Seriously...

[Anonymous]

Has anyonye seriously received an offer? The last post turned into a bitch fest. I was told by Leaders Inc. to hold tight while some loose ends were tied up but it'll be worth the wait. Salary? Bonus? Car reimbursement? Stock options?

 

[Anonymous]

Has anyonye seriously received an offer? The last post turned into a bitch fest. I was told by Leaders Inc. to hold tight while some loose ends were tied up but it'll be worth the wait. Salary? Bonus? Car reimbursement? Stock options?

Dude, listen up. This Savient nightmare is just beginning. With the news that they fucked up the drug batch and the horrible interview process and screening bullshit that has been going on, don't count on anything from this outfit and or the recruiters. This was a last ditch scramble to temporarily hire a bunch of goofs to tote the Kyrstexxa line, with no coverage, no leadership, a bunch of washed up money hungry RBD's who have the wrong intentions and assbackwards approach to this launch. The warnings, writing on the wall and the scuttle bugging by the board and investors placing giant doubt and the skeptical nature of an over priced, niche product and the INABILITY to secure partnership and a sales and marketing machine behind this launch was destined for failure months ago. All you had to do was connect the dots from this board, all the info has been posted about this on here, with ONE RBD loser trying to rebut facts and spread lies and misconceptions. The news today about the manufacturing blunder is no shocker......

 

[Anonymous]

NEW YORK (Dow Jones)--Savient Pharmaceuticals Inc. (SVNT) shares lost nearly half their value Monday after the drug company said it hasn't yet had success in its attempt to sell itself.

A big takeover premium had been built into the stock after its gout treatment, Krystexxa, was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration last month. After the approval, the company made the unusual move of trying to launch the drug and sell itself at the same time, all without raising cash.

But on Monday, Savient said its process to identify a "strategic transaction for the sale of the company" didn't result in a sale at this time. Savient said it is still working toward the commercial launch of Krystexxa, which it expects to be available by prescription in the U.S. later this year.

In recent trading, shares plunged 43% to $12.32 on heavy volume, a loss in market capitalization of about $634 million from Friday's close, and earlier fell as low as $10.43. The stock is now below the $14 range where it had traded before Krystexxa was approved last month.

The company, which couldn't be immediately reached for comment, didn't provide details on why it hasn't been able to secure a buyer, but analysts said the difficulties likely stemmed from uncertainty surrounding the market size for Krystexxa.

Krystexxa targets a hard-to-treat form of gout, a painful form of arthritis. The company has put the potential U.S. market size at 170,000 patients, but several analysts' estimates were much lower.

Summer Street Research Partners analyst Carol Werther estimated the U.S. market size for the drug was closer to 10,000 to 25,000 patients, in part because of the drug's side effects. She said large pharmaceutical companies likely want to wait to see how the launch goes before they consider buying the company.

Companies that had been seen as potential acquirers of Savient included those that already sell drugs to rheumatologists for diseases like arthritis, such as Johnson & Johnson (JNJ), Abbott Laboratories (ABT), Pfizer Inc. (PFE) and Amgen Inc. (AMGN).

Savient hasn't yet determined the price of the drug, but company executives said on a conference call last month that it would have a "significant premium or a multiple" above the anti-inflammatory biologics that command more than $20,000 a year.

Roth Capital Partners analyst Andrew Vaino, who estimated the potential U.S. market size for the drug is about 40,000 to 45,000 patients, said he doesn't think an acquisition is off the table for Savient.

"Just because they're not selling themselves today doesn't mean that in six months, if things are going well with the Krystexxa launch, that they won't be able to sell themselves at that point," Vaino said.

With expectations of a takeover getting pushed out, market observers think Savient may soon need to tap the capital markets. Roth's Vaino said Savient will likely want to do a capital raise sooner rather than later, before the balance sheet deteriorates.

