AI
Sunday, November 30, 2008 4:36:42 PM
>>Based on your posts, I would guess that you think the probability of Sanofi’s launching an AG into a market with only one approved generic is less than 20%. I think the probability is about 35%.
We may be marginally different in handicapping the probability.
I believe in stomping out competition and that the best way to do that is by limiting their profitability even if it comes at a cost. I would gate my visceral reaction by the P&L hit and what I really have to gain for it.
IF mL is the only competition for L, then product profit maximization is clear, no ag. But do not allow mL to under cut you too much.
Another argument for bringing an ag is to deprive MNTA of the profits which may accelerate their ability to develop M118. That would have some appeal to me if I ran Sanofi so long as MNTA is picking up the tab on M118. If MNTA had already partnered M118 with a strong partner or was strongly funded, I would be back to profit max during the duopoly.
All in, I am closer to 10%.
ij
We may be marginally different in handicapping the probability.
I believe in stomping out competition and that the best way to do that is by limiting their profitability even if it comes at a cost. I would gate my visceral reaction by the P&L hit and what I really have to gain for it.
IF mL is the only competition for L, then product profit maximization is clear, no ag. But do not allow mL to under cut you too much.
Another argument for bringing an ag is to deprive MNTA of the profits which may accelerate their ability to develop M118. That would have some appeal to me if I ran Sanofi so long as MNTA is picking up the tab on M118. If MNTA had already partnered M118 with a strong partner or was strongly funded, I would be back to profit max during the duopoly.
All in, I am closer to 10%.
ij
There are times when rules and precedents cannot be broken; others when they cannot be adhered to with safety. (Thomas Joplin)
Trade Smarter with Thousands
Leverage decades of market experience shared openly.
