|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 29, 2017 16:57:16 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.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 29, 2017 16:55:14 GMT -5
With all the regular heavy hitters who’ve already responded to this thread, (including the guy asking the question) I can’t believe no one has even mentioned the number 1 factor influencing the share price, and will continue to do so until resolved..... DEERFIELD ..... $3.25...... Jan 15th Dr. D probably knows more about this company, and any potential happenings, than it’s CEO. The questions I’d like to ask....... Why bump the $10 mil payment due only 2 1/2 months to Jan 15th? While making MNKD hold the $10 mil in cash. Is it because they know of possible partnerships or deals that will result because of the new shares after Dec 13th? It can’t really be just because MNKD wants to pay in shares instead of cash because they have the 4 mil shares now without needing the vote. What ever it is, it’s pretty clear to me that Dr. D gave themselves 1 month to convert after the vote. So my guess is that we’re not going up anytime before that situation is resolved..... I will say that $2.30 is my target low..... I’d love to see a quick drop there soon, vote goes thru, Dr D converts, and we’re off!!!!! Maybe a partnership in Q1, FDA filing, RLS update, continued rise in scripts, study results, all to keep it going. If it's at $2.30, Deerfield would need to be dumb as a box of rocks to convert at $3.25. Though I suspect if we're trading below $3.25 in Jan that MNKD would offer them a new deal on conversion at a discount to wherever the market price is. Deerfield has bumped payments like this before, so I don't see anything particularly interesting that they've done it again. It's nice that they are playing ball with MNKD, though when they get to convert at a discount or an averaged price as they would now, it gives them a possibility of having a nice profit that they can lock in by shorting the stock. Dilution for us, but far better than them demanding cash at every opportunity. In the big scheme of things I don't think this chunk of debt due Jan is large enough to be a sole factor that would hold the price around the minimum end of the conversion range. It might have had some psychological effect on trading given that we really haven't had other factors driving price.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 29, 2017 14:12:47 GMT -5
Castagna: "I think it's a good value today. If I could buy more, I would."
Why, exactly, can't you buy more, Mr. Castagna? SEC restrictions on insider trading generally aren't an issue if you file a planned buy and you're past the blackout period that typically precedes an earnings call. Unless, of course, you can't buy stock at this time because you possess insider knowledge that a near-term pivotal/material event is imminent...
Maybe. Or he's not flush with cash burning a hole in his pocket. I'm betting it's either an acquisition offer from Amgen, needing money for kids college tuition, or Mike's got a gambling problem. Those are the top three options offered by my ouija board.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 29, 2017 13:55:40 GMT -5
My stance is we are extremely under valued and over sold at this point in time for more reasons then i care to type out in this thread. My guess is that "the one guy" mentioned above is 100% right and we will see double digits THIS year and not next after the vote in December. I'll be thrilled (possibly to the point of cardiac arrest or stroke) if you get to tell me "I told you so". I'll be less thrilled if I get to say it. Hope I'm wrong.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 29, 2017 13:36:27 GMT -5
Suspect that we will see the TRx go over 500 in the next couple of weeks, maybe 550-600 (i say this with a wince) due to commercials. Wondering if this will be enough upward push to stave off the sellers that need to take their tax losses from our fall run up. Suspect Jan will be a great month, as I suspect a few additions of our little gem to some larger formularies in the new year. My guess is we see a low in DEC of somewhere in the $2.25 to 2.50 range (wincing again as I say this). Opinions as always appreciated? OOG I believe 2018 formularies are already out. Management made reference to talking to insurers in Jan, but that probably won't translate into changes in January. I think some PBMs/insurers update formularies twice a year so it may be summer before changes would be reflected if talks in Jan are successful. I wouldn't rule out hitting the range you predict, but I'll be a little more optimistic and say we stay in $3s range as long as scripts continue to show upward trend... though that is purely a wild guess. I certainly don't think we'll shoot up to $10 as the one guy is (or was) pushing. That seems unrealistic.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 29, 2017 13:17:41 GMT -5
