I’m still on the cyberroad looking for Big Pharma’s story. Larry made a very telling observation when I sent him my last blog for his editorial review (You didn’t really think he lets me post a blog without some form of adult supervision now did you?). He found it interesting that these companies weren’t talking about their survival.
He’s right. That’s what’s been missing here for me. Big Pharma isn’t showing any evidence that they think they are in trouble. Despite what has happened to the U.S. mainframe computer and auto industries, to name just a couple of recent, high profile examples, Big Pharma seems oblivious to what’s going on around them. I once read that Hegel, the German philosopher, had said that history repeats itself as tragedy reenacted as comedy. In which case, Big Pharma may be getting an Emmy soon for the sit-com that they’ve got in the works.
What I’ve seen so far on my journey reminds of the teams in the NFL. The team colors, the players’ names, and the hometowns are different but they’re all playing the same game by the same rules and everything always looks vaguely familiar. That’s what is most unsettling for me in this blog series.
This week, I visited Bristol-Meyers Squibb’s (BMS’s) website (http://www.bms.com/pages/default.aspx ). Another nicely done coding job, doesn’t have some of the flash of Merck’s (http://www.merck.com/ ), but, it does the technical job. I just didn’t get a sense of anything being amiss. I know I’m not the only one who feels that there’s trouble brewing in the pharmaceutical industry. (And, there are others too besides Larry who agrees with me.) Here’s another example of that complacency.
BMS’s pipeline (http://www.bms.com/research/pipeline/Pages/default.aspx ) looks like they’re keeping busy. I can’t comment on the specifics. But, I do promise that I’ll come back at some future date and look at these pipeline pages and see what it all means. Like for example, how much redundancy is there across all these pipelines? Another question, what types of markets are there? Finally, who’s going to pay for all these drugs?
When I look at sites like these, I see buzz words like big and small molecules, and biopharma. Everyone wants to take care of everyone and make them all well again. The altruism is stifling.
Please don’t get me wrong. I’m not writing this blog to be negative. I started out in search of originality and so far I’m coming up empty.
In future blogs, I’m going to visit a few more pharmaceutical companies before I go down a different path and look for some of the analysts and other commentators on the industry to validate my findings and see if I’ve missed something somewhere. Likewise, my beloved readers, please send me any links that you feel I should check out as I continue my journey looking for Big Pharma’s story.
As always, we welcome your feedback. Please contact us at larryrothmansblog@gmail.com. We look forward to hearing from you.
Contributed by Guy de Lastin
Showing posts with label Pipeline. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pipeline. Show all posts
Saturday, September 11, 2010
Saturday, September 4, 2010
On the Cyberroad
I think that I’ve finally managed to break away from Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) (http://www.phrma.org/ ) and its world view. Now, I’m continuing my journey across the Internet looking for Big Pharma’s story.
This week I wanted to move away from Big Pharma’s lobbyists and other front organizations. I went to the websites of two large pharmaceutical companies, Merck and Pfizer. These are two major players in the industry and seemed like a good place to start.
I’ll start with Merck (http://www.merck.com/ ). The usual trappings of a Fortune 500 company were there along with what I’m coming to expect at a large pharmaceutical company. Looking at the site, one could get the impression that this is an altruistic organization worried about patients, the environment, and helping small businesses. (Alright, I admit it, I’m a little bit cynical.)
But, I found what I came looking for, Merck’s pipeline (http://www.merck.com/research/pipeline/home.html?WT.svl=content ). I have to admit from a purely technical perspective, this was done very nicely. Now, let’s talk about the content.
Phase II, Phase III, and Under Review drugs are listed in addition to research areas. Three categories of drugs can be highlighted, biologics, small molecule, and vaccines. Clinical trial results can be linked to for drugs in Phase III and Under Review.
I’m the last guy who can say what’s a good drug or a bad drug from a financial perspective. And, Merck’s site doesn’t include financial forecasts for these potential drugs probably for very good SEC and FDA reasons. Although, I’m probably not going too far out on a limb here by saying that internally Merck is forecasting the financial potential of these drugs.
But, except for a mention to now looking at biologics, there’s nothing about what their philosophy is or why they are doing what they do. Yes, they talk about doing good things and saving lives and that’s about it. I just don’t see an exciting story that tells me that these guys are going to be tomorrow’s breakout story.
