Ann: Research and Development Investor Briefing, page-3

As you point out, recent outcomes are at odds with legacy performance.

Does it concern you that under Brian McNamee, the company could do not wrong, but since then it's looked much more like an average large pharma company. Major changes over the last 10 years:
-Acquiring Novartis' flu vaccine business in 2014 (1 year after McNamee resigned), which while relatively small has been a spectacular success as the industry consolidated to 3 players. It was initially managed by stalwart operator Gordon Naylor, who departed many years ago.
-Dramatically overpaying for Vifor (to the tune of US$bns), which was also cum-earnings downgrade, at the height of the 2021 market boom.
-Investing US$1bn in CSL112's development program through Phase 3, despite the 2016 Phase 2 trial showing zero efficacy.
-Investing $xxxm in many low probability / high risk drug mechanisms that today's announcement showed were failures.
-Appointing a cost-cutting CEO last year... for any other company this would be noted as a sign that the revenue outlook has matured and step-change growth investments are unlikely.
-Being outgrown by rivals coming out of CoVID, at odds with CSL typically always growing faster.
-The ongoing ageing of the developed world population, and rising indebtedness of many governments, causing a sharper focus on healthcare costs and reimbursement rates.
-The enormous restructure of US pharma industry practices 2012-2016 after many cases of price fixing and collusion were successfully prosecuted, including criminal charges against generics companies' management. CSL admitted no fault but still agreed to pay a US$64m fine to the DoJ in 2012. Was there an extra kicker to industry returns prior to this that the company has had to since make up through volume growth, which obviously is much more costly than price growth?