Sector News

Is Pfizer really weighing a BMS buy?

May 3, 2017
Life sciences

Is Pfizer thinking of buying Bristol-Myers Squibb, as the rumors go? CEO Ian Read hinted at the possibility on Tuesday’s first-quarter earnings call—but investors shouldn’t expect any immediate action, he cautioned.

As Read told shareholders on the call, “we … believe we have the ability, should the opportunity arise and should the value be there, to do a large deal.”

He noted, though, that “certain large companies have significant, almost binary risks … which could immediately alter their values,” which is one reason the company won’t be rushing into anything.

Bristol-Myers, whose status in the immuno-oncology field was compromised last year by a flopped first-line immonotherapy trial in non-small cell lung cancer, certainly fits that bill. Its lung cancer hopes are now resting on a combo of PD-1 med Opdivo and a CTLA-4 drug—an approach that’s not shared by Merck’s rival Keytruda and Roche’s Tecentriq, which are going after checkpoint inhibitor/chemo pairings.

With that in mind, snatching up BMS wouldn’t make a lot of sense for Pfizer “until more clarity is gained on how the battle will shake out between ‘CTLA4 combo’ and ‘chemo combo,’” Bernstein analyst Tim Anderson has written to clients, noting that “having the value of the target change materially for the worse could make management look bad.”

Bristol-Myers’ struggles first ignited merger rumors early this year, and the ever-deal-seeking Pfizer was quick to see its name pop up as a potential buyer. One reason? Despite its partnership with Merck KGaA on avelumab—which recently picked up its first approval, a Merkel cell carcinoma nod, under the brand name Bavencio—analysts say the New York pharma is not necessarily a lock to be a leader in the so-called second wave of immuno-oncology drugmakers.

Read, though, insisted on Tuesday that Pfizer is “committed” to the partnership and remains “focused on developing avelumab”—though he also acknowledged that backing out of the deal wouldn’t be a megadealbreaker.

“I don’t think that any type of breakup fee would be material compared to the size of a large deal,” he said, suggesting a potential BMS buy would trump walking out on Merck.

Questions surrounding the combo approach aren’t the only factor holding up Pfizer’s dealmaking activity, though. Read listed uncertainty around U.S. tax reform and even the French election as reasons to stay put for now—a stark contrast to the company’s last earnings call, on which the Pfizer chief insisted it would “continue to do BD where we see value for our shareholders” instead of taking a “dramatic pause” to wait and see “what the tax code’s going to do.”

The way Goldman Sachs analyst Jami Rubin sees things, that business development is all the more important in light of Pfizer’s first-quarter performance, which saw some key meds fall short of estimates. In a note to clients, she pointed in particular to Xtandi, whose $131 million in sales is “clearly weak given [Pfizer] paid $14 billion for this asset,” and Xeljanz, which came in $38 million behind consensus, writing that the misses raised “concerns about Pfizer’s ability to grown in the absence of M&A in our view.”

Pfizer, for its part, attributed part of the revenue miss to a selling period slightly shorter than last year’s, which it said took $300 million off its $12.79 billion revenue tally. And despite the time crunch, it was able to best forecasts with breast cancer-fighter Ibrance, which raked in $679 million to edge Wall Street’s $672 million prediction.

All eyes are on that drug now that Novartis is out with rival Kisqali, which undercut Ibrance on price. Pfizer’s innovative health president Albert Bourla, though, reminded investors on the call that the company had successfully “managed … price competition in the past, and we will do it in the future.”

Meanwhile, the company managed a beat on the earnings front thanks to lower expenses and a gain on divestments, reporting per-share profits of 69 cents that topped the 67-cent consensus estimate. It also reaffirmed its 2017 guidance, and “and we continue to maintain the numbers are well within reach,” Barclays analyst Geoff Meacham wrote in an investor note.

By Carly Helfand

Source: Fierce Pharma

comments closed

Related News

July 14, 2024

Flagship raises $3.6B for biotech investing

Life sciences

Flagship Pioneering said Wednesday that it’s added another $3.6 billion to its capital base, bringing the total raised since 2021 to $6.4 billion. Meanwhile, Flagship announced more than a dozen promotions and new hires in its leadership ranks. The changes include the promotions of Lovisa Afzelius and Paul Biondi to general partner and the addition of Dina Ciarimboli as general counsel and executive partner.

July 14, 2024

Mikael Dolsten set to leave Pfizer, sparking search for CSO successor

Life sciences

After 15 years at Pfizer, including a career-defining pandemic period, the chief scientific officer will leave the Big Pharma once the drugmaker finds his successor. Dolsten joined Pfizer when the company closed a megamerger with Wyeth in 2009. Pfizer made Dolsten president of worldwide R&D the following year. The executive has stayed at the top of Pfizer’s R&D tree ever since.

July 14, 2024

CDMO Lotte breaks ground on $3.3B production plant in Korea, touts growth goals

Life sciences

Late last week, Lotte Biologics broke ground on its flagship facility at the Songdo Bio Campus in Incheon International City, South Korea. The company is pitching the production effort as a key part of its quest to become one of the top 10 contract development and manufacturing organizations (CDMOs) in the world, Lotte said in a press release.

How can we help you?

We're easy to reach