From RMF, if I may:
""What are the economics of the Merrimack relationship with GTC?
The main economic upside for MM-093 is in RA, a very large indication. If MM-093 works in RA, its non-TNF-a mechanism of action and presumably low incidence of side effects ought to put it in a strong position to serve the roughly 50% of RA patients for whom one of the TNF-a drugs (Remicade, Humira, Enbrel) does not do the trick. Moreover, MM-093 should be safer than Rituxan, which is emerging as a popular choice in second-line RA following failure on a TNF-a drug.
Although it’s still early in the development program, it’s not unreasonable to think that MM-093 has bona fide blockbuster potential in RA. If this turns out to be true, even relatively thin supplier margins could eventually mean big money for GTC.
My guess is that GTC will get a mid-single-digit IP royalty on MM-093 sales and a markup on GTC’s fully-allocated production cost for bulk product that GTC sells to Merrimack. For the production cost mark-up, the industry standard is about 10%. If, for the sake of discussion, we say that GTC’s fully-allocated production cost will be 15% of the end-user selling price of MM-093, then the 10% mark-up is equivalent to a 1.5% royalty on sales over and above the royalty that will be earned for Merrimack’s use of GTC’s IP. Hence, the overall economic value of the deal for GTC could be a high-single-digit royalty on sales. This could amount to a highly consequential income stream if MM-093 achieves blockbuster status."
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
