Replies to post #208294 on Biotech Values

[jq1234]

Agreed likely no need to divest PD-L1 from PFE. Both NVS and AZN have PD-1 and PD-L1 combination trials ongoing. Buying BMY from here would be a much better deal than PFE ill advised plans of buying AGN and AZN which I was completely against. It would be a good deal for GILD to buy BMY now instead of in 2015 when many analysts thought GILD should.

Again people write end chapter on IO landscape too quickly. Not too long ago, less than one year actually, almost everyone put BMY as the winner over MRK by not using PD-L1 biomarker or using lower PD-L1 biomarker cutoff. I used every opportunity on Twitter to counter that argument but to deaf ears - I suppose it is easier to go with winner of the day for most people - now it is the other way around that warrants caution and counter argument.

Then:

WSJ explains why Opdivo sales are running circles around Keytruda so far. $BMY $MRK https://t.co/Y3WiiSsf7a

— Brad Loncar (@bradloncar) March 14, 2016

In this Merck vs. Bristol-Myers race, slower wins https://t.co/0LbW9ZJ8vy

— Max Nisen (@MaxNisen) June 17, 2016

Now:

Merck's IO lung cancer lead is looking pretty formidable https://t.co/Y9lCJmoNnN

— Max Nisen (@MaxNisen) January 12, 2017

$BMY's Opdivo Dependence Now Looks Dicey https://t.co/fpgmInzISg $MRK #pharma

— Bio Stocks™ (@BioStocks) January 22, 2017

[DewDiligence]

Re: PFE-BMY hypothetical

I bet [PFE] wouldn't need to divest this program [to acquire BMY]. There are plenty of PD-1/PD-L1s out there, and some companies are pursuing both PD-1 and PD-L1.

You and jq1234 could be right with respect to government regulators; however, the PFE-Merck KG PD-L1 collaboration may have a provision that forces PFE’s hand if it acquires another PD-1/PD-L1 program.

In any event, I don’t see PFE’s PD-L1 program precluding a PFE-BMY deal from happening. One could even argue that the synergy with respect to Eliquis makes PFE the prospective buyer with the most to gain.