"I feel really good about where we are!" What a joker...stock down 35% and lost the lead in immunoncology in the past 6 months. He must think we are morons...
well the entire idea behind targeted therapy is having the appropriate target, right? Whoever designed the Checkmate study is the moron. Those who want to stick around and sell Opdivo can't be blamed. They are stuck with a mess on their hands because we handed the market to Merck
And how many oncology reps are competing with each other for time with providers that want to see no one????
The big problem is that there aren't any reps competing for time with providers, because the majority of the reps don't go out and do anything.
Sure, it's easy to be an armchair quarterback. The company went for the broadest patient indication in Checkmate 226. If the science had worked, the whole industry would have heralded Giovanni as a ballsy visionary. We lost fake speculative stock value but are no worse off than before the Opdivo trial. The only real losers here are cancer patients who are praying for a miracle, so stop your whining and get back to work.
WTF does "FROM" mean? I am a woman from a non-Commercial part of the company. Reading these boards, I am disgusted by how some of our Commercial colleagues behave. Get a real job and stop bashing everything. You are not owed anything except a day's pay for a day's work-- which apparently means faking your logs and bitching anonymously online.
Once again, a culture of zero accountability for management while shareholders are screwed and the employee layoffs continue for management's blunders.
Amazing that Caforio is poised to become Chairman. Given the reins with three growth products, a diverse pipeline, and all reasons for optimism, BMS has a shareholder return near the bottom of the industry during his tenure, has lost a clear lead in oncology, and has shifted dramatically away from diversification. As a shareholder, I earnestly hope that there are checks placed on his control over the company- he simply has not earned consolidation of power yet, and his credibility appears weaker and weaker with each set of claims he makes to investors which go undelivered. Scientific failures happen, and -026 is a clear reminder of how little is known before you run the studies, but Caforio's judgement on what was communicated was appallingly bad....he made a trial failure much worse by selling the study to investors before the readout with a confidence level which could not possibly be supported given the riskiness of the trial design. He compounded that issue 3 months later by teasing a filing he had no path to deliver (no completed randomized trials against SOC). Really sad to see even the most stalwart BMS supporters like Cramer start to lose faith in what the company says publicly.
As a recent buyer @ $50, I am more concerned with where BMY is going, not where it crashed down from. I think it will cross above $60 before it ever approaches $40. It looks like good risk/reward to me. Similarly, looking for TEVA to rise up from its ashes.
What really puzzles me is why the company did not do a parallel study (along with checkmate 26) in PD-1 expressers >50% to commercially cover itself - just in case of failure of study 26, which it did. I realize that hindsight is 20/20. But foresight and strategy are the justification for executive pay.
...and who's paying the price of those failures? People who have nothing to do with them. The smart Global Oncology GM should go with his R&D counterpart