|
Post by mnkdfann on Jun 24, 2019 10:51:07 GMT -5
If we're headed towards an activist investor coming into play, it sure appears that Bill and Vdex is trying to make the case that they're it. I'm not comfortable with that given what's transpired over the last week and if it goes that direction, I'll likely move on. Nothing that has been said by either side has been an "AHHA!" moment of 100% clarity. I'm not 100% pleased with what's happened with MNKD and some decisions either...December dilution the most prominent example. I'm comfortable with seeing where things go for the remainder of 2019 and decide if my money stays in or not. Unfortunately, what's going on right now ( and whatever MK has up his sleeve) will be more destructive and constructive IMO. Looking for positive events to drown out the ick! Angling for a C-suite job?
|
|
|
Post by mnkdfann on Jun 24, 2019 10:49:38 GMT -5
My opinion no Vdex connection, that guy had a friend who worked high up in Mannkind. A friend and myself we’re just talking about that post last night because we remembered it also. “It has been said by others that you want a CEO with integrity, energy and intelligence” Vdex guy said this recently. So this post is also him? Oh, that is a very good catch! Vdex: "It is said that you need a CEO with integrity, intelligence and energy, but without the first one, the last two will kill you." Galileo: “It has been said by others that you want a CEO with integrity, energy and intelligence” But to be fair, I suppose that could be a coincidence. I mean, Warren Buffet has said the same thing. Also, when Galileo talked about the two MNKD execs who left, my thought was that these were Pfeffer and Saldanha. Of course, that is just a guess, but the description seemed to fit.
|
|
|
Post by mnkdfann on Jun 24, 2019 9:45:53 GMT -5
I do not invent I do my due diligence. Got a ton of heat on this board when I said the stock was heading below 2 towards a buck. Take it for what it is worth. Matt P is the guy behind VDEX. Just like the stock went to a buock. Watch and learn. People can delete their own posts but they can't delete their words when they have been quoted in someone else's post. I'm not a lawyer but I'm pretty sure you crossed the line here. I'm not sure if Matt P cares about this but your words will be preserved if he does. But I don't see why Matt P would even remotely care, unless he was involved and trying to hide it.
|
|
|
Post by mnkdfann on Jun 24, 2019 8:55:51 GMT -5
Crazy stuff, huh? I'm taking a step back. Now, both sides are pulling in help and nothing is to be believed. A lot of new ID's being created by various factions...are they for Bill, Mike K or Mike C. You highlight a great point, new names are trying to connect dots with non-existent lines. FWIW, a number of the newbies that have shown up in the last few pages have actually been registered on this forum for a long time. They just never posted much or at all previously. I suppose they may be sleeper identities set up long in advance. Nothing surprises me here anymore.
|
|
|
Post by mnkdfann on Jun 24, 2019 8:50:06 GMT -5
I came across an old post that takes on some new meaning after recent Vdex events. At least, it supports a bit of what Vdex said. Of course, for all I know, this poster (who no longer seems active) had a Vdex connection himself. mnkd.proboards.com/post/167136" I’ve spoken to 5 executives who’ve worked with Mike, 3 in former companies and 2 now departed from MNKD. None of them want their names used so these anonymous sources are subject to that criticism. So be it. Dismiss what I write below if you want. All five said very similar things: 1) Mike is ruthlessly political, 2) out for his own good, 3) will stab people in the back-has no loyalty, 4) is only interested in his own ideas or ideas that he can take credit for, 5) surrounds himself with yes men, and 6) is a very good talker. One said upon hearing Mike was made CEO of MNKD said he lost all respect for or interest in the company. The guy said Mike was “not impressive,” and he wondered how a company could be so desperate to make Mike the leader. He questioned whether the MNKD BOD was “asleep at the wheel.” This person is a successful, high-profile businessman who’s held high level executive positions in companies that you’d all recognize instantly. He has no apparent axe to grind. The other two non-MNKD people said mostly the same thing and that Mike was ambitious to a fault. These were people I met randomly so I didn’t seek out the contrary opinions." " The two departed MNKD execs told me to look at the turnover since Mike came in. They said good, competent people don’t like working with Mike because he is so obviously calculating and self-absorbed. He is not a team player. One told me Mike privately admitted to him his goal to displace Matt Pfeffer within a month or two of Matt bringing Mike in. He said Mike went right to work on the BOD undermining MP. The other said Mike is a phony who’ll pretend to befriend you but will knife you in the back when it suits him and will step over the body. One commented that Mike’s line is “I’ve never failed with a drug.” I could go on, but you get the point."
|
|
|
Post by mnkdfann on Jun 23, 2019 22:48:17 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by mnkdfann on Jun 23, 2019 21:59:09 GMT -5
Soo, any guesses what the trading is gonna be like tomorrow? I actually bought MNKD shares on Friday for the first time in a little while. Don't get excited. I bet I own <0.1% of what some on this board own. But my point is, I just bought shares and so with my luck the SP will be tanking tomorrow.
