Before I begin, let me be very clear -- I am not s
Post# of 154804
(Total Views: 878)
Posted On: 06/23/2020 11:03:16 PM
Before I begin, let me be very clear -- I am not suggesting there is a buyout in process. Please don't waste time accusing me of that. These are just some random thoughts about the BP that is allegedly talking to CytoDyn.
Ever since NP introduced the BP topic, I have been operating under the assumption that if a BP engaged with us to discuss a potential distribution agreement for COVID, then it is likely that they have interest in our molecule beyond just COVID.
I am clearly no expert in this sector, but let's think about this for a moment:
If I'm not mistaken, I believe CytoDyn was in discussions with 5 or 6 distribution companies before the topic of a BP was ever raised by NP. And that made sense -- because distribution is probably all we need. Leronlimab for COVID does not need a marketing team, does not need a sales force, does not need an advertising agency, and does not need a media buying company. All it needs is distribution -- because the molecule will sell itself in a pandemic.
So I wonder what the advantages would be for a BP, and for CytoDyn, to engage in such an agreement.
What does the BP get?
1. I assume most, if not all, BP's have an extensive global distribution network that supports their own drugs, devices and services. It is hard for me to imagine how a BP could be so desperate for ancillary revenue that they'd seek to offer their distribution network to another company -- especially a company like CytoDyn that almost definitely represents some amount of overlap or competition to a BP's existing portfolio or pipeline. So, I'm guessing the reason to engage with a CytoDyn may be more than just distribution.
2. NP has stated and stressed several times, the BP wants to wait and see the results of the trials. Tell me, if you're a BP and you're just offering your distribution network -- why do you need to see the results of the trials? I mean really, other than the FDA demanding larger trials, the outcome is binary -- either the FDA approves (and there's a product to distribute) -- or the FDA rejects (and there's no product to distribute).
Are we to believe that a BP, who is only interested in distribution, is going to sit in the corner and hold its breath waiting for the trial results -- as opposed to simply drafting a distribution agreement that is conditional on FDA approval?
I'm assuming the BP might have interest in the molecule, and they want to know to more about how it works. Engaging with CytoDyn in this manner provides them with an unprecedented advanced look at the trial results, and allows them to decide if there's a business opportunity worth talking about. Again, I'm not suggesting there's a buyout. Maybe it's a licencing agreement or strategic partnership. Who knows?
What does CytoDyn get?
1. Let's start with the fact that a company that held out for so long to find a commercialization partner desperate enough to agree to a 50/50 gross revenue split on Domestic HIV indications is probably not going to overpay for COVID distribution services -- an indication that, once again, sells itself. And I sincerely doubt any BP would agree to undercut and charge less for distribution -- than the kind of dedicated distribution companies CytoDyn might have been talking to. So, I'm guessing there's a bigger motivation.
2. Then there's the FDA. I have to believe that some amount of the FDA getting comfortable with approving leronlimab for COVID is knowing that the entire supply chain is a well-oiled machine that will operate flawlessly. Distribution is a big part of that machine. So, I would imagine CytoDyn would earn some valuable brownies points for delivering to the FDA a polished, end-to-end solution for deploying leronlimab to the nation.
3. As many of you will probably agree, the events of the past couple of months have provided a sobering view of the unbridled influence and manipulation wielded by BP on the FDA and other governmental agencies.
In my opinion, if leronlimab is lucky enough to be approved for COVID, CytoDyn will have avoided some of the regulatory friction deployed by BP to prevent competitive drugs from eroding their market share. Frankly, even with a COVID approval, I anticipate FDA corruption will still make approvals for competitive indications a steep uphill battle.
But what if your COVID distribution partner happens to be a BP? And what if CytoDyn's relationship with that BP extends beyond just COVID? I think it's the functional equivalent to having a big brother who will beat the crap out of anyone trying to do you harm.
Do you think the BP bullies on the pharmaceutical playground are going to mess with CytoDyn if it is closely aligned to another BP? Do you think dealings with the FDA might be 'lubricated' to some degree if CytoDyn has a relationship with a BP? And, do you think that launching a massive number of concurrent clinical trials might be easier with a relationship with a BP? I think the answers to all of those questions is a resounding "Yes". And so, even if distribution costs more with a BP, there maybe a compelling advantage to having a relationship with a BP.
