|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Dec 1, 2017 17:14:22 GMT -5
In this case, would insurance cover the prescription? can you paint the picture for me?
(everything I know about One-Drop comes from their website and conjecture) One-Drop has a couple subscription models, Plus and Premium, that look to be made for people not being covered by insurance. They include 50/100/unlimited test strips per month, as well as unlimited coaching from experts. They have a free One-Drop Mobile app that looks to be for people who have insurance coverage, and just want to track stuff. There are many others like it, and I don't know which ones are actually used They also have One-Drop professional, which is for Docs/staff to check up on patient levels, send messages and "Stratify population and triage high-risk individuals". I assume they have to follow HIPAA security rules, but it sounds like a convenient way for a doctor or payer to review patientsA new (and made up by me today) One-Drop A+ subscription model for $yyy.yy/month would include x units of Afrezza per month, unlimited coaching and probably unlimited strips. Several levels of cost and units/month. This would still require a doctor's prescription, which would have to be on file at One-Drop. I don't think One-Drop would try to make a lot of profit on reselling Afrezza? I think he's more interested in proving that his service will get a better HbA1C reduction than any other service, and growing his base. Having the cheapest source of Afrezza outside of insurance coverage would help with that I think. This would provide MNKD with an avenue to sell (almost) directly to consumers. The question is, are regulatory hurdles for delivering perscription drugs too difficult, even if the insurance companies are completely out of the picture? It appears OnDuo may already be ahead of One Drop in signing health insurers up... and they are brand new into the market. That's the google backed competitor to One Drop. Given that there is coaching involved in One Drop and OnDuo, perhaps One Drop can deliver a better service but they'll be in for a tough fight I would imagine.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Dec 1, 2017 17:00:38 GMT -5
DBC my comment addressed to you earlier this week below. It’s about a partner interested in BUY IN. In conclusion my FANTASY is that the vote passes and then Mike thanks all the shareholders for their support in authorizing the additional shares. The next week he make an early premarket announcement that MannKind has a new investor in the company who has bought 15% of the new shares at a price of $20.00 per share. Say that’s 42,000,000 shares X $20.00 = $840,000,000 Great liquidity and an international partner. What would happen to share price if that occurred? You would see the PPS surpasss that $20.00 figure. FANTASIES do happen just ask Mike Castagna about his hometown Eagles. They are flying high. Perhaps Mike is the air beneath the wings of MannKind. Looking back over they last 24 months many of us had the bleakest view of our investment in MannKind. Look how many steps forward Mike Castagna and the board have moved the football down the field. The authorization of shares is needed in order for a buy-in partnership to even be possible. Today there is simply not enough to shares for a good deal to get done. The reason i included the quote about the TASE delisting is because 10m preferred shares became available for issuing. Selling these shares and making them convertible into a larger quantity of common shares requires authorization of new common shares and would be the best case scenario for current shareholders. There is no immediate dilution in this scenario and the conversion to common shares happens only if certain milestones are met by the partner. For example filing and approval in specific countries, sales and marketing milestones, etc, or linked to PPS (assuming the deal is written this way). The partner then also has a stake in the success of Mannkind as a company as well as significant incentive to sell more Afrezza. Why would Kresa and an unnamed healthcare related company buy at 6, well to me it signifies that they believe they were getting a deal and those shares were worth more than what they paid for them. Authorization of shares does not have to be done ahead of time. A deal and authorization of shares can be put to vote anytime. If 10M preferred need convert to anywhere near 140m common I would not view that as a best case scenario for me as a current shareholder, but your mileage may vary as the saying goes. As for buying at $6, the healthcare related company could have been an investment company and yes on the day they agreed to buy at $6 indeed the shares were worth more. If they had shorted the same number of shares on that day and then covered the short with the shares they got from the PIPE they would have made a hefty and guaranteed profit because of the shares being worth more when the deal was struck. There is no reason to read anything in particular into the authorization of shares. Management has stated they can be used for anything and everything. That is all we know about it. The rest is wild conjecture.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Dec 1, 2017 16:56:03 GMT -5
