Hey mate. It is at these times that I wish the great man Wombat was still with us. For those who had the pleasure of knowing him, it is known that he would have been all over this and many would benefit from it.
As I understand them, some of the major differences in the MST model and mine are as follows: 1. MST use lower patient population (48,475 vs 57,165) 2. MST use a lower probability of success (32% vs 50.3% in high risk model) 3. MST use a lower discount rate (12.5% vs 15% in high risk model) 4. MST use a royalties model to calculate their NPV (10%), while I base mine purely off peak sales 5. MST use a 3% yearly increase in net price per annum, while I do not 6. MST assume revenues start later (2030 vs 2028) 7. I can't be sure how they have determined market penetration from 2030 to 2039, but it probably does not reflect my modelling
While both royalty-based and revenue-based rNPVs are both applicable to RAC, I do not have the knowledge to comment on which is better. While RAC may license Bisantrene to geographical locations, they are chasing a large commercial transaction, which are typically peak sales multiplied by 3-5. This is not captured by the MST report focusing purely on royalty payments.
RAC Price at posting:
$1.79 Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.
(20min delay)