InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 211
Posts 32355
Boards Moderated 1
Alias Born 06/30/2009

Re: Waverunner1 post# 130835

Sunday, 11/22/2015 1:03:35 PM

Sunday, November 22, 2015 1:03:35 PM

Post# of 403599
I'm determined to continue to misread the situation based on my conviction that no one, not even BIG PHARMA, can simply absorb costs and stay in business. Either they must pass them along or the damage to the usual process of competitive development gets messed up, probably both.

Without slipping into the economic complexities, the expenditure of that $350 million cost some other company an element of their ability to compete.
Basically a derivative has been created. The word and the concept aren't that simple and obviously not without cost.

On the face of it the idea of creating an incentive for companies to develop drugs to deal with diseases that wouldn't be economically feasible to pursue makes a lot of sense (and no, I don't have a better idea), but the market price of a voucher went from $67 million to $350 million in 13 months. To ignore the economic impacts of such things is the same mindset that allowed the cost of healthcare to get where it is. Of course that's an easy fact to overlook if one is holding, or hoping to hold, a voucher for sale.

Leave me to my ignorance :o)

It's morally wrong to allow a sucker to keep his money.......Cuthbert J. Twillie

Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y
Recent IPIX News