Replies to post #175765 on Biotech Values

[jq1234]

No, in this particular case, my assumption on ABBV pricing much lower is 50-50 - they say they won't but I can't believe they can't see through this - so I can't make assumptions on pricing. From investment point of view in case like this, I prepare for both outcomes.

[oc631]

That’s sort of a cop-out. The two premises vying for support are that: a) the HCV market will be demand constrained (what ‘ciotera’, ‘zipjet’, and a few other posters on this board think); or b) the HCV market will be supply—i.e. throughput—constrained (what GILD, ABBV, ENTA, Deutsche Bank [#msg-99031302], and I think).

A third premise may trump the two you suggest. Insurance payers and government healthcare agencies , with the support of industry regulators, may limit or cap quarterly/annual patient reimbursement requirements due to budgetary constraints which will create an increasingly price competitive market (amongst two or more players) and drive down the price of HCV treatment. The sickest patients including those with liver disease will be offered treatment first while asymptomatic patients will be scheduled for future treatment based on their diagnosis date. Limiting the number of treatable patients annually will support competitive pricing within the industry. Warehousing patients has already proven this to be a sustainable model in terms of patient health. Politicians are getting involved and everybody is looking for a creative solution.

[zipjet]

Unfortunately, DD your choice is a false one.

Physician-gating will be the limiting factor in the short run.

But once the bolus of patients is treated, demand for treatment will be the limiting factor.

My guess - and that is all it is - is that physician gating will limit use for the first 12-18 months and thereafter the limiting factor will be patient demand.