Seeking Alpha
View as an RSS Feed

Eben Tessari  

View Eben Tessari's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • 5 Reasons Pfizer Shouldn't Buy Wyeth [View article]
    quite


    On Jan 26 07:48 AM RandDChemist wrote:

    > Astonished???
    Jan 26, 2009. 08:06 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • 5 Reasons Pfizer Shouldn't Buy Wyeth [View article]
    I disagree with the premise that Wyeth fill the $11B hole left by Lipitor (even slightly). Wyeth has its own patent cliff to deal with in 2010 and 2011, and there's little in the Ph III pipeline to take over.

    It's a fools errand to duct tape the dam together but ignore the gaping hole in the middle that is R&D productivity. I don't disagree that there are cost savings with a merger but that won't fix the gaping hole.


    On Jan 25 04:56 PM PharmaBanker wrote:

    > The above article is nonsense.
    >
    > Consolidation of Big Pharma is inevitable. Reduced R&D productivity
    > over the past 10 years has set up a scenario where there is too much
    > sales/distribution capacity for the future fewer drugs that are making
    > their way through the FDA approval process. Mergers are a way for
    > management and investors to quickly take capacity out. Sorry to the
    > sales folks who won't continue pulling in $150k+, but they need to
    > find something else to do....I would transition into HCIT and try
    > to get hired by Cerner, Allscripts, etc....companies that are perfectly
    > positioned to help electronify physician's offices with the help
    > of Obama's $40k plus subsidy over five years.
    >
    > Pfizer faces a massive patent cliff in 2011 with Lipitor (a Wyeth
    > deal helps plug the hole and is an excuse to right size). Wyeth has
    > faced uncertainty on viability of pipeline, including the hailed
    > Alzheimer's programs (de-risk the possibility of development failure).
    > Wonder what happens to Elan?
    >
    > Synergies in this deal are worth at least $19B alone, assuming $3B
    > run rate cost savings (~30% of WYE combined SG&A and R&D),
    > restructuring expenses of 1.5x * run rate spread over first two years
    > with heavier weighting on first year, 30% blended tax rate, and discounted
    > at a 9% cost of capital...take that out of the $65B Ent Val and you
    > are below $50B unaffected trading value at a time when valuations
    > are at historically reasonable levels (approximate average historical
    > PE is 15x). Feels like a good deal.
    >
    > To come -- Sanofi acquisition of BMS, GSK acquisition of WYE Consumer
    > (if they can get it unlike their past attempts...JNJ could spoil
    > with a last minute $1B bump too) then AZ.
    >
    > Bank on. ;)
    Jan 26, 2009. 08:06 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • 5 Reasons Pfizer Shouldn't Buy Wyeth [View article]
    These are all fair points (the MS Office reference was particularly brilliant).

    I too, plead ignorance (mostly) as to the details of the merger (I employed by no party in these negotiations), and I'll be the first to admit I'm wrong if this merger is a success, but for the time being I'm going resist the urge to have my de facto position be one of confidence in the Pfizer management team.

    I guess we'll find out sooner or later.. and again, phenomenal comment.


    On Jan 26 05:51 AM donzelion wrote:

    > I'm cautiously optimistic about this merger, but I plead (and vehemently
    > affirm) ignorance - because:
    >
    > (1) Do I know more than Pfizer management about what's in Wyeth's
    > pipeline and what the potential value could be? (Anybody who knows
    > better than Pfizer management is entitled to an opinion; anyone else
    > is an arm-chair quarterback)
    >
    > (2) Do I know more than Pfizer management about what the potential
    > costs and cost savings from the merger? (mergers destroy shareholder
    > value - in the sense that one $110 billion company + one $60 billion
    > company will not result in one $170 billion company...but that's
    > a pretty weak concept of shareholder value...)
    >
    > (3) Do I know the full scope of the opportunities out there? Pfizer
    > could buy 10-50 companies for the money they're looking to spend
    > on Wyeth. But that doesn't mean they should...
    >
    > Two turkeys together may not fly like an eagle - but if you take
    > the worst word processor (Microsoft Word version 3.0) and mix it
    > with the worst spreadsheet (Excel v. 2.0), use consistent icons and
    > keyboard shortcuts - you can take over the world. For a time.
    Jan 26, 2009. 07:58 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Novartis Example: Why Drug Discovery / Development Is Hard [View article]
    Killerz,
    True, but no one predicted that a drug inducing lymphopenia would actually boost any part of the immune system before this study was done.

    The conclusion makes sense now, but I think it clearly illustrates how difficult biological systems are to predict, no?

    Eben
    Aug 15, 2008. 09:46 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Wyeth and Elan Take Hits on Bad Trials [View article]
    Biotechbull,
    I don't totally disagree with your statement about evaluating programs based on NPV but you made one crucial error... why do you assume that all programs have a 67% success rate in phase III?

    Just because that is the industry average doesn't mean that it is the
    best number to use for bapineuzumab. You have to take other things into account: novel therapeutic target, missing phase II endpoints etc...

    Using 67% is mathematically lazy.

    Furthermore, your assumption that "all this drug has to do is not kill anyone" is completely off base. The FDA has been tighting like crazy, this is not the agency of four years ago when your comment would have made sense.

