Allergan Employees Beware

anonymous · Dec 27, 2019 at 10:59 AM

Does anyone know what the trade/brand name for elagolix will be when AbbVie gets approval from the FDA next year for the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding secondary to fibroids? Will elagolix keep the same name Orilissa and simply have a second indication or will AbbVie brand it differently, possibly to avoid confusion with dosing?

anonymous · Feb 14, 2020 at 3:06 PM

anonymous said: ↑

This deal may be delayed or NOT CLOSE at all.
Political platform for Dems to take down the 1%
class action by Abbvie Shareholders going on
Allergan shareholders have class action too.
Political platform for Dems to take down the 1%

Dear Chairman Simons:

In light of ongoing consolidation in the pharmaceutical sector, we write to urge the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to closely scrutinize pharmaceutical mergers that raise competition issues, including AbbVie Inc.’s (AbbVie) $63 billion bid for Allergan plc (Allergan) and Bristol-Myers Squibb Company’s (Bristol-Myers) proposed $74 billion acquisition of Celgene Corporation (Celgene).

The past several years have seen a steady increase in mergers and acquisitions across our economy, and the pharmaceutical sector is no exception. In just the first half of 2019, we have seen multi-billion dollar acquisitions announced by Pfizer and Roche in addition to the proposed AbbVie and Bristol-Myers deals. And reports indicate that pharmaceutical mergers and acquisitions are expected to increase. This industry consolidation is occurring against a backdrop of ever rising prescription drug spending and reports that one in four people taking prescription drugs have difficulty affording their medication. It is more important than ever that the FTC take appropriate action to protect consumers from acquisitions that may threaten competition in drug markets, raise drug prices, or reduce patient access to essential medications.

The proposed AbbVie/Allergan and Bristol-Myers/Celgene transactions raise significant antitrust issues. In fact, it has been widely reported that the parties involved in both acquisitions are already preparing to divest certain drug products to resolve potential competition concerns. Allergan announced that it would divest an experimental inflammatory bowel disease therapy, brazikumab, and its marketed pancreatic treatment, Zenpep. Bristol-Myers has already arranged to sell its psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis drug, Otezla, and Celgene has relinquished its rights to an experimental cancer drug, tislelizumab, to its Chinese development partner. While we understand that analyzing and addressing potential antitrust concerns in individual drug markets is part of the FTC’s review of pharmaceutical mergers, there are other potential issues that also merit investigation and serious consideration.

First, we have concerns about the potential impact of these proposed transactions on pharmaceutical innovation. The development of new drugs is essential to fostering competition, reducing drug prices, and ensuring that patients have access to new treatment options. Research has shown that pharmaceutical mergers may have a negative effect on innovation by reducing the competition to discover new therapies. More specifically, reports indicate that AbbVie is planning $1 billion in research and development budget cuts to pay off debt after the merger closes, which does not bode well for innovation at the combined company going forward. If these mergers reduce innovation, competition and patients will suffer.

In addition, combining the drug portfolios of the merging companies may give them increased negotiating leverage to force buyers to provide them with more favorable terms across multiple product categories. The AbbVie/Allergan merger would give the combined company control over AbbVie’s anti-inflammatory medication, Humira, the world’s top selling drug with U.S. sales of more than $10 billion, as well as Allergan’s dry eye drug, Restatis, and Botox. The combined Bristol-Myers/Celgene would control Bristol-Myers’s cancer drug, Opdivo, and the anticoagulant, Eliquis, in addition to Celgene’s multiple myeloma drug, Revlimid. Post-merger, the combined firms would have greater ability to condition buyers’ access to these multi-billion dollar drugs on purchases of less popular drugs in their portfolios. They could also use their increased leverage to secure favorable positions on buyers’ drug formularies by offering volume-based rebates that competitors with rival products cannot match; these “rebate traps” or “rebate walls” can have the effect of preventing alternative drugs, including more affordable biosimilars and generics, from competing.

Finally, if the competitive issues raised by these proposed mergers are resolved by consent decree, we urge the FTC to take all necessary steps to ensure that any settlements are effective in addressing any threats to competition. If divestitures are included as part of a package of negotiated remedies, it is essential that the FTC ensure that those divested products are able to compete effectively in the market. Comments last year by the Director of the Bureau of Competition indicated that the FTC may no longer allow the merging parties to keep a product that is on the market and divest a product still in development because of a history of problems with such divestitures. Yet news reports suggest that Bristol-Myers/Celgene will be allowed to retain Bristol-Myers’s marketed cancer drug, Opdivo, and divest Celgene’s development-stage cancer drug, tislelizumab. It also appears that AbbVie/Allergan intends to divest Allergan’s development-stage brazikumab to treat Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis, but retain AbbVie’s Skyrizi, which is in late stage development for the same conditions and approved for another use. We urge the FTC to ensure that the divested products in any settlements are capable of replacing the market competition that would be eliminated by the merger, even if it means compelling the merging parties to divest the more viable product. As always, if the FTC’s competitive concerns cannot be resolved by negotiated settlement, we urge the Commission to take appropriate action in district court to protect competition.