 

[Anonymous]

Dude, listen up. This Savient nightmare is just beginning. With the news that they fucked up the drug batch and the horrible interview process and screening bullshit that has been going on, don't count on anything from this outfit and or the recruiters. This was a last ditch scramble to temporarily hire a bunch of goofs to tote the Kyrstexxa line, with no coverage, no leadership, a bunch of washed up money hungry RBD's who have the wrong intentions and assbackwards approach to this launch. The warnings, writing on the wall and the scuttle bugging by the board and investors placing giant doubt and the skeptical nature of an over priced, niche product and the INABILITY to secure partnership and a sales and marketing machine behind this launch was destined for failure months ago. All you had to do was connect the dots from this board, all the info has been posted about this on here, with ONE RBD loser trying to rebut facts and spread lies and misconceptions. The news today about the manufacturing blunder is no shocker......

Im loving your 'lone gunman' rbd theory escape goat. It's a good thing that you're just one of a chorus of concerned Samaritans trying to save us all from making a big mistake. In fact you and several of your friends all posted the exact same shit (again) on 3 different threads within 10 minutes.
I'm not sure how you keeping getting your hands free of the straightjacket so that you can type, but I think it might be time to hang it up.
And yes it was your posts on the last thread about offers that the op was referring to when he mentioned that it broke into a bitchfest so.....to answer the op's question, yes some offers are out.
How about anyone with info to answer the particulars chimes in?

 

[Anonymous]

Offers are going out. When did you interview? and where? if its been more than a week I would be asking the manager who interviewed you, NOT cafepharma idiots.

 

[Anonymous]

NEW YORK (Dow Jones)--Savient Pharmaceuticals Inc. (SVNT) shares lost nearly half their value Monday after the drug company said it hasn't yet had success in its attempt to sell itself.

A big takeover premium had been built into the stock after its gout treatment, Krystexxa, was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration last month. After the approval, the company made the unusual move of trying to launch the drug and sell itself at the same time, all without raising cash.

But on Monday, Savient said its process to identify a "strategic transaction for the sale of the company" didn't result in a sale at this time. Savient said it is still working toward the commercial launch of Krystexxa, which it expects to be available by prescription in the U.S. later this year.

In recent trading, shares plunged 43% to $12.32 on heavy volume, a loss in market capitalization of about $634 million from Friday's close, and earlier fell as low as $10.43. The stock is now below the $14 range where it had traded before Krystexxa was approved last month.

The company, which couldn't be immediately reached for comment, didn't provide details on why it hasn't been able to secure a buyer, but analysts said the difficulties likely stemmed from uncertainty surrounding the market size for Krystexxa.

Krystexxa targets a hard-to-treat form of gout, a painful form of arthritis. The company has put the potential U.S. market size at 170,000 patients, but several analysts' estimates were much lower.

Summer Street Research Partners analyst Carol Werther estimated the U.S. market size for the drug was closer to 10,000 to 25,000 patients, in part because of the drug's side effects. She said large pharmaceutical companies likely want to wait to see how the launch goes before they consider buying the company.

Companies that had been seen as potential acquirers of Savient included those that already sell drugs to rheumatologists for diseases like arthritis, such as Johnson & Johnson (JNJ), Abbott Laboratories (ABT), Pfizer Inc. (PFE) and Amgen Inc. (AMGN).

Savient hasn't yet determined the price of the drug, but company executives said on a conference call last month that it would have a "significant premium or a multiple" above the anti-inflammatory biologics that command more than $20,000 a year.

Roth Capital Partners analyst Andrew Vaino, who estimated the potential U.S. market size for the drug is about 40,000 to 45,000 patients, said he doesn't think an acquisition is off the table for Savient.

"Just because they're not selling themselves today doesn't mean that in six months, if things are going well with the Krystexxa launch, that they won't be able to sell themselves at that point," Vaino said.

With expectations of a takeover getting pushed out, market observers think Savient may soon need to tap the capital markets. Roth's Vaino said Savient will likely want to do a capital raise sooner rather than later, before the balance sheet deteriorates.

Wow, if there is going to be a "significant premium" for the cost of Kyrstexxa over the unaffordable current biologics, this drug will NEVER sell....... never. Who is making these decision and POA for the launch. Sounds absurd and very unintelligent. Business savvy seems to be lacking along with market intelligence and statistics are being over shot and set up for failure.