Who knows, maybe this is just a corporate version of a first date that allows the companies to get to know each other better and learn what they each bring to the party. I sense, though, that a BP that is waiting for trial results is probably interested in more than just moving vials around the country or planet. Either way, I have trouble believing this discussion is only about distribution.
Ever since NP introduced the BP topic, I have been operating under the assumption that if a BP engaged with us to discuss a potential distribution agreement for COVID, then it is likely that they have interest in our molecule beyond just COVID.
I am clearly no expert in this sector, but let's think about this for a moment:
If I'm not mistaken, I believe CytoDyn was in discussions with 5 or 6 distribution companies before the topic of a BP was ever raised by NP. And that made sense -- because distribution is probably all we need. Leronlimab for COVID does not need a marketing team, does not need a sales force, does not need an advertising agency, and does not need a media buying company. All it needs is distribution -- because the molecule will sell itself in a pandemic.
So I wonder what the advantages would be for a BP, and for CytoDyn, to engage in such an agreement.
What does the BP get?
1. I assume most, if not all, BP's have an extensive global distribution network that supports their own drugs, devices and services. It is hard for me to imagine how a BP could be so desperate for ancillary revenue that they'd seek to offer their distribution network to another company -- especially a company like CytoDyn that almost definitely represents some amount of overlap or competition to a BP's existing portfolio or pipeline. So, I'm guessing the reason to engage with a CytoDyn may be more than just distribution.
2. NP has stated and stressed several times, the BP wants to wait and see the results of the trials. Tell me, if you're a BP and you're just offering your distribution network -- why do you need to see the results of the trials? I mean really, other than the FDA demanding larger trials, the outcome is binary -- either the FDA approves (and there's a product to distribute) -- or the FDA rejects (and there's no product to distribute).
Are we to believe that a BP, who is only interested in distribution, is going to sit in the corner and hold its breath waiting for the trial results -- as opposed to simply drafting a distribution agreement that is conditional on FDA approval?
I'm assuming the BP might have interest in the molecule, and they want to know to more about how it works. Engaging with CytoDyn in this manner provides them with an unprecedented advanced look at the trial results, and allows them to decide if there's a business opportunity worth talking about. Again, I'm not suggesting there's a buyout. Maybe it's a licencing agreement or strategic partnership. Who knows?
What does CytoDyn get?
1. Let's start with the fact that a company that held out for so long to find a commercialization partner desperate enough to agree to a 50/50 gross revenue split on Domestic HIV indications is probably not going to overpay for COVID distribution services -- an indication that, once again, sells itself. And I sincerely doubt any BP would agree to undercut and charge less for distribution -- than the kind of dedicated distribution companies CytoDyn might have been talking to. So, I'm guessing there's a bigger motivation.
2. Then there's the FDA. I have to believe that some amount of the FDA getting comfortable with approving leronlimab for COVID is knowing that the entire supply chain is a well-oiled machine that will operate flawlessly. Distribution is a big part of that machine. So, I would imagine CytoDyn would earn some valuable brownies points for delivering to the FDA a polished, end-to-end solution for deploying leronlimab to the nation.
3. As many of you will probably agree, the events of the past couple of months have provided a sobering view of the unbridled influence and manipulation wielded by BP on the FDA and other governmental agencies.
In my opinion, if leronlimab is lucky enough to be approved for COVID, CytoDyn will have avoided some of the regulatory friction deployed by BP to prevent competitive drugs from eroding their market share. Frankly, even with a COVID approval, I anticipate FDA corruption will still make approvals for competitive indications a steep uphill battle.
But what if your COVID distribution partner happens to be a BP? And what if CytoDyn's relationship with that BP extends beyond just COVID? I think it's the functional equivalent to having a big brother who will beat the crap out of anyone trying to do you harm.
Do you think the BP bullies on the pharmaceutical playground are going to mess with CytoDyn if it is closely aligned to another BP? Do you think dealings with the FDA might be 'lubricated' to some degree if CytoDyn has a relationship with a BP? And, do you think that launching a massive number of concurrent clinical trials might be easier with a relationship with a BP? I think the answers to all of those questions is a resounding "Yes". And so, even if distribution costs more with a BP, there maybe a compelling advantage to having a relationship with a BP.
Who knows, maybe this is just a corporate version of a first date that allows the companies to get to know each other better and learn what they each bring to the party. I sense, though, that a BP that is waiting for trial results is probably interested in more than just moving vials around the country or planet. Either way, I have trouble believing this discussion is only about distribution.
(8)
(0)