Let’s take a quick look at Pfizer’s site (http://www.pfizer.com/home/ ). Here we have all the state of the art social media, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and LinkedIn. When I went looking for their pipeline I found a twenty-two page PDF document (http://media.pfizer.com/files/research/pipeline/2010_0127/pipeline_2010_0127.pdf ). (They really could learn something from Merck.)
Like at Merck’s site, I couldn’t find any reference to where Pfizer saw it’s future heading. From both sites I came away with a picture in my mind of countless lab techs all over the world mindlessly droning away at testing compounds for some vague end. I’m reminded of players at a roulette wheel in a casino. Play enough numbers long enough and sooner or later, you’ll win. Didn’t this get Wall Street in trouble a while back?
My journey so far hasn’t shown me any insights yet into why Big Pharma will turn around. If they have any, they should bring them to the fore better than they’ve done so far. Come back next week to see what I’ve found.
As always, we welcome your feedback. Please contact us at larryrothmansblog@gmail.com. We look forward to hearing from you.
Contributed by Guy de Lastin
This week I wanted to move away from Big Pharma’s lobbyists and other front organizations. I went to the websites of two large pharmaceutical companies, Merck and Pfizer. These are two major players in the industry and seemed like a good place to start.
I’ll start with Merck (http://www.merck.com/ ). The usual trappings of a Fortune 500 company were there along with what I’m coming to expect at a large pharmaceutical company. Looking at the site, one could get the impression that this is an altruistic organization worried about patients, the environment, and helping small businesses. (Alright, I admit it, I’m a little bit cynical.)
But, I found what I came looking for, Merck’s pipeline (http://www.merck.com/research/pipeline/home.html?WT.svl=content ). I have to admit from a purely technical perspective, this was done very nicely. Now, let’s talk about the content.
Phase II, Phase III, and Under Review drugs are listed in addition to research areas. Three categories of drugs can be highlighted, biologics, small molecule, and vaccines. Clinical trial results can be linked to for drugs in Phase III and Under Review.
I’m the last guy who can say what’s a good drug or a bad drug from a financial perspective. And, Merck’s site doesn’t include financial forecasts for these potential drugs probably for very good SEC and FDA reasons. Although, I’m probably not going too far out on a limb here by saying that internally Merck is forecasting the financial potential of these drugs.
But, except for a mention to now looking at biologics, there’s nothing about what their philosophy is or why they are doing what they do. Yes, they talk about doing good things and saving lives and that’s about it. I just don’t see an exciting story that tells me that these guys are going to be tomorrow’s breakout story.
Let’s take a quick look at Pfizer’s site (http://www.pfizer.com/home/ ). Here we have all the state of the art social media, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and LinkedIn. When I went looking for their pipeline I found a twenty-two page PDF document (http://media.pfizer.com/files/research/pipeline/2010_0127/pipeline_2010_0127.pdf ). (They really could learn something from Merck.)
Like at Merck’s site, I couldn’t find any reference to where Pfizer saw it’s future heading. From both sites I came away with a picture in my mind of countless lab techs all over the world mindlessly droning away at testing compounds for some vague end. I’m reminded of players at a roulette wheel in a casino. Play enough numbers long enough and sooner or later, you’ll win. Didn’t this get Wall Street in trouble a while back?
My journey so far hasn’t shown me any insights yet into why Big Pharma will turn around. If they have any, they should bring them to the fore better than they’ve done so far. Come back next week to see what I’ve found.
As always, we welcome your feedback. Please contact us at larryrothmansblog@gmail.com. We look forward to hearing from you.
Contributed by Guy de Lastin
Friday, July 18, 2008
Insights from a Top Five Star Fund Manager on Drug Pipelines (Part III)
Recently, Larry and I met with an interesting person, Ken Kam. Ken manages the Masters 100 Fund (MOFQX) and is a Morningstar Five Star fund manager. He has been regularly beating the S&P 500 Composite Stock Price index. Ken believes that his approach to investments using virtual portfolios to derive real investment decisions will be the wave of the future. Ken’s approach can be checked out at www.marketocracy.com. Earlier in his career, he had managed a technology and healthcare fund and had also run a medical devices company. During our meeting, we learned about his current holdings and what he thinks about the future of the pharmaceutical industry. This is the third and final of three blogs based on that interview.
This is my third and final blog based on a meeting that Larry and I had with Ken Kam, the fund manager of the Marketocracy’s Masters 100 Fund (MOFQX). In my two earlier blogs, I reviewed Ken’s thinking on the current and future prospects for Elan Corporation PLC. When Ken began talking about the future of Elan, he was touching on some of the current issues in the drug industry. That’s when Larry and I started to ask him questions about the industry in general and its future prospects.