Wish I bought more DXCM than I did when they had weakness on Libre US approval.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 29, 2017 12:47:03 GMT -5
From Oct 15 to Oct 31st, 4 million more shares were sold short, due to increased supply. With no new good news, and after a big price spike, that's going to drive PPS down That price action drove PPS down below $3.25. Meaning that at any time Deerfield could have pulled the trigger and gotten their 10M debt paid in shares (I don't think we would be informed?). We've seen in the past year that Deerfield has sold shares after they've been acquired but the timeframe is tough to gauge. So it's possible they have been selling some too, and that amount of shares is ~3.4 million. From Nov 1st to Nov 15th, 600k more shares were sold short Stock gamesmanship is one of the factors in pushing PPS down here, with the upcoming vote for more shares keeping longs from doing much buying. I'm hoping we get some good news at the vote. Not huge news, just that we hit guidance. I think this year is too soon to see any results from regional ads. Missed my chance to buy more at $2.80, ah well. There may be other opportunities Being below $3.25 means the opposite. Deerfield, as with anyone, is not going to pay $3.25 to get shares when they are trading below that in the open market.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 28, 2017 21:33:14 GMT -5
Would have liked it a lot more if he'd said $100M, $500M or $1B. $100M is basically break even. We'll go belly up if we plateau at $50M. He mentions this in his context of “12-18 month view” We'll that's a good spin on it. Ever thought of becoming a White House Press Secretary.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 28, 2017 19:37:55 GMT -5
By the way, in the following statement of Mike "So it's really a matter of are we going to be $50 million, $100 million, or $500 million", he was really referring to the annual sales of Afrezza (rather than the market cap of Mannnind). I would like to point this out in case someone here would read that comment as referring to market cap of Mannkind. Would have liked it a lot more if he'd said $100M, $500M or $1B. $100M is basically break even. We'll go belly up if we plateau at $50M.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 28, 2017 19:30:51 GMT -5
Nate talking about the vote...read from the bottom up. NatesNotes oneking @thomasedward needed to fight off a hostile bid, I imagine most of them will sit on the shelf collecting dust until actually needed 1 14 Nov. 7 at 3:22 PM NatesNotes oneking @thomasedward at some point, they will likely issue a portion of those shares to help add fuel to the fire, yes; however, unless 1 14 Nov. 7 at 3:20 PM NatesNotes oneking @thomasedward ought to carry them through for plenty of years to come...I certainly hope that is the understatement to end all understatements. Imagine if they burn through these 140M and then decide to double again to 560M. Before you know it we'd be doing another reverse split. 140M "ought" to be way more than they would ever need. Stay down you horse... [whack!] I said stay down... [whack!] Could've sworn I saw that horse twitch.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 28, 2017 17:40:13 GMT -5
Well, I don't see any up "trend" over a one week period... looks like a lot of sound and furry amounting to nothing for a month now. Though taken over 6 months we're up... so I'll chalk that up as a win for management. Suppose if you were to look at the competing scripts and saw less this week than past week(s)? Probably doesn't mean anything. Hopefully you aren't suggesting that you think you see Afrezza eating into Novolog or Humalog at this point. Our sales are still well under a rounding error for their sales. I'm somewhat encouraged by the script growth, but what is really needed is many more doctors writing scripts and I think the slow increase in NRx still shows that a lot of new doctors aren't yet jumping on board. I'm guessing we're still far under the number of active prescribers that there were right before SNY pulled the plug on marketing.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 28, 2017 17:36:11 GMT -5
DBC, nice typo! "furry" Nonetheless, excellent use of the famous phrase, and you know what Will said in the same quote - "tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow" and that does sound a lot like MNKD, so kudos to you! Don't you know about the "furry" pattern in technical analysis? I'm sure Peppy can explain the significance better than I. I think you have to be able to discern which animal to know whether it is a good pattern or a bad pattern.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 28, 2017 16:54:07 GMT -5