kc ... It is a great FANTASY. Not sure if you really want me to comment on whether I think that is possible. Best to hold one's fantasies close, and not solicit too much feedback. I think once you rope multiple people into it, it either destroys the fantasy or becomes more akin to a cultish group delusion rather than simply a fantasy. [offered in a lighthearted spirit] My less ambitious fantasy is that we get at least $6 a share for any newly issued shares. agree with that assessment. Somewhere in the $6 range with maybe a little premium possible, but not expected. 20% (used by Mike in his example on the last call) would be 56M shares after new shares authorized. At $6, that is $336M. Price would shoot past $6. Question is whether MC will make a play for a company like One Drop prior to partnering. Personally I don't think any marketing partner is going to involve some huge equity investment. By managements own information they are looking at a regional approach retaining control of US marketing themselves, already having signed one international partner and not yet looking at EU as a target region. I think we'd be lucky to get a small upfront payment of something like $10M or $30M rather than an investment of $336M... remember Brazil was no upfront. Personally I would not at all like an acquisition of One Drop. Not that One Drop isn't a useful tool but they are one of many in that space, and it appears MySugr is more popular and Google is now getting into that space with OnDuo and appears to have insurance coverage much stronger than One Drop. No reason for MNKD to go directly into competition with those companies. I hope $6 or above if they do a PIPE or secondary, though I certainly wouldn't guarantee it. I think the size of the authorization is an overhang that will make it easier for shorts to hold down the price. We'll still be in an uncomfortable situation with trying to wait as long as possible for scripts to rise and hopefully raise share price, but realizing that as cash dwindles the short position strengthens.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 30, 2017 21:28:16 GMT -5
kc... It is a great FANTASY. Not sure if you really want me to comment on whether I think that is possible. Best to hold one's fantasies close, and not solicit too much feedback. I think once you rope multiple people into it, it either destroys the fantasy or becomes more akin to a cultish group delusion rather than simply a fantasy. [offered in a lighthearted spirit] My less ambitious fantasy is that we get at least $6 a share for any newly issued shares.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 30, 2017 13:44:50 GMT -5
Being able to cite the STAT study (assuming it shows what we believe it will) is going to be a good bit of ammo for these types of letters I'd think. Wish we knew when that will be published.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 30, 2017 13:32:59 GMT -5
Oh No !!! Another person letting the cat out of the bag. Aw heck ... I may as well give you all more insight. The doubling of authorized shares is just a ploy to make shorts feel safe and cause them to short more. No shares will be issued ... they are just setting the trap that will spring soon!But, that is just mytakeonit ... and maybe David Shaw's also who predicts 8000% rise. Hey, 80 times current price puts us very close to $27 !!! Hmm ... hey peppy ... didn't someone else predict $27 I'm sure that was mostly in jest, though I do think it could embolden shorts. I don't think management would ever purposely do something to embolden shorts.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 30, 2017 13:21:32 GMT -5
I wish MNKD was more transparent with company plans. As an example, Mike has talked about filling with Canada but never gives a timeline. “As a general defense to activism, it is also important to develop strong shareholder engagement and communications programs, and demonstrate responsiveness to shareholder concerns. Ongoing shareholder engagement makes shareholders more likely to be supportive of management and receptive to their positions in the event of a short attack.” I do think Mike has engaged in a bit of spin or smoke and mirrors... such as RLS tease. I'll have to admit being of two minds on it. I think it presents opportunity for shorts to exploit, but the recent capital raise was at much higher price than I would have thought, and in part I think it was due to smoke and mirrors campaign. Please don't interpret that I'm claiming Mike has said anything untrue or done something unethical... I'm not. Just saying that it is a fine line to tread between selling all the positive "possibilities" vs being very transparent with timelines and likelihoods. I don't envy that aspect of Mike's job needing to sell hope, yet manage expectations all with the context of the rocky journey encountered over the past many years.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 30, 2017 13:03:28 GMT -5
I received a notice from my brokerage encouraging account holders to oppose the provision in the new federal tax code (currently working its way through Congress) that will change stock transactions to FIFO (First In, First Out). This means that the profit on a stock sale must be calculated, for tax purposes, using the oldest stock purchased against the most recently sold stock. Since stocks purchased years ago will typically have the lowest price, FIFO would result in higher capital gains taxes. Of course, you don't have to worry about capital gains this year with your MNKD stock. How do they propose handling the situation if someone has multiple brokerage accounts? Yikes, that could get messy for record keeping.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 30, 2017 12:58:41 GMT -5
We're all about sexual harassment these days! Perhaps a new channel that is devoted just to that topic? Someday, the guns will be trained on securities, but some pretty powerful people exert significant influence there. Don't tell me you've already heard from Sport's attorney
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 30, 2017 12:55:11 GMT -5
It is highly unlikely that Deerfield would ever convert if the method of calculating the price would yield something greater than where the market is trading. You should think of this as MNKD offering a discount. It would be very different if the conversion was not at Deerfield's option, then they might pay less than market price or they might pay more. That said, offering a discount for conversion of debt is not uncommon and staving off another PIPE or secondary offering could well be worth that discount. None of this is an exact science, as the timing and size of successful capital raises has to do with market sentiment.