 

[Anonymous]

Im loving your 'lone gunman' rbd theory escape goat. It's a good thing that you're just one of a chorus of concerned Samaritans trying to save us all from making a big mistake. In fact you and several of your friends all posted the exact same shit (again) on 3 different threads within 10 minutes.
I'm not sure how you keeping getting your hands free of the straightjacket so that you can type, but I think it might be time to hang it up.
And yes it was your posts on the last thread about offers that the op was referring to when he mentioned that it broke into a bitchfest so.....to answer the op's question, yes some offers are out.
How about anyone with info to answer the particulars chimes in?

The only "offers" if you even want to call them that, that are out are to a few "hold overs" from when they had to suspend the sales force last year, deja vu all over again folks.....

 

[Anonymous]

1. The press release about the takeover premium being built into the stock price is from months ago.

2. Companies and people take risks every day - some work some don't. We'll all see about this one over time.

3. Offers are going out to candidates who have been chosen, some of whom were involved last year and some who are newcomers.

4. In some territories, decent candidates have been identified, but searches continue so that we can be sure to get the best people for the positions. Past experiences are considered and are important, but more importantly it's based on how people do in the interviews and how we feel they will fit with what we need for the launch. That's why delays are occurring.

5. We understand that waiting to hear about a job offer is torturous and are doing our best to keep people informed. If it doesn't happen fast enough for people's satisfaction, we are sorry.

6. We are a small group and Leaders is a relatively small firm. If you've been involved with startups/small pharma, you know that everyone is doing a lot of different things and is overwhelmed most of the time. That's part of the excitement. You can either handle that or you can't. If you can, hang in there and keep communicating appropriately. If you can't, then you wouldn't enjoy the job any way so keep looking for something that better matches up with what you would like.

7. Why all of the animosity? Everyone makes choices and some of us have chosen this. Have we done anything to hurt you or make your life worse? No...we're all just trying to make a living and position ourselves for success based on what we know and feel at the time.

8. In this job market, especially in our industry, there are no more "perfect" jobs. It's either big pharma/biotech with process and BS out the ears as well as the potential for layoffs, or small to medium pharma/biotech where risk is high for takeover, buyout or just sheer not enough resources to turn the corner.

9. In my opinion, for whatever it's worth, there are some bright, quality people here and DR is an outstanding leader. We are meeting with excellent candidates for the most part, who are interested in and positive about this opportunity - that's all we can ask.

10. The compensation package is very competitive and opportunities to launch a first in class drug are rare. This has the possibility to be great and also has the risk of being short term. No one is trying to deceive anyone and our offering and environment are pretty transparent so that people can make their own decisions appropriately.

You can all keep piling on the hate and disparaging comments based on whatever ax you have to grind with the company and/or people, but at least be honest with yourself about where you're coming from...it's not a pretty place.

 

[Anonymous]

1. The press release about the takeover premium being built into the stock price is from months ago.

2. Companies and people take risks every day - some work some don't. We'll all see about this one over time.

3. Offers are going out to candidates who have been chosen, some of whom were involved last year and some who are newcomers.

4. In some territories, decent candidates have been identified, but searches continue so that we can be sure to get the best people for the positions. Past experiences are considered and are important, but more importantly it's based on how people do in the interviews and how we feel they will fit with what we need for the launch. That's why delays are occurring.

5. We understand that waiting to hear about a job offer is torturous and are doing our best to keep people informed. If it doesn't happen fast enough for people's satisfaction, we are sorry.

6. We are a small group and Leaders is a relatively small firm. If you've been involved with startups/small pharma, you know that everyone is doing a lot of different things and is overwhelmed most of the time. That's part of the excitement. You can either handle that or you can't. If you can, hang in there and keep communicating appropriately. If you can't, then you wouldn't enjoy the job any way so keep looking for something that better matches up with what you would like.

7. Why all of the animosity? Everyone makes choices and some of us have chosen this. Have we done anything to hurt you or make your life worse? No...we're all just trying to make a living and position ourselves for success based on what we know and feel at the time.

