Share
89 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 58
clock Created with Sketch. 17/10/23
20:47
Share
Originally posted by Danielguda1:
↑
Pharma would like to have most of the manufacturing done in-house - where they can control costs and their profit margins "There is far more risk for large pharma with in-house teams handling the manufacturing as they can hide a multiple of sins." - I don't agree with this. Every pharma has its quality management and internal auditing teams which allows them to control more of the process and have 24/7 surveillance, using vendors and CMOs often have that risk bc they can't always control what's happening in the vendor 24/7. There is more risk in outsourcing your manufacturing without setting up your own. Also, if you don't have your own process, your CMO will have more leverage to negotiate and will take a higher cut on your profit margins."This is one of the reasons large pharma likes to buy assets out Phase 2 so they can make sure that there are no skeletons hiding." - there are no skeletons hiding bc the commercial manufacturing process has not been set. Clinical trial supply is peanuts compared to commercial manufacturing supply. Large pharma evaluate whether they have the expertise and how much CAPEX they have to expend to set up manufacturing and logistics to satisfy global demand.
Expand
tbh I'd love for a bigger pool of companies to be potential buyout candidates but I can't look past this important aspect of biotechs
(20min delay)