Member Info for Jatw

AZ reported positive results for Tagrisso + Chemo in its FLAURA2 trial.

The Savo trials get a mention in the accompanying text about NSCLC ongoing work.

While it is good for patients that Tagrisso is proven to be effective I am not sure that is such a good thing for HCM and Savo……as it may reduce the application of Savo to smaller cohorts and also delay the commencement of US treatment to maximise the patent on Tragrisso before starting a new treatment regime of Tagrisso + Savo to extend its life…..

As a further thought, I wonder how the combined therapy will be priced and divided between the compounds…..the combination will likely have to be not much different to the preceding treatment, although much of the value will be attributable to the new compound as the first will then be “generic”…..HCM will need to fight its corner for a fair allocation by AZ.

But now it has entered the no news doldrums….expect some drift until HY results in August.

May be they should produce an end of quarter AUM statement….that would provide some indication of flows and performance. Many of their peers do.

Cites expected change in fortunes for emerging markets and a change in the flow of funds (and fees) to ASHM.

If a full merger does not get past the competition authorities, CKHH has announced a deal in Italy today to put its network service into a new company, 60% owned by EQT infrastructure funds and 40% owned by CKHH. One of the attractions is said to be a split in management between the retail operations and the networking/B2B side.

A network company covering both the VOD and 3 networks would be a second option for VOD and 3 and would realise the network efficiencies but leave the retail competition largely in place.

Looks like their shiny new INED may have some issues in taking up their post….

Not a good look.

TBH it is very hard to spot any differences, just the April pipeline news I think.

The GM announced today is to renew the powers of directors to allot shares and disapply pre-emotion rights.

The powers are substantial and would allow about 50% new shares to be issued.

While this is sensible governance to avoid a cash crunch / corporate accident, it does signify a signficant dilution of existing shareholders is likely to happen. I wonder where the boundary is between allowing the company to raise cash quickly and the equitable treatment of existing shareholders should we wish to participate in future fund raising.

The full scale may not be needed….but I bet it is used by those with influence to increase their share of the pie…..although hopefully it is to be a much bigger pie.

Now delayed until 2 June……

ADIA and EQT funding is almost certainly not an issue, so I think an offer is likely unless due diligence throws up some major issue with the underlying business

The bounce today reverses a bit of nervousness in the last few days that an offer may not be forthcoming.

Bit of excitement today, presumably something to do with the broker upgraded target from 115 to 125.

But generally stuck between 80 and 95p…..financials generally the same influenced by liquidity in banks and credit risks…..bumper sales expected for the next few years…but will it prove to be sufficiently profitable?

The customer pays higher premiums….and all is well.

Seems very learned and well connected to academia…..likely helpful in prioritising the pipeline over the commercialisation of the products.

david and amones - this is going back over old ground, but i believe the surufatinib rejection was more a case of bad timing….innovent working with lilly tried to get a drug approved without even doing the bridging study that hcm did. the fda did appear to accept the bridging approach, but during its assessment period held a meeting that changed its policy requiring more specific data relevant to us….that is what was cited by innovent when it got its crl. the fda should have been able to inform the company at the time…or maybe the company should have seen the way the wind was blowing and done more work…..

the bridging study was always a risky short cut….we should assume that most of the phii registrational intent studies will need a confirmatory ph iii (as savo has in china)….there are not many shortcuts to success you just need high levels of effective patient response to treatment and that is very very hard…..as the competition raises the bar….fru*****inib may well get its approval in china, but it is risky to take it to the us as it did not boost overall survival so may not be markedly better than the competition.

The intentions of EQT should be clearer this week. The Takeover Panel deadline for an offer is on Thursday at 5pm……they can apply for an extension

The least they could do…..plough some of their Directors fee into shares aligning their interests with shareholders - that is who they are supposed to represent after all.

It will be true one day…..this tie up has been talked about for a long time….

VOD and 3 are both struggling in the UK due to previous regulatory decisions……they cant count on regulatory approval and there will be a lot of anti-Chinese rhetoric from some politicians even though such a deal should reduce CKHH influence. Hopefully they have an outline agreement with the regulator that they can agree to in the inevitable CMA investigation.

Also AZ acquisitions include licensing of which Savo is an example….there will be plenty of deals to be done with newer companies both for development and distribution in and outside China.

Re the outside of china thought…..would the Chinese allow it?
I think the Chinese would rather create some national champions than let its smaller Biopharmas fall into the hands of the global players. ..if HCM was sold it would only be a matter of time for Innovent (Novartis took a stake), Junshi and even Beigene to fall.
I would expect CKHH to be susceptible to pressure from Beijing for an internal consolidation over a sale to a western company……there will be consolidation at some point and I expect HCM to be part of it…..we may not get bought out for cash but we may get an uplift in stock value.

Do doubt she would want to sell you some more at £14 for an instant profit.

All I am suggesting is that in the next 5 years we will probably get 3% pa in dividend and maybe 10-15% in capital gain……I certainly would not expect another 75% capital gain (which is adding £135bn and take the mcap to well over £300bn.
This is not a highly scaleable tech company……its products are highly regulated for quality, target market and price and it takes £1bn or more to bring a new drug to market….

Have to treat mega pharma stocks as income stocks with limited capital growth but a decent dividend…..even 10% gain from here is like creating a company worth 18bn….and remember these are really global stocks priced in USD not £ so it goes up and down with the exchange rate.

Growth can come through the new drug pipeline and taking risks in licensing /take it over early stage companies to boost growth. AZ has done well with its M&A and drug pipeline for the last 10 years but those drugs will start to exit patent protections in the next decade which will mean it has to run harder to maintain its earnings.
There are plenty of smaller companies that have potential to create a brilliant new treatment or be taken over and will be more volatile than AZ. If you want to play in these then avoid anything that has less than 2 years funding visibility - it could just vaporise before your eyes.
As well as a few specific pharma I hold L&G Global Healthcare & Pharmaceutical OEIC to give wider exposure to the market - it has done pretty well for me and is certainly less volatile than my individual stocks.