Will Brilinta Be Approved Next Week or Not?

[Anonymous]

Your post doesn't make any sense.

As for my political slant, I am a free enterprise capitalist. That's why I don't like the way pharmaceuticals are sold -- under government protection, selected by people who aren't buying or using the product.

In no other system other than the US's would we have a company trying to push an inferior product like Brillanta. They know if they get approval (protection) from our government, they'll be able to make money on the product, despite the fact that it is inferior and has safety concerns. The problem is there is no ceiling on the price they can charge -- no free market competition keeping prices down.

so..............what is your enterprise Mr. Capitalist? Living off the gubment tit?

Go away whinner.

 

[Anonymous]

so..............what is your enterprise Mr. Capitalist? Living off the gubment tit?

Go away whinner.

Not going away, of course you'd like that because it's easy. Easy as patenting an isomer. AZ is the entity living on the government tit, and paying idiots like you to be lemmings on the "team."

All AZ has to do is come up with some real innovations, and it'll survive. But AZ cannot do that. All AZ has brought to the table since it was merged up has been isomer, XL and combination versions of existing products. The last one (Symbicort) was so bad that the European regulators removed their protections on the product because the combination is "obvious."

Hey but so long as you're getting your measly 100 grand paycheck, you're on board regardless, right? Patient Health First!!

 

[Anonymous]

You didn't answer the question did you loser? Guess you have no enterprise, if you did you wouldn't have time to waste here. You would be out being a capitalist. All you can do is bitch moan and groan while we make millions. Go figure! you're a loser.

 

[Anonymous]

Your post doesn't make any sense.

As for my political slant, I am a free enterprise capitalist. That's why I don't like the way pharmaceuticals are sold -- under government protection, selected by people who aren't buying or using the product.

In no other system other than the US's would we have a company trying to push an inferior product like Brillanta. They know if they get approval (protection) from our government, they'll be able to make money on the product, despite the fact that it is inferior and has safety concerns. The problem is there is no ceiling on the price they can charge -- no free market competition keeping prices down.

Who told you that word?? "free enterprise capitalist"? Did you google it and write it here because you thought it would make you sound smart? You lost alot of credibility when, promptly after using it, you displayed you have absolutely no knowledge of what "free enterprise" actually means in the real world.

The basis of "free enterprise" -- without getting into the logistical implications -- is that there are limited or no barriers to entry for competing firms. Meaning that, the government or a monopoly does not DOMINATE the marketplace and stifle new products, innovation, and competition. You have this entire thing backwards. If ANYTHING, as a "free enterprise capitalist" you would be a proponent of EVERY product that is developed to have the opportunity to reach the consumer. It is of the opinion of the very conservative and the "capitalists" that the CONSUMER must do their due diligence in deciding what products they need (in this case, the Doctor makes that determination with collaboration from the patient).

Now, in the modern day pharmaceutical marketplace, thats never gonna happen. The government will always be involved in the approval process. However, STILL, as a so called "free enterprise capitalist", you would also be a proponent of a plethora of drug options hitting the market as long as they passed the FDA approval process, even if their benefits are marginal.

In other words: Your an idiot.

 

[Anonymous]

Who told you that word?? "free enterprise capitalist"? Did you google it and write it here because you thought it would make you sound smart? You lost alot of credibility when, promptly after using it, you displayed you have absolutely no knowledge of what "free enterprise" actually means in the real world.

The basis of "free enterprise" -- without getting into the logistical implications -- is that there are limited or no barriers to entry for competing firms. Meaning that, the government or a monopoly does not DOMINATE the marketplace and stifle new products, innovation, and competition. You have this entire thing backwards. If ANYTHING, as a "free enterprise capitalist" you would be a proponent of EVERY product that is developed to have the opportunity to reach the consumer. It is of the opinion of the very conservative and the "capitalists" that the CONSUMER must do their due diligence in deciding what products they need (in this case, the Doctor makes that determination with collaboration from the patient).

Now, in the modern day pharmaceutical marketplace, thats never gonna happen. The government will always be involved in the approval process. However, STILL, as a so called "free enterprise capitalist", you would also be a proponent of a plethora of drug options hitting the market as long as they passed the FDA approval process, even if their benefits are marginal.

In other words: Your an idiot.

Barriers to free market competition in pharmaceuticals:

The patient is not even able to SEE the products on the shelf in the pharmacy
Someone else selects the product the patient takes
Someone else pays for the product the patient takes
The patient frequently can't walk away and decide to do without -- take the bus, for example, rather than buy a car
The government protects one manufacturer of the product the patient takes and someone else selects and someone else pays for.
The entities manufacturing the products have long histories of corruption including but not limited to:
Altering data on the trials so as to make their products seem safer or more effective
Ripping of the government reimbursement system
There is a long history of dispute regarding "AWP", a convoluted pricing scheme that is far from the truth regarding pricing
Hiding their records regarding their own internal costs, yet they moan and groan about how much their costs are. And they have made zero innovations (yet they claim that their high prices are needed to keep the system going) in over a decade.


