Would Lilly Keep Us In A Hostile Takeover?

[anonymous]

It’s very expensive to hire new employees. Since we are experts on our products, it seems like we would be kept.

 

[anonymous]

It’s very expensive to hire new employees. Since we are experts on our products, it seems like we would be kept.

LMAO at your comical post! You actually said, “we are experts on our products”! The only thing you and 100% of all pharma reps are experts at is bringing Chick-Fil-A and Starbucks into offices! What an idiot! What a moron!

 

[anonymous]

It’s very expensive to hire new employees. Since we are experts on our products, it seems like we would be kept.

You would be gone. A hostile takeover gives the acquired company zero rights.

 

[anonymous]

LMAO at your comical post! You actually said, “we are experts on our products”! The only thing you and 100% of all pharma reps are experts at is bringing Chick-Fil-A and Starbucks into offices! What an idiot! What a moron!

Well, I’m also an expert at making well over 6.5 figures every year while building a 401K North of 7 figures; getting free lunch/dinner most every day & night, and working MAYBE 15 hours a week -at the most, so looks like you’re the bitter jealous idiot!

 

[anonymous]

Well, I’m also an expert at making well over 6.5 figures every year while building a 401K North of 7 figures; getting free lunch/dinner most every day & night, and working MAYBE 15 hours a week -at the most, so looks like you’re the bitter jealous idiot!

This company is in dire trouble. Why should they waste anymore money on you?

 

[anonymous]

You would be gone. A hostile takeover gives the acquired company zero rights.

Thats incorrect.. Sanofi performed a hostile takeover with Aventis many years back and the Head of Aventis was kept on the board. I was with Sanofi and from what I remember the reps at Aventis were all kept..

So be sure you know what your talking about before chiming in…..

 

[anonymous]

Thats incorrect.. Sanofi performed a hostile takeover with Aventis many years back and the Head of Aventis was kept on the board. I was with Sanofi and from what I remember the reps at Aventis were all kept..

So be sure you know what your talking about before chiming in…..

Thanks for the history lesson, but it doesn’t matter since this is all just one big hypothetical fantasy scenario. Lilly is not buying out Pfizer.

 

[anonymous]

why would Lilly want Pfizer? Poorly run company with no pipeline who just way overpaid for Seagen.

 

[anonymous]

It’s very expensive to hire new employees. Since we are experts on our products, it seems like we would be kept.

Everyone outside of Pfizer knows that the Oncology team isn't good. I mean, how many people have willingly left other onc companies to come here? At any level? Yes there are some really good people on this team, but the Seagen people are going to be head and shoulders above most. They will be the experts you speak of. One can only hope that the new head of oncology will make the necessary changes in talent, strategy, pay and perks that are needed in order to make this team as good as it needs to be. Because a base model Nissan Altima, no Christmas shutdown and primary care managers and marketers won’t get it done.

 

[anonymous]

Everyone outside of Pfizer knows that the Oncology team isn't good. I mean, how many people have willingly left other onc companies to come here? At any level? Yes there are some really good people on this team, but the Seagen people are going to be head and shoulders above most. They will be the experts you speak of. One can only hope that the new head of oncology will make the necessary changes in talent, strategy, pay and perks that are needed in order to make this team as good as it needs to be. Because a base model Nissan Altima, no Christmas shutdown and primary care managers and marketers won’t get it done.

Remember, we are not experts in oncology because 20 years ago we basically bought the oncology portfolio when we took over Pharmacia/Upjohn. Very, very few of those marketing, medical and other "home office" folks wanted towers here. So what did we do? We took lower level people from primary care brands and one brand that sold faaaar more with off label use than FDA approved use and moved them over to oncology. Typical Pfizer move, reeking of ignorance and arrogance.
We just cant help ourselves

 

[anonymous]

Everyone outside of Pfizer knows that the Oncology team isn't good. I mean, how many people have willingly left other onc companies to come here? At any level? Yes there are some really good people on this team, but the Seagen people are going to be head and shoulders above most. They will be the experts you speak of. One can only hope that the new head of oncology will make the necessary changes in talent, strategy, pay and perks that are needed in order to make this team as good as it needs to be. Because a base model Nissan Altima, no Christmas shutdown and primary care managers and marketers won’t get it done.

