|
Post by stevil on Jan 27, 2016 12:34:11 GMT -5
Here is the exact quote from Al Mann that I was referring to:
While such technology provided the best clinical results in diabetes, I learned that the pharmacokinetics of the prandial insulin products delivered by the pumps were certainly not physiologic. The long persistence of existing insulins causes much of the hypoglycemia in diabetes therapy. I realized that the problem was that those insulins are formulated into six molecule hexamers to stabilize them, and that to utilize the insulin the body takes time to break down the hexamer into monomers. I became very interested in trying to find a way to improve the kinetics of prandial insulins.
We had been exploring ways to stabilize other large molecule drugs for pump delivery and discovered a viable technology that could greatly improve stabilization. I wondered if that technology could stabilize insulin monomers, so I directed creation of such a formulation that turned out to be very successful. When I saw the pharmacokinetics, I said, “My God, that will revolutionize diabetes!” That was before I later realized the magnitude of the challenges bringing a drug product to market, to develop what is now called Afrezza. MannKind has invested about 1.8 billion dollars, of which about 975 million dollars came from me personally. Although that development and regulatory process proved to be a huge challenge, Afrezza is now FDA-approved and we are excited to bring it to market.
"My God, that will revolutionize diabetes!" not "My God, that will make a boatload of money!" Sorry, I had to I promise I'm done now... If someone wants to keep arguing, go ahead and PM me. Let's give our moderators a break. They have to read all of our nonsense.
|
|
|
Post by stevil on Jan 27, 2016 12:02:24 GMT -5
Right, you're still not understanding my point. Afrezza/MNKD wasn't just an entrepreneurial endeavor. The main purpose of both was to leave a legacy of healing and betterment of medicine. It still seems like you're purposefully choosing to read into what I'm writing. I could have worded it better, but one doesn't preclude the other. In fact, the success of Afrezza/TS would have meant that his philanthropic effort reached its potential. Surely you can understand this. Al didn't need the money. His family didn't need the money. He wasn't doing this for money, at least not for himself. If that's the case, a sale should not be looked upon favorably because it would mean that he was forced to do so, meaning they believe bankruptcy is imminent. That is my point. I'm still not sure what yours is outside of trying to quibble with me... You sound like one of those politicians trying to walk back your ridiculous statement. How about this statement of yours - "It's because they are forced to sell out of inevitable bankruptcy." I'm understand your point of view, and don't buy into your soft bashing FUD. Trend Soft bashing FUD? So you're trying to tell me that Al is going to sell his namesake company purely to profit from it? He's not going to care if it ends up in hands of people he doesn't know/trust rather than leaving it in the hands of people he hand-picked? Think about what you're saying right now... If Al was really trying to turn a profit from this company, now wouldn't be the time to sell. Its valuation is at the lowest it has ever been. If Al's motivation was money (which why in the world would a 90 year old billionaire need more money?) then why sell now and not before? Come on man, I'm trying to be nice but you're being really dense. I guess I have nothing more to add and we'll just have to agree to disagree if you want to.
|
|
|
Post by stevil on Jan 27, 2016 11:31:08 GMT -5
Not sure why you're focusing exclusively on one part of what I'm saying while ignoring the point I was making. I don't think Al started MNKD with the intention of losing money. My point was Al and his family is already set financially. I don't think he will sell/not sell based on money. The only reason he would sell is if he is forced to. I'm not even really sure what you're debating other than just trying to disagree with me on a point I was never making... Of course he doesn't want to lose money and of course he's trying to protect shareholders value. What did I say that would lead you to think I was stating otherwise? Well, let's just start with the first sentence - "Al didn't start Mannkind to make money - he started it as a philanthropic effort." What I object to is the overall dark cloud that surrounds your post, which is Al doesn't care about making money and he has no real profit motive. This point of view begs the question - why should any investor own Mannkind shares if the position of the founder, Chairman of the Board, and largest shareholder is what you state? It's what I would call sophisticated FUD. Trend Right, you're still not understanding my point. Afrezza/MNKD wasn't just an entrepreneurial endeavor. The main purpose of both was to leave a legacy of healing and betterment of medicine. It still seems like you're purposefully choosing to read into what I'm writing. I could have worded it better, but one doesn't preclude the other. In fact, the success of Afrezza/TS would have meant that his philanthropic effort reached its potential. Surely you can understand this. Al didn't need the money. His family didn't need the money. He wasn't doing this for money, at least not for himself. If that's the case, a sale should not be looked upon favorably because it would mean that he was forced to do so, meaning they believe bankruptcy is imminent. That is my point. I'm still not sure what yours is outside of trying to quibble with me...
