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.

Technology Stocks : Qualcomm Moderated Thread - please read rules before posting -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: kech who wrote (48299)	11/1/2005 8:28:37 PM
From: quartersawyer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 196867

if I were a Roche shareholder, and the licenses don't allow them to get a return on their investment, it seems like a good reason to shut down R&D labs. well, I got the flu last year, got some Tamiflu which had terrific results, did some basic research into Roche, bought the stock, fairly heavily, as well as $1000 worth of Tamiflu (expires 2009) because WHO has been concerned about avian flu for a while and other gopv'ts have seen fit to stockpile the drug for over a year. The wheels are turning and I figure there will be no pandemic, but if there is, you and I hope there's enough antiviral material to turn the tide as early as possible. So does Roche. They and this shareholder are not the least bit interested in shutting down R&D for lack of maximum $return under emergent catastrophic conditions. That would be kind of bent, right? Part of what I saw in the company, (after observing what I personally concluded to be lethal bullshit from Pfizer and Merck in their cushioned studies and rehashes of their Cox-2 inhibitors-- and yes I know the pros and the cons) was integrity and resourcefulness in the context of the big picture of global health care. To this shareholder, that's the right stuff to sow and the money will follow. Same with Q.

To: kech who wrote (48299)	11/2/2005 4:59:59 PM
From: JGoren	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 196867

nothing indicates that Roche won't get a good royalty; there is a difference; this is a health emergency and Roche can't make enough to supply the need; Roche makes more money by obtaining a royalty on vaccine others make than if none is produced. and what happens if millions were to die? bluntly, Roche forever loses revenues, the world economy is disrupted and there are fewer people alive to buy its products--so it is a good business--bottom line-- decision for Roche