Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Rexahn Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Message Board

ofir_menkes 509 posts  |  Last Activity: Jul 12, 2016 10:34 AM Member since: Jul 27, 2008
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    Increase of 5350% in short interest.

    by dubi_calmy Jun 3, 2016 12:08 AM
    ofir_menkes ofir_menkes Jun 7, 2016 2:54 PM Flag

    gamida cell shareholders did not refuse. novartis backed out as they changed focus inside the company.

  • Reply to

    Increase of 5350% in short interest.

    by dubi_calmy Jun 3, 2016 12:08 AM
    ofir_menkes ofir_menkes Jun 7, 2016 2:11 PM Flag

    I think it was going to be $200M cash and the rest based on milestones plus some future royalties. later they invested according to $200M for the 15% they have.

  • Reply to

    Increase of 5350% in short interest.

    by dubi_calmy Jun 3, 2016 12:08 AM
    ofir_menkes ofir_menkes Jun 7, 2016 2:05 PM Flag

    you mean to say that novartis was going to buy gamida cell. I do not remember insightec being even close to being sold.

  • Reply to

    Increase of 5350% in short interest.

    by dubi_calmy Jun 3, 2016 12:08 AM
    ofir_menkes ofir_menkes Jun 7, 2016 1:50 PM Flag

    read the asco thing. I always thought they had a great chance at it, but I hope they just get bought up (gamida cell) by somebody looking to fill a gap in their portfolio in the area.
    the process is so slow. phase 3 could take as much as 3 years.
    Hopefully it would work out.

  • Reply to

    Increase of 5350% in short interest.

    by dubi_calmy Jun 3, 2016 12:08 AM
    ofir_menkes ofir_menkes Jun 7, 2016 1:39 PM Flag

    they can cover in Israel (higher volume) or they could have just bought in Israel and sold in the u.s (arbitrage).

  • Reply to

    does anyone know when EMITF will benefit..

    by starteam003 Jun 6, 2016 1:46 PM
    ofir_menkes ofir_menkes Jun 7, 2016 1:37 PM Flag

    it will. this is a slow moving process.

  • Reply to

    shares halted

    by andrewulsaker Jun 3, 2016 4:56 PM
    ofir_menkes ofir_menkes Jun 7, 2016 1:23 PM Flag

    they could not pay off that easily. they have debt (to the same lenders - fyi) of 3-4 times the size of the lp's debt ($200M). the general partner has enough EBITDA to support their debt, but if you add the other debt it will be tougher for them.

  • Reply to

    shares halted

    by andrewulsaker Jun 3, 2016 4:56 PM
    ofir_menkes ofir_menkes Jun 7, 2016 1:19 PM Flag

    in the case of any limited partnership, the only recourse for debt is the general partner. that is how mlp (master limited partnership) work. that is why the co owner of the Azure lp general partnership walked away.

  • Reply to

    shares halted

    by andrewulsaker Jun 3, 2016 4:56 PM
    ofir_menkes ofir_menkes Jun 7, 2016 1:14 PM Flag

    when market value becomes so low compared with debt weird things can happen... lets hope that they happen for the best. eventually a liquidity event will need to happen. I am guessing it will not happen until the general partner decides it bought enough units and that valuation is right (not now...).

  • Reply to

    does anyone know when EMITF will benefit..

    by starteam003 Jun 6, 2016 1:46 PM
    ofir_menkes ofir_menkes Jun 7, 2016 1:11 PM Flag

    when they reach a stage of being sold (gamida) or going public (insightec). it will take time.

  • Reply to

    shares halted

    by andrewulsaker Jun 3, 2016 4:56 PM
    ofir_menkes ofir_menkes Jun 7, 2016 11:20 AM Flag

    p/e is not relevant here (in my opinion). this is one of the cases where gaap is not a factor. I hope they write off as much as possible, so that going forward they have lower depreciation (does not mean much, but why not...).
    what counts here is: does it make sense for the banks to blow it up? I think not.
    can they sell ngl pipelines of 20,000bbl/d of c5+ when the ownership of the fractionator belongs to someone else? who would be the buyer?
    would they want to sell under utilized processing plants just when natural gas markets are about to favor the Haynesville?
    do they want to cause

  • ofir_menkes ofir_menkes Jun 7, 2016 8:24 AM Flag

    gaap or non gaap does not mean much. as long as they have cash generation to payoff interest and run the business, they will be fine. looks like $300M this quarter free cash flow. bonds trading for 90. could in theory buy back some (opportunistically).

  • ofir_menkes ofir_menkes Jun 7, 2016 8:20 AM Flag

    I am sure that somebody else bought 5M shares. for every share sold, there is a buyer.