8. In this job market, especially in our industry, there are no more "perfect" jobs. It's either big pharma/biotech with process and BS out the ears as well as the potential for layoffs, or small to medium pharma/biotech where risk is high for takeover, buyout or just sheer not enough resources to turn the corner.

9. In my opinion, for whatever it's worth, there are some bright, quality people here and DR is an outstanding leader. We are meeting with excellent candidates for the most part, who are interested in and positive about this opportunity - that's all we can ask.

10. The compensation package is very competitive and opportunities to launch a first in class drug are rare. This has the possibility to be great and also has the risk of being short term. No one is trying to deceive anyone and our offering and environment are pretty transparent so that people can make their own decisions appropriately.

You can all keep piling on the hate and disparaging comments based on whatever ax you have to grind with the company and/or people, but at least be honest with yourself about where you're coming from...it's not a pretty place.

Waiting to an offer is one thing, waiting for an interview after being told that an interview is being set up for you and then having the silent treatment with no feedback but to "wait it out " is unacceptable. We all get that this is going to not be a smooth nor professional experience up front and if chosen and if one decides to come on board ultimately, things will have to change on the communication and protocol on how to recruit, train, and communicate with perspective hires.

I know for a FACT that some of SAvient's best candidates and the ones who would have made a most impact for the launch were passed over and never even had an interview set up yet. They are being told to wait it out and that if things change the will be re contacted at that point in time. This is not how you attract or maintain the best of the best. It sounds like many of the RBDs are working under the table with trying to get former reps in to work under them to protect their ass vs. hiring someone that leaders picked out and may not have the security blanket and political ties to it like the safety hire of nepotism for the RBD.

This system that is going on here with interviews, who is getting them, who is not, is all bush league and turned me off, way off. And I have heard the same thing over and over again from other cand. who were also told they were the best choice and to expect an interview and offer shortly after....... you dont tell reps that when w all have multiple decisions to make with other companies in the mix at the same time. YOu are either lying right to our faces or you have no say in who is being interviewed because the RBD is shooting down you top 5 cand. and swapping in his top 5 from previous relationships......it is a stinky low brow way to hire for this salesforce...that is all I am saying, and it is hard to argue!!!!!

 

[Anonymous]

Waiting to an offer is one thing, waiting for an interview after being told that an interview is being set up for you and then having the silent treatment with no feedback but to "wait it out " is unacceptable. We all get that this is going to not be a smooth nor professional experience up front and if chosen and if one decides to come on board ultimately, things will have to change on the communication and protocol on how to recruit, train, and communicate with perspective hires.

I know for a FACT that some of SAvient's best candidates and the ones who would have made a most impact for the launch were passed over and never even had an interview set up yet. They are being told to wait it out and that if things change the will be re contacted at that point in time. This is not how you attract or maintain the best of the best. It sounds like many of the RBDs are working under the table with trying to get former reps in to work under them to protect their ass vs. hiring someone that leaders picked out and may not have the security blanket and political ties to it like the safety hire of nepotism for the RBD.

This system that is going on here with interviews, who is getting them, who is not, is all bush league and turned me off, way off. And I have heard the same thing over and over again from other cand. who were also told they were the best choice and to expect an interview and offer shortly after....... you dont tell reps that when w all have multiple decisions to make with other companies in the mix at the same time. YOu are either lying right to our faces or you have no say in who is being interviewed because the RBD is shooting down you top 5 cand. and swapping in his top 5 from previous relationships......it is a stinky low brow way to hire for this salesforce...that is all I am saying, and it is hard to argue!!!!!

Actually, it's very easy to argue.

If you've ever led a team you would know that hiring people who you know first hand and trust is highly desirable. No matter how good a candidate looks on paper or in person, there is no substitute for first hand experience.

Also, if your biggest problem is having multiple offers to sort out, you're doing OK. I've been in the position of working multiple interviewing processes at once and the timing never comes together in terms of having all of the offers on the table at once.

Your comment about knowing for a FACT who the best choices are is kind of silly when you really think about it given the subjectivity of any hiring decision and the massive number of variables involved. Again, I would question whether you've ever hired someone in your life.