Putting a floor on the price is wise for MNKD, but in the end they might well want to convert even below that. In the meantime the market knows they would not be forced to do so if they are willing to part with precious cash. Who knows, maybe there will be some source of additional capital/revenue before then and MNKD would choose to use cash. I'm thinking that is not likely, but I'm sure there are many here that would believe otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 30, 2017 12:36:17 GMT -5
Agree with the posts above that the Deerfield option of converting $10 million debt at around $3.25 is not a major (or not as major as some at this board believe) factor in where the PPS is right now. Someone's comments about this being a battlefield stock makes me think that there are people working the market to keep PPS below $3.25 through Jan 15th. That way Deerfield would have to take the $10 mil rather than the stock (or renegotiate). Which would be rough on Mannkind's bottom line and a negative event. Not that that's the only reason for the drop, but it could be part of why we are stuck in this range. I suppose that could be plausible goal for shorts to aim for, as it would seem negative even if another delay or conversion at lower price were negotiated as I'd suspect would be done.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 29, 2017 18:55:47 GMT -5
Wow. Someone sure doesn't want the share price to stay above $3.25. Kinda interesting how that is the exact floor set by the Dearfield financing agreement. Hmmmmm Deerfield wouldn't want it to stay at $3.25 as they don't make a lot of profit if the price is flat. What they'd want is for the price to shoot WAY up one day. Then they could agree to convert at a much lower price since they get averaged over a few days, then immediately short the stock and when shares are delivered under the convert close out the short position. Guaranteed profit. That doesn't matter at all whether the stock is at $3.25 or $6 as long as there is a nice pop over the length of the price averaging window.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 29, 2017 18:45:26 GMT -5
Not quite spanning the entire globe, as EU is conspicuously absent, but the "targets" do include some big regions. I don't think anyone has lied, but when you're merely stating something aspirational such as getting international distributors it is kinda hard to ever claim that is a lie, since anyone in their position would be wanting a suitable partner. The pertinent questions are whether there are better partners that may now be interested meeting Mike's criteria for covering larger regions... and is there any hope of seeing upfront money, which we did not for Brazil. DBC, I thought you were going to bring up the rumor of Mike talking with Elon Musk in terms of Mars... That's a huge opportunity... assuming a trip to Mars resembles the space ship in Wall-e.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 29, 2017 17:16:25 GMT -5
They've been dropping those bread crumbs ever since SNY backed out. It would take a very, very long post to include every quote where they have talked about potential partnering and international expansion. Yes, which is why i purposely started when Mike became CEO which is relevant to what's going on now with THIS management team. Matt P was not lying either, As we were told when Mike became CEO he passed on an international deal that only covered one country in the UAE. He's focused more on strategic deals and partnerships with larger entities spanning the globe. Not quite spanning the entire globe, as EU is conspicuously absent, but the "targets" do include some big regions. I don't think anyone has lied, but when you're merely stating something aspirational such as getting international distributors it is kinda hard to ever claim that is a lie, since anyone in their position would be wanting a suitable partner. The pertinent questions are whether there are better partners that may now be interested meeting Mike's criteria for covering larger regions... and is there any hope of seeing upfront money, which we did not for Brazil.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 29, 2017 17:08:22 GMT -5
Bravo for posting this. This is exactly why to vote yes on the share authorization. Shorts can cover in December after the vote or when the partnership is announced. How soon will partnership be announced? Those potential suitors might want to see the impact of the commercials. One of mikes interviews said the dtc impact takes 3-6 months? The deal gets done before more vanilla dilution is needed. The issuing of shares to a partner gives the partner skin in the game unlike the sanofi deal. Shorts will scream dilution but it is offset by 1) having more cash on hand and 2) credible partner with potential afrezza sales. To be fair, they have already closed one international partnership for Brazil. I would hope MNKD doesn't have to entice a partner with shares to close a deal. They just need to pick regional partners that don't have competitive insulin offerings. I doubt having shares would have stopped SNY from dropping Afrezza, and dumping the shares into the market as well.
|
|