Biotech Values

[pollyvonwog]

I'm sure you think the comment is absurb, but again we'll have to wait to find out because we don't have the data at this point.

This strange notion you have has been discussed ad nasauem with you. I don't think another comment is needed.

Secondly, I guess you are agreeing that the original agreement is poor. I never said that the agreement wasn't the best deal they could get at the time, I only said it was bad.

I disagree that is poor. I see the agreement as NVS telling MNTA proove it with its technology. If MNTA is right, then they get a huge payday from the profit splits. If not, they at least get a constant source of income for the multiple generics. It was clear that MNTA was in a better position to deal in 2006.

Evidently, because they were able to do a better agreement the 2nd time around couldn't we assume the M-enox agreement is inferior.

I guess so. CW has even said as much.