Stockwatch: Unintended consequences
This article was originally published in Scrip
A recent US Supreme Court ruling allowing the continuation of a dispute between investors in the company Matrixx Initiatives and the company, could have ramifications far beyond those being debated in the case. The Matrixx position is based around its duty (or not) to disclose confidential adverse reporting events for its drug as Matrix considered the number of adverse events to be too small to be material. Matrixx investors, however,have argued that, in this case, the adverse reports were highly material. This was a view that was supported by the stock price reaction when the reports came to light (scripintelligence.com, 23 March 2011).
You may also be interested in...
Lexicon’s announcement of two positive cardiovascular outcome studies was tempered by the realization that its drug is not approved in the US, nor in Europe in the diabetic populations studied.
Among big pharma there is a creeping realization that the effects of the coronavirus on revenues and prescriptions may linger. At smaller biotechs, it is patently obvious.
It is one thing to aspire to build a rival to another company’s banner therapeutic franchise, but quite another to start from the ground up, especially when your form in that area is mixed.