 

[Anonymous]

Waiting to an offer is one thing, waiting for an interview after being told that an interview is being set up for you and then having the silent treatment with no feedback but to "wait it out " is unacceptable. We all get that this is going to not be a smooth nor professional experience up front and if chosen and if one decides to come on board ultimately, things will have to change on the communication and protocol on how to recruit, train, and communicate with perspective hires.

I know for a FACT that some of SAvient's best candidates and the ones who would have made a most impact for the launch were passed over and never even had an interview set up yet. They are being told to wait it out and that if things change the will be re contacted at that point in time. This is not how you attract or maintain the best of the best. It sounds like many of the RBDs are working under the table with trying to get former reps in to work under them to protect their ass vs. hiring someone that leaders picked out and may not have the security blanket and political ties to it like the safety hire of nepotism for the RBD.

This system that is going on here with interviews, who is getting them, who is not, is all bush league and turned me off, way off. And I have heard the same thing over and over again from other cand. who were also told they were the best choice and to expect an interview and offer shortly after....... you dont tell reps that when w all have multiple decisions to make with other companies in the mix at the same time. YOu are either lying right to our faces or you have no say in who is being interviewed because the RBD is shooting down you top 5 cand. and swapping in his top 5 from previous relationships......it is a stinky low brow way to hire for this salesforce...that is all I am saying, and it is hard to argue!!!!!

It sounds like your problem is with Leaders. As the last poster just said very effectively, your points are easy to argue. Remove yourself from the situation personally for a moment. Ask yourself, if you were a newly named (or just rehired) RBD and you were handed a stack of resumes from leaders and you also had some previous (well qualified) contacts interested what you would do? Relationships matter both in accounts and within teams. Especially when there is risk involved and a launch at stake.
Who's issue is it when someone is "told they were that best choice and to expect an interview and offer shortly after.." by a recruiter. That just seems a bit off doesn't it? I mean if they can tell you that you should expect an offer, why do you even need to interview? BECAUSE IT ISN'T THE RECRUITERS DECISION, so if you were one of their "top 5 candidates" that doesn't mean you'll be viewed the same way by the RBD.
The logistics and communications issues - Leaders as well I'd say. And my experiences with them were similar. The difference is that I didn't believe every word that came out of their mouth (when I actually did hear anything from them), and when they fell short of what they promised, I wasn't surprised or offended.

 

[Anonymous]

1. The press release about the takeover premium being built into the stock price is from months ago.

2. Companies and people take risks every day - some work some don't. We'll all see about this one over time.

3. Offers are going out to candidates who have been chosen, some of whom were involved last year and some who are newcomers.

4. In some territories, decent candidates have been identified, but searches continue so that we can be sure to get the best people for the positions. Past experiences are considered and are important, but more importantly it's based on how people do in the interviews and how we feel they will fit with what we need for the launch. That's why delays are occurring.

5. We understand that waiting to hear about a job offer is torturous and are doing our best to keep people informed. If it doesn't happen fast enough for people's satisfaction, we are sorry.

6. We are a small group and Leaders is a relatively small firm. If you've been involved with startups/small pharma, you know that everyone is doing a lot of different things and is overwhelmed most of the time. That's part of the excitement. You can either handle that or you can't. If you can, hang in there and keep communicating appropriately. If you can't, then you wouldn't enjoy the job any way so keep looking for something that better matches up with what you would like.

7. Why all of the animosity? Everyone makes choices and some of us have chosen this. Have we done anything to hurt you or make your life worse? No...we're all just trying to make a living and position ourselves for success based on what we know and feel at the time.

8. In this job market, especially in our industry, there are no more "perfect" jobs. It's either big pharma/biotech with process and BS out the ears as well as the potential for layoffs, or small to medium pharma/biotech where risk is high for takeover, buyout or just sheer not enough resources to turn the corner.

9. In my opinion, for whatever it's worth, there are some bright, quality people here and DR is an outstanding leader. We are meeting with excellent candidates for the most part, who are interested in and positive about this opportunity - that's all we can ask.

