Eastbourne Capital, one of the shareholders who waged a proxy contest over Amylin Pharmaceuticals earlier this year, has sold its entire stake in that company, according to an SEC filing.
There are twelve seats on the Amylin board. Five of them were up for grabs at the meeting in May. The dissidents won two of those five.
Amylin, a San Diego based pharma company (NASDAQ:AMLN), focuses on drugs for the treatment of diabetes and obesity.
Dissidents have expressed frustration with some of the deals Amylin's management has cut, especially a partnership with giant Eli Lilly.
The stock price was between $11 and $11.50 at the time of that annual meeting. It rose in subsequent weeks, getting as far as $15.50 in early August, though the price has lost some of those gains since. Even with the recent slide, the stock price has considerably outperformed the Nasdaq-100 index in recent months.
This news made me curious about the size of the market for diabetes treatments. A little googling discovered the abstract of a book on the subject, INNOVATIONS IN THE MANAGEMENT OF DIABETES published last year.
The abstract begins: "Diabetes has become the fifth leading cause of death across developed markets, and cases of the disease are forecast to grow by 7.1% across the globe by 2013. The market for innovative diabetes treatments will be driven by this projected rise in prevalence, together with the substantial unmet need for drugs that can effectively halt or reverse disease progression. Although extended lifecycle management for existing antidiabetic therapies may offer sales growth in the short term, the development of new drugs from novel classes will become increasingly important in the future."
Showing posts with label pharmacology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label pharmacology. Show all posts
Monday, October 12, 2009
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Roche and Genentech
Roche has announced what it cals a "hostile bid" (hold that thought) for Genentech: $86.50 a share.
Roche, formally F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd., of Switzerland, is a research-heavy pharma giant.
Genentech is the US (San Francisco) based genetic-research firm (sometimes called the "founder of biotech" as an industry separate from old-line pharma), the one that caused a lot of pop-cult buzz in 1979-80. It was THE hot stock in that era. Indeed, even the buzz from that era seems innocent nowadays.
I remember a Barney Miller episode in which a high-class call girl is in the departments, and Det. Harris tries to wheedle stock tips out of her. She's onto one big stock, but she's keeping mum about it.
"You don't have a lead on the next Genentech, do you?"
"I'm dumping all my Genentech to buy this," she replies. At this his eyes bug out.
But enough for my personal trip down memory lane. Roche has initiated a hostile tender offer for 100% of Genentech. What does this mean exactly? It strikes me as odd, since Roche already owns 55.8% of Genentech. One might naively expect that 55.8% serves as a controlling share, so this is a bit like wrestling with one's own left arm.
The point, though, is that US law offers certain protections for minority owners, and those minorities can make pains in the next of themselves. A majority-owned subsidiary isn't the same thing as, say, one of the parent company's operating divisions.
So far as I understand it, Roche is buying out the nuisance value of that minority stock. It has also lowered its offering price in recent days, to convey the message that irt won't be a roll-over for holdouts. Ouch. That's playing hardball, for a bunch of neutral Swiss yodelers!
Roche, formally F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd., of Switzerland, is a research-heavy pharma giant.
Genentech is the US (San Francisco) based genetic-research firm (sometimes called the "founder of biotech" as an industry separate from old-line pharma), the one that caused a lot of pop-cult buzz in 1979-80. It was THE hot stock in that era. Indeed, even the buzz from that era seems innocent nowadays.
I remember a Barney Miller episode in which a high-class call girl is in the departments, and Det. Harris tries to wheedle stock tips out of her. She's onto one big stock, but she's keeping mum about it.
"You don't have a lead on the next Genentech, do you?"
"I'm dumping all my Genentech to buy this," she replies. At this his eyes bug out.
But enough for my personal trip down memory lane. Roche has initiated a hostile tender offer for 100% of Genentech. What does this mean exactly? It strikes me as odd, since Roche already owns 55.8% of Genentech. One might naively expect that 55.8% serves as a controlling share, so this is a bit like wrestling with one's own left arm.
The point, though, is that US law offers certain protections for minority owners, and those minorities can make pains in the next of themselves. A majority-owned subsidiary isn't the same thing as, say, one of the parent company's operating divisions.
So far as I understand it, Roche is buying out the nuisance value of that minority stock. It has also lowered its offering price in recent days, to convey the message that irt won't be a roll-over for holdouts. Ouch. That's playing hardball, for a bunch of neutral Swiss yodelers!
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
Biogen Idec
In a filing with the SEC yesterday, Carl Icahn and associated entities said that they've increased their stake in the biopharm company Biogen Idec from 4.3% to 6%.
Biogen, a Cambridge, Mass. based concern, (NASD: BIIB) has a market value of close to $15 billion, and employs more than 4,000 people.
Two months ago, Icahn tried to get three nominees on the Biogen board, and as regular readers of this blog know, they were defeated.
But Icahn is nothing if not persistent, and that he has responded to defeat not by liquidating his stake but by increasing it is characteristic.
There is also the little matter of the price chart. The price of a share of BIIB was above $57 when Icahn's slate lost that election. It's below $51 now. What has changed?
This has changed: there have been two occurrences of a fatal brain disease, progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML), among patients receiving a Biogen producr, Tysabri. Tysabri has been linked with PML before, and these new occurrences could spook doctors into keeping their patients off the stuff.
