FiercePharma's Top 15 WORST M&A Deals - Onyx!!

Discussion in 'Amgen' started by anonymous, Dec 3, 2019 at 1:25 PM.

Tags: Add Tags
  1. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    GREAT reading!

    FiercePharma
    by Carly Helfand |
    Dec 3, 2019 12:00pm


    Amgen/Onyx

    Deal size: $10.4 billion
    Date announced: August 25, 2013

    When Amgen agreed to nab Onyx for $10.4 billion back in 2013, multiple myeloma drug Kyprolis—central to the deal—was on a tear. After generating $64 million in its first partial year on the market, it had nearly doubled that tally with $125 million in the first few months of 2013.

    Amgen, with extensive experience in running clinical trials and marketing drugs in the cancer and cancer side-effects arena, figured it could not only keep the ball rolling, but accelerate growth through promotion and label expansion. Its sales and distribution network in Europe was a nice plus, too.

    "Amgen has a unique opportunity to add value to Kyprolis, a product which is at an early and promising stage of its launch," CEO Bob Bradway said in a statement the day the companies unveiled the deal.

    Analysts only expected that Kyprolis’ hot streak would continue as well, pegging 2019 sales at $2 billion to $2.4 billion, with some predicting up to $3 billion in peak sales. Particularly with Amgen’s top sellers staring down a future full of biosimilar competition, it sounded like a nice prospect.

    Only, Kyprolis didn’t get there—or come anywhere close. With $778 million in worldwide sales through the first nine months of the year, Kyprolis is in position to eke its way across the blockbuster barrier in 2019 for the first time. In the U.S., third-quarter sales totaled $163 million, less than $20 million ahead of where they were during the same period last year.

    One reason? Those line extensions didn’t exactly go as planned. In 2016, Kyprolis flopped a phase 3 trial in newly diagnosed patients, missing its chance to move in the front-line setting, where there are more patients who stay on therapy for longer.

    And then there are Kyprolis’ myeloma competitors, which have multiplied in recent years. The company has at times maintained that newcomers have not specifically hurt Kyprolis’ opportunity, but Amgen has still watched Celgene’s Pomalyst—launched within a year of Kyprolis—cruise to blockbuster status, with $1.84 billion in sales through the first nine months of this year.

    More recently, J&J’s Darzalex has leapfrogged from a fourth-line treatment to a first-line standout, racking up $2.17 billion over 2019’s first three quarters.

    So should Amgen never have gone after Kyprolis, or was it the Big Biotech’s postdeal execution that hurt the drug’s expansion opportunities?

    That’s still up for debate. Amgen, for its part, pointed to double-digit volume increases for the drug on its third-quarter earnings conference call.

    "Kyprolis grew 15% year-on-year driven primarily by 12% volume growth with the breadth of prescribers continuing to increase. We continue to invest behind Kyprolis and add to the growing body of clinical evidence demonstrating Kyprolis' important role in the treatment of multiple myeloma," the company said in a statement, adding that the Onyx deal also brought it an 8% royalty worldwide on Pfizer breast cancer blockbuster Ibrance.

    But no matter how you slice it, $10.4 billion is an awful lot to pay for a company whose star product has brought in a combined $4.19 billion through its first six years of ownership—and it’s difficult to argue that Amgen, which is still in need of biosimilar defense, couldn’t have spent that money more effectively elsewhere.
     

  2. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    Amgen BD biggest losers!!
     
  3. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    This was not a bad buy. This was bad execution. Read the article. The drug had great potential. Failing to get indications and sell the drug isn't BD's fault. How can you hit BD's deal model when you don't do any of the right studies to expand the business and your sales has no idea what to do with a therapeutic Oncology asset. This drug could have made so much money in another company's hands.
     
  4. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    Chalk one up for Piaquad.
     
