Thanks for posting this, as it is something I give thought to also...
First, I agree that PFE is the most likely partner. I think they would put the FOB programs in their Established Products division (or spinoff if that were to occur). And MNTA might be willing to sacrifice one particular product (Enbrel) to get the broad platform deal with strategic alignment.
SNY is an interesting one...a deal with MNTA would represent an impressive display on management vision and focus to set aside the Lovenox "defeat"
MRK: I agree the con you list seems to large. They've stated they are working on Enbrel, Neupogen, Neulasta. I think we can all agree that one can't really take a biosimilar enbrel program and "convert" it into a MNTA style characterization. True biogenerics would have to start from scratch or at least backtrack greatly. Or, the MNTA programs would have to be completely distinct - and I question whether such parallel investment would be prohibitive (or merely unpalatable)
NVS: I still hold out the possibility that NVS will come around after they realize/decide that the European model will 1) not be that profitable and 2) will preclude substantial economic success in US (and would seem to require NVS salesforce to promote Sandoz biosimilars)
So do I take it that your assigned probabilities to a Roche or Amgen deal is nil or close to?
Any comments here may have previously been disseminated on Twitter @BioDueDiligence or at www.biotechduediligence.com