you sound so darn STOOPID
If you add in a few hundred mil for EU then you see that it's not hard to get to well over 100m in revenues to enta this year. With Japan coming on at the end of this year and contributing a good bit in 2016 with the 50 percent higher royalties on Japan then it's very possible that the well over 100m in 2015 goes to close to 200m in 2016
People have poo poo'd abbv statement of reaching a 3b run rate by the end of 2015 but I think it's a conservative number put out by abbv.
Adam F chart can be found in his article "Hey ABBV Don't start what you cant finish"
The other thing to remember about this
additional share from crossovers is that it add move to
revenues than the almost 2 percent because these crossovers
are not discounted.
The other part of the math is that in the SA
transcript for gild earnings con call gild said that the
wider use in these exclusive contracts that have been
bargained will up the number of patients treated from about
170k to 250k for gild. Here are two quotes from the
"Regarding HCV since the launch of Sovaldi in December
2013 and Harvoni
in October 2014 more than 170,000 individuals around the
world have been
treated with the sofosbuvir-based regimen. "
"Overall with these new arrangements in place we are
confident that a
substantially higher number of patients will be treated in
States in 2015. We think that there is capacity to treat at
250,000 patients across all genotypes."
It's hard to put your finger on exactly what this
means because the first quote is 170k worldwide in a little
over a year. The second quote is for the US expectation for
2015 of 250k+. If the US is going to go from, a guess here,
of 150k to 250k that is 66 percent more. I would actually
guess the US number is less than 150k for 2014 but trying to
be conservative here.
If you now think abbv is going to get something like
19 percent (AF's 17 plus my 2 for crossovers) of the
market that last year was something like 150k that would
represent about 30k which then is going to grow this year 66
percent or more because of easier access in these bargained
contracts then you come up with about 50k treated for abbv
in the US alone. If you use an avg discounted price of 44k
(assuming higher discounts for exclusive and adding back in
a little for the full priced crossovers and the higher
priced equal access contracts) which I think is a
conservative estimate then you come up with 2.2B in revenues
on an nrx basis this weeks numbers
would be about 4 percent of nrx. I don't think you can
look at trx yet as it's to early in the launch to have
any significant number of people going back to get second
script filled. Right now I just want to watch NRX.
We still don't know how much we can rely on that
IMS number with the supposed non reporting of esrx which
would be the largest portion of abbv hepc scripts. But even
4 percent at this early stage is not bad and looks like it
can build to at least that 17 percent number that Adam F was
Here is some of the math. REFER TO Adam F's table
where he is laying out current supposed
contracts that abbv and gild have signed. There are a couple
of problems with his analysis. One is that it's somewhat
based on rumored contracts. Some of the contract are known
but not all.
The other thing that it doesn't account for is
that some of each companies hepc treatments will not be a
fit for some of the exclusive contract customers for that
company. If you assume that for those that abbv has an
exclusive and for those that gild has an exclusive that 3 to
5 percent of the people will get the other just because of
some counter indication or because one is stronger in a
particular geno or geno subtype then that adds to abbv
because gild has the higher customer base.
If the contracts break down along the lines of the
80/20 percent that people are speculating that gild and abbv
will get then assume that each will get 3 percent of the
others market for that exclusive crossovers then 3 percent
of 20 percent is a smaller number than 3 percent of 80
percent that would go to abbv. In theory abbv would loss .6
to gild and gild would lose 2.4 to abbv for crossovers. This
adds almost 2 percent to abbv market share even if you agree
with AF numbers.
Reading this post makes me think of that WIll Farrell SNL skit where he was a cheerleader. Ridiculous drivel...and I'm LONG MIFI
Dude, from what I can ascertain from your posts, your shilling pretty hard for GILD so perhaps your sincerity is questionable...
BTW Im long but....
The chatter about OVERWHLEMING beats is basically omnipresent. Therefore, an overwhelming beat is NOT an upside surprise so why should the stock rocket higher if it IS a massive beat. In the meantime if its anything less than a massive beat there will be disappointment and we all know what that outcome will be. It wouldn't be such a big deal but in the wake of all these MASSIVE beat declarations, the stock price action has been kinda poor. All these upgrades and no big runup...So what can be a possible impulse to rocket the price higher? Is this whole thing just a massive bear trap?
Here is how I would think about enta. Pull up the most recent CS scripts report for the 20 of Jan which had script numbers for 9 jan. You had abbv at 57 for the 9th. Today someone posted 181 as the number. I'm not looking for a ramp like solvadi or harvoni. Just give me a launch path that somewhat matches up with incivek or olysio which are the red and purple lines on the script chart. Abbv launched at a bad time around the holidays. Notice the recent dip for Harvoni as evidence of slowdown at this time of year.
So today let's assume 181 is correct. That's an additional 130 scripts week over week gain. The other drugs in the chart of launch ramps for the hep c drugs show about 20 weeks of ramp and then they start plateauing. OK, lets hope for 130 additional avg scripts per week for another 15 weeks. That would mean you start to see a plateau around 2000 scripts a week. What we don't know is if that is US or world numbers but let's assume worst case that it's world numbers.
At the 20 week point we have a run rate of 2000 * 60000 (discounting the list price by about 30 percent so I think it's conservative) = 120m per week to abbv and 120m * 6% = about 7m a week to enta which is 350m a year and that doesn't even account for milestones for various achieved sales levels. I don't know what those are but there are some in the agreement.
That 2k a week script level equates to about 20 percent share. I would be very happy with that percent of the market. Give me the red or the purple line on that chart and ENTA makes a LOT, of money. At 300m a year in royalties they do about 15 dollars a share in eps. So are they gonna trade at a 2 pe (price minus current net cash after recent us and eu milestone payments) ? Of course maybe the script numbers I've seen are wrong but if there right I don't get the price currently and the market reaction other than some some unrealistic expectation that they were going to do Harvoni like numbers.
How do you think they became a 79 billion company? BTW: The boards fiduciary duty is TO the stockholders not the employees....and I speak as an employee and don't disagree with your judgement