jbog my take from DD's response was that 100% of MNTA's development expense was reimbursed and now after approval sandoz is due 100% of their development, evening things up so to speak. this of course assumes that the relative cost of development was about equal, and the 50-70M figure does not include MNTA's expense line. i haven't read the flurry of posts last night and perhaps my interpretation is way off. regardless i did note that the 50-70M refers to the lovenox process and legal fees, not inventory build - which is usually expensed as R&D until approval. so i assume total R&D to be substantially higher if you include 30% COG of about 200M worth of inventory (5M units shipped)
all of that aside if you want to just use the 40M/6 weeks as a projection i get 109M in annual profits pro forma to MNTA using your 30% COG and 45% share of profits. discount that however you want for risk of other generic entrants, but that # is sure to grow as manufacturing capacity increases and since this is a hospital product to a large degree pricing contracts to be finalized
why ask myself why sandoz was brought into the agreement - i think that is obvious - manufacturing, commercial infrastructure, and near term funding. as yourself why MNTA was brought into the agreement
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
