RE: Best Advice ......OT MPH
Theres nothing to feel sorry about for them other than the fact that the Top Line Data is going to be Presented on ALL FOOLS DAY. They were warned by at least one analyst about 5 months prior that the phasell Data was Lousy. They took the risk and lost. Oh well......Too much downside risk running Phaselll without a partner ..........Duh! There in lies MPH's mistake.
The MPH fiasco has really only strengthened qualification of Transitions Business Model. Transition would Never Ever run a Phaselll without a partner. Ever. Transitions Model is to bring any technology they wish to move forward no further than a Phasell even if not partnered by that time. That is the way it is. It is with this rule that Dr. Cruz limits the steep steep downside risk such as seen today with MPH.......... where IMO any Co. running a Phaselll without a partner should be avoided at all costs.
Transition is stalwart with this conviction as seen with their IET technology which definitely will NOT be moving forward in HepC unless a partner were to come along. We know that. We know that ahead of time. We know that because thats Transitions Business Model. No If's And's OR But's.......That is Rule#1. MS-IET was discontinued due to competition from the new Gold Standard MS Drug Tysabri and the predicted big market share that drug would grab and HAS Grabbed . No other reason. Pretty good reason though when Interferon is no longer the Gold Standard. Good move. Cut your losses in the way less costly early stage Studies.......and get on with other things. Be proactive not reactive.
I'll stick with Transitions Business Model. Takes a lot of the Big Big Risk out of the Equation........Partnering qualifies the work already done and provides the necessary Huge Cash required to run the Later Stage Trials. You're going to unlock more value from your Drug if you show Efficacy in your Phasell Trials. WAY More. Thats another Key Point to the Model. Thats the Business Model for Transition and I'm comfortable with it.
Take Transition and ELAN's WorldWide Global Collaberation Agreement for example. A $200,000,000.00 Agreement for AZD-103 that basically pays Transitions share of the expenses for development up through Regulatory Approval and Commercialization. And then Transition shares in the Operating Profits. Risky?? You Betcha!! But a heck of a lot less risky for Transition than going it alone. Eleven Co.'s were vying for AZD-103 exclusivity but there can only be one Winner.
ELAN=WINNER.
Compare that to MPH's ill-conceived go-it-alone Drug Trials........Big Difference. It's a known fact that Drugs that are partnered in Phaselll's are more successful than Drugs that are not. Check it out with Tufts Think Tank. A partnered Drug will have less of a discount applied to it and will have a higher success percentage applied to it in an Analysts forecast than an Unpartnered Drug due to that very reason.