10. The compensation package is very competitive and opportunities to launch a first in class drug are rare. This has the possibility to be great and also has the risk of being short term. No one is trying to deceive anyone and our offering and environment are pretty transparent so that people can make their own decisions appropriately.

You can all keep piling on the hate and disparaging comments based on whatever ax you have to grind with the company and/or people, but at least be honest with yourself about where you're coming from...it's not a pretty place.

WELL DONE!!! WELL SAID!!!

 

[Anonymous]

so who made the long post ?

if this has the real possibility of being short term, how is that being factored into a comp package to make it worthwhile for candidates to consider taking on that risk.?

 

[Anonymous]

so who made the long post ?

if this has the real possibility of being short term, how is that being factored into a comp package to make it worthwhile for candidates to consider taking on that risk.?

That's a good question. In terms of comp, salary up to 130, and bonus of 40 @ plan, but that's in the ballpark of what you'd need to hire the experience and skill backgrounds that they've targeted without considering the potential short term nature of the job (which everyone seems willing to acknowledge is at least possible) has anyone heard about a severance plan, or will no one touch that one at this stage?

 

[Anonymous]

Actually, it's very easy to argue.

If you've ever led a team you would know that hiring people who you know first hand and trust is highly desirable. No matter how good a candidate looks on paper or in person, there is no substitute for first hand experience.

Also, if your biggest problem is having multiple offers to sort out, you're doing OK. I've been in the position of working multiple interviewing processes at once and the timing never comes together in terms of having all of the offers on the table at once.

Your comment about knowing for a FACT who the best choices are is kind of silly when you really think about it given the subjectivity of any hiring decision and the massive number of variables involved. Again, I would question whether you've ever hired someone in your life.

As a DSM for a biologic outfit for may successful years and over the course of those years interviewed at least 500 candidates. I would have give agreement to the op who is fed up with this process. It came to my attention because many of my current reps were contacted and asked if they would consider this Savient job. My best reps came to me for advice, and of course I gave them my support and ear. The problems are neck deep with this product, the RBD's who were hired, and the process "itself" did not screen the best candidates. How do I know, well lets leave that to the imagination, but I can with fact tell you that the reps who I would have hired did not even get an interview. That tells me all I need to know about who the RBD's for Savient are keying in on as "hirable" rep. There is a very very temporary stigma to this position, and while a stigma can be subjective, there are also facts that support many issues that the general public and base is unaware of regarding how reps are being "selected". That is all I will say. This post above is on the wrong path. Best of luck to you all, my 2 cents, do not put your eggs in this basket.

 

[Anonymous]

so who made the long post ?

if this has the real possibility of being short term, how is that being factored into a comp package to make it worthwhile for candidates to consider taking on that risk.?

Dude, are you serious? Nobody is going to adjust a comp program due to the inheriting risk of selling krystexxa for Savient. This is a gamble, and that is this industry in a nut shell but this job is especially a crap shoot, everybody gets that. Your post although funny and full of satire is also a reminder as to how unstable this landscape and industry has become over the last couple of years, no loyalty, no stability, and layoffs are more common than expansions... and even the expansion most of the time ends up in a layoff within 12 months of the hire. This is clearly not the place to be. Go find a real job, this is a stop gap to gain a quick paycheck for the unemployed while they continue to look for other options, not a career move......wow.

 

[Anonymous]

Dude, are you serious? Nobody is going to adjust a comp program due to the inheriting risk of selling krystexxa for Savient. This is a gamble, and that is this industry in a nut shell but this job is especially a crap shoot, everybody gets that. Your post although funny and full of satire is also a reminder as to how unstable this landscape and industry has become over the last couple of years, no loyalty, no stability, and layoffs are more common than expansions... and even the expansion most of the time ends up in a layoff within 12 months of the hire. This is clearly not the place to be. Go find a real job, this is a stop gap to gain a quick paycheck for the unemployed while they continue to look for other options, not a career move......wow.

wrong. any employee (and usually management as well) in any new job has a reasonable expectation that the job will continue beyond 2-3 weeks...3-6 months etc. Comp packages are structured accordingly. This job has a huge risk involved. In any venture the higher risk equals higher reward ABOVE the comp needed to attract the talent in the first place. grow up with your dude talk. a previous poster put it well that there should be severance comp as part of discussions. what's leaders inc saying about that? maybe this is a better gig for unemployeds or peeps looking for a temp thing. options would likely supervest on a buyout. and yes dude I was serious.

