Can you explain how you know what all independent medical experts think? I have a friend whose job is to travel to hospital and make assessments on performance and operations. One of the items examined was how doctors prescribe medicine. Her summary to me was that in 90% of the hospitals she has assessed the doctor writes scripts for about 6 drugs and the drugs they use are primarily a function of the reps that come in and hawk goods in their office, or they have been prescribing the same 5 drugs for years. Her opinion after assessing several dozen hospitals across the country was that few think for themselves. BTW, it wasn't the reliance on the reps for hearing about drugs that she found disturbing, but their lack of understanding the pharmacology of the drugs they prescribed and justifying why they selected a certain drug over other alternatives. If what she says is true any company with a new drug needs to have a good marketing arm, and the strength of that may weigh more on the success of the drug then the drug itself.
As such I think who Elite partners with to get their drug on the street will have a large impact on their success, not what any doctor thinks because the ones that spend time researching which drug to prescribe and stay on top of new drugs themselves are very much in the minority.
But even if Elite has only average to below average sales, its price will likely increase significantly because a small piece of a big number will still be a significant revenue increase for Elite. On the other hand it is unlikely that Embeda sales will move Pfizer's stock price much given all their other drug revenues. So if someone wants to invest in abuse resistant technology it seems more profit potential is in the smaller companies.