Ken said that the industry will respond as in the past but that it can’t shortcut research. The old hit or miss approach to drug research is dead. More specifics will be required. Ken says that Genomics will drive much change and that new drugs will have a Genomics element. Large drug companies will have to find early stage drug research and then purchase it.
When looking to make future investment decisions, Ken says that he considers two stages. First, the beginning when the drug is unknown and it’s not known yet whether it will work. It’s tough to invest until the clinical trials are done. Next, once the trials are successful, it’s the basic blocking and tackling to run the business that counts. He cites Amgen as an example of a company that had been here with its drug Epogen but had to bring in a partner that had a sales force with preexisting relationships with doctors. Ken says that it’s hard to get into doctors’ offices with only one product. But, it can be done as Amgen and Genentech have demonstrated.
Ken thinks that Elan may get there. Also, Ken notes that manufacturing drugs is tough, there aren’t that many people who know how to do it, and even the big players get it wrong once in a while. Start-up’s only have scientists and this second stage is equally as important as the first. Hot IPO markets sometimes let start up’s fund these activities. Other times, it’s the big companies that provide the funding. Ken thinks that we’re in these later times right now. Also, what the business model looks like becomes a factor in making an investment decision. Outsourcing services and support to gain a cost advantage become important considerations.
Both Larry and I enjoyed our meeting with Ken Kam and we would like to take this opportunity to thank him and his team for arranging this opportunity for us.
As always, we welcome your feedback. Please contact us at larryrothmansblog@gmail.com. We look forward to hearing from you.
Contributed by Guy de Lastin
This is my third and final blog based on a meeting that Larry and I had with Ken Kam, the fund manager of the Marketocracy’s Masters 100 Fund (MOFQX). In my two earlier blogs, I reviewed Ken’s thinking on the current and future prospects for Elan Corporation PLC. When Ken began talking about the future of Elan, he was touching on some of the current issues in the drug industry. That’s when Larry and I started to ask him questions about the industry in general and its future prospects.
Ken said that the industry will respond as in the past but that it can’t shortcut research. The old hit or miss approach to drug research is dead. More specifics will be required. Ken says that Genomics will drive much change and that new drugs will have a Genomics element. Large drug companies will have to find early stage drug research and then purchase it.
When looking to make future investment decisions, Ken says that he considers two stages. First, the beginning when the drug is unknown and it’s not known yet whether it will work. It’s tough to invest until the clinical trials are done. Next, once the trials are successful, it’s the basic blocking and tackling to run the business that counts. He cites Amgen as an example of a company that had been here with its drug Epogen but had to bring in a partner that had a sales force with preexisting relationships with doctors. Ken says that it’s hard to get into doctors’ offices with only one product. But, it can be done as Amgen and Genentech have demonstrated.
Ken thinks that Elan may get there. Also, Ken notes that manufacturing drugs is tough, there aren’t that many people who know how to do it, and even the big players get it wrong once in a while. Start-up’s only have scientists and this second stage is equally as important as the first. Hot IPO markets sometimes let start up’s fund these activities. Other times, it’s the big companies that provide the funding. Ken thinks that we’re in these later times right now. Also, what the business model looks like becomes a factor in making an investment decision. Outsourcing services and support to gain a cost advantage become important considerations.
Both Larry and I enjoyed our meeting with Ken Kam and we would like to take this opportunity to thank him and his team for arranging this opportunity for us.
As always, we welcome your feedback. Please contact us at larryrothmansblog@gmail.com. We look forward to hearing from you.
Contributed by Guy de Lastin
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Insights from a Top Five Star Fund Manager on Drug Pipelines (Part II)
Recently, Larry and I met with an interesting person, Ken Kam. Ken manages the Masters 100 Fund (MOFQX) and is a Morningstar Five Star fund manager. He has been regularly beating the S&P 500 Composite Stock Price index. Ken believes that his approach to investments using virtual portfolios to derive real investment decisions will be the wave of the future. Ken’s approach can be checked out at www.marketocracy.com. Earlier in his career, he had managed a technology and healthcare fund and had also run a medical devices company. During our meeting, we learned about his current holdings and what he thinks about the future of the pharmaceutical industry. This is the second of three blogs based on that interview.
