Anyone been contacted by Harvard Business School for their case study on the collapse of Novo Nordisk?
Well played. I believe you will only hear the sweet sound of crickets in response. I could add a few more examples but that might expose certain leaders and maybe myself. But I agree with your assessment 100%It's so easy to make you look foolish previous poster.
1. Collapse defined: to break down, fall down
2. Let's look at your two key arguments:
a. When is going from double digit growth to single digit growth a failure:
ANSWER:
It's a failure when the double digit growth was fueled by market growth of ~5-6% in insulin and 20+% in ( the even more expensive) GLP-1 segment.
Add on semi-annual price increases of 12-18% (realizing price protection in recent years tempered what hits the net), and without doing a single thing - just riding the wave of diabetes segment growth and price increases, you've grown the business nearly 15%. That's called good luck, being at the right placemat the right time. And yes sometimes it's better to be lucky than good.
Got the math on that one you dumbass ? Stop breathing your own exhaust.
Now, let's move to your second 'argument': "NNI is still significantly better than the competition"
How's that ? You didn't present any argument to support that claim.
I'd argue Lilly is killing it with a stronger strategy, solid clinical development and real commercial execution.
How is NNI better ?
-CEO stepping aside
-NNI President fired
-CVP of HR fired
-ET (your leadership team) is the same except for one or two spots. How's that better ?
Tresiba is struggling to say the least
Xultophy is delayed (When did NNI last launch on time ?)
Novo's core insulin business of over $4.2B, had been fully commoditized (no sales efforts needed)
Biopharm is deprioritized and with a relatively flat forecast going forward. Facing new competition.
Nearly 500 were just terminated. And that was just Round One.
Stock just hit a 3-year low.
LLY has dramatically outperformed NVO stock past 2 and 3 year periods.
After reading this, do y'all really think Novo Nordisk is significantly better than competition ?
I didn't think so.
4622
It's so easy to make you look foolish previous poster.
1. Collapse defined: to break down, fall down
2. Let's look at your two key arguments:
a. When is going from double digit growth to single digit growth a failure:
ANSWER:
It's a failure when the double digit growth was fueled by market growth of ~5-6% in insulin and 20+% in ( the even more expensive) GLP-1 segment.
Add on semi-annual price increases of 12-18% (realizing price protection in recent years tempered what hits the net), and without doing a single thing - just riding the wave of diabetes segment growth and price increases, you've grown the business nearly 15%. That's called good luck, being at the right placemat the right time. And yes sometimes it's better to be lucky than good.
Got the math on that one you dumbass ? Stop breathing your own exhaust.
Now, let's move to your second 'argument': "NNI is still significantly better than the competition"
How's that ? You didn't present any argument to support that claim.
I'd argue Lilly is killing it with a stronger strategy, solid clinical development and real commercial execution.
How is NNI better ?
-CEO stepping aside
-NNI President fired
-CVP of HR fired
-ET (your leadership team) is the same except for one or two spots. How's that better ?
Tresiba is struggling to say the least
Xultophy is delayed (When did NNI last launch on time ?)
Novo's core insulin business of over $4.2B, had been fully commoditized (no sales efforts needed)
Biopharm is deprioritized and with a relatively flat forecast going forward. Facing new competition.
Nearly 500 were just terminated. And that was just Round One.
Stock just hit a 3-year low.
LLY has dramatically outperformed NVO stock past 2 and 3 year periods.
After reading this, do y'all really think Novo Nordisk is significantly better than competition ?
I didn't think so.
4622
It's so easy to make you look foolish previous poster.
1. Collapse defined: to break down, fall down
2. Let's look at your two key arguments:
a. When is going from double digit growth to single digit growth a failure:
ANSWER:
It's a failure when the double digit growth was fueled by market growth of ~5-6% in insulin and 20+% in ( the even more expensive) GLP-1 segment.
Add on semi-annual price increases of 12-18% (realizing price protection in recent years tempered what hits the net), and without doing a single thing - just riding the wave of diabetes segment growth and price increases, you've grown the business nearly 15%. That's called good luck, being at the right placemat the right time. And yes sometimes it's better to be lucky than good.
Got the math on that one you dumbass ? Stop breathing your own exhaust.
Now, let's move to your second 'argument': "NNI is still significantly better than the competition"
How's that ? You didn't present any argument to support that claim.
I'd argue Lilly is killing it with a stronger strategy, solid clinical development and real commercial execution.
How is NNI better ?
-CEO stepping aside
-NNI President fired
-CVP of HR fired
-ET (your leadership team) is the same except for one or two spots. How's that better ?
Tresiba is struggling to say the least
Xultophy is delayed (When did NNI last launch on time ?)
