I am somewhere in between the two arguments. Many of your arguments are valid to me. To prevent the sharp decline of revenues you forecasted after a few years, it really depends on what the manufactures do IMO. For example, better education and take consideration of social and economic status of majority HCV patients - lower income, less educated, drug user and prisoner etc - and to make sure both public and private payers don't raise unnecessary burden for utilization. People on this board would get treated without any symptoms even if have to jump through hoops doesn't mean majority of other patients would.
I really hope ABBV would price much lower than GILD to reach larger patient population. GILD doesn't price the drug to be used by millions of people to me. I think people who argue about Sovaldi being priced fairly compared to Incivek/Victrelis miss the point, yes pricing is fair compared to those two on individual patient basis, but drug pricing has to take consideration of size of usage population. Incivek/Victrelis weren't going to be used by millions of people. Sometimes companies need to think outside of the box, short term vs long term etc. If all oral DAAs were priced similar to Sovaldi, I would be very close to your position that revenues would drop sharply after a short few years.
I think ABBV/ENTA have a great opportunity here, not for any other reason than their own economics. I'd be a seller if they'd price similarly.
AI
Market Data 
Markets 