  • ofir_menkes ofir_menkes Jun 7, 2016 4:10 AM Flag

    good rules. unfortunately private equity funds do not operate like that. they bought some old pipelines at a distressed sales in 2009, changed the name to southcross and started adding assets to it (using credit). at some point they needed an exit, so they started an mlp (aka - looking for naive investors) and started dropping down their assets in exchange for cash. cash went to repay the funds and debt accumulated at the mlp level. the mlp continued to develop the purchased assets (growth capex). at some point they bought texstar, so they have more assets to drop down later (at an increased price). the music stopped at the energy crush and here we are.

  • ofir_menkes ofir_menkes Jun 7, 2016 3:59 AM Flag

    was it not going to 0 when it was at 0.42? did you short it back then?
    in 3 years you will be arguing that the share price should not be above 10 and it will be at 15.

  • Reply to

    shares halted

    by andrewulsaker Jun 3, 2016 4:56 PM
    ofir_menkes ofir_menkes Jun 6, 2016 11:26 PM Flag

    yes, you are right. the banks would make the general partner take uppon itself $200M of extra liabilities and, as a result, have a downgrade in the loan of the general partner. that would be total of $800M - $1B of total of bad loans instead of getting paid interest (6%/year which the lp can and will pay) plus fees (any agreement amendment cost fees) while they wait for the second half of the year (haynesville getting more activity = revenues beyond MVC for the lp = EBITDA increase).
    you do know that bad loans mean extra capital that banks need to put aside?
    so, lets summerize: the banks would push the lp into bankruptcy, creating $1B of bad loans, they will not get paid for a while (until bankruptcy court allows for payments) and at the end of 2016 the company could emerge out with higher EBITDA while selling the transloading facility rights in order to reduce debt.
    You should take this scenario and offer it as part of your resume to banks in order to show them you can run a bank.
    anyway, good luck with that.

  • Reply to

    shares halted

    by andrewulsaker Jun 3, 2016 4:56 PM
    ofir_menkes ofir_menkes Jun 6, 2016 2:37 PM Flag

    no, the other way around. azur has 10 million shares, no more than one type of shares (common) and their general partner is a reasonably financially stable company.
    its true that their debt/ebitda is high, but better utilization will take care of it.

  • Reply to

    shares halted

    by andrewulsaker Jun 3, 2016 4:56 PM
    ofir_menkes ofir_menkes Jun 6, 2016 12:04 PM Flag

    same here, just with a larger position... a lot will be depending on how much activity is coming to the area after people are discovering (to their amazement) that it is much easier to make money in natural gas when the pricing is close to henry hub (after transportation expenses).

  • Reply to

    shares halted

    by andrewulsaker Jun 3, 2016 4:56 PM
    ofir_menkes ofir_menkes Jun 6, 2016 11:41 AM Flag

    I tried to. it is not an extremely transparent market right now (everything is about location, location, location). from what I did read, they are in solid areas of mostly dry gas.
    one of the questions is what is the oil price in which the transloading places make sense again to operate again? those are quick increases to EBITDA once oil goes probably into the 65+. since right now Azure is paying lease but has no revenue on these, assume that EBITDA for the rest of the business is $23M including MVC's and underutilized processing plants and underutilized ngl pipelines.
    a major problem for lenders here is that the general partner (Azure - the private company) is the operator of the mlp as part of their larger system. this will not be an appealing thing for any potential pipelines operator. the general partner is backstopping those loans and has debt of its own (which, according to the last cc, they are doing well with). the debt is probably to the same lenders...
    this is kind of sxe, but with a better general partner and less units and complexity (only in my opinion).
    anyway, good luck.

  • Reply to

    shares halted

    by andrewulsaker Jun 3, 2016 4:56 PM
    ofir_menkes ofir_menkes Jun 5, 2016 1:27 PM Flag

    I still think that bankruptcy in here would serve no one. I wonder if Azure (the general partner) could get some private equity to infuse equity for the 10 million units aes walked away from as part of the larger deal.
    infusing $30M or so in return for the units, would let the fund be 50% owner of a company with currently $20M of EBITDA against what would be $170M of debt with excess assets which are under unitized and with improving prospects for natural gas (which is the blood life of the pipeline industry).
    my guess is that natural gas prices of $3.5 at 2017 strip on average, could get a lot of developers to utilize more of their dry gas core holdings. that is what Azure depends on.
    oh, did I mention that if Azur goes down, their general partner would be on the hook for their debts (same lenders, I believe), so the lenders have nothing to gain from causing this to become a mass.
    Hope I am right and good luck to the company and to us, the shareholders.

RNN
0.2597-0.0002(-0.08%)10:17 AMEDT