Bhag:
Agree with you 100%. However, take two San Diego companies as examples....... while AGPH struggled and learned its way, the managers and scientists took home modest incomes, worked hard, and <generally> retained their shares. Cytel employees (some) cashed out early and, from my observations, started in on a 9 to 5 schedule. Howard Gray, Jim Paulson et al....... these guys/gals were good scientists, at the top of the immunogenetics game.... they were potentially in the same class as Immunex and Oncogen (now Bristol Myers Squibb Research Institute).
Some companies just get rich and lazy. Johnson didn't, and AGPH didn't.
Yes, they have covered a variety of potential projects, but such was the nature of biotech..... it looked, at first, like every other protein was going to be a gold mine. The projects have fallen aside due to the sophistication of the science applied, in general, not to technical failure. That is, the bench science was successful, revealing that the target stunk.
We have 20 years under our belt. We can bet on certain managers, the ones that want to be recognized for their contributions to society rather than just the life style that they achieve.
Some are naively ragging on AGPH because they didn't do the initial chemistry on Viracept. They don't understand the nature of the collaborative agreements in those days..... AGPH could deliver coordinates from X-ray crystallographic studies. That was their role, and that's what Lilly valued. Without AGPH, there would be no Viracept. They weren't pharmaceutical chemists, and most of the early-day biotechnologists didn't have an appreciation or knowledge of what it took to produce a "drug". AGPH didn't make the molecule because they weren't supposed to.
AGPH is a big company now, with pharmaceutical chemists and other stuff. Yes, "ten years of R&D has yet to earn a dime, much less pay for itself". Now we get to pick from all those that have moved up that long learning curve.
For all of those that are pointing out that AGPH has never marketed a drug that was designed in-house..... you're correct. Lilly gave AGPH an opportunity to independently manage success. At that time, January 1994, Johnson said that the Lilly ----> AGPH molecules included compounds that "display(ed) desirable pharmacological properties in vivo and anti-HIV activities in vitro which are equal to or greater than that of any other HIV protease inhibitor yet reported". He is a scientist's manager..... no smoke and mirrors.
Yes, it takes time on the learning curve, when you're protein biochemists, to appreciate the art of (and the requirement for) pharmachemists. With Alanex, AGPH is trying to take the art forward faster than most.
Biotech investments are bets on the future. Some managers travel a lot, spend a lot of time in nice hotels, and do a lot of selling. If this, selling, becomes their primary goal, then watch out.... they'll lose contact with the quality of their own science. Worse, they may begin to promote science when their own scientists are telling them that "it stinks". You could look at Johnson when he spoke and detect a person who wanted to generate enthusiasm, but wanted firm footing in the science to do such. There are a few others like that around.
Rick |
