Member Info for Mars1

What is going on we have ano 1 buy already

FX future talks could mean continuation, there is no doubt Merck has been speaking to someone as their CEO talks about formulation and delivery of Lynparza and extending their control into the next decade in the attached interview quite a few parallels
https://tradetoday.co.in/merck-co-inc-mrk-ceo-rob-davis-presents-at-the-goldman-sachs-43rd-annual-global-healthcare-conference-transcript/

Well we had a 1 share buy Friday pm followed by an RNS on Monday, we have ano 1 share buy this pm surely to soon for ano RNS

Thought Alex looked after the lab is he still employed? When the CRO test is contracted there will be a point of contact to deal with the CRO, thought it might be Jo, with Dan the same on bus dev.

Jiving my point was Chairmen and ceos are necessary to manage boards/ companies of a size where it is necessary, you don’t need them where there are 2 directors and no staff

Jiving the titles Chairman and CEO are just labels and are necessary when you have several executive and non exec directors ie Chief executive gives you a clue, when there is more than one executive director. Same goes with the Chairman you don’t have to vote at every board meeting which director is going to sit at the head of the table. We have 2 directors and 2 advisers not complicated what is important is there is enough resource to do the job properly, plan, make decisions and implement and communicate. If the team decide they do not have enough resources first decision has to be to get another body.

If the bod with their advisers can continue to perform at the level of the first s/h communication then I wonder what additional contribution can be made. There are 2 jobs, develop the products and sell the products, there is no internal business to run. A small team can be effective, sometimes a larger structure although may seem stronger is just inefficient and excessive. A chairman will chair a meeting a ceo will ask the bus dev guy has he sold it yet.

I don’t comment as a rule on mgt personalities or performance but I seem to remember a lot of people criticising DG and hailing AB and AR as saviours and now clamouring for new mgt.
I have just seen a step up in timing with the outstanding durability test and a pretty good shareholder communication. Why wish for another deadhead to run the business, the current team have just hit the bullseye twice. The structure meets legal requirements and they have just upped the ante.

Lynparza on a roll, EU approval
https://www.merck.com/news/lynparza-olaparib-receives-positive-opinion-from-eu-chmp-as-adjuvant-treatment-for-germline-brca-mutated-her2-negative-high-risk-early-breast-cancer/

Yes agreed well written RNS not only that the schedule laid out is in advance of what was said in the last RNS so either pressure has been applied or a new CRO is being used

If Merck have short arms and do not want to pay a market rate for 004 it should be offered to the market, patents until 2040
https://tradetoday.co.in/merck-co-inc-mrk-ceo-rob-davis-presents-at-the-goldman-sachs-43rd-annual-global-healthcare-conference-transcript/

Lynparza sales of $2.75 bn in 2021 before breast cancer and prostate cancer sales. Prostate cancer sales alone could reach $1.8bn and that could be understated however it may not peak before patents run out in 2028.
“Lynparza has maintained a market leadership with $2.75 billion in 2021 sales for AZ after 21% year-over-year growth, thanks in part to its additional indications in breast cancer, pancreatic cancer and previously treated mCRPC, all of which are limited to either BRCA or HRR mutations.”
https://www.fiercepharma.com/pharma/astrazeneca-merck-s-lynparza-one-ups-johnson-johnson-s-zejula-prostate-cancer-win-regardless

The sub is a wholly owned of the parent no issues, there has to be a board meeting to appoint a director it will be pure admin

There has to be a director for a subsidiary, I believe the sub holds the patents

Lynparza value keeps on an upward trajectory
https://stockhouse.com/news/press-releases/2022/06/21/results-from-phase-3-propel-trial-of-lynparza-xae-olaparib-plus-abiraterone-in

So industry consolidation already started how many gaming add suppliers are there? Barriers to entry has to be the tech.

Another quote from the interview;
“Got it. And then another issue to address, final on the business development front is the mindset of the folks that you may be sitting around the table or across the table from. We’re seeing a really challenging environment for small mid-cap biotech. Science is advancing tremendously, but certainly amongst the smaller companies in the public sphere, it’s been very difficult. And the debate inevitably becomes whether or not the willingness to reach across that table and shake hands, the bid-ask spread. Has that mindset adjusted in any way? I think during the first quarter call, you had commented that you had not necessarily seen some of that shift. Tick-tock, we’re further along. Where are things at now?

Rob Davis

I would tell you that as of now the world has not meaningfully shifted from where we were. We continue to not see a meaningful change yet. We’re going to have to see what happens, obviously, as the market continues to be down and for a sustained period of time, and as cash becomes tighter for a lot of these companies, I do think it could evolve, but we’re not seeing it. I think there’s enough cash still in the system for a lot of the companies that they have time to kind of wait. So, we’ll have to see how it plays out over the rest of the year.”

Sorry made a mistake the quote was not to extend the next 10 years it was quote to extend to the next decade ie to 2040, who will have a patent to do that

Now I find this conference interview with Rob Davis of Merck interesting, if they want to be a leader in oncology by 2025 they are going to do it with Lynparza and if they are going to extend it 10 years they have to have patent protection. Even if they do not go for 004, it will give them a problem as another pharma will be able to patent an improved formulation and compete in the market diluting their key objectives

Rob Davis from the same interview below
“Yeah. So if you look at the portfolio we have today, I would start with an important goal and that is, we want to continue to leverage and grow in the oncology space. We’ve made it very clear. Our goal is to be the leader in oncology by 2025 and then to sustain that leadership well into the next decade. So we will continue to drive our own pipeline, continue to deepen, to broaden and extend the pipeline we have, and I do believe there continues to be real opportunities from business development in that specific arena to add to our portfolio.”