In my last blog, I introduced Ken Kam, the fund manager of the Marketocracy’s Masters 100 Fund (MOFQX) and reviewed his position in Elan Corporation PLC, his thoughts on its drug, Tysabri,(Bapinuezumab) and its current prospects. In this entry, I will go over Ken’s future prospects for Elan and Tysabri.
Since taking his first in Elan in June 2005, the stock has doubled several times. Ken thinks that it could double again. Larry and I queried him about this and he gave us his reasons. First, Elan is conducting trials for Tysabri for use with Alzheimer’s disease. Unlike the multiple sclerosis space where Tysabri has three other competitive drugs to go against there are no others in the Alzheimer’s space to contend with. For this reason alone, Ken thinks Elan could double. He likes the Alzheimer’s story and thinks that it could make Elan another Amgen.
Next, Ken is taking a longer view on Elan. It possesses nanocrystal technology which allows the manufacture of nano-sized versions of existing drugs. This increases the surface area of the drug permitting a more effective dosage with reduced side effects. This is fundamental technology that can be applied to many other drugs, that are coming off patent. Other companies would have to do the research to see of their drugs were effective. Elan could either acquire other drugs coming off patent and make nano-sized versions or license the technology to the other drug manufacturers. Manufacturers with drugs coming off patent are looking at ways to make their drugs more effective. Nanocrystal technology offers the chance to extend a patent for another ten years Ken explained to us. This is what Ken sees as the future pipeline for Elan and explains his optimistic future for the company.
In my next and final blog based on Larry’s and my meeting with Ken Kam, I’ll write about Ken’s thoughts on the drug industry and its future.
As always, we welcome your feedback. Please contact us at larryrothmansblog@gmail.com. We look forward to hearing from you.
Contributed by Guy de Lastin
In my last blog, I introduced Ken Kam, the fund manager of the Marketocracy’s Masters 100 Fund (MOFQX) and reviewed his position in Elan Corporation PLC, his thoughts on its drug, Tysabri,(Bapinuezumab) and its current prospects. In this entry, I will go over Ken’s future prospects for Elan and Tysabri.
Since taking his first in Elan in June 2005, the stock has doubled several times. Ken thinks that it could double again. Larry and I queried him about this and he gave us his reasons. First, Elan is conducting trials for Tysabri for use with Alzheimer’s disease. Unlike the multiple sclerosis space where Tysabri has three other competitive drugs to go against there are no others in the Alzheimer’s space to contend with. For this reason alone, Ken thinks Elan could double. He likes the Alzheimer’s story and thinks that it could make Elan another Amgen.
Next, Ken is taking a longer view on Elan. It possesses nanocrystal technology which allows the manufacture of nano-sized versions of existing drugs. This increases the surface area of the drug permitting a more effective dosage with reduced side effects. This is fundamental technology that can be applied to many other drugs, that are coming off patent. Other companies would have to do the research to see of their drugs were effective. Elan could either acquire other drugs coming off patent and make nano-sized versions or license the technology to the other drug manufacturers. Manufacturers with drugs coming off patent are looking at ways to make their drugs more effective. Nanocrystal technology offers the chance to extend a patent for another ten years Ken explained to us. This is what Ken sees as the future pipeline for Elan and explains his optimistic future for the company.
In my next and final blog based on Larry’s and my meeting with Ken Kam, I’ll write about Ken’s thoughts on the drug industry and its future.
As always, we welcome your feedback. Please contact us at larryrothmansblog@gmail.com. We look forward to hearing from you.
Contributed by Guy de Lastin
Monday, July 14, 2008
Insights from a Top Five Star Fund Manager on Drug Pipelines (Part I)
Recently, Larry and I met with an interesting person, Ken Kam. Ken manages the Masters 100 Fund (MOFQX) and is a Morningstar Five Star fund manager. He has been regularly beating the S&P 500 Composite Stock Price index. Ken believes that his approach to investments using virtual portfolios to derive real investment decisions will be the wave of the future. Ken’s approach can be checked out at www.marketocracy.com. Earlier in his career, he had managed a technology and healthcare fund and had also run a medical devices company. During our meeting, we learned about his current holdings and what he thinks about the future of the pharmaceutical industry. This is the first of three blogs based on that interview.
