|
Post by dreamboatcruise on May 8, 2018 15:38:27 GMT -5
Interesting that by the end of the day they took the shares from my account with the largest number (about 60%) and left the remaining 40% in the other two accounts. Though they now have my permission to take all, so they would be sitting there to meet requirement to "locate" shares if a bunch of shorting happens.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on May 8, 2018 15:18:12 GMT -5
It feels like something shady is going on. A bunch of people get their shares returned last week (myself included) that were at 8% Now, a few days later, most of us have an offer to loan out again at 2% Did anyone that had shares loaned out not go through this cycle? I think there was someone that didn't have their shares returned with Schwab. Boca was having shares loaned out at Fidelity on the same day I had ones returned with Schwab. Go figure. There is absolutely no reason they would need to have returned the shares to lower the rate. They have the right to adjust the rate as low as they want at anytime... and you have the right to pull shares out if that rate isn't acceptable to you. Maybe they are simply building up a pool of available shares in case there is demand to short because of the earnings call.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on May 8, 2018 13:09:08 GMT -5
I for one just deluded myself about what was there for all to see. Then managed to slap some sense into myself so have been making better MNKD decisions for a year or more. At this point the shorts can count on further dilution, but I think their view has been muddied by the fact that other progress just might offset the dilution anticipation and/or allow it to happen at meaningfully higher price. Of course the flip side is that most longs really aren't comfortable on betting on that hopeful outcome in a meaningful way. Hence... sideways. IMO With the right news, I can envision a buy in that would provide operating funds but tie up the additional shares in a way they aren't available to the shorts. If MNKD finds itself going back to the same toxic lenders, then, yes, we can expect the shorts will have an easy way out of their positions. Ah, yes, if one squints and looks out over the horizon around twilight people often claim to have seen glimpses of the mythical "buy in"... which legend has it is magical. BTW... the PIPEs they've done recently really weren't that toxic. I've seen far worse deals... the type often having "death spiral" used as a descriptor. These weren't death spiral type deals. Highly likely the next round of dilution will be a discounted PIPE just like the last two. That certainly is something longs should "see" now, as they should have seen the last one coming for months. Is it theoretically possible that something else happens... sure. But if what you think you primarily see is something other than that, then you'll likely be posting the same sort of thing again that shorts saw something you didn't. If they pulled off a repeat of the PIPE from last fall I'd be thrilled.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on May 8, 2018 12:44:37 GMT -5
Great abstract. Google has his office as permanently closed. Be hard to increase scripts from his office. The light bulb about inhalable insulin must of gone on right before retirement. "I've been wrong this whole time...." His own website doesn't show as closed (and it has 2018 copyright notice), though it does say not accepting new patients.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on May 8, 2018 12:36:05 GMT -5
Fidelity at this time is paying lending rate of 8% with borrow rate of 17%. Certainly changing fast. Well, if past loan rates were indicative of share price movement (mostly decline), maybe this dramatic change in the lending landscape is foreshadowing an eventual (maybe sooner than later) change in the trend. It has always seemed like the shorts "saw" things coming before the rest of us did. I for one just deluded myself about what was there for all to see. Then managed to slap some sense into myself so have been making better MNKD decisions for a year or more. At this point the shorts can count on further dilution, but I think their view has been muddied by the fact that other progress just might offset the dilution anticipation and/or allow it to happen at meaningfully higher price. Of course the flip side is that most longs really aren't comfortable on betting on that hopeful outcome in a meaningful way. Hence... sideways. IMO
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on May 8, 2018 12:13:56 GMT -5
Should have checked my email before posting... just got the request for my shares (in all three accounts) 20 min ago. Now I'll be able to buy an extra Starbucks coffee every month So, Sports, I can confirm indeed 2% is what Schwab is paying.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on May 8, 2018 12:02:54 GMT -5
Well, that makes me a little less sad that none of mine are on loan. Mine were all called back but now the offer is back up for 2%, you might want to check if interested. hardly seems worth the phone call
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on May 8, 2018 11:59:44 GMT -5
Loan rate decreased to 2% at Schwab. Well, that makes me a little less sad that none of mine are on loan. Wonder what the reasoning is that they have someone all set up for loans with shares available and they are soliciting new people.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on May 8, 2018 11:02:18 GMT -5
"between meals if needed"
Wonder if this patient was using CGM. If so, wonder if stats on TIR and hypos are given in the full article.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on May 8, 2018 10:34:09 GMT -5
Am I missing something? If we averaged $600k / week in sales for the year, isn’t that well within the 2018 guidance? Not that I’m happy with $31.2 mil in sales, but I don’t understand the concern that they’ll lower guidance. Perhaps you're missing that retail sales reported by Symphony include money that goes to pharmacy and middlemen so that the revenue then actually received by Mannkind is much lower. If you're merely observing that $600k/wk in revenue would hit guidance, that may well be correct, but we've not come anywhere near that in recognizable revenue to Mannkind at this point. Guidance will be the single most important thing in my opinion, with a good outcome being the reiteration of their prior guidance (fingers crossed).