 

[Anonymous]

wrong. any employee (and usually management as well) in any new job has a reasonable expectation that the job will continue beyond 2-3 weeks...3-6 months etc. Comp packages are structured accordingly. This job has a huge risk involved. In any venture the higher risk equals higher reward ABOVE the comp needed to attract the talent in the first place. grow up with your dude talk. a previous poster put it well that there should be severance comp as part of discussions. what's leaders inc saying about that? maybe this is a better gig for unemployeds or peeps looking for a temp thing. options would likely supervest on a buyout. and yes dude I was serious.

Funny, keep dreaming little drummer boy. This is a risk you have to weigh, this is AT WILL Pharma sales with a company that is very unstable and a very unpredictable future. How hysterical to even imagine that comp or pay packages would be adjusted because the future of the company and product are horse shit and extremely unstable.

Savient knows that reps would take this job for 50K and 2500k bonus payouts per quarter. The beauty of all this is that Savient can get above average temp workers with relationships for peanuts due to the trending down in the industry and the amount of highly qualified reps who are on the unemployment line. 70,000 reps were downsized in this industry last year and most are still clawing desperate for anything that pays a two week check. Of course Savient is aware of this and can get a steal on personnel for the time being. But ultimately whom ever takes these jobs will continue to look and move on as soon as the market picks back up, if it ever does, no guarantee on that, and some experts say it will never be what it was and what most of us are accustomed to who have been in the biz for a fair amount of time. Welcome to pharma sales you rookie. You clearly have never worked in the pharma industry. That is laugh out loud funny.

This is where you need to be able to read in between the lines and factor in the risk of this position. Also why it is ideal for unemployed reps who need something for a few months while they look for real jobs. This is not a career move. For shits and giggles during your interview ask the hiring manager that exact same question. See what the response is, ok I will just tell you. Resume in garbage, crossed of list and next cattle call candidate marched in to hear the spinning of the great "hopes" of Savient and the launch plans for Kryst. ahahahahha.ahhhahahhaha.ahahhahahhaha. Love the funny posts! Next!

Supervising of options, now that is equally as funny. They are grants, not unrestricted stock certificates and with the way things are going with the market and share price, you would not be vested until 4 years and then it the strike price of the grant vs. the current value of the stock in which you can purchase the share for 1/10 profit on the difference of grant strike vs. current price. Geez, get your facts straight before you come on here. You are not going to make any money or get rich of the "stock options"...DUDE you sound like you never worked a day in pharma, is this who we are hiring? Probably.

 

[Anonymous]

Thanks for the lecture. Best reply to someone like you, on behalf of all other posters here, is to borrow an old line from the late great Phil Hartman of SNL fame as he portrayed ol blue eyes: "I have chunks of guys like you in my stool."

 

[Anonymous]

As a DSM for a biologic outfit for may successful years and over the course of those years interviewed at least 500 candidates. I would have give agreement to the op who is fed up with this process. It came to my attention because many of my current reps were contacted and asked if they would consider this Savient job. My best reps came to me for advice, and of course I gave them my support and ear. The problems are neck deep with this product, the RBD's who were hired, and the process "itself" did not screen the best candidates. How do I know, well lets leave that to the imagination, but I can with fact tell you that the reps who I would have hired did not even get an interview. That tells me all I need to know about who the RBD's for Savient are keying in on as "hirable" rep. There is a very very temporary stigma to this position, and while a stigma can be subjective, there are also facts that support many issues that the general public and base is unaware of regarding how reps are being "selected". That is all I will say. This post above is on the wrong path. Best of luck to you all, my 2 cents, do not put your eggs in this basket.

]

Can you elaborate on the alleged probs with the RBDs that were hired ? Thank you. It seems that some (most actually) people on this board are able to offer some good insights and commentary, and even some informed opinions.