The Federal Trade Commission must carefully consider whether the proposed transactions may lessen competition, stifle innovation, or harm consumers. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Kamala Harris (D-CA), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Tammy Baldwin (D-WA), Tina Smith (D-MN), and Bernie Sanders (I-VT).
Click to expand...

anonymous · Feb 14, 2020 at 3:07 PM

anonymous said: ↑

This deal may be delayed or NOT CLOSE at all.
Political platform for Dems to take down the 1%
class action by Abbvie Shareholders going on
Allergan shareholders have class action too.
Political platform for Dems to take down the 1%

Dear Chairman Simons:

In light of ongoing consolidation in the pharmaceutical sector, we write to urge the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to closely scrutinize pharmaceutical mergers that raise competition issues, including AbbVie Inc.’s (AbbVie) $63 billion bid for Allergan plc (Allergan) and Bristol-Myers Squibb Company’s (Bristol-Myers) proposed $74 billion acquisition of Celgene Corporation (Celgene).

The past several years have seen a steady increase in mergers and acquisitions across our economy, and the pharmaceutical sector is no exception. In just the first half of 2019, we have seen multi-billion dollar acquisitions announced by Pfizer and Roche in addition to the proposed AbbVie and Bristol-Myers deals. And reports indicate that pharmaceutical mergers and acquisitions are expected to increase. This industry consolidation is occurring against a backdrop of ever rising prescription drug spending and reports that one in four people taking prescription drugs have difficulty affording their medication. It is more important than ever that the FTC take appropriate action to protect consumers from acquisitions that may threaten competition in drug markets, raise drug prices, or reduce patient access to essential medications.

The proposed AbbVie/Allergan and Bristol-Myers/Celgene transactions raise significant antitrust issues. In fact, it has been widely reported that the parties involved in both acquisitions are already preparing to divest certain drug products to resolve potential competition concerns. Allergan announced that it would divest an experimental inflammatory bowel disease therapy, brazikumab, and its marketed pancreatic treatment, Zenpep. Bristol-Myers has already arranged to sell its psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis drug, Otezla, and Celgene has relinquished its rights to an experimental cancer drug, tislelizumab, to its Chinese development partner. While we understand that analyzing and addressing potential antitrust concerns in individual drug markets is part of the FTC’s review of pharmaceutical mergers, there are other potential issues that also merit investigation and serious consideration.

First, we have concerns about the potential impact of these proposed transactions on pharmaceutical innovation. The development of new drugs is essential to fostering competition, reducing drug prices, and ensuring that patients have access to new treatment options. Research has shown that pharmaceutical mergers may have a negative effect on innovation by reducing the competition to discover new therapies. More specifically, reports indicate that AbbVie is planning $1 billion in research and development budget cuts to pay off debt after the merger closes, which does not bode well for innovation at the combined company going forward. If these mergers reduce innovation, competition and patients will suffer.

In addition, combining the drug portfolios of the merging companies may give them increased negotiating leverage to force buyers to provide them with more favorable terms across multiple product categories. The AbbVie/Allergan merger would give the combined company control over AbbVie’s anti-inflammatory medication, Humira, the world’s top selling drug with U.S. sales of more than $10 billion, as well as Allergan’s dry eye drug, Restatis, and Botox. The combined Bristol-Myers/Celgene would control Bristol-Myers’s cancer drug, Opdivo, and the anticoagulant, Eliquis, in addition to Celgene’s multiple myeloma drug, Revlimid. Post-merger, the combined firms would have greater ability to condition buyers’ access to these multi-billion dollar drugs on purchases of less popular drugs in their portfolios. They could also use their increased leverage to secure favorable positions on buyers’ drug formularies by offering volume-based rebates that competitors with rival products cannot match; these “rebate traps” or “rebate walls” can have the effect of preventing alternative drugs, including more affordable biosimilars and generics, from competing.