Novo's core insulin business of over $4.2B, had been fully commoditized (no sales efforts needed)
Biopharm is deprioritized and with a relatively flat forecast going forward. Facing new competition.
Nearly 500 were just terminated. And that was just Round One.
Stock just hit a 3-year low.
LLY has dramatically outperformed NVO stock past 2 and 3 year periods.
After reading this, do y'all really think Novo Nordisk is significantly better than competition ?
I didn't think so.
4622
Oh Yeah.
Well, our U.S. Sales Leader can lift more weights, and workout harder than your Pharma Co.'s.
And Everyone that hangs on his every word, and now has the same accent as him when they "preach the word" are all really fit as well.
Finally, please don't mention the whole "price increase" thing....kind of a sore subject here.
It's so easy to make you look foolish previous poster.
1. Collapse defined: to break down, fall down
2. Let's look at your two key arguments:
a. When is going from double digit growth to single digit growth a failure:
ANSWER:
It's a failure when the double digit growth was fueled by market growth of ~5-6% in insulin and 20+% in ( the even more expensive) GLP-1 segment.
Add on semi-annual price increases of 12-18% (realizing price protection in recent years tempered what hits the net), and without doing a single thing - just riding the wave of diabetes segment growth and price increases, you've grown the business nearly 15%. That's called good luck, being at the right placemat the right time. And yes sometimes it's better to be lucky than good.
Got the math on that one you dumbass ? Stop breathing your own exhaust.
Now, let's move to your second 'argument': "NNI is still significantly better than the competition"
How's that ? You didn't present any argument to support that claim.
I'd argue Lilly is killing it with a stronger strategy, solid clinical development and real commercial execution.
How is NNI better ?
-CEO stepping aside
-NNI President fired
-CVP of HR fired
-ET (your leadership team) is the same except for one or two spots. How's that better ?
Tresiba is struggling to say the least
Xultophy is delayed (When did NNI last launch on time ?)
Novo's core insulin business of over $4.2B, had been fully commoditized (no sales efforts needed)
Biopharm is deprioritized and with a relatively flat forecast going forward. Facing new competition.
Nearly 500 were just terminated. And that was just Round One.
Stock just hit a 3-year low.
LLY has dramatically outperformed NVO stock past 2 and 3 year periods.
After reading this, do y'all really think Novo Nordisk is significantly better than competition ?
I didn't think so.
4622
Oh Yeah.
Well, our U.S. Sales Leader can lift more weights, and workout harder than your Pharma Co.'s.
And Everyone that hangs on his every word, and now has the same accent as him when they "preach the word" are all really fit as well.
Finally, please don't mention the whole "price increase" thing....kind of a sore subject here.
I stand by my comments which are factual.
Glad to see you're checking in on CP while you're out protesting tonight, walking the streets of some major city in a state that voted for Trump. You probably didn't even vote and you probably don't do your job well.
Get over it my friend. Trump is in, and at the end of Q2 '17, you'll be out.
You seem really angry. Not sure why.
Your argument above simply explains why we're not doing as well as we were before. I still don't see any evidence of a collapse. Last time I checked, we're still up and running, still making a profit, and still growing our profit. Not really a collapse, is it? You even changed the wording to "failure" - all we failed to do is meet our growth projections, and we only missed them by 1%. You could argue that we failed to meet expectations, but this company is miles upon miles away from a collapse.
And, my comment that we've done better than the competition - both Lilly and Sanofi have had consecutive years with a decrease in operating profit. Ours has grown in both of those years. I can't claim to be a rocket scientist, but when our numbers get bigger and theirs get smaller, I think it's safe to say we're performing better than they are. The industry average is negative growth. We're positive growth. Is that math making any sense to you? I'll concede that their stock has done better in the last 2 years. Our did better for the previous 10 years. But, you measure the health of the business by more than stock price.
You can point to bad things that have recently happened at this company, and they are things that have happened at every company. Lilly has been through lay-offs. Sanofi has been through lay-offs. Their Presidents have stepped down. They've had changes on their ET. Have Sanofi and Lilly collapsed? Are they better than we are simply because they went through what we're going through at a three-fold rate over the last several years, and it just happened to us now?
Look, I'm not pretending that things are perfect here or that we're as good as we used to be. My point is that only a fool thinks this company has collapsed. I'm pretty sure Harvard won't be knocking on our door anytime soon to put together a case study.
What is particularly funny is that anyone thinks that what Harvard says or does in business matters. Many HBS Professors that have little to no business experience and my HBS grads who are full of BS. Don't get caught up in case studies from business schools, worry about clueless european executives who think Americans are stupid, there is no such thins as a "no see" doctor and that PBMs and Healthplans don't rule the pharma landscape.