thekindaguyiyam... likelihood of BK is far less now, in my assessment. However, authorizing shares does not somehow magically make money available to the company. Companies do go bankrupt with shares authorized and unissued quite often. At this point my fear of bankruptcy is pretty much gone, but I do fear significant dilution. I would totally agree that authorizing some additional shares is prudent at this point and that adequate capitalization is necessary. I simply think 140M is a mistake. If believing in Afrezza or technosphere logically meant that 140M is the right amount then I'd be fully on board. I simply don't see the connection of stating that you believe in those things as supporting a need to double the number of shares. In fact quite the opposite. If there is as much potential as some would like to believe (and short term deals in the offing) then management should need far, far fewer shares than doubling the number. I agree with you that in all likelihood there are enough yes votes, but that doesn't keep me from encouraging people to exercise their shareholder right to say NO. Even if/when this is approved I shall remain a shareholder and hope for the best.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 28, 2017 16:32:21 GMT -5
I don't think I'd take one day as having broken a trend.Of course Kovacocy is telling shorts to cover. He has predicted $10 share price by end of year. I think this share authorization is helping shorts not hurting them, and that the generally assumed "yes" vote on this is already being reflected in the share price weakness. That said, I think management has set themselves up with a bit of a lose-lose scenario as MNKD detractors will beat up on MNKD either way... i.e. "management thinks they need to dilute by 50% before reaching profitability and based on history they probably will" if yes vote and "look, shareholders don't have confidence in management" if no vote. So I don't anticipate share price strength in either case. It will now take some real good news to get us back on strong share price appreciation path, IMO. How about one week? No? Didn't think so either. However, OOG's new comparison of competing scripts is interesting compared to prior week ( mnkd.proboards.com/post/131442/thread). Maybe there is a downtrend, somewhere...? Well, I don't see any up "trend" over a one week period... looks like a lot of sound and furry amounting to nothing for a month now. Though taken over 6 months we're up... so I'll chalk that up as a win for management.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 28, 2017 15:14:45 GMT -5
(another made up answer), they have word that they have 50%+1 of the votes needed & are now putting the finishing touches of a buy in agreement. Speights: You announced the upcoming stockholder meeting on authorizing around 140 million new shares. Why that number? Do you anticipate any pushback or difficulty getting the authorization approved?Castagna: The purpose of the 140 million --- there is no right or wrong number. You could have went for 20 million. you could have went for 200 million. There are 140 million outstanding shares now, so we're just increasing that count to 280 million. The reality is that if you want to make an acquisition, you have to have shares. If you want to continue to expand the company, you might need shares available to do things. To do partnerships, you could need shares, to bring in an ownership in the company.So we only have 4 million shares left. That's not in the interest of shareholders to run a company and have zero options on the table if things pop up over the next two to three years. So what I didn't want to do, honestly, is say I want 20 million shares and everybody says, "Oh, we have 10% dilution coming." You needed to have a number that was reasonable but not too absurd. I think that's what's important.
So, what if the interview answer was, perhaps, maybe, in order of preference/precedence? - The reality is that if you want to make an acquisition, you have to have shares. (Who/what is the acquisition? Arguably laughable at this time to make any major acquisition, but something smaller that may make sense?
e.g., a smaller start-up like One Drop?) - If you want to continue to expand the company, you might need shares available to do things. (e.g., employee incentives?)
- To do partnerships, you could need shares, to bring in an ownership in the company. (e.g., speaks for itself)
This is actually one of the stranger things Mike has said. Setting aside that his math is incorrect it seems to be a misreading of the situation they are in. If it were 20M shares he acts like people would assume something bad and that there would be significant (ooo, scary, 10% dilution), whereas if he makes the number of shares 7x larger, people aren't going to fear the dilution? 20M is scary for people so let's go for something that is so large it is just a little absurd, "but not too absurd". Makes no sense. I assume he is actually aware of the history of MNKD and how there has been massive dilution in the past. Yes, Mike is new but that doesn't erase previous decisions by management and BoD. Yes, the bus driver is new, but the safety record of the bus company isn't something the bus company should assume is a non issue.
|
|