InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

ggwpq

06/21/19 7:13 AM

#197869 RE: Mellowmood77 #197868

Your math is wrong, please double check.
icon url

HerbieRay

06/21/19 8:10 AM

#197874 RE: Mellowmood77 #197868

Where did the 3 million current come from?
icon url

sharinky

06/21/19 8:41 AM

#197881 RE: Mellowmood77 #197868

You would need to multiply it by 12 because the script number is only for a one month script. Those 100 million people would be getting 12 scripts.
icon url

MedResCollab

06/21/19 8:58 AM

#197884 RE: Mellowmood77 #197868

Our model suggests Amarin is currently overvalued relative to likely peak sales, which we have at ~2.3B worldwide (*if positive outcomes with FDA and the ANDA litigation), of which they will only have licensing royalties on ~860mm of the ~2.3B (our view). And that is being generous considering they do not have the means without extreme dilution to push the product aggressively. Buyout premium is already too high.

To help modeling, consider total worldwide normalized scripts (not 1 g vs 4 g) for Lovaza at peak * 1.35; why? consider AHA recommendation for Lovaza, as well as successful studies in GISSI-P, and for heart disease (not applicable to Vascepa) showed greater efficacy than statin; highly aggressive marketing $80mm/yr GSK + >2000 reps; consider most common royalty 6% pharma product after launch; consider some difficulty in adherence to 4 g/d; consider difficulty in adoption PCPs and cardiologists that will always see it as a lot of fish oil, and the need for more studies to confirm; consider sluggish ramp in surplus of refined product; etc.

~$2.3B WW is generous. Net-revenue after all (incl. poorer margins than fully synthetic molecules) is ($________)... Disclosed in our report.

icon url

IgnoranceIsBliss

06/21/19 10:02 AM

#197898 RE: Mellowmood77 #197868

If you want to know peak sales, get to know SonamKapoor.

Because the answer is: As much as they can make.

Which is less than you’d think.

(But more than $13bn worth per year, probably.)