Finally, if the competitive issues raised by these proposed mergers are resolved by consent decree, we urge the FTC to take all necessary steps to ensure that any settlements are effective in addressing any threats to competition. If divestitures are included as part of a package of negotiated remedies, it is essential that the FTC ensure that those divested products are able to compete effectively in the market. Comments last year by the Director of the Bureau of Competition indicated that the FTC may no longer allow the merging parties to keep a product that is on the market and divest a product still in development because of a history of problems with such divestitures. Yet news reports suggest that Bristol-Myers/Celgene will be allowed to retain Bristol-Myers’s marketed cancer drug, Opdivo, and divest Celgene’s development-stage cancer drug, tislelizumab. It also appears that AbbVie/Allergan intends to divest Allergan’s development-stage brazikumab to treat Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis, but retain AbbVie’s Skyrizi, which is in late stage development for the same conditions and approved for another use. We urge the FTC to ensure that the divested products in any settlements are capable of replacing the market competition that would be eliminated by the merger, even if it means compelling the merging parties to divest the more viable product. As always, if the FTC’s competitive concerns cannot be resolved by negotiated settlement, we urge the Commission to take appropriate action in district court to protect competition.

The Federal Trade Commission must carefully consider whether the proposed transactions may lessen competition, stifle innovation, or harm consumers. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Kamala Harris (D-CA), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Tammy Baldwin (D-WA), Tina Smith (D-MN), and Bernie Sanders (I-VT).
Click to expand...

All Democrat Party ass wipes and one communist..... ooohhhh I'm so scared!

anonymous · Feb 14, 2020 at 3:08 PM

anonymous said: ↑

Does anyone know what the trade/brand name for elagolix will be when AbbVie gets approval from the FDA next year for the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding secondary to fibroids? Will elagolix keep the same name Orilissa and simply have a second indication or will AbbVie brand it differently, possibly to avoid confusion with dosing?
Click to expand...

Different name

anonymous · Feb 14, 2020 at 10:27 PM

In a presidential election year, getting back an Irish domiciled company to domicile in US will be a great talking point. Merger will happen. Also, Allergan employees who do not have AGN stock in their portfolio will be happy. So why do you say Allergan employees beware?

anonymous · Feb 14, 2020 at 10:29 PM

Your letter is from last year

anonymous · Feb 15, 2020 at 9:36 AM

Done deal, April 10th!

anonymous · Feb 24, 2020 at 12:53 PM

Does Abbvie provide field sales reps with cell phones or is there a reimbursement allowance? Not a fan of the current ALLERGAN model.

anonymous · Feb 24, 2020 at 1:13 PM

Yep they give you a cell phone to track you and make sure you aren’t helping offices with/ PA’s. Even though management knows we have to help offices get this shit drug approved..office staff can barely dress themselves. BTW...way to do AR a solid and shit can her before NSM

anonymous · Feb 25, 2020 at 7:01 PM

anonymous said: ↑

Does Abbvie provide field sales reps with cell phones or is there a reimbursement allowance? Not a fan of the current ALLERGAN model.
Click to expand...

Boy are you in for a treat. Abbvie is going to give you a tin can and a string to communicate with. Just wait to your first meeting to see how this broke ass excuse for a pharma company is run. Training will be a cluster F***! You will be running for the hills! Just pray you are given a severance package. It will be for the best.

anonymous · Feb 25, 2020 at 11:25 PM

anonymous said: ↑

Boy are you in for a treat. Abbvie is going to give you a tin can and a string to communicate with. Just wait to your first meeting to see how this broke ass excuse for a pharma company is run. Training will be a cluster F***! You will be running for the hills! Just pray you are given a severance package. It will be for the best.
Click to expand...

Oh my god are you telling the truth!

anonymous · Feb 25, 2020 at 11:39 PM

Dear AbbVie fucktards:

Please get your shit together and communicate when we're all being fired.

anonymous · Mar 21, 2020 at 4:36 PM

anonymous said: ↑

U.S. corporate debt is nearly $10 trillion, or a record 47 percent of the overall economy. If the economy unexpectedly deteriorates, credit rating agencies would likely react to a slowing economy by downgrading companies that have issued the lower-quality bonds, turning those suspected of being unable to cover their interest payments into “fallen angels.” In a flash, as all those fallen angels fell into junk territory, there would be too much speculative-grade debt for the market to absorb. Companies that already would be seeing profits shrivel from the downturn would suddenly face higher interest rates, chilling investment, forcing layoffs and spreading pain throughout the economy. During the 2009 crisis, “BBB-rated” companies — the lowest rung of investment-grade — faced borrowing costs almost 7 percentage points higher than higher-quality companies. Today, the difference, or “spread,” is just 1.4 percentage points. If the junk market were to be sufficiently disrupted, companies could be forced to default on their debts. That would likely force massive layoffs and sharp reductions in business investment, turning the financial market’s headache into a punishing economic disaster.
Click to expand...

Told y’all in December. This already is happening.

anonymous · Mar 21, 2020 at 5:27 PM

Stock buy back and Corporate bond sale may along with abbv stock tank will haunt Abbvie. I can’t see any way out of this factoring in Humira loss and government pending crackdown on Pharma pricing to pay for $2T Covid relief.

