Dew - more on provenge valuations
You are asking good questions that are way beyond me. But let me try.
>>BMY asserts that US Erbitux sales have merely plateaued due to confusion by clinicians regarding the K-ras mutation and that Erbitux sales growth will resume in a quarter or two. Is this believable? I’m not sure.<<
Until FDA approves a K-ras kit, the confusion will persist. I wonder if NCCN would allow physicians to order their own K-ras test so insurance could pay for off-label front-line use. Even then, no offense to IMCL bulls, a survival benefit still appears to be elusive, so I am not sure how much onco docs care about it. Comments anyone?
>>DNDN’s manufacturing facilities would seem to be usable only for making Provenge; if this is correct, then a separate valuation for the manufacturing facilities is not warranted <<
I would think those "pods" - ie clean hoods or incubators can be used to maufacture any vaccine in Dendreon's pipeline. The company can always have GMP contractors to supply commercial grade and quantity of vaccine antigen cassette. It is labor intensive, as David published, the profit margin is a tad lower than monoclonal antibodies (75% vs 90-95%). To your point, I think I want ot agree that manufacturing facilities are less valuable than those of MoAb.
Pipeline-wise, prominently Neuvenge is a minimum of 7 years away from commercialization, so perhaps can be ignored for near-term valuation exercise?
For the sake of argument, what do you think the valuation of Provenge alone should be, assigning 0 value to manufacturing and pipeline? Thanks.
AI