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on May 8, 2018 9:56:47 GMT -5
Very quiet trading today and the last week. Eerily still. I sure hope the CC tomorrow jump starts some upward movement. Would love to see some clarification on the recent REMS news and insurance. Cautiously looking forward to tomorrow. REMS is pretty straightforward, just have to read the FDA docs that state what MNKD needed to do (that they completed). Doubt much will be said on insurance as they usually only tease at that topic without much detail.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on May 8, 2018 8:58:08 GMT -5
Formularylookup is now showing Medicare as 100% not covered.
Still think something doesn't seem right with this site's data.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on May 7, 2018 14:44:05 GMT -5
MNKD investors are a fascinating bunch. It sounds to me like from the outside, looking in. just sayin, sounds like you are talking about others, not yourself. Oh, I plead guilty to plenty of strangeness when it comes to this investment. I think I've broken many of my typical rules about investing... though trying to be better now. However, there are some behavior patterns of MNKD investors that I haven't fallen pray to, such as paranoia. Also, I try to keep a relatively even keel, so not after managements' heads one day and composing laudatory odes the next.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on May 7, 2018 14:06:06 GMT -5
This will be an epic ASM, hopefully a lot of our questions are answered! MNKD may need to hire security for this one (lol). I can see Baba rushing the podium if he doesn't hear something he likes! this is a great turn of events just a couple weeks ago people were going to attend the shareholder meeting and want mgmts head on a platter now everyone's looking forward to seeing if filet mignon and lobster is being served on that platter :-) :-) :-) MNKD investors are a fascinating bunch.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on May 7, 2018 0:30:22 GMT -5
Though someone posted the link to another site to look up formulary coverage that seems to have contradictory info. Simple logic tells us they cannot both be accurate. Belief in formularylookup may be more of confirmation bias than Occam. Occam's razor (also Ockham's razor or Ocham's razor; Latin: lex parsimoniae "law of parsimony") is the problem-solving principle that, when presented with competing hypothetical answers to a problem, one should select the one that makes the fewest assumptions. The idea is attributed to William of Ockham (c. 1287–1347), who was an English Franciscan friar, scholastic philosopher, and theologian.
Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor
---
Go to that site that supposedly contradicts FormularyLookup.com and you'll quickly discover that you can only select a maximum of 5 plans out of approximatey 4,450 commercial plans listed on FormularyLookup. It would be incredibly complex and would likely take you hundreds of hours to go through all states, five plans at a time, then assimilate to assess and compare national coverage with FormularyLookup.
If you're a perpetual skeptic/naysayer, your solution would be to go with the complex solution but THAT would indicate a true confirmation bias (e.g. "Wow, I've confirmed that there is an opposing viewpoint so, therefore, the original must be wrong). Do you notice that digger is selectively posting only a handful of poor coverages out of the many thousands summarized in the charts? Was he able to quantify the date of the updates s/he's feverishly posting?
Occam's razor would easily favor the FormularyLookup.com numbers and the deceased Franciscan, were he alive to read digger's posts, might suggest that digger go to confession...
You can sort the plans by their size. And pretty simple to search for a given name like UnitedHealth. So if one selects the top 5 largest UnitedHealth plans and get very different results from the 89% "covered" of formularylookup... it seems there is a discrepancy. I won't claim to know WHY there is. I'm just pointing out that one might want to take this with caution. There is that discrepancy, there is the fact that people (including myself) have formularies on their health plan sites that are inconsistent with it and there is the fact that formularylookup previously had major erroneous data that went up and was then corrected. You can believe whatever you wish. Lord knows most here have been believing in things for years upon years that turn out to not be true. Perhaps your "faith" will finely come through. I wish it to be true this time... as I always do. I simply separate wishes from factual evidence. I'd give it a 40/60 probability. You of course feel you have to 100% believe it, lest you blaspheme your MNKD religion.
|
|