Of course I could go on and on.

 

[Anonymous]

I have sold AZN at $52. A possible dividend buy below 40. Stock will likely test this level if not approved.
Drug will likely be approved but with a limited label. Single digit share expectations.
Most reps do not know what they are in for, the battle will be a losing one for them as hospitals already have determined how to limit use based on cost and guidelines. It is a niche drug and due to the restricted operating environment and poor marketing will struggle to find it's highest and best use.
This company is worth more and could operate better if divisions were spun off and new management put in place.

IMO they are replicating the poor business and relationship decisions they have made for years. There appears to be no saving this company with present management. This reminds one of the Exanta decision when FDA asked for a proposal to address the hepatotoxicity issues and they offered a solution to test patients once a month, which is how the patients were being tested in the trial itself. You would have the same number of deaths as in the trial if not more as trial patients are generally more compliant with testing. This proposed solution killed the drug forever, probably any credibility along with it.

What information is missing here is that scientists are questioning the veracity of the actual data in the trial. They are concerned that the countries with high response rates had problems with the data resulting in an overstatement of benefit versus Plavix.
From what I have read this concern is not addressed, they repeated the opinion that the difference was aspirin. This in spite of the fact that FDA previously told them they did not believe that the aspirin explanation was sufficient to address their concerns!
A previous poster was correct in that the appropriate way to address these types of problems are through the BOD, but I have no confidence in them unless they show some leadership.
I am not encouraged by the way the compound was managed, the pipeline or current management.

 

[Anonymous]

Barriers to free market competition in pharmaceuticals:

The patient is not even able to SEE the products on the shelf in the pharmacy
Someone else selects the product the patient takes
Someone else pays for the product the patient takes
The patient frequently can't walk away and decide to do without -- take the bus, for example, rather than buy a car
The government protects one manufacturer of the product the patient takes and someone else selects and someone else pays for.
The entities manufacturing the products have long histories of corruption including but not limited to:
Altering data on the trials so as to make their products seem safer or more effective
Ripping of the government reimbursement system
There is a long history of dispute regarding "AWP", a convoluted pricing scheme that is far from the truth regarding pricing
Hiding their records regarding their own internal costs, yet they moan and groan about how much their costs are. And they have made zero innovations (yet they claim that their high prices are needed to keep the system going) in over a decade.


Of course I could go on and on.

You do go on and on.

First. The Patient is NOT the customer, so what they see on the shelves is not relevant.

I'd feel more comfortable with you if you were not a Pharma employee. If you are, and are spilling this diatribe, you are the ultimate hipocrite. Feeding off the tit you profess to abhor, then ripping into it on an anonymous forum with your vacuus statements.

Fck off and get a job in another indutry and then come back and slag us.

 

[Anonymous]

You do go on and on.

First. The Patient is NOT the customer, so what they see on the shelves is not relevant.

I'd feel more comfortable with you if you were not a Pharma employee. If you are, and are spilling this diatribe, you are the ultimate hipocrite. Feeding off the tit you profess to abhor, then ripping into it on an anonymous forum with your vacuus statements.

Fck off and get a job in another indutry and then come back and slag us.

Interesting rationalization... False, but interesting. Especially coming from someone who claims to be a free market advocate and not a socialist. My statements are substantive, not vacuous. Your statement left something out:

You claim the patient is not the customer, but don't go on and explain who is... Who is the customer in your view? According to you, it's not the person who consumes the product, who is also the person who's body needs the product and who benefits directly from the product.

Do you mean our society is the customer? Or is it the doctor, even though he doesn't pay for the product, and in fact, frequently, IS PAID to select the product, for someone else to consume and a third party to pay for?

(I also notice you have the habit of so many who defend untenable positions of lambasting your opponents' personally. Your colors are showing clearly for all of us to see.)


Also clear from your writing above is a mentality which does not hear dissent, solidifying the position that the only way to correct the situation is to utterly and completely clean house. The managements running pharma must be replaced, and a new thinking be brought in, or we'll get more of the same.

 

[Anonymous]

Interesting rationalization... False, but interesting. Especially coming from someone who claims to be a free market advocate and not a socialist. My statements are substantive, not vacuous. Your statement left something out:

You claim the patient is not the customer, but don't go on and explain who is... Who is the customer in your view? According to you, it's not the person who consumes the product, who is also the person who's body needs the product and who benefits directly from the product.