|
|
|
Post by stevil on Jan 27, 2016 10:34:04 GMT -5
Al didn't start MNKD to make money- he started it as a philanthropic effort. He was already a billionaire and publicly stated that he didn't want to leave his fortune to his children. He's not in this for the money, although he's not in it to lose money either. If they are entertaining any deals, it's not because they're trying to profit on the company. It's because they're being forced to sell out of inevitable bankruptcy. I don't know Al personally, so this comment might seem silly, but I can almost guarantee you that he wouldn't hand over this company to someone else unless he needed to. He'd much rather keep it in the hands of those whom he appointed and trusts. Stevil, I don't think you know anything about Al Mann or his motivations. Your statement that Al started Mannkind as a philanthropic effort is just utter nonsense. If you have read or listened to any of Al Mann's interview, you would understand that Al is an entrepreneur interested in making money by developing products that help people. Although he intends to or has already donated his shares to the Al Mann Foundation, unless Mannkind is successful in its endeavors, his goal of helping people well past his own lifetime will not have been realized. Al has said many times, that his goal with Mannkind is to help patients and reward shareholders, I believe that is still his goal. Trend Not sure why you're focusing exclusively on one part of what I'm saying while ignoring the point I was making. I don't think Al started MNKD with the intention of losing money. My point was Al and his family is already set financially. I don't think he will sell/not sell based on money. The only reason he would sell is if he is forced to. I'm not even really sure what you're debating other than just trying to disagree with me on a point I was never making... Of course he doesn't want to lose money and of course he's trying to protect shareholders value. What did I say that would lead you to think I was stating otherwise?
|
|
|
Post by stevil on Jan 27, 2016 8:56:45 GMT -5
Again, I don't know the guy, but from the videos and print that I've seen, I don't think he's all that worried about his wealth. He's nearing the end of his life- if he was concerned about money, he wouldn't have risked losing it. It sounded like he socked away what he wanted to leave for his beneficiaries. I truly don't think he's concerned about losing this money, although I do believe he would try to salvage whatever was possible so that he could have more to give away to a different cause. I thought I remembered hearing that he was only leaving 10% or so to his beneficiaries and the other 90% was going to charity. I would think that Afrezza would fall under the charitable umbrella because I don't think Al was ever intending to directly profit from it. He wanted it to be his contribution to his fellow man.
|
|
|
Post by stevil on Jan 27, 2016 8:18:56 GMT -5
Correct. MNKD doesn't sell here if they feel like they can avoid bankruptcy. MNKD doesn't sell here if Al Mann is not happy with whatever offer he can get. My gut tells me he won't be happy at all, and therefore, no sale. Al didn't start MNKD to make money- he started it as a philanthropic effort. He was already a billionaire and publicly stated that he didn't want to leave his fortune to his children. He's not in this for the money, although he's not in it to lose money either. If they are entertaining any deals, it's not because they're trying to profit on the company. It's because they're being forced to sell out of inevitable bankruptcy. I don't know Al personally, so this comment might seem silly, but I can almost guarantee you that he wouldn't hand over this company to someone else unless he needed to. He'd much rather keep it in the hands of those whom he appointed and trusts.
|
|
|
Post by stevil on Jan 26, 2016 15:24:28 GMT -5
while i agree with you, i don't believe a company will come in and buy Mannkind right now anywhere near what we all think it's worth in the long run. Would you be willing to accept an offer under a billion? If MNKD is sold, it's because our hand was forced and not because Al Mann wanted it. Correct. MNKD doesn't sell here if they feel like they can avoid bankruptcy.
|
|
|
Post by stevil on Jan 26, 2016 14:40:01 GMT -5
This should be fun
|
|
|
Post by stevil on Jan 26, 2016 14:34:37 GMT -5
I love to hear differing opinions... both good and bad as long as they are sincere and honest with no agenda behind them.. the problem I have with Stevil is that he comes across as judgmental and condescending.. He might get a better response with another approach..
I have thought that I should change my profile pic to something other than a blonde girl after hearing from Stevil... but then I just decided to ignore it..
But yes, I have noticed on YMB, that ANYTHING to the contrary of peoples positive hopes gets attacked, not so much here on proboards which is refreshing... we need to hear all sides of things, not just the good and be honest with ourselves... pie in the sky hope is not a good basis for an investment.. Many of us however are underwater here, and are looking for signs of hope .. I think we are all aware of the dire situation..
