>MNTA – It looks like the predominant opinion on here is that the FDA will approve its generic Lovenox in early 2009. If so, that will be big not only because there should be significant cash coming in shortly thereafter, but perhaps equally important that the approval validates MNTA's approach and the rest of its pipeline.<
A key issue from a valuation standpoint is whether MNTA/NVS obtains the only FDA approval of a generic Lovenox or whether the competitors—Teva and Amphastar—also get approval.
There are several reasons why MNTA’s valuation will be higher if MNTA/NVS obtains the only Lovenox approval:
• A sole generic will garner a larger share of Lovenox sales (branded + generic) than will a generic that is one of several.
• The price per dose of a sole generic will almost certainly be higher than the price of a generic that is one of several.
• The terms of MNTA’s Lovenox collaboration with NVS provide MNTA a 40-50% share of net profits in the case of a sole generic but only a modest royalty on sales in the case of multiple generics.
• The market will consider the “validation” of MNTA’s technology to be much more consequential if the competing applicants for generic Lovenox are rejected.
Regards, Dew
p.s. Welcome to the board!
“The efficient-market hypothesis may be
the foremost piece of B.S. ever promulgated
in any area of human knowledge!”