Do you mean our society is the customer? Or is it the doctor, even though he doesn't pay for the product, and in fact, frequently, IS PAID to select the product, for someone else to consume and a third party to pay for?

(I also notice you have the habit of so many who defend untenable positions of lambasting your opponents' personally. Your colors are showing clearly for all of us to see.)


Also clear from your writing above is a mentality which does not hear dissent, solidifying the position that the only way to correct the situation is to utterly and completely clean house. The managements running pharma must be replaced, and a new thinking be brought in, or we'll get more of the same.

From your weak meanderings, you are in the industry.

So go at it big fellow. Get a job that will allow you to institute the change you call for.

It's easy to be the guy who sits on the sidelines, or even plays a role on the field.

You seem to think yourself bright enough to run the company. Get up there and run it. You'd be surprised at how easy it is to actually do that. Not many try.

Most senior leaders are just rolling along as you are. Maybe they even come on CP to piss and moan. Like you do.

You seem to think that you're a revolutionary. Change is happening whether you like it or not. Maybe in directions you think are good, maybe not.

Get up there yourself and push it in the direction you believe is the right one. I wish you well. I am not averse to your opinion. Just that you are sitting on your ass and spouting out.

Get a real position and make the changes.

 

[Anonymous]

From your weak meanderings, you are in the industry.

So go at it big fellow. Get a job that will allow you to institute the change you call for.

It's easy to be the guy who sits on the sidelines, or even plays a role on the field.

You seem to think yourself bright enough to run the company. Get up there and run it. You'd be surprised at how easy it is to actually do that. Not many try.

Most senior leaders are just rolling along as you are. Maybe they even come on CP to piss and moan. Like you do.

You seem to think that you're a revolutionary. Change is happening whether you like it or not. Maybe in directions you think are good, maybe not.

Get up there yourself and push it in the direction you believe is the right one. I wish you well. I am not averse to your opinion. Just that you are sitting on your ass and spouting out.

Get a real position and make the changes.

Funny how you're just focused on me personally, you jackass... guess in your mind you can't win any other way. Since I'm right and you're in disagreement and can't justify it there must be something wrong with me.

Who's the customer, dipshit?

 

[Anonymous]

Funny how you're just focused on me personally, you jackass... guess in your mind you can't win any other way. Since I'm right and you're in disagreement and can't justify it there must be something wrong with me.

Who's the customer, dipshit?

The customer my friend is who you are speaking to at the time.

You don't speak to patients.

You do speak to Drs, Pharmacy, Managed Markets if you are there.

When you speak with your DSM or yoiur RSD, they're who you're trying to influence.

And it's not personal. You asked I responded. I bet there are many more like you out there. It's a lack of understanding of what we do for a living, and a lack of perspective. I blame your DM, or you for not paying close attention.

 

[Anonymous]

The customer my friend is who you are speaking to at the time.

You don't speak to patients.

You do speak to Drs, Pharmacy, Managed Markets if you are there.

When you speak with your DSM or yoiur RSD, they're who you're trying to influence.

And it's not personal. You asked I responded. I bet there are many more like you out there. It's a lack of understanding of what we do for a living, and a lack of perspective. I blame your DM, or you for not paying close attention.

(Your attack was personal, and it's in writing.)

The world does not revolve around you or AZ, friend. I'm sorry to inform you.

The customer to the salesman from the drug company's perspective may be the receptionist, nurse, doctor or pharmacist -- that's cute, BTW -- but from any real world perspective (like what a legislator would reasonably consider as an industry outsider) the customer is the person consuming the product, the person selecting the product, and the person paying for the product.

In a free market it's the same person. In pharma, there are three entities involved at least. That's why little pills that cost less than a penny to manufacture can be sold for over $4.00 each! Because there are not free market forces at work to drive prices down. A symptom of the problem is the idiotic managements at the pharma companies. Huge, ridiculous bureaucracies.

 

[Anonymous]

(Your attack was personal, and it's in writing.)

The world does not revolve around you or AZ, friend. I'm sorry to inform you.

The customer to the salesman from the drug company's perspective may be the receptionist, nurse, doctor or pharmacist -- that's cute, BTW -- but from any real world perspective (like what a legislator would reasonably consider as an industry outsider) the customer is the person consuming the product, the person selecting the product, and the person paying for the product.

In a free market it's the same person. In pharma, there are three entities involved at least. That's why little pills that cost less than a penny to manufacture can be sold for over $4.00 each! Because there are not free market forces at work to drive prices down. A symptom of the problem is the idiotic managements at the pharma companies. Huge, ridiculous bureaucracies.

