Sector News

What's wrong with Sanofi's dealmaking approach?

February 17, 2017
Life sciences

It’s no secret that Sanofi has struggled of late at the dealmaking table. But why? The deal prospectus from former target Actelion and its agreed-to buyer, Johnson & Johnson, offers some clues.

Late last year, when J&J walked on Actelion after nearly a year of talks, many industry watchers thought Sanofi had a $30 billion deal for the Swiss biotech in the bag. The French drugmaker had reportedly offered up a price higher than what J&J was wiling to pay, forcing the New Jersey pharma giant out of the picture.

But as the prospectus notes, things didn’t go as planned when it was time for Actelion and its new bidder—referred to only as Company A—to hammer out specifics. “Prior to and during the course of this meeting, Company A indicated that it would only be willing to proceed with a transaction on the basis of a price lower than its previously communicated offer price and on different terms,” the prospectus notes. Sanofi also had “extensive due diligence requests” for its target.

The way Actelion saw it, those issues—along with the “tenor and content” of the meeting itself—raised “significant uncertainty” in a potential transaction, and that was enough to convince Actelion to ring up old friend J&J. Time between J&J announcing it had ended negotiations and then that it had struck exclusive ones back up? Eight days. And the two unveiled their $30 billion deal about a month after that.

It’s not a good look for Sanofi, which has now been foiled twice in high-profile M&A conquests since CEO Olivier Brandicourt took the helm. Earlier last year, he embarked on a hostile pursuit of Xtandi-maker Medivation that ended in Pfizer nabbing the $14 billion prize.

The failures have frustrated some investors, who think Sanofi needs deals to help get itself back on track. After all, payer pressure and competition have hit its anchor diabetes business hard, and its PCSK9 therapy Praluent has so far been stymied in more ways than one.

Brandicourt, though, notified investors on the company’s fourth-quarter conference call that Sanofi is “not in a hurry to do M&A,” and last month, he told Reuters that some investors are perfectly fine with that fact.

“When I see investors they seem to be very happy for us not to have spent $14 billion on Medivation,” he said.

By Carly Helfand

Source: Fierce Pharma

comments closed

Related News

May 21, 2022

As monkeypox cases emerge in US and Europe, Bavarian Nordic inks vaccine order

Life sciences

A monkeypox outbreak is emerging in the U.S. and Europe, and at least one country is amping up countermeasure preparedness. Bavarian Nordic has secured a contract with an unnamed European country to supply its smallpox vaccine, called Imvanex in Europe, in response to the emergence of monkeypox cases, the Danish company said Thursday.

May 21, 2022

Moderna chairman Afeyan defends hiring practices after CFO debacle: report

Life sciences

Moderna’s recent chief financial officer debacle—in which Jorge Gomez departed on his second day on the job—raised questions about the company’s hiring process given its rush to global biopharma prominence. The most obvious one: How was it possible for Gomez to be hired when he was under investigation by his previous employer, Dentsply Sirona of Charlotte, N.C.

May 21, 2022

Merck to pay up to $1.4B in cancer deal with Kelun, but details are scarce

Life sciences

Merck & Co. is plucking a cancer project from the branch of Chinese-based Kelun Pharmaceutical for up to $1.4 billion, but details from the New Jersey-based Big Pharma have been hard to come by. The deal, first disclosed Monday on the Shenzhen stock exchange, has Merck handing over $47 million in upfront cash in exchange for ex-China rights to a “macromolecular tumor project.”