He also said the former CEO's job is not in jeopardy, just days before they canned him. I agree with the posters here. The fact that he stated this means he is willing to negotiate for an acquisition.
Shorts bet Dilution was coming - 50M shares short
Shorts bet that the Adcom will vote Afreeza down - 60M short volume
Shorts bet the FDA will not approve Afrezza - 70M short volume
Shorts are betting Afrezza wil fail in the market - 90M shares short
I'll tell you why they are really shorting. They are selling shares to get the cash to pay off their banks and cocover for other losses. It's a Ponzi Scheme. It's not about anything rationale other than that's the only thing they can get away with. The only time they fold will be either BK or pps takes off and they are forced to cover. But cover for any rationale reason - they can't because they don't have the cash to buy the shares. They'll have to sell short something else to raise the cash but their bankers won't allow that unless they liquidate other short position.
So stop thinking why shorts are shorting more. A Ponzi Scheme has no other way to go.
william_gustinberg: "Most would agree that short sellers are much more experience and savvy than the average investor"
You mean the same shorts that shorted 70M shares that the FDA won't approve Afrezza? You call that smarter and savier? Speak for your own I.Q.
A letter to their investors? Why? Are they planning on asking their investors to approve something BIG related to Afrezza??
opc, I am disappointed with your shallow analysis. You know all expenses (your $120M operating expense) is reimbursed by Sanofi as Cost of Goods. You also know that "convertible debt" has mostly been converted. So what's left in your statement that is remotely correct?
Good. We could use the publicity Would make good news. Loser shorts vs satisfied customer. Guess who the public will side with
AF discloses in his articles that he does not maintain any position that he bashes. A simple FBI investigation can uncover this to be untrue. He may not directly own any position, but he is compensated by a firm of group of people who do maintain a position. That is false and misleading representation that the public may rely on to their detriment.
He testified before the AdCom and as part of the procedure had to disclose that he had no relationship with Mannkind or Afrezza- videotaped for the world to see. You are saying he lied before an enforcement agency? Is anyone that dumb?
gamblerjag, you shouldn't be investing if you only want the 'facts' because by the time you get the 'facts', everyone's moved on. Investing is about the future, not the past.
Problem is, the shorts are running a Ponzi scheme. They sell short to use the cash to cover other losses. They don't have the money to cover. So you can keep warning them all you want. They won't cover because they can't!
You know very little about health insurance. First, switching around is not really likely because in most cases, an employer only offers several choices and an employee is stuck with those few. Second, there is no such thing in the U.S. as the "first large insurance company".
The jokes on GS. Whoever pulled this stunt must be nursing a whiplash. They're busy counting their losses. Sell low buy high. TThat was not the plan. Just amazing how much wall street is just pure gambling. There's no investment going on, just pure manipulation for profit.
knox, neither. They make their shares available to the shorts to borrow and are happy with the 12% return the shorts are paying for it while waiting for the stock to really take off. If you've been around long enough you would have seen a direct correlation between institutional holdings at 22% and short interest at 22%.
If the shorts have over 200M shares short, do they get control of the company? Bwahhhhh!!!! They can short 400M shares and they can't get a seat on the board. They keep guessing wrong. Why would they be right now?