Replies to post #108850 on Biotech Values

[mcbio]

Re: MNTA/monetization of generic Lovenox profits

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think I'd prefer that MNTA not monetize their generic Lovenox royalty stream.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please state your reasons.

Just because I think it sends kind of a bearish signal. If you're confident in your drug, why limit your ceiling? I think you expressed some bearishness when VRTX monetized a portion of its Telaprevir royalty stream and I totally agree with that. Clearly there's the benefit of a big chunk of cash up-front, which MNTA can put to use on the rest of its pipeline, but it also eliminates the generic Lovenox story which is such a key part of MNTA. Given that I'm confident in the future of MNTA's generic Lovenox, and I agree with you that TEVA won't be receiving approval for its own version any time soon, if ever, I'd prefer that MNTA retain its rights to generic Lovenox profits because I believe in the long run those profits will greatly outweigh any amount that can be received up front through monetization of those profits.

Also, as long as MNTA sticks to funding no more than 25% of the next Phase 2b trial of M118 with a partner, I don't think they'd need to monetize the generic Lovenox profits. This is of course dependent on m-enoxaparin remaining the sole generic and MNTA continuing to accumulate cash it can use to fund a portion of the next M118 trial.