If that happens, it could be a misfortune all around. Tysabri is reportedly very effective in improving the quality of life of people with both multiple sclerosis and Crohn's disease which is why it was allowed back on to the market despite a previous round of PML reports in 2005.
Both of the two new Tysabri-taking PML patients were warned that an increased risk of that disease was a side effect of this drug.
Risk/reward. Reward/risk. It isn't just business. It's life. Though one must always hope that the researchers in the field will press on toward improving the terms of such trade-offs.
Biogen, a Cambridge, Mass. based concern, (NASD: BIIB) has a market value of close to $15 billion, and employs more than 4,000 people.
Two months ago, Icahn tried to get three nominees on the Biogen board, and as regular readers of this blog know, they were defeated.
But Icahn is nothing if not persistent, and that he has responded to defeat not by liquidating his stake but by increasing it is characteristic.
There is also the little matter of the price chart. The price of a share of BIIB was above $57 when Icahn's slate lost that election. It's below $51 now. What has changed?
This has changed: there have been two occurrences of a fatal brain disease, progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML), among patients receiving a Biogen producr, Tysabri. Tysabri has been linked with PML before, and these new occurrences could spook doctors into keeping their patients off the stuff.
If that happens, it could be a misfortune all around. Tysabri is reportedly very effective in improving the quality of life of people with both multiple sclerosis and Crohn's disease which is why it was allowed back on to the market despite a previous round of PML reports in 2005.
Both of the two new Tysabri-taking PML patients were warned that an increased risk of that disease was a side effect of this drug.
Risk/reward. Reward/risk. It isn't just business. It's life. Though one must always hope that the researchers in the field will press on toward improving the terms of such trade-offs.
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
Melnyk and a Comeback
On February 28, Eugene Melnyk wrote the board of directors of the company he founded, Biovail, indicating that he's unhappy with their current direction.
He was the chairman of that board until last June, when he quit as part of a settlement with Canadian regulators over insider trading allegations.
Eight months of idleness appears to have been wearying, though. Melnyk, who owns 18.2 million shares (about 11% of the outstanding) writes: "I am at this juncture formally informing the Board that I have decided to explore, and am exploring, various options available to me in connection with my interest in Biovail, including the possibility of joining with a partner or partners to acquire the remaining shares of Biovail, selling all or a portion of my current Biovail shares to a third party, continuing to hold my shares for investment, or seeking changes to the composition of the Board of Directors."
Biovail is a pharmaceutical company specializing in making time-release versions of medicines (or, as their website puts it, "drug-delivery technologies.")
Between May and mid-July of last year, Biovail stock was trading in the neighborhood of $25. There was a sharp downward move in July, when the US FDA refused to approve a once-daily salt formulation of an anti-depressant. In August it found a floor at $16.
It fell trough that floor in December, when it announced it expected to settle a class-action lawsuit in the federal courts by making a payment of $85 million. The settlement, as is customary, includes no admissionof wrong-doing.
The stock price didn't find its new floor until mid January 2008, when it reached $12. It has rebounded a bit since then. But so far as I can tell, Melnyk believes that his successor has been inadequately aggressive as a litigant, leading to his 'decision to explore options.'
My own guess? (Just a guess folks, and don't take anything I say as investment advice -- if you do, you're an idiot!) My guess is that Biovail is better off without him, and ought to resist any "options" he explores that might put him back in a decision to make decisions. Melnyk was part of the problem, he isn't part of the solution. They can work their way through the tough times they've encountered.
"Once you went away, I was petrified/ Kept thinking I would never live without you by my side ... I will survive/ I will survive."
He was the chairman of that board until last June, when he quit as part of a settlement with Canadian regulators over insider trading allegations.
Eight months of idleness appears to have been wearying, though. Melnyk, who owns 18.2 million shares (about 11% of the outstanding) writes: "I am at this juncture formally informing the Board that I have decided to explore, and am exploring, various options available to me in connection with my interest in Biovail, including the possibility of joining with a partner or partners to acquire the remaining shares of Biovail, selling all or a portion of my current Biovail shares to a third party, continuing to hold my shares for investment, or seeking changes to the composition of the Board of Directors."
Biovail is a pharmaceutical company specializing in making time-release versions of medicines (or, as their website puts it, "drug-delivery technologies.")
Between May and mid-July of last year, Biovail stock was trading in the neighborhood of $25. There was a sharp downward move in July, when the US FDA refused to approve a once-daily salt formulation of an anti-depressant. In August it found a floor at $16.
It fell trough that floor in December, when it announced it expected to settle a class-action lawsuit in the federal courts by making a payment of $85 million. The settlement, as is customary, includes no admissionof wrong-doing.
The stock price didn't find its new floor until mid January 2008, when it reached $12. It has rebounded a bit since then. But so far as I can tell, Melnyk believes that his successor has been inadequately aggressive as a litigant, leading to his 'decision to explore options.'
My own guess? (Just a guess folks, and don't take anything I say as investment advice -- if you do, you're an idiot!) My guess is that Biovail is better off without him, and ought to resist any "options" he explores that might put him back in a decision to make decisions. Melnyk was part of the problem, he isn't part of the solution. They can work their way through the tough times they've encountered.
"Once you went away, I was petrified/ Kept thinking I would never live without you by my side ... I will survive/ I will survive."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
