Yup and duh.Originally Posted by David S.
Yup and duh.
I love this opinion because it's utterly unsupported by evidence.
How COVID-19 has affected product sales at the top 15 pharmaceutical companies
Across these 15 companies that is a net decline in revenue of almost 5 billion dollars.GlaxoSmithKline: +$650 million
Eli Lilly: +$243 million
Gilead Sciences: +$77 million
Takeda: +$56 million
Johnson & Johnson: -$7 million
Bristol-Myers Squibb: -$119 million
Amgen: -$285 million
AstraZeneca: -$330 million
Novartis: -$378 million
AbbVie: -$512 million
Sanofi: -$592 million
Roche: -$619 million
Bayer: -$675 million
Pfizer: -$1.2 billion
Merck: -$1.3 billion
More:
What about the vaccines?Facing such strong headwinds, what has been the impact on the pharmaceutical industry? Many of the pharmaceutical majors, in reporting their second-quarter and first-half results, showed some effect of declining revenues year-over-year attributable to the COVID-19 pandemic.
For the second-quarter 2020, Pfizer reported revenues of $11.8 billion and $23.8 billion for the first half of 2020, respectively a 11% and 10% decline year-over-year, which reflected the impact from COVID-19. Pfizer pointed to a reduction in in-person meetings between sales representatives and physicians in the US and a decline in prescriptions as contributors to its revenue decline.
“Pfizer has experienced an impact on its sales and marketing activities due to widespread restrictions on in-person meetings with healthcare professionals and the refocused attention of the medical community on fighting COVID-19,” said the company in its second-quarter 2020 earnings release of July 30, 2020. “Access to prescribers for sales force colleagues during second-quarter 2020 was mixed, with those in most international markets able to meet with healthcare professionals for most of the quarter while those in the US were unable to meet in-person with doctors for nearly all of the quarter…. As a result of the lower number of in-person meetings with prescribers and restrictions on patient movements due to government-mandated work-from-home or shelter-in-place policies, the rate of new prescriptions for certain products and of vaccination rates for most vaccines slowed in certain markets, including the US, which negatively impacted second-quarter 2020 financial results.”
US Pharma COVID-19 Vaccine to Benefit Revenue More than Margins
Oh.Fitch Ratings-Chicago-11 November 2020: Increased evidence that an effective COVID-19 vaccine may be available by year-end or early 2021 is broadly positive given the severity of the coronavirus pandemic, and will provide a short-term revenue opportunity for US drug manufacturers, but the possibility of below-normal margins may limit credit profile benefits, says Fitch Ratings. The US government is sharing the financial risk of large parallel manufacturing prior to regulatory approval of vaccines, and has preordered doses from several pharmaceutical companies. However, final product pricing, margins and the rate of vaccination participation, and therefore volumes, are uncertain.
We anticipate manufacturers’ pricing and margins in the first year of COVID-19 vaccine sales will not resemble typical market launches. The US government and health insurers are likely to work together to ensure broad access to the vaccine, given the critical nature of the health crisis and ongoing legislative efforts to reduce drug costs. Pharmaceutical companies will also likely want to avoid the appearance of price gouging. The US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) indicated the current administration wants vaccines purchased with US taxpayer dollars to be given to Americans at no cost.
Lower-than-normal product price points and margins are possible for all companies including Pfizer (A/Negative), despite any first-to-market advantage which will quickly erode as more vaccines are commercialized. This should not materially reduce overall company margins over the long term, given the large size and diverse product portfolios of US drug makers, and the expected reduction in the percentage of sales the vaccine will generate. Operating EBITDA margins for branded pharmaceutical companies in the US are in the 40%-50% range.
Seriously... given the enormous financial beating that the US healthcare industry has endured since March, I really struggle to understand the leap of logic required to think that the pharmaceutical industry is somehow raking it in during the COVID-19 pandemic.
e.g.
-AbbVie reported an unfavorable net impact of $900M, roughly 8.7% of their Q2 earnings.