Investors are fleeing corporate bonds at a record pace, sending down shares of funds that buy investment-grade debt at a magnitude not seen since the financial crisis of 2008, according to Bank of America research. As the equity market collapses, the value of this debt has to tumble with it Leveraged firms now short on cash because they borrowed to buy back stock, pay dividends, and pay themselves face tough terms for any Federal bailouts – if authorized.” What can the selloff slamming bonds tell us in terms of expected defaults? In the near $1.5 trillion high-yield sector, 32.6% of its outstanding bonds were trading at distressed levels, as of Wednesday’s close, according to Fidson, which implies a 8.35% default rate over the next 12 months. A far more grim 86.5% subset of high-yield energy debt was distressed, or nearly a 15% market-implied default rate over the same period.

anonymous · Mar 21, 2020 at 5:38 PM

No BAILOUTS for Pharma. Especially Abbvie! Trump better realize Americans are watching who gets what and the greed of Abbvie is well documented. Y’all know I’m with DJT but I kid you not, I (and millions of other republicans) will stay home in November or vote for Biden. No joke either. This shit needs to stop!

anonymous · Mar 21, 2020 at 6:07 PM

anonymous said: ↑

No BAILOUTS for Pharma. Especially Abbvie! Trump better realize Americans are watching who gets what and the greed of Abbvie is well documented. Y’all know I’m with DJT but I kid you not, I (and millions of other republicans) will stay home in November or vote for Biden. No joke either. This shit needs to stop!
Click to expand...

STOP WRITING IN ALL RED CAPS. IT HAS BEEN ANNOYING FOR YEARS. SORRY THAT YOU LOST YOUR SHIRT H R. WHAT A FOOL FOR KEEPING EVERYTHING IN ABT/ABBV STOCK.

xoxox

anonymous · Mar 21, 2020 at 10:39 PM

anonymous said: ↑

youre not entirely correct
It will all depend on who takes over day to day operations in the field. When Actavis bought Forest it was the Forest Management that took over in the field. It was the Forest Managers that kept their reps etc at the expense of Actavis folks. Even though it was Actavis folks who had the experience and purchased Forest. Same deal with Allergan. This is just Forest with another name. They look out for their own. It is the ABBVIE reps who should be concerned
Click to expand...

They need to fire everyone that came from Forest starting with the idiot scumbag managers. In order to survive at Forest, those people had to lie like dogs. If they have survived this long, they can't be trusted. Get rid of them. You don't need the headache. They will destroy the company's reputation.

anonymous · Mar 22, 2020 at 2:47 AM

Is there any chance AbbVie scraps the deal and pay the 1.25b penalty? Like Shire

anonymous · Mar 23, 2020 at 11:21 PM

anonymous said: ↑

STOP WRITING IN ALL RED CAPS. IT HAS BEEN ANNOYING FOR YEARS. SORRY THAT YOU LOST YOUR SHIRT H R. WHAT A FOOL FOR KEEPING EVERYTHING IN ABT/ABBV STOCK.

xoxox
Click to expand...

Look what crawled out from under their rock. A pathetic slug! I just saw this now and may I remind you Karma got you once and will be coming again. Didn’t you learn your lesson? Abbv stock was 3% of my portfolio. Nice try rat.

anonymous · May 9, 2020 at 3:03 PM

anonymous said: ↑

Abbvie told shareholders they will deleverage $18 billion by 2021. Abbvie will have massive layoffs and RIF/WARN by Q320. Abbvie will SELL off Allergan divisions and keep top line revenue drugs and dump the rest. They will dissect Allergan and lay-off you folks JUST like Ian Read dissected the dozens of company’s and their workforce’s. AbbVie paid for the acquisition with around $60 worth of its own undervalued stock. AbbVies trading at a paltry 7.7 times 2019 earnings. Allergan will bring $23.5 billion in new debt and combined with AbbVie’s existing debt of $35 billion AND an additional $30 billion to finance the merger, total debt will come out to around $90 billion. That load represents 4.5 times EBITDA, a troublesome high ratio for investors. There MUST be layoffs to bring this to fruition. Look what happened Knoll employees AND most Kos employees. Look at Hospira HPD spin which was sold to Pfizer who dismantled it and sold off injectables and the device end to ICU. Look at ADD division dumped. Look at Solvay employees who were let go in mass numbers. Look at TheraSense employees who were axed. Look at Stemcentrx employees axed by Abbvie a few months ago. The list goes ON and ON and the next chapter will be written for YOU!
Click to expand...

So $18 billion to be deleveraged by 2021. $90 billion in debt with clock ticking on Humira patent and current dwindling overseas sales? This is a signal off mass layoffs coming. If you don’t see this you’re blind. Reorganization of divisions and Allergan folks will let go in droves. Q3 sounds about right!

Allergan Employees Beware

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

Useful Searches

Allergan Employees Beware

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest

anonymous Guest