    Finally, given that:
    1.) the drug failed multiple endpoints (and no drug targeting any tau related protein has ever worked in the clinic)
    2.) has a pretty nasty dose-dependent AE of vasogenic edema
    3.) at best works in 30% of AD patients

    I'm all about disagreement but to hand wave using "average" statistics and make wildly off base judgment calls about the FDA approving anything that doesn't kill AD patients is not an argument that impresses me. Especially in the face of the three critical issues laid out above.

    Tesa,
    I'd totally agree that combination therapy holds the greatest promise.


    FrankieCooper
    For the record... I have never had a position in Wyeth or Elan. Though I now wish I had pulled the trigger on those shorts.

    Also, i fucked up the link in my blog... it's been fixed there and the link here:
    www.pharmababble.com/b.../



    Jul 31, 2008. 07:20 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Wyeth and Elan Take Hits on Bad Trials [View article]
    Bozak,
    Thanks for reading. There is absolutely no connection between any adverse events seen with Tysabri vs Bapineuzumab. Two completely different mechanisms.

    Tysabri got in trouble because it does it's job too well. It suppresses the immune system by inhibiting a molecule (a4B1 integrin) used by immune cells to get into the brain. Exactly what you want if you have MS. Unfortunately, it did this job so well that an opportunistic virus, PML for short, showed up in a few patients (though none since the initial scare).

    So far, the most important adverse event for bapineuzumab has been vasogenic edema, or fluid buildup in the brain. This is really really not good, especially because the amount of fluid was dose dependently related to the amount of drug given.

    Anyway, two completely different problems. Hope that helps. I added some links if you want to know more.

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
    Jul 30, 2008. 01:03 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Kosan Acquired by Bristol-Myers for 233% Premium [View article]
    I've said it before... I'll say it again.... I can't edit this and I'm not the one adding the stock symbol information. I write on a personal blog (pharmababble.com) that seeking alpha syndicates. They add the ticker info.

    Seeking alpha messed up the symbol, not me.
    Jul 21, 2008. 08:21 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Alzheimer Drug Fails Trial [View article]
    I think it's interesting that you all feel personal attacks are somehow a counter point.

    If, when the results are published in July and after the first phase III data is in, I am wrong, I'll be the first to admit it (I doubt you'll be offering me the same consideration and dropping me emails if I'm right).

    Until then, my opinion remains that no program targeting amyloid-beta or the pathway has shown efficacy on the primary (read: approvable) endpoint of ADAS-cog.

    I hope I'm wrong. I hope targeting the amyloid-beta pathway leads to truly disease modifying therapy but believing doesn't make it true.
    Jun 19, 2008. 07:35 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Big Pharma in Effort to Stimulate Innovation [View article]
    DRich,
    I don't disagree that Pfizer shareholders don't have a valid gripe and that the company is floundering. I was speaking strictly from a revenue growth perspective. I don't think I made that clear in the post.

    Drug discovery and development is difficult (and recently it's been made only more so by the FDA), even for Pfizer.

    Expecting one or two blockbuster drugs a year is unreasonable. The low hanging fruit has been picked. It is just unreasonable to think that 50B in revenue can grow at 10%/yr given all the variables, but that is what people expect.

    Again, this doesn't mean that Pfizer doesn't need some managment changes or a rethinking of their strategic plan, just that we as investors should re-evaluate what we need out of pharma stocks.
    Jun 11, 2008. 08:31 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Big Pharma in Effort to Stimulate Innovation [View article]
    The Real Expert,
    Where is your site? Where is your analysis? Are you just one of those losers who rips everyone else apart without bringing anything to the table?
    Jun 11, 2008. 08:21 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • What is GSK Thinking With Its Latest NDA? [View article]
    Rocc,
    Took me to school. Best comment ever. Period. Thanks for reading.
    Jun 2, 2008. 09:39 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • What is GSK Thinking With Its Latest NDA? [View article]
    Right... but I don't, nor does anyone outside the committee have access to the application. GKS and Ligand's stock dropped quite a bit on wednesday after the news. I wasn't the only one making assumptions.

    I was proffering opinion on comments by member of said committee and was asking anyone who has more regulatory experience than I, to comment and enlighten me.

    Waiting until the meeting has concluded and using their positive opinion still doesn't answer the question I asked. Do you have any insight to add or do you just chide those with an opinion?
    May 30, 2008. 10:45 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • What is GSK Thinking With Its Latest NDA? [View article]
    Right... but I don't, nor does anyone outside the committee have access to the application. GKS and Ligand's stock dropped quite a bit on wednesday after the news. I wasn't the only one making assumptions.

    I was proffering opinion on comments by member of said committee and was asking anyone who has more regulatory experience than I, to comment and enlighten me.

    Waiting until the meeting has concluded and using their positive opinion still doesn't answer the question I asked. Do you have any insight to add or do you just chide those with an opinion?
    May 30, 2008. 10:45 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Icahn Steals The Future of Enzon Pharmaceuticals [View article]
    that's fair.
    May 8, 2008. 11:02 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Icahn Steals The Future of Enzon Pharmaceuticals [View article]
    In addition, a company can be mainly valued by the NPV of it's future cash flows. I fail to see how spinning off the future revenue generators of the company (its discovery pipeline) is not devaluing.
    May 8, 2008. 08:24 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
17 Comments
1 Like