InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

edcoolidge

05/09/24 11:29 PM

#7307 RE: SuperAstrologer43 #7305

The market obviously doesn't believe they can hit the guidance. The current trajectory makes it look pretty difficult. I'm skeptical they can do it. I'm concerned that a recession could derail their progress, although there's an argument to be made that Revance could gain more share in such a scenario as their products offer better value. Regardless, despite what the clown accounts on this board (the ones who will likely tag this post with a clown emoji) want you to believe, Daxxify is by far the best toxin currently on the market. It's likely we will see more of an S-curve pickup in adoption as more people become aware of Daxxify's superiority. Obviously there are a lot of people who want to prevent that. Some post right here on this board. The biggest risk to Revance's long term success is that an even better toxin emerges, and Foley's stumbles have cost them a lot of time to grow large enough to survive that.
icon url

iwfal

05/10/24 5:23 AM

#7308 RE: SuperAstrologer43 #7305

Operating expense is $100M, revenue is $60M approximately.. short $40M per quarter. How can they expect to be even when generating $280M revenue 2024 and be break even in 2025?



Yep. Compare to EOLS, for instance, which has higher sales, but substantially lower SG&A, and R&D. And Foley does not appear to have any plan to address this immense gap other than 'our targets are unchanged' (this is a general problem with Foley - nothing but vague soundbites, vague plans, but little actually changes and/or the changes drag out very slowly - eg the coupons being introduced 2Q after pricing changes, and even then Foley acknowledges using them only as a stopgap).

I genuinely do not see how this plays out well in this kind of interest rate environment. Eg he may be forced to an ultra-dilutive offering when he finally realizes he has no plan. Yes the Daxxi product is substantially better (my favorite example is that 2x dosing, 4x concentration of Jeuveau does indeed produce longer duration - but at the expense of much longer time to onset), but not so much so that the company can just ignore finances.
icon url

biotech_researcher

05/10/24 9:02 AM

#7312 RE: SuperAstrologer43 #7305

Operating expense is $100M, revenue is $60M approximately.. short $40M per quarter. How can they expect to be even when generating $280M revenue 2024 and be break even in 2025? Unless operating expense can cut down to $70M? Just curious by 2025 meaning end of 2025 to break even?

You are intermixing years. $280M is revenue for 2024, not 2025. No estimate for 2025 revenue was given. Foley said the CD sales will really ramp in 2025.