I invested because I believe in Afrezza and Al Mann. I still believe , however after my personal experiences with docs and insurance companies I discovered the obstacles we were facing. The questions are now, can we market this innovative drug with the label that we have, or can we find a creative way around this, and do we have the money to do it. ? Honestly I didn't see any of this coming when I first invested. It was a speculative investment I made based on one thing... my belief in Afrezza.... It seems right now, that no matter how good Afrezza is... it is the marketing and other circumstances that will decide the fate of my investment. Therefore, everything counts including this new relationship with Receptor life.
Regarding FUD ..... It is my opinion that there are those out there spreading FUD in a very systematic manner... possibly in collusion with big banks etc... and yes I DO have a problem with that .. My apologies to you and anyone else if I have come across as being judgemental or condescending. That has not been my intention. I'll try to do a better job of representing my opinions without being so abrasive.
|
|
|
Post by stevil on Jan 26, 2016 14:29:59 GMT -5
Why is it that whenever anybody asks good questions they are accused of being a "soft basher". This is a financial investment opportunity, not a religion. Stevil may not be a true believer, but that doesn't mean he is going to hell. That's true. stevil is studying to become a doctor, not a lawyer... haha hope there aren't any lawyers on the board
|
|
|
Post by stevil on Jan 26, 2016 14:29:16 GMT -5
Why is it that whenever anybody asks good questions they are accused of being a "soft basher". This is a financial investment opportunity, not a religion. Stevil may not be a true believer, but that doesn't mean he is going to hell. Those that throw around ad hominem arguments to quiet opinions they don't like are either delusional or suffering from a terrible case of cognitive dissonance. Many such people make liberal use of the "block" or "ignore" feature on other sites, but just because somebody has an opinion that is contrary to yours doesn't mean it is invalid. Unless the poster is an obvious shill, read it, consider it, and then act as you deem appropriate. That is how you learn new information; burying your head in the sand just gets your hair dirty. matt , I suppose it all boils down to how you define, "good questions." For example, just as a lawyer's question, "Have you stopped beating your wife?" is a seemingly straightforward question with an expected binary response, it actually represents a very subtle logical fallacy. Posters can ask "good questions" all day long, but when those questions are reviewed in the context of their entire posting history, the "good questions" may appear to be none other than a litany of attempts to instill, Distress, Apprehension and Skepticism. DAS, if you prefer, rather than FUD. It is still mind-boggling to me how anyone who could benefit by the success of MNKD and its products, would seek to continuously express their extreme doubt about their investment on this board! Do they really care for the financial well-being of all the rest of us? Are they really looking out for our best interests? Are they trying to warn us away from this horrible investment? Do they suppose we should all take our investment advice from them? I've asked before, so I'll ask again: How is it that any of these posters, accused of being "soft bashers" by some and defended by others such as yourself, can gain anything financially by continuously posting "good" question after "good" question, the forms of which, regardless of the responses, represent only doom and gloom? Again, if I were a non-investor in MNKD reading his board, my first reaction would be, if these individuals really believe in the prospects of MNKD implied in their questions, why in the world do they waste their time here? matt , this is the real question that has not been adequately answered by these numerous soft bashers. By the way, opinions are NEVER invalid. Only facts can be invalid. To answer your question, yes, I do truly care about people on here. I'll be the first to admit that I might have a comment or two that might offend the PC police, so my intentions may come across as mixed messages. However, (and I've stated this before) that the majority of the reason that I have such a staunch stance on the negative side is because this board is predominantly one-sided. I'm an advocate for the other side. I do want people to be exposed to every variable possible so that they can make a proper analysis. Researching the other side also helps me because it helps me form an opinion on where I really stand. The more I researched and consider "the other side", the more it pulled me over there. I would challenge you to consider what you said- and this is pretty much the thesis for my stance- if every "good" question represents only doom and gloom, what does that say about the direction of the company? Right now, it really only boils down to 3 questions. 1. How will we solve our short term financial problem? 2. Is what we're doing currently sufficient to solve #1? 3. Is anything in the future going to materialize quickly enough to satisfy our debtors and keep the lights on? I'll let you answer those questions for yourself. But please don't pretend I haven't answered these very questions, as well as your own personal questions as to why I'm still here. I have many, many times. Whether you choose to believe my intentions or not is up to you. But I have stated them honestly over and over. Never in my wildest imagination did I think I would constantly become the center of debate. This wasn't the reason I joined the board. I just noticed that people were coming up with these crazy, speculative stories that never turned out to be correct and everyone seemed to feed off of one another. So when I kept seeing people say that they were buying up gobs and gobs of stock when my perception of reality was drastically different than the common groupthink here, and when I found that my perception was more correct than the common groupthink (at least short term), I gained confidence enough to speak out. I learned to trust my instincts. I'm not the authoritative voice on anything. I'm no more qualified than anyone else to make predictions and guidance for the company. But I do know that my strengths are in logic, reasoning, and analysis. So I challenge people according to those strengths. I don't have time to do the research of some of the posters here, so I count on them to help save me time. Some people are really good at digging stuff up. Unfortunately, some people are also really good at curving some pretty radical lines to connect dots. I come here to challenge others to think critically. I don't understand why they take it as such a personal assault. I'll even alert the PC police here again and say that for the people who do feel like they're being assaulted, it might be a good time to take a step back and reflect on this stock. Because you should never invest in a stock you're emotionally tied to.