This is the Pfizer + oncology problem in a nutshell.
Pfizer is a primary care company down to its deep roots, That includes medical, legal and regulatory reviewers that are completely (and largely appropriately) uncomfortable with how the oncology reps want to interact with HCPs. They know the oncologists well and also know that lots of oncology treatment is off label combinations and cocktails. It is why oncology reps from other companies have little interest here and why Pfizer doesn’t recruit them. That said, oncology reps from some (not all) smaller companies can be a bit spoiled and undisciplined in how they promote. It’s not a good match on either side.

my bigger concern with being heavily indexed to oncology is that it’s ripe for government scrutiny on cost of therapy and promotion activity. It’s an easy target to create negative public opinion and government agencies have shown that they are comfortable being adversarial and divisive. Pfizer makes a fat target coming off Covid as we did nothing to elevate our position in public opinion. If anything, we sank the ship by failing to communicate effectively and transparently about the role of vaccines in managing a pandemic virs down to endemic levels.

 

[anonymous]

This is the Pfizer + oncology problem in a nutshell.
Pfizer is a primary care company down to its deep roots, That includes medical, legal and regulatory reviewers that are completely (and largely appropriately) uncomfortable with how the oncology reps want to interact with HCPs. They know the oncologists well and also know that lots of oncology treatment is off label combinations and cocktails. It is why oncology reps from other companies have little interest here and why Pfizer doesn’t recruit them. That said, oncology reps from some (not all) smaller companies can be a bit spoiled and undisciplined in how they promote. It’s not a good match on either side.

my bigger concern with being heavily indexed to oncology is that it’s ripe for government scrutiny on cost of therapy and promotion activity. It’s an easy target to create negative public opinion and government agencies have shown that they are comfortable being adversarial and divisive. Pfizer makes a fat target coming off Covid as we did nothing to elevate our position in public opinion. If anything, we sank the ship by failing to communicate effectively and transparently about the role of vaccines in managing a pandemic virs down to endemic levels.

Lots of oncology treatment IS NOT off label combinations and cocktails. NCCN guidelines drive treatment decisions, period. Even onc reps here know this. People have little interest in Pfizer because of the primary care mentality and pay/perks that are far below industry standards. And because of their reliance on co-promotes. No company big or small, as well as reps, are looking to be on the wrong side of the FDA as far as compliance goes.

Being a successful oncology rep requires you to do a whole lot more than deliver brand messages and show sales aids with pictures of horses or whatever. You have to become a trusted advisor that docs want to spend a few minutes with because you give them information that helps them make the best decision they can in a highly complex disease state. That takes time, skill and a commitment to support you with home office people who understand this - from training, marketing and regulatory.

This is the second golden age of cancer care. The breakthroughs that have occurred since 2015 and are still occurring today is the reason why we overpaid for Seagen. I don't see the government looking to disrupt this. Success in oncology means success as a company. Failure here means failure. Nothing proves this more than the Seagen purchase. Pfizer Oncology has to change and they have the perfect opportunity to do so. If it does it will become a destination employer in Oncology.

 

[anonymous]

Generally speaking, companies don’t like “seasoned” reps. While you may say that they know the products, doctors, etc., they possess the old company paradigm's. The old “we never used to do it that way” attitude is not welcome. New people can be trained and molded.

 

[anonymous]

why would Lilly want Pfizer? Poorly run company with no pipeline who just way overpaid for Seagen.

Totally correct!

WTF…. LLY would never want PFE!!!

Why by a liability?

I think the original poster looks at LLY stock appreciation, pipeline, etc and wishes PFE would get acquired.

 

[anonymous]

Lots of oncology treatment IS NOT off label combinations and cocktails. NCCN guidelines drive treatment decisions, period. Even onc reps here know this. People have little interest in Pfizer because of the primary care mentality and pay/perks that are far below industry standards. And because of their reliance on co-promotes. No company big or small, as well as reps, are looking to be on the wrong side of the FDA as far as compliance goes.

