Skip to main content

Putting a Price on Innovation

Founded 30 years ago at the dawn of biotech, Genentech is a legend in an industry where companies yearn to do what it does: to make billions of dollars off of novel drugs while remaining true to innovation and science.

Unfortunately, it's also a legend being positioned for a fall.

That's because the Swiss drug giant Roche, which has owned a majority of Genentech shares since 1990, wants to buy the 44 percent of shares in the company that it does not already hold. Late Thursday, Genentech said it had formed a special committee to evaluate the $89 per-share offer, which many analysts and shareholders believe is too low.

At any price, this whopper of a deal could mean an end to Genentech’s distinctive culture of innovation, despite promises from Roche not to meddle.

It would also provide more evidence that the days of “Big Biotech” – a relatively small subset of successful companies in an industry that takes years to develop products and to become profitable – are over. Big Biotech is being swallowed by Big Pharma.


Facing slender pipelines for new drugs and expiring patents for blockbusters, big pharmaceuticals are snapping up medium and large biotechs with abandon. Biotech’s biggest selling product line this year will not be new meds for cancer or Alzheimer’s, but deals.

Roche’s initial Genentech offer is $43.7 billion, equal to over half of all of biotech’s revenues last year. The offer was 9 percent over premium last Friday, but the share price has quickly risen to $95, signaling that shareholders want more. Analysts expect Roche to pay $100 a share if they are serious about the purchase.

"The special committee intends to proceed in a timely manner to review the Roche proposal, which was both unsolicited and unexpected," said committee chairman Charles Sanders in a statement. "The outcome of this process has not been pre-determined, and there can be no assurance that the special committee will approve any transaction with Roche."

In the past, Pharma companies have been content to support certain biotechs like farm teams in baseball through licensing and milestone deals, worried that engulfing them might destroy the innovation.

No more. In April, Japanese pharma giant Takeda bought Millennium Pharmaceuticals for $8.8 billion, and last year biotech biggies such as Medimmune were sold for billions of dollars. And remember Chiron? Another biotech pioneer for the San Francisco Bay Area, Chiron was purchased by Novartis in 2005, and now seems to have vanished.

Nobody seems as intent on buying new companies as Roche. Already this week it has bought Canada’s Arius Research for $189 million, and Mirus Bio of Madison, Wisconsin for $125 million, on top of the Genentech offer late last week. Apparently, new Roche C.E.O. Severin Schwan likes to shop.

Roche argues that duplications in the two companies are costing hundreds of millions dollars a year, and efforts to keep the two companies separate keep operations from being as smooth as they might be.

But critics of the deal insist that this is really about Roche taking advantage of a weak dollar and a declining stock market.

One thing is likely: there may not be another Genentech for a long time. Any company with the potential will be snatched before it has a chance.

This may not be healthy for the larger pharma industry, which not only needs more novel drugs, but it also desperately needs novel new business strategies and new cultures that are able to keep the innovations coming even in a huge company.

Genentech was the most important player in this experiment to find a new way to incorporate both.

If the deal gets done, the ball will be in Roche’s court to see if its buying sprees will help it become more like Genentech, or will turn Genentech into another disappearing act like Chiron.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

What is Team Effectiveness?

Team effectiveness refers to the system of getting people in a company or institution to work together effectively. The idea behind team effectiveness is that a group of people working together can achieve much more than if the individuals of the team were working on their own. Team effectiveness is determined by a number of factors, such as: * The right mix of skills. Team effectiveness depends in part on bringing together people who have different skills that somehow complement each other. This can mean different technical abilities or communication skills. In fact, teaming up people who share the exact same characteristics is often a recipe for disaster. Team effectiveness depends on people taking on different roles in a group setting. If there is no agreement on who does what in the group, it is unlikely that the team will prosper. * The right motivation. Team effectiveness is directly linked to the interest that the group has on the project. If the job is too easy or ...

Graphical Analysis Demo - Swot Analysis Software

Graphical Analysis 3 arrives as an easy to use program that produces, analyzes and prints graphs that you make. It’s been a popular product for years and with this third version new features and capabilities are included as well as an updated look. Graphical Analysis 3 can do a lot of things. Create and print graphs, data tables, text, FFTs, and histograms. They are highly customizable; allowing you to perform automatic curve fits, calculate statistics, tangents, integrals, and interpolations. You can also adjust the parameters of your graphs. Putting data into Graphical Analysis 3 is easy. Type the values into the data table, import your collected data from a supported TI graphing calculator using the TI-GRAPH LINK cable or USB direct cable supplied with TI-84 or TI-89 Titanium Calculators. Then simply copy and paste the data from another program. New features abound, including video analysis of still photos, double-Y graphs, function plotting, and support for importing information fr...

10 Questions you should ask to yourself

"What Really Makes You Tick?" 10 questions you should ask to yourself: a preparation to self-improvement Be all you can be, but it's not always in the Army. I often see myself as somewhat contented with my life the way things are, but of course it's hard to think of anything else when where are real issues to be discussed. Still I aspire for something deeper and more meaningful. So we're all pelted with problems. Honestly it shouldn't even bother or even hinder us to becoming all we ought to be. Aspirations as kids should continue to live within us, even though it would be short-lived or as long as we could hold on to the dream. They say you can't teach an old dog new tricks… or can they? 1. What do I really want? The question of the ages. So many things you want to do with your life and so little time to even go about during the day. Find something that you are good at can help realize that small step towards improvement. Diligence is the key to k...