|
|
Post by mnholdem on Mar 25, 2020 15:49:43 GMT -5
Did they give a reason why? I'm assuming there was enough shares supporting the nominations? This is just one reason ..they need at least three females on the board by the end of 2021 The committee is mindful of the mandate of California’s SB 826, which requires publicly traded companies headquartered in California to have at least three female directors by the end of 2021 if their board consists of six or more members. In its letter, the company stated: In evaluating candidates, the committee sought to advance the following priorities:
• Bring greater diversity to the Board
• Finance (investment banking) experience
• Experience with commercializing pharmaceutical/ biotechnology products (especially in the diabetes area)
• Digital health experience
• Managed care and health systems experience
|
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Mar 25, 2020 12:39:43 GMT -5
I wasn't certain where to put this, so I place this announcement here, as this seems as good a place as any. Earlier today I was notified today by MannKind Corporation that I was not selected by the board's Nominations and Corporation Governance Committee to be seated on the board or to be listed on the 2020 proxy. Frankly, this does not come as a surprise to me as I do not believe I am as qualified as other nominees. I would have enjoyed being an advocate for stockholders, though, and would have pushed for much greater transparency and accountability of the board of directors. Thank you for those who expressed their support. Good fortune all!  |
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Mar 24, 2020 8:22:21 GMT -5
Outstanding!  |
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Mar 23, 2020 12:04:18 GMT -5
Considering that I've been an advocate for MannKind improving transparency with stockholders, I suppose that I should disclosed that I was recently informed that MannKind's Board of Directors' Nominations and Governance Committee is still reviewing stockholder-nominated director candidates and that there has been at least one tele-interview with more planned. That's all the information I have on the topic, as of one week ago... |
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Mar 20, 2020 5:46:27 GMT -5
Unfortunately trying unproven medications may be analogous to testing parachutes. Having a set (of balls I presume you meant?) won’t mean much if an infected patient doesn’t get a 2nd chance.
|
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Mar 20, 2020 5:30:00 GMT -5
Dorms may not have the essential services a cruise ship provides such as food services that can easily handle patients’ dietary restrictions. Laundry services would be another and everything is a commercial scale operation.
|
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Mar 17, 2020 14:07:03 GMT -5
A collaboration with Immix makes no sense, although they do have a "nano-particle delivery vehicle" being used ( clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03382340 ) it's a phase 2 for cancer treatment. This PR makes me wonder if our CEO is setting himself up for a new job... |
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Mar 16, 2020 19:25:14 GMT -5
For once, I would like to see MannKind take the lead by announcing that the company will provide vouchers for free insulin to individuals/families who have lost their jobs because of the state government business closures and other social distancing measures to limit the spread of the COVID-19 virus.
Come on, management and get on this now !
|
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Mar 16, 2020 18:57:38 GMT -5
The question is significant if the device we to be used for training, such as at a clinic, but would have little relevance if BluHale were provided/prescribed to a patient and not shared. I would think that an alcohol wipe would be sufficient but, obviously, being able to have a low cost or free BluHale Pro would be ideal. |
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Mar 14, 2020 20:23:48 GMT -5
I’ll help whenever I can liane...until you’re in a better mood. ;-)
|
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Mar 4, 2020 12:39:46 GMT -5
Congrats!
|
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Mar 3, 2020 5:41:51 GMT -5
Oh yeah! Who can forget your pizza guy?
|
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Mar 1, 2020 16:17:53 GMT -5
Here's rational: Novavax' Nanoflu Phase 3 trial data may show less effectiveness than demonstrated in the Phase 2 data. Why? Simply because the four major flu vaccines are showing more effectiveness (40%-60%) this year than was demonstrated last year (15%-20%). Novavax could be releasing it Phase 3 data any day/week. What if their numbers don't demonstrated clinically significant improvement simply because the major brands of flu vaccine worked better this year? The share price could tank within hours, much like when the company reported that the ResVax trial data didn't meet its primary end points. I plan to lock in my initial investment with NVAX. The remainder (all profit) could be consider play money but I'll be keeping tight stops regardless. CEO Stan Erck has demonstrated a pattern of embellish in the past and I bought into it. It was a hard lesson. |
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Mar 1, 2020 15:54:17 GMT -5
At the 2015 ASM Sanofi's big excuse for not selling afrezza was the spirometer requirement. Al brought with him a handheld device which was about $400. We got into a discussion about Jones marketing the afrezza spirometer. Soon after Al's health got bad so I don't think he ever put a deal together. Jone's is still selling the afrezza spirometer www.jonesmedical.com/spirometry-for-afrezza/I wonder why no spirometry testing for tobacco, weed, even asthma meds, why just Mannkinds Afrezza. I'd suggest the simplest reason: because there are unknowns with Afrezza. Look at the response to the coronavirus. Seasonal flu infections and deaths dwarfs COVID-19 and yet some are panicky because there are still so many unknowns about the new virus. The FDA (like the CDC) has to assume the worst-case scenario with Afrezza until enough data is gathered about insulin and the inert FDKP particles' side-effects to the lungs. |
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Feb 29, 2020 11:45:06 GMT -5
Incentive Stock Option transactions fall into five possible categories, each of which may get taxed a little differently. With an ISO, you can: 1. Exercise your option to purchase the shares and hold them. 2. Exercise your option to purchase the shares, then sell them any time within the same year. 3. Exercise your option to purchase the shares and sell them after less than 12 months, but during the following calendar year. 4. Sell shares at least one year and a day after you purchased them, but less than two years since your original grant date. 5. Sell shares at least one year and a day after you purchased them, and at least two years since the original grant date. Each transaction has different tax implications. The first and last are the most favorable. The time at which you sell determines how the proceeds are taxed. Source: turbotax.intuit.com/tax-tips/investments-and-taxes/incentive-stock-options/L4azWgfwySo there you have it. Everything you didn't want to know. |
|
