away; if at the point they are rolled forward they are winners, then the roll is a sell, and your profit is realized. The roll position is a new bet. |
|
|
|
Post by awesomo on May 18, 2018 14:28:50 GMT -5
Oh look, we're at $2.00 with half an hour of trading left.  |
|
|
|
Post by liane on May 18, 2018 15:02:49 GMT -5
$2.00 it is - imagine that!
|
|
|
|
Post by peppy on May 18, 2018 15:19:05 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by racedog on May 18, 2018 15:29:23 GMT -5
No manipulation going on here!! Nothing to see...move along.
|
|
|
|
Post by goyocafe on May 18, 2018 15:31:03 GMT -5
No manipulation going on here!! Nothing to see...move along. No manipulation going on here!! Nothing to SEC...move along. |
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on May 18, 2018 15:52:38 GMT -5
While we have shorts doing all sorts of things (and occasionally longs, too), closing on a strike number is nothing new for almost any stock. Can't investigate them all.
|
|
|
|
Post by awesomo on May 21, 2018 11:37:05 GMT -5
Recovered nicely from the early market spike down, pretty low volume halfway through the trading day (800k vs 2.4M average).
|
|
|
|
Post by joeypotsandpans on May 21, 2018 13:02:18 GMT -5
Come on... even with the most amazing product launch you have to tilt the hockey stick as if a player is holding it Though if we hit that 5000 script week Mike was talking about tomorrow... repost this. Is this better?
Matt_PK Comments (387) |+ Follow The underlying thesis, that Afrezza is not likely to be financially successful enough in the hands of MNKD to create a sustainable enterprise, has considerable merit. As much merit as your suggesting that the company would already be BK at this point in time to some on this board via direct message? (please feel free to deny if you are not the same Matt from proboards) Where you lose me is the suggestion that MNKD focus on drug delivery, particularly Technosphere, AND become a contract manufacturer. To have a credible strategy, and one that is affordable, I suggest the company should pick one or the other. It is true that Danbury has tremendous excess capacity, but is that plant (and its overhead) best left in the hands of MNKD or should it be sold off to one of the numerous contract manufactures that support the pharma industry, most of whom produce huge quantities of drugs and bring more contract manufacturing experience? A change of ownership does not necessarily mean that TS production would no longer be available, just that it would not be the sole source of revenue for the facility. A facility sale would allow the company to pay down the Deerfield debt unless the plant has so little value on the open market that the "mortgage" is further underwater than a Florida condominium. As a drug delivery technology company, MNKD could potentially be more competitive but TS is clearly not positioned to be all things to all people, and the company would need to acquire or develop additional technologies. Absent a broader technology portfolio, the "new" MNKD would be like the proverbial tradesman who, owning only a hammer, wanders around town looking for a nail, but TS could be a critical tool in an expanded toolset to be offered to other pharma companies. However, expanding the toolset would require a shift in philosophy to something akin to a pure R&D shop which implies a different set of management skills and corporate resources. Regardless of which strategy is chosen, having an underutilized plant in the Connecticut and a corporate office in California is not a particularly desirable real estate configuration trying to pivot to a new strategy while limiting the future cash burn. Any change will have to be driven from the board, and that in turn will require some difficult discussions that I am not sure they are ready to have. 21 May 2018, 11:43 AM Reply0Like Spencer Osborne, Contributor Comments (14522) |+ Follow Author’s reply » Matt..... I was contemplating a starting off point. We agree that the plant in CT is underutilized. See above regarding large volume deals internationally to offset excess capacity and inventory until sales ramp up in U.S. which they will just like that Golden Knights hockey stick... It happens to have massive manufacturing capacity with Technosphere. If the company were to structure deals in such a way that it got a royalty and a manufacturing contract, it gives time to build up the value of that plant. Most likely why the deal with Cipla was backend loaded...you are stating things that are already taking place... I agree that there will likely be a "one or the other" moment. At issue is whether they can convince a single player to buy up the technology or whether there is more than one player. No issue, there will be players in their respective geographic regions that will partner with Mannkind doing the manufacturing.... Multiple players makes ownership stay in MannKind's court.
Yes this is a correct statement.What we know is that MannKind has not been adept at selling drugs. Nor does it have the resources to give it the best possible effort. The CT facility is essentially tied to Deerfield as collateral, making things even more complicated. This last statement is based on prior mgmt, current mgmt has been in place for a relatively short period of time and is making great strides considering the pieces they were left with when they took over...21 May 2018, 11:59 AM Reply1Like |
|
