Replies to post #13034 on GTC Biotherapeutics (fka GTCB)

[Lewis R Goudy]

>In any event, the goats will still have a major cost advantage.<

Yes and that's what started the thread--I was trying to make
the point that being the low-cost supplier of merchant protein
trumps the calculus of proprietary application. No
matter what the molecule is good for--and that's usually a
moving target, witness viagra which is now returning to its
clinical roots in the cardiosphere--we stand to benefit from
its therapeutic employment.

I think the FoB propaganda war is winding down and the only
aspect still in play is duration of exclusivity (maybe a bit
of data access too), and that BIO is not going to enjoy the
Obama administration.

[DewDiligence]

FoB or brand?

You’re quite right, Vinnie: a drug can’t be both similar and substantially better at the same time.

If GTC’s enhanced ADCC to turns out to be something of great consequence, the drugs that have it will have to be commercialized as brands.

If GTC’s enhanced ADCC turns out to be much ado about nothing, the drugs that have it may be suitable for commercialization as FoB’s.

In the vast middle ground—where enhanced ADCC has some clinical value but not a lot—GTC will have to decide whether it makes more sense to bring a drug to market as a brand or an FoB. GTC’s CD20 program may fit into this third category.

[gym gravity]

that's a keeper, thanks vinny.