RE:RE:RE:Must Say No, because AEZS will go to 0 in around two yearslscfa wrote: Maybe closer to $24M/yr revenue. Novo originally agreed to a 15% royalty but is was reduced to 8.5% when they accelerated an upfront payment. Also, the European license is for royalties in the 10% to 20% range.
With all clinical trial costs completed and approval for children what royalty could AEZS receive on a new North American licensing agreement? The only thing left for the partner to do is sell the product. Novo Nordisk's royalty may have been low because they financed the childhood trial and needed a return. The childhood market is also the most lucrative. Could AEZS receive 40% of revenue?
Just listening to some old AEZS's presentations on YouTube and one analyst had a US$40-US$70 million estimate for revenue many years ago. Significant pricing flexibility was expected for children given the Orphan Drug Designation. 90% of Novo Nordisk's drug sales for growth hormone deficiency were in the childhood market. That might help explain why Novo Nordisk dropped the test. AEZS's test wasnt' approved for children and the childhood trial was significantly delayed due to COVID and Putin's invasion of Ukraine. The trial was expected to take place, in part, in Russia. In 2024 AEZS is finally expected to receive FDA approval for the childhood market. Children are the key market for growth hormone deficiency. How about relicensing it to Novo Nordisk with approval now for children.