InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 829
Posts 119615
Boards Moderated 14
Alias Born 09/05/2002

Re: biopearl post# 17762

Saturday, 10/07/2017 4:56:03 PM

Saturday, October 07, 2017 4:56:03 PM

Post# of 20689
Taking stock:

No, I haven’t downgraded my assessment of MNTA’s technology just because MYL got FDA approval for generic Copaxone. It took MYL nine years to tweak Natco’s Copaxone-like drug sold in India into something acceptable to the FDA, and this occurred only after MNTA’s own approval helped to illuminate the path to some degree.

In the FoB arena, the decision by a pharma company as large as MYL to partner 50/50 on five products is prima facie evidence of the value of MNTA’s technology.

Clearly, MNTA’s Copaxone franchise won’t be worth as much as investors previously thought, and the share price has adjusted itself according. However, it would be mistaken, IMO, to ascribe MNTA’s meager Copaxone profits and profit potential to MYL’s FDA approval (after nine years, as noted above). Rather, the primary blow to MNTA’s Copaxone franchise was MNTA’s unpreparedness for TEVA’s switching the market from 20mg Copaxone to 40mg. This was a business failure on MNTA’s part, not a technical failure.

“The efficient-market hypothesis may be
the foremost piece of B.S. ever promulgated
in any area of human knowledge!”