|
|
|
Post by stevil on Jan 26, 2016 0:04:24 GMT -5
I've said it many times... I want to be proven wrong. There's a lot of my money left on the table if I'm right. I got sucked into the hope as well. It's obviously not too late. And there's still some hope left... Do you currently hold a short position? No. I have stated many, many times that I am holding my shares and I would never short this stock
|
|
|
Post by stevil on Jan 25, 2016 23:50:54 GMT -5
Thanks for the kind words. I really do try to play nice in the sandbox, but I'm human and my emotions get the best of me. It's nice to know my time here hasn't been completely wasted. I really haven't picked a side... I'm here to fight for "Truth", as much as she can be found. I just find myself currently in the short camp and I'm challenging others to pull me over to the long camp in a tug of war. It's unfortunate that I become the topic for debate rather than the issues I point to, but it is what it is... Stevil: So you're a short and therefore it's in your best interest to continue your soft bashing of MannKind. Got it. And no, I'm not going to make the effort to pull you over to the long side. I just believe that in the long run you'll be proven wrong. Big time. I've said it many times... I want to be proven wrong. There's a lot of my money left on the table if I'm right. I got sucked into the hope as well. It's obviously not too late. And there's still some hope left...
|
|
|
Post by stevil on Jan 24, 2016 17:41:22 GMT -5
Some insulin is still OTC- the older technology stuff. I don't know if any of the drugs in the link at the bottom are rapid-acting, but I'd be pretty surprised if they were. It scares me to think that insulin can be available OTC without at least consulting with a pharmacist. While I know many diabetics are pros- and like the guy said in the article you linked, it's nice to be able to get an emergency supply if you need it. But there should be some kind of proficiency test that they'd have to pass- whether it just be a few questions from a pharmacist- to make sure that the person knows how to properly dose and inject insulin before sale. Insulin is easier to overdose on than many other OTC products so I don't think it's really safe to allow anyone to purchase it. Afrezza would likely have to conduct a safety test to show that it's safe to have OTC (which shouldn't be an issue since it's hard to hypo on it), but I'd be surprised if it did go OTC simply because they'd likely recoup less money than if it was rx only. Who knows what Matt will want to do, though. www.aetnabetterhealth.com/illinois/assets/pdf/pharmacy/OTC-IL.pdf
|
|
|
Post by stevil on Jan 24, 2016 17:17:47 GMT -5
wow a fasting blood glucose of 74. You are not an ordinary human being.
You'd be surprised. Most of my class was in the 70's to low 80s. We only had one guy (who was obese) with a FBG of... I think... 124? I'm not sure if he was on any type of therapy, but he was obviously pre-diabetic if not diabetic... One of my friends who is a pharmacist (we give him flak all the time for being dumb enough to come back to school) is actually 40 years old and Chinese. And when I say Chinese, I mean he eats only authentic Chinese food. Both he and his wife are from China. Anyway, he was the one that surprised us the most... His FBG was actually 69 and his postprandial graph had the broadest slope and lowest peak of anyone else in my class. That guy wasn't human... After eating a medjool date, that we were told had around 50 g of glucose in it, his BG peaked around 125 or so after 45 min and then down to around 90 after an hour. I think mine peaked in the high 130s or low 140s and then returned to around 105 after an hour after drinking orange juice, also with around 50g of glucose. I don't think it's too terribly uncommon for healthy individuals (especially if they're in their 20s) to have FBG levels in the 70s, so long as they regularly exercise and have diets with fairly low carb and high fiber content.
|
|