Being a successful oncology rep requires you to do a whole lot more than deliver brand messages and show sales aids with pictures of horses or whatever. You have to become a trusted advisor that docs want to spend a few minutes with because you give them information that helps them make the best decision they can in a highly complex disease state. That takes time, skill and a commitment to support you with home office people who understand this - from training, marketing and regulatory.

This is the second golden age of cancer care. The breakthroughs that have occurred since 2015 and are still occurring today is the reason why we overpaid for Seagen. I don't see the government looking to disrupt this. Success in oncology means success as a company. Failure here means failure. Nothing proves this more than the Seagen purchase. Pfizer Oncology has to change and they have the perfect opportunity to do so. If it does it will become a destination employer in Oncology.

I'm almost positive that we will not change. As others have stated, this is at its foundation a primary care company that made its bones with the reach & frequency silliness with mega blockbusters like Lipitor and Celebrex and Viagra. We are weak down to the very foundation. Worse, senior leadership is clueless.

 

[anonymous]

we are top heavy with poor leadership, crappy pipeline, inefficient...WTH would Lilly ever want to acquire us?

 

[anonymous]

Lots of oncology treatment IS NOT off label combinations and cocktails. NCCN guidelines drive treatment decisions, period. Even onc reps here know this. People have little interest in Pfizer because of the primary care mentality and pay/perks that are far below industry standards. And because of their reliance on co-promotes. No company big or small, as well as reps, are looking to be on the wrong side of the FDA as far as compliance goes.

Being a successful oncology rep requires you to do a whole lot more than deliver brand messages and show sales aids with pictures of horses or whatever. You have to become a trusted advisor that docs want to spend a few minutes with because you give them information that helps them make the best decision they can in a highly complex disease state. That takes time, skill and a commitment to support you with home office people who understand this - from training, marketing and regulatory.

This is the second golden age of cancer care. The breakthroughs that have occurred since 2015 and are still occurring today is the reason why we overpaid for Seagen. I don't see the government looking to disrupt this. Success in oncology means success as a company. Failure here means failure. Nothing proves this more than the Seagen purchase. Pfizer Oncology has to change and they have the perfect opportunity to do so. If it does it will become a destination employer in Oncology.

 

[anonymous]

Lots of oncology treatment IS NOT off label combinations and cocktails. NCCN guidelines drive treatment decisions, period. Even onc reps here know this. People have little interest in Pfizer because of the primary care mentality and pay/perks that are far below industry standards. And because of their reliance on co-promotes. No company big or small, as well as reps, are looking to be on the wrong side of the FDA as far as compliance goes.

Being a successful oncology rep requires you to do a whole lot more than deliver brand messages and show sales aids with pictures of horses or whatever. You have to become a trusted advisor that docs want to spend a few minutes with because you give them information that helps them make the best decision they can in a highly complex disease state. That takes time, skill and a commitment to support you with home office people who understand this - from training, marketing and regulatory.

This is the second golden age of cancer care. The breakthroughs that have occurred since 2015 and are still occurring today is the reason why we overpaid for Seagen. I don't see the government looking to disrupt this. Success in oncology means success as a company. Failure here means failure. Nothing proves this more than the Seagen purchase. Pfizer Oncology has to change and they have the perfect opportunity to do so. If it does it will become a destination employer in Oncology.

this was the model of a rep years ago, brought value and was respected. We could actually get into a conversation utilizing the literature and able to answer questions raised. Unlike the cookie cut visaids of today

 

[anonymous]

this was the model of a rep years ago, brought value and was respected. We could actually get into a conversation utilizing the literature and able to answer questions raised. Unlike the cookie cut visaids of today

Pfizer got into huge trouble for embellishing data several years ago. That is why everything is canned, including the presentations of hired speakers.

 

[anonymous]

pfizer is shit, debased mess

lilly never buying this crap