Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Biotech / Medical : Biotech Valuation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: nigel bates who wrote (8622)	6/5/2003 3:38:38 PM
From: Biomaven	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 52153

Is AMGN really worth 65% of Glaxo ??? Well just about at the peak of the bubble there was some conversation on this thread about the big biotechs munching some small pharma. So let's hope this isn't a reprise. If we compare AMGN to Glaxo, we see that: 1. AMGN's sales force has to be only tiny compared to Glaxo - the advantage of selling a "niche" product. So AMGN's margins are (I think) better, despite the biologic vs. small molecule disadvantage. 2. Generic competition is still a ways off for AMGN, whereas Glaxo is running very hard to keep stationary. But clearly at some level AMGN is more vulnerable - just what if someone finally comes up with a small-molecule challenge to their two big products? (Look at POTP as an example - this previously SEPR-controlled pico-cap has a potential small molecule challenge to Neupogen - 100 bagger potential in the remote chance it succeeds, incidentally). So yes, the comparison makes me uneasy. But AMGN is going to be growing sales and earnings at 20%+ for the next few years, and Glaxo certainly isn't. Peter