I re-read it. It certainly isn't personal. But it is specifically.

So nothing resolved except your return to the intellectual bs spouted in the corners of university bars.

Come back in 20 years when your eyes open fully.

 

[Anonymous]

He said he was right? There for no one else can speak! What a troll, I hope he is at least sterile. Guess with a mouth like that he is ghay----yes ghay, I would insult gays.

 

[Anonymous]

From your weak meanderings, you are in the industry.

So go at it big fellow. Get a job that will allow you to institute the change you call for.

It's easy to be the guy who sits on the sidelines, or even plays a role on the field.

You seem to think yourself bright enough to run the company. Get up there and run it. You'd be surprised at how easy it is to actually do that. Not many try.

Most senior leaders are just rolling along as you are. Maybe they even come on CP to piss and moan. Like you do.

You seem to think that you're a revolutionary. Change is happening whether you like it or not. Maybe in directions you think are good, maybe not.

Get up there yourself and push it in the direction you believe is the right one. I wish you well. I am not averse to your opinion. Just that you are sitting on your ass and spouting out.

Get a real position and make the changes.

This isn't personal? The entire rant is about me, my job, where I'm sitting, how bright I think I am, how I'm rolling along, pissing and moaning on CP, thinking I'm a revolutionary, don't like change happening, how I should get up there and push the direction that I believe is right, how I don't have a real direction, etc. etc...

And you reread this and claim it isn't personal? Are you that stupid, or blinded by your loyalty to the company or industry, or paycheck and company car?


My points are not spouted in university bars, or any bars, either -- people still believe the lie that pharma companies are doing things to help discover medicine, and prices are high in order to offset the R & D. My ideas need to be spouted in university bars and everywhere -- they need to be promulgated! As it stands, most people don't understand the enormous rip-off to society that pharma is pulling off...

 

[Anonymous]

This isn't personal? The entire rant is about me, my job, where I'm sitting, how bright I think I am, how I'm rolling along, pissing and moaning on CP, thinking I'm a revolutionary, don't like change happening, how I should get up there and push the direction that I believe is right, how I don't have a real direction, etc. etc...

And you reread this and claim it isn't personal? Are you that stupid, or blinded by your loyalty to the company or industry, or paycheck and company car?


My points are not spouted in university bars, or any bars, either -- people still believe the lie that pharma companies are doing things to help discover medicine, and prices are high in order to offset the R & D. My ideas need to be spouted in university bars and everywhere -- they need to be promulgated! As it stands, most people don't understand the enormous rip-off to society that pharma is pulling off...

What a sensitive soul. Searching for meaning.

You are a crybaby. No wonder you are verklempt about sales.

 

[Anonymous]

This isn't personal? The entire rant is about me, my job, where I'm sitting, how bright I think I am, how I'm rolling along, pissing and moaning on CP, thinking I'm a revolutionary, don't like change happening, how I should get up there and push the direction that I believe is right, how I don't have a real direction, etc. etc...

And you reread this and claim it isn't personal? Are you that stupid, or blinded by your loyalty to the company or industry, or paycheck and company car?


My points are not spouted in university bars, or any bars, either -- people still believe the lie that pharma companies are doing things to help discover medicine, and prices are high in order to offset the R & D. My ideas need to be spouted in university bars and everywhere -- they need to be promulgated! As it stands, most people don't understand the enormous rip-off to society that pharma is pulling off...

Precious, of course it's not personal. This is CP, this person doesn't even know who you are. I am agreeing with him. You make some sense, bt this post looks like you are hysterical

 

[Anonymous]

Precious, of course it's not personal. This is CP, this person doesn't even know who you are. I am agreeing with him. You make some sense, bt this post looks like you are hysterical

OK now I'm hysterical too.

Got you on the issues. You're two (maybe one) anti-capitalist pigs, and rather than learn something or debate a point you believe in, you must kill any messenger whose ideas threaten you.

You'll go a long way in this world -- you're a true follower, unable to think on your own, but you probably look OK in a suit and know how to use a tablet computer.

 

[Anonymous]

OK now I'm hysterical too.

Got you on the issues. You're two (maybe one) anti-capitalist pigs, and rather than learn something or debate a point you believe in, you must kill any messenger whose ideas threaten you.

You'll go a long way in this world -- you're a true follower, unable to think on your own, but you probably look OK in a suit and know how to use a tablet computer.

So why won't you ever say what your enterprize is that you do and makes you so smart? I hope you never buy another drug in your life. That will show them.

 

[Anonymous]

So why won't you ever say what your enterprize is that you do and makes you so smart? I hope you never buy another drug in your life. That will show them.

When are you going to come off of the messenger and focus on the message? Maybe when you have a leg to stand on...