Bioparin deal with Inozyme for 270M is dwarfed by posts on Novo Nordisk and Lilly deals that go into billions. This is the appearance by the CEO and Business Development pretending to be active. Inozyme is a weak company and enzyme drugs prospects are stagnant. Lack of vision and mismanagement.
We at Lilly may question the decision of spending $1.3B on Rznomics and the RNA technology of hearing restoration since nothing could come out of it, but that decision was not as bad as series of Novo Nordisk decisions. Back to the old dumb and dumber race. Novo Nordisk used to look down on us, but they ended dumber after all. Let's enjoy at last.
Adding to the Novo Nordisk post. SUS has been founded in 2017. Their expertise was nil. The company used the Me Too business model, building hardware employing principles introduced by others decades ago. Their entry into US was a disaster. To attract Novo Nordisk they temporarily invited Mr Singh to provide a front. Novo took the bait, since they had no expertise in the field at all.
Novo Nordisk has mastered technologies that are mature or obsolete now and lacks in-house expertise not only to conduct research and development, but even be able to evaluate technologies that can benefit the company. The 2024 examples can be putting 1.46B USD into Neomorph to develop molecular glues technology. This was not well researched decision. The company had excess of cash and underestimated competition in the GLP1 markets as lasting cash source. Selection of Neomorph was flawed. Different field at smaller scale was acquiring 60% of Single Use Systems. They did not fit into Novo Nordisk business model, did not have original technologies, but NN lacked expertise in single use systems and could not properly do the due diligence. It was blindly wanting to replace many obsolete small scale stainless steel systems with disposables.
It is not appropriate to discuss who was responsible for these decisions, but there were more similar blunders. The profile of workforce and hiring practices could be the factors.
These days of drug price cutting will see layoffs across the whole pharma spectrum. Large companies are notoriously wasteful in many respects including artificially inflated workforce. Small companies operate more efficiently. They will all suffer, the large companies through layoffs and small companies by layoffs and going under. Foreign companies would adjust too due to decrease in the US revenues.
Result will be more balanced international landscape with American patients being more fairly treated. Finally! Even if it means fewer opportunities for international leaches.
Our esteemed colleagues from Novo Nordisk gave us a boost with their opinion. Yes we are less sophisticated bumpkins with simple business model, but Indianapolis is not Copenhagen on the world stage. However, we also have problems, one being quality of personnel. Often we end up with former CMO employees, with limited qualifications and experience and foreign degrees from less than average institutions.
Big News, Our CEO is leaving. This could be anticipated considering market and stock price decline and incoming revenue reduction from the US market. There have been many causes for this, systemic, business models, personnel structure, manufacturing technologies , operations, to name a few.They could be separately analyzed and this is a task of the company to address these problems. There are also subtle influencing factors, like overly relying on NN Foundation in setting directions and affecting decisions. There was also the ivory tower attitude, as a part strategy. Managerial thinking across company is affected by the same mold coming from Copenhagen Business School. Many managers went to the school, but may lack of daily skills in the fields they operate, like technical or scientific. Often it was enough to have a Danish background and some experience in disciplines not necessarily connected with pharma. Company was lucky with hitting the target with GLP 1, which was relatively simple molecule. This however, could not last considering the above, and other deficiencies. Lilly's less sophisticated approach, is less grandiose, but more business-like. Inviting more NN coworkers to this discussion with a lot to fix.
Having two drugs on the top of the most expensive drugs list is a shame. It is clear that insurance companies increase premiums to all others for select few treated. Time to leave Sarepta.
CEO is driving down the stock by coasting. Preparation for takeover by Roche. Roche waits for further price drop to move. In such case even if Roche offers a premium most of the investors would lose money. Good job Alex
Pharma companies disguise themselves as gentle and caring lambs working hard to save lives. The scale of money involved in rare diseases cure is disproportional to resulting benefits. This is a cover up for industrial elites to live a safe and wealthy existence, whereas their technology lags behind and development progress is much slower than in other industries. Increasingly the work is offshored and the pharma companies mostly add to the cost being the wealth-consuming part in the chain. In contrast to rare diseases and gene and cell therapy that may be focused on small numbers of patients, vaccines are directed towards large populations and must be developed quickly. Being from vaccine field we have little respect for people who doodle for years to develop some marginal drugs and getting rich in the process
