|
|
Post by saxcmann on Dec 15, 2015 12:07:23 GMT -5
unconfirmed i_am_ultron • 3 minutes 58 seconds ago 2users liked this postsusers disliked this posts0Reply FIDELITY DROPS LENDING RATE JUST NOW TO 16.5% AND BORROWING RATE TO 25.25% Lending rate has dropped from 42.5% to 16.5% in just a few weeks. Shorts are moving on to their next target. Back To Board Ultron is correct. 16.5% now. |
|
|
|
Post by saxcmann on Dec 14, 2015 16:50:34 GMT -5
Almost like WS is forcing mnkd to talk?
|
|
|
|
Post by saxcmann on Dec 8, 2015 15:51:53 GMT -5
Saxcman (who has been rock solid) reporting TV ads starting January. Someone somewhere had speculated (and i remember on the CC it was research related) that the milestone payment may be for this SD meeting and the info it would provide. Not verified Can't tell if this is sarcasm or legit(?), hasn't this guy reported like Oct. - Nov. - and Dec. as well? He posts on YMB a lot, here not so much... usually a sign he's into reading and writing nonsense exclusively. I don't post on ymb a lot. No sarcasm here. No I didn't report before. Jeremy you post a lot of babble...I don't. |
|
|
|
Post by saxcmann on Dec 7, 2015 19:26:14 GMT -5
Fidelity just lowered again to 20.5%! Rate cut in half in about 2 weeks! Any theories why? I say more shares flooded the market to lend out recently.
|
|
|
|
Post by saxcmann on Dec 2, 2015 15:43:10 GMT -5
Why do you think they covered? The proof is a lower SI report. For all we know more shares maybe bought and now loaned out? Saxcmann you may already have this information , but I will provide it for the people that do not . The link to Interactive brokers will show the available shares to borrow at this brokerage . They charge short borrowers a lot more than SC or Fidelity does . Aswhiwi using Fidelity 's level two can see the rate charged , but I don't think the amount available can be seen . This link gives you a quick available in the market at Interactive . As Interactive is the more expensive ( sometimes the rate charged is 100% or greater to borrow mnkd shares ) , it makes sense that once the number of available shares to short increases , the rates at SC and Fidelity will drop because demand is lower .
www.interactivebrokers.com/en/index.php?key=mnkd&cntry=usa&tag=&ib_entity=llc&ln=&asset=&f=4587&conf=am&amref=1
Okay,thanks gwb. More shares could have been purchased recently to lend for shorting therefore more shares available? shorts could be covering but low volume indicates not fast enough for big drop in rates? |
|
|
|
Post by saxcmann on Dec 2, 2015 15:09:44 GMT -5
Fidelity has lowered the interest to borrow shares again today to 53.57%. They have lowered the interest over 11% in the past 2 days. Somehow shorts are covering without a spike in price. Probably covering into some tax selling. Why do you think they covered? The proof is a lower SI report. For all we know more shares maybe bought and now loaned out? |
|
|
|
Post by saxcmann on Dec 2, 2015 12:31:12 GMT -5
Yes, higher dose is needed Sweedee and Sanofi knows this. 20U is recommended by my source. Training for doctors speaking start February 2016. I personaly think clamp studies were needed for EMA filing.
|
|
|
|
Post by saxcmann on Nov 30, 2015 12:42:30 GMT -5
Still no shares available to borrow with Fidelity. If you could borrow you would pay an interest rate of 65.25%. Who is paying 65.25%, did that change from 61.25%? |
|
|
|
8-K
Nov 27, 2015 12:04:51 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by saxcmann on Nov 27, 2015 12:04:51 GMT -5
Mr. Edstrom would provide the Company with a general release of claims and remain employed with the Company to provide transition and other services through July 1, 2017, subject to his earlier resignation or termination by the Company. Mr. Edstrom would report to the Company’s principal executive officer during the term of the agreement.
Is mnkd paying Haken to be quite until CT expires?
|
|
|
|
Post by saxcmann on Nov 20, 2015 18:53:07 GMT -5
I think your point about Sanofi 'throwing us a bone' is a telling one. It wouldn't have taken much in their recent investor mtg CC, a single sentence about Afrezza would have sufficed. Yet we got nothing, unless you hunted through a long annex, and even that could reasonably been seen as being simply the bare minimum they would need to prove they are still meeting their contractual obligations to market Afrezza. I don't think they plan to abandon Afrezza in the short term (if only to hedge their bet and make sure it doesn't turn out to be a winner in someone else's hands), but they are clearly minimizing their investment in marketing and, long-term, I would guess they are keeping their options open. If we don't have impressive script numbers by next summer I'm pretty sure they will start laying the groundwork for cutting us loose. Adam F's shrill prognostications of January breakup seem unlikely, but short of having inside information, I think only a clown can 'guarantee 99.9%' that Sanofi won't back away by EOY2016. I don't consider myself a clown so I'll say why I think Sanofi won't back out in January...I confirmed recently Sanofi will begin training doctors soon to speak on afrezza in 2016, therefore why would they be terminating there partnership with mannkind? Maybe "99% sure" comment was a little much but seems highly unlikely they'll cancel anytime soon. |
|
|
|
Post by saxcmann on Nov 20, 2015 17:15:48 GMT -5
There is always the very real possibility, even though in the past I have had a really hard time accepting this, that Sanofi is on his way out. I can almost guarantee you (99% sure) that your first sentence above is not true. Sny is committed to afrezza in 2016. |
|
|
|
Post by saxcmann on Nov 20, 2015 8:43:19 GMT -5
I remember when Howard Schultz took back over Starbucks. Things turned quickly. Go Al Mann!
|
|
|
|
Post by saxcmann on Nov 19, 2015 14:32:49 GMT -5
61.25% shorts are paying now. I think this will continue to go up until the middle of January. Maybe close to 70% and about 50% for us. The institutions maybe selling call/puts so they can't short the stock they own. Tutes make money on premium for selling options. January calls that don't hit strike price get control back to tutes who sold premium. How is this theory? Love your theory but there is a hole... who is supplying the shorts with borrowed shares? Maybe another institution or HF (via BP)? |
|
|
|
Post by saxcmann on Nov 19, 2015 14:16:27 GMT -5
I think your formula looks correct scotta. And I believe Fidelity is now charging over 60% to the borrowers. 61.25% shorts are paying now. I think this will continue to go up until the middle of January. Maybe close to 70% and about 50% for us. The institutions maybe selling call/puts so they can't short the stock they own. Tutes make money on premium for selling options. January calls that don't hit strike price get control back to tutes who sold premium. How is this theory? |
|
|
|
Post by saxcmann on Nov 19, 2015 10:12:41 GMT -5
Fidelity pays at the end of each month.
|
|