|
|
|
Post by mnkdfann on Jun 23, 2019 21:54:21 GMT -5
Could’ve been take it out of context, but why would someone even say that if they hadn’t been thinking it... or that it was least an option. Bankruptcy is always an option. IMO, Mike as CEO would be negligent / an idiot if he wasn't aware that it was least an option. But I agree with the previous poster that the context is important. MC's comment could have been a perfectly innocent one, in response to something even crazier that was presented to him.
|
|
|
Post by mnkdfann on Jun 23, 2019 20:51:04 GMT -5
I didn’t even see it got posted here because I was looking at it getting posted on StockTwits. Stocktwits before Proboards? Now we know where your loyalties lie. I hate to read at Stocktwits, because every-time I go there my laptop's ad blocker identifies about 30 different spyware / malware / adware trying to hook into my system.
|
|
|
Post by mnkdfann on Jun 23, 2019 17:44:49 GMT -5
A fellow in the U.K. wrote about how he decreased his A1c from 9 to 4.1 in 11 days, just through diet. He followed Professor Taylor's Newcastle protocol. (By the way, you can do that with the protocol gradually over months. One does not have to fast track it over a week or two.) He's not the only one, they did a study and many others had like experiences. So, I guess fast and extreme A1c reductions are certainly physiologically possible. His story (in two articles) can be found at two of the links at this site. www.ncl.ac.uk/magres/research/diabetes/reversal/#publicinformationSorry but I don't buy the Newcastle story any more than VDEX's. Per www.medscape.com/viewarticle/460876"The glycosylated hemoglobin (A1C) concentration reflects the time-weighted average of mean daily plasma glucose over 2-3 months....Because A1C seems to have a half-life of about 28 days, of the eventual change in A1C that would occur over 3 months after a change in treatment, perhaps 50% will occur within 1 month and 75% in 2 months." If A1c has a half life of 28 days, then I doubt you would see much if any change in two weeks or less. You raise a good point. The newspaper article did not say how the blood sugar was measured. I agree that the glycated hemoglobin (A1c) test gives a 2 or 3 month average. But apparently there are other glucose tests that measure the level of blood glucose only at that moment. Presumably the results we're talking about made use of one of those. (Or a CGM based estimate?) Also, the newspaper article only talked about blood sugar levels. It never mentioned A1c (that was my edit). I may be guilty of confusing terminology.
|
|
|
Post by mnkdfann on Jun 23, 2019 17:18:30 GMT -5
Vdex doesn’t just prescribe Afrezza..so let’s say they advertise that they can lower your A1c. They can also prescribe Afrezza in the way that’s most beneficial to lower that A1c because they have their own doctors that are trained on Afrezza and their protocols. Therefore getting the retention and the results that they need to help with the insurance companies. I have to question the alleged success of the VDEX "protocols." On page 10 of the second white paper is the claim that treating three patients with afrezza achieved decreases in A1c of 3.4, 7.3, and 4 in just two weeks. Please excuse me for saying that I think that is simply hokum. Indeed, from what I understand of A1c, it's physiologically impossible. A fellow in the U.K. wrote about how he decreased his A1c from 9 to 4.1 in 11 days, just through diet. He followed Professor Taylor's Newcastle protocol. (By the way, you can do that with the protocol gradually over months. One does not have to fast track it over a week or two.) He's not the only one, they did a study and many others had like experiences. So, I guess fast and extreme A1c reductions are certainly physiologically possible. His story (in two articles) can be found at two of the links at this site. www.ncl.ac.uk/magres/research/diabetes/reversal/#publicinformation
|
|
|
Post by mnkdfann on Jun 23, 2019 13:24:23 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by mnkdfann on Jun 23, 2019 8:49:42 GMT -5
Some, certainly not all, of the other AMSL announcements also mention the companies without mentioning their products by name. www.amsl.com.au/newsandevents/
|
|
|
Post by mnkdfann on Jun 23, 2019 8:44:29 GMT -5
Since MC is on this board, hope he can also defend the ad campaign spending. By now we know it has zero result after $9m spending. Even amateurs like us on this board knew the ad was not effective s many pointed out early this year. Zero results? Totally incorrect. You can say did not have desired affect but not zero - irresponsible post. As noted in one of the scripts threads, the number (#) of scripts grew May to May at a slower rate this year than they did last year. That would seem to support the zero effect argument, ceteris paribas.
|
|
|
Post by mnkdfann on Jun 23, 2019 8:37:42 GMT -5
Yes..correct it was Steve. And I believe him too. I appeal to your common sense regarding the alleged document that Mr. Castagna allegedly refused to supply. Can you think of a single document that is not already public, the lack of which would interfere with the approval of afrezza in the UAE? I have tried and I can think of nothing that the UAE would need that isn't already public knowledge. "It was either the Minister of Health or our distributor that needed a document so we requested the doc from MC and he said he would send it." The statement is vague. It doesn't say the document was necessary for approval of Afrezza in the UAE. It could have been a document with final pricing that the distributor wanted. Or a document that guaranteed that a certain minimum amount of Afrezza could be produced and shipped to the UAE each month by Mannkind.
|
|