Ken Kam manages the Marketocracy Masters 100 Fund (MOFQX) that has a Morningstar Five Star for three year returns. The fund’s objective is to seek capital appreciation in common stocks of domestic and foreign companies of any size, seeking to outperform the S&P 500 Composite Stock Price index. What brought Larry and I to meet with Ken was his position in Elan Corporation PLC. Elan has been conducting clinical trials on a drug, bapineuzumab, for Alzheimers patients, and they currently market Tysabri, to treat multiple sclerosis. Elan represents the largest holding of MOFQX at about 9½ % of its entire portfolio. What had brought Elan to Ken’s attention was two of the virtual portfolio managers who use his website (www.marketocracy.com). In March 2005, these two virtual fund managers made Elan 25% of their test portfolios. They were betting their long term track records on this stock. (One had been running cash at 22% of his portfolio, a fairly conservative position.) In addition, 1,500 of 80,000 virtual investors at www.marketocracy.com had Elan in their portfolios. Elan’s clinical trials on their drug, Tysabri, for use with multiple sclerosis had been proving successful. However, because of a one in one thousand chance of a fatality, the FDA had ordered the drug withdrawn.
Ken decided to do more research on the drug. What separates Ken from other stock researchers is his use of the Internet. He e-mailed 1,500 people on the Internet to solicit their feedback. Approximately five hundred responded of whom, one hundred were MS patients and some had been participants in Tysabri’s clinical trials. All were waiting for their insurance companies to approve the drug for use despite the risk of fatality. Ken’s research approach took him in a different direction from other Wall Street analysts who normally talk with the neurologists. Being doctors, they reply that there isn’t information yet to give an opinion.
With this research behind him, Ken took his initial position two months after Elan first came to his attention. Since then the stock has doubled several times after the FDA ban was lifted and Ken is hopeful for the future.
Several things caught my attention during our meeting. First, the use of the Internet to bring together virtual investors to develop stock picks. Next, Ken’s use of the Internet to take advantage of his in depth understanding of clinical trials to conduct original patient research on Tysabri’s effectiveness. In the next several blogs, I will write about what Ken thinks about Elan’s future pipeline and the drug industry in general.
As always, we welcome your feedback. Please contact us at larryrothmansblog@gmail.com. We look forward to hearing from you.
Contributed by Guy de Lastin
Ken Kam manages the Marketocracy Masters 100 Fund (MOFQX) that has a Morningstar Five Star for three year returns. The fund’s objective is to seek capital appreciation in common stocks of domestic and foreign companies of any size, seeking to outperform the S&P 500 Composite Stock Price index. What brought Larry and I to meet with Ken was his position in Elan Corporation PLC. Elan has been conducting clinical trials on a drug, bapineuzumab, for Alzheimers patients, and they currently market Tysabri, to treat multiple sclerosis. Elan represents the largest holding of MOFQX at about 9½ % of its entire portfolio. What had brought Elan to Ken’s attention was two of the virtual portfolio managers who use his website (www.marketocracy.com). In March 2005, these two virtual fund managers made Elan 25% of their test portfolios. They were betting their long term track records on this stock. (One had been running cash at 22% of his portfolio, a fairly conservative position.) In addition, 1,500 of 80,000 virtual investors at www.marketocracy.com had Elan in their portfolios. Elan’s clinical trials on their drug, Tysabri, for use with multiple sclerosis had been proving successful. However, because of a one in one thousand chance of a fatality, the FDA had ordered the drug withdrawn.
Ken decided to do more research on the drug. What separates Ken from other stock researchers is his use of the Internet. He e-mailed 1,500 people on the Internet to solicit their feedback. Approximately five hundred responded of whom, one hundred were MS patients and some had been participants in Tysabri’s clinical trials. All were waiting for their insurance companies to approve the drug for use despite the risk of fatality. Ken’s research approach took him in a different direction from other Wall Street analysts who normally talk with the neurologists. Being doctors, they reply that there isn’t information yet to give an opinion.
With this research behind him, Ken took his initial position two months after Elan first came to his attention. Since then the stock has doubled several times after the FDA ban was lifted and Ken is hopeful for the future.
Several things caught my attention during our meeting. First, the use of the Internet to bring together virtual investors to develop stock picks. Next, Ken’s use of the Internet to take advantage of his in depth understanding of clinical trials to conduct original patient research on Tysabri’s effectiveness. In the next several blogs, I will write about what Ken thinks about Elan’s future pipeline and the drug industry in general.
As always, we welcome your feedback. Please contact us at larryrothmansblog@gmail.com. We look forward to hearing from you.
Contributed by Guy de Lastin
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)