RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Novel precision technologyLooks like the guy that oversaw Gileads IMMU acquisition in Strategy was promoted to CFO and now Strategy is under him. So pays to wait and overpay by many billions! ...Andrew Dickenson, CFO.
Wino115 wrote: It's the agency problem that arises between the employee in Strategic Planning at PharmCo recommending the acquisition, his boss, and his bosses boss. This sounds odd, but most Senior VP's in Strategic Planning won't risk their cushy job over possibly saving them a few billion and looking like a genius on a potential commercial drug if it requires them to be making the personal and likely job-losing risk of an embarassing loss of $20mil that didn't work out. They'll happily recline in their Aeron chairs, open a pack of Cheetos and pay up billions for something they know works and they hope they can expand upon. The probability of being fired is a lot less -- I'll bet even the Gilead guys who bought IMMU are still there even though there hasn't yet been a substantial new add-on for Trodelvy or the science they bought.
Biobob wrote: I understand your point but these companies have the resources to evaluate the risk (like Solueus) and basically logic would make Thera a stupid buy for even the risk averse Pharma considering the legacy sales, th FX discount, the near death experience of the biotech sector and of course the potential. But I'm told on a regular basis that Pharma don't think like that. Paul use to be the one in that position at Pfizer, shurely it must at least intreague some former collegues or competitors.