<"These studies have to be taken for what they are...JNJ pimped studies.">
Where do you get this from? Of course Reality had some JNJ influence - but ISAR and SIRTAX were independently funded, and Taxus V was funded by Boston.
<"Bottom line...should any MD believe any study that has as part of its conclusion "that the Cypher is equal to the Taxus in deliverability"? I think not!!!!">
I appreciate your frustration with this, but SIRTAX made the same statement about "deliverability" (i.e. equivalence) as Reality did. It's just a question of definition. Reality and SIRTAX simply asked - can you get the stent where you set out to place it or not.
Its difficult to measure the ease of getting there (where Taxus has it's advantage). I'm sure Boston would like to continue to foster the "better deliverability" descriptor, and the docs will likely continue to use that terminology, but the Taxus advantage would probably be better described as better maneuverablility. I'd rather drive a Porsche to work, and I might even shave a minute or two off my transit time doing so, but a minivan will get there just as surely.
I follow the message board for Cyberonics (CYBX) and have noticed many post think CYBX is ripe for acquisition since the VNS is approved with conditions for treatment of depression. Potential buyers suspected to be JNJ, MDT and BSX. BSX already owns 15% of CYBX. This new application is slated to be launched in May of this year. Would BSX be downgraded if someone thought BSX would be buying out CYBX?
That's one thing Reality missed. Reality did not measure ease of delivery, it simply demonstrated that Cypher CAN be delivered sucessfully as often as Taxus in the easy lesions studied in Reality (heavily calcified lesions were excluded in the study). But it would seem that "ease of delivery" is the only advantage Taxus has going for it at this point.
"Reality added nothing to help JNJ."
I disagree. While Reality failed to meet it's primary endpoint, it did demonstrate a meaningful difference in neointimal hyperplasia. While this had no clinically significant effect in the Reality patient set, it can, and is, being used as further evidence that Cypher is better in difficult lesions --where clinical outcomes are more dependent on the extent of late loss.
Yes, Reality failed, but it tells us the following: in standard lesions either stent is great, but in difficult lesions Cypher is probably better.
Combine this with Sirtax and ISAR-diabetes, and Cypher could take 50% market share IF they have the manufacturing capacity to do so (FWIW they claim they can supply 50% of the market).
These studies have to be taken for what they are...JNJ pimped studies.
I am a long strong BSX'er but I have to crack up when one of the results says that deliverability was equal. That is THE ONLY REASON BSX HAS 65% marketshare.
Even local JNJ reps admit that the Taxus is easier to deliver. These MD's used Cypher for almost a year, exclusively. Then the Taxus comes out and there is a remarkable difference in deliverability.
I will admit that over a long time period, and lots of patients, the drugs will be equal. But no one can deny that the Taxus is so much easier to deliver.
Bottom line...should any MD believe any study that has as part of its conclusion "that the Cypher is equal to the Taxus in deliverability"? I think not!!!!
Long and Strong BSX and short March 30 and 27.5 puts.
<"It was JNJ study to begin with and the study determined the BSX Taxus stent to be slightly superior to the JNJ product.">
I'm not sure why you feel the Reality study determined the BSX stent to be slightly superior. None of the clinical endpoints were (statistically) significantly different and if you are going to start pointing to trends, the opposite was evident - Cypher trended better on most clinical measures.
Reality added nothing to help JNJ. It will be Boston who will be able to use it for marketing advantage. But the best they can get from it is to suggest that differences between the two stents is small.
Taxus market share is not the least bit threatened by Reality results but it certainly is threatened by ISAR-diabetes suggesting Cypher performs better in diabetics, SIRTAX suggesting that Cypher performs better in real world "all-comer" rather then "trial type" (trial type patients are typically not as acutely ill) patients, and Taxus V suggesting that there might be a problem inherent in either overlapping Taxus, or in using multiple Taxus stents.
JNJ was shooting blanks with Reality, but these other studies (two by independents and one by Boston themselves) will be very useful to the Guidant / Cordis rep in the battle for marketshare. Unlike the data we had seen previously suggesting there might be a Cypher advantage in ultra-long lesions or ISR (which were niche markets), this data applies to a much larger percentages of patients.
Will it matter? It should. But Boston has the better relationship with physicians and Cordis is likely still struggling with shelf life and manufacturing issues - so who knows?
On that note - is there anyone who can add any info on the current Cypher shelf-life?
Can't argue with you....BSX can't buy a break right now. The PRU downgrade is questionable at best. Does anyone know if the PRU analyst is still Sandra Hollinghorst (or something like that). She's the dumb ass from PRU that had a $12 price on the stock just before it made a meteoric rise. But like you say....doesn't matter.
The MDT numbers didn't look that good...doesn't matter.
The Q1 results are all that matter now.
BSC needs to keep costs under control (lean and mean) and from what I have heard, that isn't happening.
I hear ya and can sympathize; but a two-thirds market share in a 5 billion a year business should produce some earnings sooner rather than later if they have the better product. Got to admit tho that your analysis of the down blahs echoes my own thinking over the last year and the broker has no good explanation either. Maybe BSX goes up when JNJ starts getting hit with the law suits since litigation is the main bad news on BSX. But look where RJR and Altria are now...so litigation shouldn't be that much of a concern
One thing they should do right away is declare a decent quarterly dividend. At least whil the share value is low we can look forward to a dividend. Insiders should like it since they own 34.8% of the stock!
Yeah, hang on. Been hanging on for over a year now as this POS goes down, down, down... doesn't seem to matter what kind of news comes out: good news - BSX down bad news - BSX down no news - BSX down. Targets are 47 - 55 and BSX is down to 30-something. Great value play - but it still goes dwon.... ridiculous peg, but it still goes down. Busted through its 52-week low - and it still goes down - even farther. I know PRU is full of sh_t with this downgrade - doesn't matter - made the stock go down. I know JNJ is full os sh_t with their spin of "reality" - doesn't matter - made the stocl price go down. Do you see a pattern? I do. It goes down. Down. Down. The direction is down. Good nes, bad news, no news, bullsh_t news - it goes down. The stock has dropped 30% since last March... the whole time analsyts are saying the fair value is 47+... the whole time posters to this board are saying it is such a great buy - it is soooo undervalued. Well, you know what? It's time for the bozos who run this company to put up or shut up... if you're going stand by mutely as JNJ wreaks havoc on your company's sp with some BS spin of their FAILED test, it's time for new leaders!!!!! I've seen some crazy bullsh_t dealings with some companies before, but this one takes the prize!! I rue the day I bought this lousy, piece-of-sh_t company... I sure thought it was a good, solid company and, boy, did they ever prove me wrong!!
Disc: Long and feeling every inch of my anal canal that's been abused by each share of the worthless company that I've bought.