Week of: AddXR/Concerta/Strattera/StratTRx's
Feb 7, 2003 23.0%/26.3%/4.3%/24,275
Jan 31, 2003 23.2%/26.4%/3.7%/19,506
Jan 10, 2003 23.6%/26.7%/0.6%/3,521
Dec 6, 2002 23.2%/26.7%/0.0%
Nov 1, 2002 22.7%/27.1%
You might want to throw this into excel and plot the points. However, I'd be cautions about drawing too many conclusions (good or bad) with only 4 weeks worth of data.
by my reckoning this makes strattera more successful than adderall XR at a comparative stage (week 4?).
See Shire website Adderall XR data/News section-although not updated recently for some strange reason (!!).
If Lilly continue in similar fashion over the next few weeks/months where would this leave Shire?
pharma dood says: With the launch of Fosrenol being pushed back to sometime between August and October, I can't imagine that Shire can sustain itself long
Where did you get the timeline for Fosrenol release to market?
..the press releases on Fosrenol all talk as if there is a small problem which will be resolved quickly and everyone remains optimistic. The delay and your post suggest otherwise-if there is a problem as IMO seems more likely with each passing day then Shire was obliged to disclose fully to the market immeditely upon the problem arising.
If Shire has not disclosed fully I am sure that a raft of sharkish US plaintiff lawyers will come calling with a hole host of aggrieved shareholders who bought in on a Fosrenol launch in 2002.
The silence is deafening-time for an update!!!!
I talked today with prominent nephrologist (kidney doctor) that deals with dialysis patients as a carrer. We talked about Fosrenol, and it is as effective as all other phosphate lowering drugs. It hasn't shown any bad side effects that calcium carbonate or aluminum hydroxide have shown, akin to Renagel. Just because something hasn't shown potential side effects doesn't mean it won't once released for use and being used long term ie 10 years, as it took this long for artery calcification and aluminum bone disease to show up with calcium carbonate and aluminum repectively. Otherwise the drug is extremely likely to be approved. At the very worst we will get an approvable letter and launch in late 2003.
That's my understanding from the conversation, as well as from my perspective as a pharmacist and doctor to be in 2 months.
approvable letter in Europe??-is there such a thing or are you talking about the US NDA?
Either way 1-2 year delay without any real disclosure from executive management-if this one bombs there will be a lot of questions asked and I am sure paper flying!
are you a poor reader or just completely stupid? jeez, mr. happy, you're not very quick.
at worst it would be a six month delay with launch in fourth quarter 2003. pay attention to what gets said to you.
Extract from Shire's 2000 10K
"Foznol (now of course Fosrenol) is currently undergoing Phase III clinical trials in the U.S. A
Marketing Authorization application is planned to be submitted in the EU during
the first quarter of 2001. We intend to submit a U.S. filing by the end of 2001."
If MAA had been submitted first Q 2001-Shire would have got approval in Q1 2002 if everything had gone to plan-you are talking of launch in Q4 2003.Go figure!
I can read and I can research and I appear to be a lot quicker than you numbnuts!
right mr. happy, no need to resort to name calling, it just reflects your immaturity and lack of self control. i am right you are wrong. get used to it kid. delay from original timeline versus now as i referred to, rather than your misleading statements. you might be quicker than a tortoise, but much slower than i, the hare.
I am with Mr Happy as thats the statement in
the public domain-Shire is well behind its timeline as per the 2000 10K and we have not had an adequate explanation as to why.
You seem to be very sure of the launch date of Fosrenol and refer to Shire as "we"-you may wish to think about insider trading issues when addressing the board next time.
History,as ever, will make fools of some of us in due course-but always good to read lively debate!
I am struggling slightly with your broken English.I think my point is quite logically made and is relevant to Shire investors.
are you really saying that Shire can move its own deadline by nearly two years and that following such move there isn't a delay anymore because they told us.
..by analogy ..so your stand at a train station awaiting the 10.00am train,the station announces its going to be five hours late -the train then duly arrvies at 3pm-no delay according to you because they moved the time and let you know-tell that to the passengers!
Can you spell IQ?