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 : Momenta Pharmaceuticals Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DewDiligence_on_SI who wrote (2892)	11/29/2011 8:17:11 AM
From: IRWIN JAMES FRANKEL	4 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3027

>>You think SNY gives a rat’s ass what NVS and MNTA told the Judge? You are clueless, Jim. You do excel at making this personal. :-) SNY is not bound by what MNTA or judge Groton say in the case. Duh! I have NOT said otherwise. SNY will be interested in how Sandoz responds to the market share battle. The parties can't collude. But they can read the market signals and act to maximize their profits. The AG launch and suspending sales are market signals sent by SNY that Sandoz would do well to read properly. Perhaps, Sandoz should back their market share down some. That signal could very well lead SNY to make the suspension a withdrawal or halt. Both sides win. Escalate competition means more price cutting. Both sides lose. Why did SNY suspend sales of the AG? Because they thought it profitable to do so. Why would they relaunch and push the AG? Another generic approval (tL), or Sandoz market share rises too far. It appears that NVS did not expect the patent to block aL. To MNTA's credit they pushed for the suit and won a PI. It is perverse that NVS takes a disproportionate share of the profits, the fruits of a patent they did not want to support. ij