CP, I'd like to get your impressions on the "who needs who more" question I posed to Paul yesterday.
Here is the full post.
Paul, thank you for your response reprinted below:
Unfortunately, I believe you are wrong on many fronts - so I'm not quite sure how to respond - but please note Jake's response to your post below - as he and I agree that "time is indeed of the essence" at this juncture - so, as SK spelled out quite clearly on the last CC - PPHM is now working diligently with world class partners to "get the show on the road" so to speak - and as such, partnerships will be coming soon - with AZN now clearly the first and very logical choice if they wish to have any hope of catching up to - and possibly passing by - BMS and Opdivo.
And just as an aside - for sake of discussion lets assume my prior statement is correct - then think for just a moment about the relative LEVERAGE each party brings to the negotiating table - In short - Who needs who more?? I think a good argument could be made that AZN needs PPHM - and of course Bavi - more than PPHM needs AZN. I only point this out to demonstrate that some pretty good terms - from a PPHM standpoint - may still be quite reasonable to achieve - and both parties will want to reach that deal ASAP.
One other point to keep in mind {and as I'm sure Entdoc would agree} - the bar is still extremely low in NSCLC - so if you put ANY WEIGHT on Dr. Brekken's research, then a Durvalumab plus Bavi combo could very easily not only blow away the Opdivo SOC of just 12.2 months MOS - but would very likely dramatically increase overall response rates as well.
James
I'll be out for awhile but will check back in later this afternoon. Thanks in advance for sharing your thoughts.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
