Novartis Prepares to divest Surgical

Jumpin' Joe says he will consolidate pharma, keep the Alcon brand and will focus on growing surgical. This means Novartis has officially has killed Alcon and will try to recover some of their losses. There can only be one reason why a big pharma company wants to focus on a device division; it is to sell it once it is worth something. When this happens there will be nothing left of the former Alcon. Pharma will be absorbed into the Novartis dysfunctional family, and surgical will be spun off to a device oriented company. Alexander and Connor are rolling over in their graves (Of course they have to in order to make room for Alcon). RIP

 

He also said that cataract surgerical is the CORE of Alcon. Alcon pharma will get absorbed by Novartis pharma, and surgical will be focused on for greater growth.

Although you may be right; this may be to pretty up surgical for a future sell off.

 

You are right. With pharma being spun off and Novartis putting lipstick on the Surgical pig to sell it off Alcon is done as an entity. Stick in the the fork; the pig is roasted.

 

This is probably the most likely scenario. Ball prepared Hospira to be acquired by Pfizer. He ha been hired as a beautician to make surgical look more attractive to sell off. Sorry FTW

 

One glaring problem with that picture: with pharma mfg moving to Novartis, and FTW bearing all of surgical mfg, how could one sell off the surgical division at that point? Would FTW mfg then go back to making pharma product again? How many millions would that cost?

 

KB/BB ,JG and a bunch of idiots ,some still here like Attias have just killed a great company ,now let's look at what impairment will be ,there is no free lunch ...

 

Who says FTW needs to manufacture anything? Novartis is taking a 1.2 billion write off. I would think that would cover ridding itself of FTW manufacturing.

 

Surgical is all we have that's worth a damn. Sabri and his R&D clowns didn't come up with any new on the Pharma side for years, and CLC is a money pit for everyone. What else is there?

 

Typical arrogant surgical talk. What % of revenue and profitability are you guys driving? Oh right a fraction of a penny compared to Pharma. You're a rounding error on Novartis' Income Statement. Alcon Pharma will have a future once it sits under capable leadership, not JG, RW, GM and KB.

 

Surgical is around 55 percent of revenue.

IOLs are Alcon's most profitable product.

Any other questions?

 

Lol, not even close. Such a distorted view from this group. Your OPHs stroke your ego so you think your important. Pharma products cost pennies to make and make hundreds of millions of dollars. Good luck in the land of Gilenya where only brands with a b in front of the $$$ matter.

 

IOLs used to be the most profitable product at Alcon. The only way Alcon can sell IOLs is to tie it to a rebate on custom packs. When they do this they sell all of these products in a custom pack at cost. Hardly a profitable endeavor.

 

Hi, I work in Finance and had to comment. The other poster's two statements about surgical is actually correct, except that the total revenue percentage breakdown varies slightly from year to year.

If you choose not to believe me then ask someone to give you a sales breakdown with profit margins.

 

Why should we concern ourselves with profit margins?

We are in the business of human health and quality of life improvement, are we not?

Why should we rip off our fellow human beings?

Should we not sell at cost or at a simple limit of 10% profit margin?

We do work within a regulated industry, do we not?

 

You are asking the wrong person. That should be directed to the pharma reps who are bashing surgical above.

 

The reps cannot be expected to answer those questions.

They are pawns in another kind of chess game played out in today's economics and across the "for limitless growth of profits" healthcare industry.

No, these questions are addressed to those who own and establish the game rules.

 

The reps are making the claims.

For those who are making the rules, that would be Novartis. All it comes down to is how much $$ we make to appeal to the stock holders. That's reality. If you don't like it you can always go work for a non-profit org.

 

Agreed. Customers are no longer willing to commit a large portion of their lens volume to get a price break on mediocre 20 year old technology.

 

And we can change that man-made reality by turning Novartis into a non-profit enterprise and expand access to billions more patients.

The world will love us, calling on their government regulatory agencies and insurance providers to purchase our cost-effective, high-quality products.

 

Trying putting all your wishes into one hand and crap in the other and see which one fills up first.