  5. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    That's not how you spell it and no one actually calls him his last name. You clearly don't know him
     
  6. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    [​IMG]
     
  7. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    OK keep defending a bad deal, Bob and the BoD ok any deal and oversee any further development. So essentially they all failed, David included. In 2 years you’ll read the same thing on an irrational Otezla deal. Our inability to develop meaningful drugs means we overpay for mediocre products that don’t fit the strategy Bob has laid out. Price increases, share buybacks, cutting expenses and headcount is how Bob has run the company. Forbes list of top CEOs just came out, guess who’s not on it - again!?
     
  8. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    Bob is a visionary leader and you have no idea. That’s why I went to Wharton and have the ability to see greatness. Maybe you can use the Amgen bonus to help buy you a penile implant.
     
  9. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    Bob screwed up.
     
  10. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    Noice!
     
  11. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    Losers Always criticize those that have to make the hard decisions. The onyx deal was predicated on a much broader more successful development plan that never materialized. The indications that kyprolis ended up getting are pathetic. Had kyprolis mimicked velcaded regimen strategy we'd be sitting on a multi billion dollar drug. The deal was not a failure. Sean Harper and Amgen R&D failed to put kyprolis in the right patient segments to be successful. How can you succeed when the deal model has 3 additional indications, including Frontline? That's not a bad deal that's bad development strategy and a total lack of any conviction around multiple myeloma for Amgen R&D back in 2013-2015. Amgen has (had) no experience in how to properly develop this drug and compete in the space. We took a good asset and ruined it's potential. Can anyone legitimately say Kd and KRd is a well developed product? It's a joke. We just barely got an indication with Dara. Nothing with pom. Dara smoked us because they knew how to invest in a broad development strategy. So when you say Dara was a good deal it's because they INVESTED in it after acquiring it. We did not. You can't just buy an asset and not invest in it. That's what we did. Now shut the fuck up because you have no clue what you're talking about. Bob has done very well with shit revenues. He's delivered on all his financial promises. Anyone who thinks he has done a poor job has no understanding of how a company should be run and probably doesn't have a reputable education
     
  12. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    You idiots at Amgen. The BD group here is better than you all. You are the reason the stock sucks. Wish you call could be fired. That is all. Wharton baby!
     
  13. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    Oh by the way, you clearly don't get involved in any major decisions here because neither Bob nor the board of directors are involved in life cycle management for existing assets. Kyprolis once acquired had nothing to do with Bob or the board. Its failure fell squarely in the hands of Amgen development, notably Sean and Elliot, who failed to run the right trials and spend money to get indications that would put the drug on the map. I dont really blame sales or marketing for this one. The development strategy and bare bones set of indications is so bad it's not their fault. This one is purely the fault of development and anyone who doesn't see that has no idea about how acquisitions work and how pharmaceutical development works. Once you acquire an asset it's not done. The deal model has tons of assumptions around additional indications that would be achieved. If the company never pursues or gets those indications, obviously your deal model and valuation are going to be way off and you way over pay. That's not BD's fault. At that point it is out of their hands. Bob and the board didn't have anything to do with this. Why do you think Sean "left" the company. He was pretty much fired. He did a terrible job. Anyone who actually has any insight would stop shitting on Bob and realize the two people responsible for anything bad that has happened are Sean and Tony. And guess what...They're gone. You can thank Bob for that. Dave R and Murdo are FAR better. Maybe a few people will read this and learn something
     
  14. anonymous

    anonymous Guest


    All you said there is, and you didn’t need that many sentences, Bob is an idiot. He was too stupid to see he had the wrong players on his team.
     
  15. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    Yup everyone is an idiot but you. I'm sure we'd have 50 billion in sales right now if you were making the decisions. You're a chump
     
  16. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    Calm down. You're, both, pretty.
     
  17. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    Murdo came form BMS and is the same shit as Tony.
    Dave R is Sean H Jr and his handpicked loser.

    go home loser
     
  18. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    stfu you longwinded low-IQ asskisser. Anyone who yaps that much in such a non-productive manner is not useful to any organization.
    And get back to cleaning Bob's toilet
     
  19. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    What an insightful post.