-Lilly reported an unfavorable impact of ~$250M, roughly 4.5% of their Q2 earnings.
-Merck reported an unfavorable impact of $1.6B, roughly a 14.5% of their Q2 earnings.
-Pfizer reported a net unfavorable impact of $500M, roughly 4% of their Q2 earnings.
PRESCRIPTION TRENDS FOR NEW PATIENT STARTS CONTINUED TO BE A CHALLENGE ACROSS THERAPY AREAS. MOST COMPANIES FELT PEAK IMPACT IN THE MONTHS OF APRIL/MAY, WITH RECOVERY BY EARLY JUNE.
-Merck reported that during the months of April and May, new patient starts in Oncology were down to a range of 5% – 10%, depending on the type of cancer; however, things improved as of June 2020.
-Lilly reported that for their diabetes portfolio, new prescriptions for the GLP-1 class were down by 32%, whereas prescriptions for the SGLT2 class were 38% less than pre-COVID levels.
-Within migraine, new to brand prescriptions for CGRP class of migraine drugs were 15% – 20% below pre-COVID levels for months April – July.
-New to brand prescriptions in immunology declined 36% during COVID-19 and recovery in this area has been slower with the current market still at 21% below pre-COVID levels as of July 2020.
MOST THERAPY AREAS WERE AFFECTED, SOME MORE THAN OTHERS
-Oncology remained relatively resilient during the pandemic, with most of the drugs experiencing limited impact. BMS called out melanoma as the most affected oncology indication in terms of new therapy starts on their earnings call.
-Ophthalmology drugs saw a drastic decline in revenues. Novartis reported that Lucentis declined by 24% due to market decline and their mature ophthalmology portfolio was down overall by ~32.5%.
-Gilead reported that HCV revenues declined by 47% YOY and were down by 39% compared to Q1 2020, due to delayed patient visits and decreased diagnosis.
-Aesthetics portfolios also saw a decline as providers closed offices and AbbVie reported a decline of 47.9% for their aesthetics portfolio.
VACCINE PORTFOLIOS ACROSS THE BOARD TOOK A LARGE HIT AND WERE BY FAR THE MOST AFFECTED
-GSK reported a 29% decline in their vaccines portfolio. Shingrix declined by 19%, the meningitis portfolio declined by 29%, while Hepatitis vaccines revenues declined by as much as 62%.
-Pfizer reported that Prevnar13 revenues declined by 22% in the US, reflecting the impact of disruptions to physician office visits.
-Merck reported that Gardasil revenues declined 24% YOY.
-Sanofi reported that their travel vaccine portfolio declined by 60% over the last quarter.
Love him or hate him he's a warrior for that in which he believes. He's looked, as expected, really tired on some of the recent interviews.
As are we.
If we have to march off into the next world, let us walk there on the bodies of our enemies.
David S.
I don't see any possible way anyone could have that information.
If .054% of 70+ year olds died, then a nation of 330 million where 100% of the people got it would have .00054*330000000=178200 deaths. And since we've had more deaths than that, I don't think those numbers can be right.
So this makes something ok, because it only affects older people? What’s your point? Data out of context is noise.
Ken
BBI: ...”you better not forget the safe word because shit's about to get weird”...
revchuck38: ...”mo' ammo is mo' betta' unless you're swimming or on fire.”
There is no way to account for asymptomatic numbers unless everyone was tested simultaneously.
The chart was an erroneous interpretation of CDC statistics from September 10th. They didn't convert the ratio into a percentage properly, and even Fox News confirmed the error and disavowed the chart.
Multiply by 100, and you'll have the correct case fatality rate for the US as of Sept 10th. So, 70+ is 5.4%, not .054%.
In other words:
FAKE NEWS
@whomever,
It's a case fatality rate...meaning fatalities vs confirmed cases within an age group. It's not fatalities among ALL living people of those age groups.
"Are you ready? Okay. Let's roll."- Last words of Todd Beamer
Reply With Quote