Sector News

VenBio slams timing, terms of Immunomedics’ $2B deal

February 14, 2017
Life sciences

VenBio has criticized the timing and terms of Immunomedics’ licensing deal with Seattle Genetics.

The investment fund has accused Immunomedics of rushing through a “poorly constructed deal” to sway shareholder opinion ahead of the upcoming fight for control of the biotech’s board.

Immunomedics is set to pocket $250 million upfront and up to $2 billion in total in exchange for the rights to IMMU-132, a solid tumor antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) that is closing in on a filing for FDA approval in triple-negative breast cancer. The Immunomedics management team hailed the deal as validation of their efforts and the company’s share price rose 22%. But venBio, which has bought a 9.9% stake in Immunomedics and is agitating for change, is unimpressed.

“[The deal announcement] is a blatant and shameful maneuver by the current board and management to manipulate the outcome of the upcoming annual meeting and entrench themselves at the expense of stockholders’ best interests, and venBio is exploring all options to hold them accountable,” venBio Managing Partner Behzad Aghazadeh said in a statement.

Aghazadeh went on to criticize Immunomedics over the timing of the deal, which was unveiled days before the annual meeting where venBio was due to learn whether shareholders support its board candidates. Immunomedics has postponed the annual meeting from February 16 to March 3. As Aghazadeh sees it, claims the timing of the agreement is coincidental are “preposterous and clearly disingenuous.”

VenBio goes on to lay into what it calls a “seemingly poor deal”, singling out the $4.90 a share price at which Seattle Genetics can buy Immunomedics’ stock and the “absurd shortness” of the period in which rival bidders can best the $2 billion deal for criticism. Immunomedics has given other companies until February 19 to better Seattle Genetics’ offer, a time frame venBio thinks will discourage potential rival bidders.

By Nick Paul Taylor

Source: Fierce Biotech

comments closed

Related News

November 28, 2021

Founder-led biotech is making space for ideas—and diverse leaders—where it didn’t exist before

Life sciences

Decades ago, the founder-led biotech was rare and considered the tougher path to follow. Now there is a trend of founder-led biotechs that have risen in prominence in recent years, going from startup to well known with lightning speed. Scientists-turned C-suite occupants know their technology inside out. They’ve got credibility both at the bench working with their research teams and in the boardrooms selling their future products.

November 28, 2021

Pfizer to become $100B behemoth next year thanks to COVID-19 drug and vaccine: analyst

Life sciences

Pfizer’s revenue could reach $101.3 billion in 2022, with major contributions coming from the company’s BioNTech-partnered COVID vaccine and an antiviral therapeutic that has shown stellar clinical data, SVB Leerink analyst Geoffrey Porges projected in a Monday note to clients.

November 28, 2021

GlaxoSmithKline takes aim at sick pay access inequities with microgrant program and new campaign

Life sciences

In a survey commissioned by GlaxoSmithKline’s consumer health division of 2,000 working people in the U.S., almost 70% admitted to clocking in while sick, often because they couldn’t afford to lose a day’s pay. Black and Latina women were 10% more likely than white women to shun taking sick time for fear of fallout from their boss, according to the company’s 2021 Temperature Check Report.

Send this to a friend