|
|
|
|
||
Re: How about Tweeting Ms. Morgenson? No big deal, but I would suggest leaving it alone. If it is to be handled, let Celgene do it. But if I were advising them, I would suggest they let it pass and not do anything to get the company in the press's cross hairs. The simple story is that Celgene develops and offers high value, clinically proven products that are fairly priced in keeping with developmental costs (and those of failures, as well). Relative to Pharma, in general, a significant portion of its revenue is plowed back into R&D. It can be said better, but that is the line of logic. And it should only be directed to the analyst/investment community, unless otherwise asked. Getting into a mud slinging contest with the press is a losing proposition; and the good reporter, who has done his or her homework, will be asking management about every price increase taken on Revlimid, etc. since its approval(s) - and no matter how defensible each was, they will collectively be made to look predatory in today's 'witch hunt" environment. We know Celgene to be a leading, ethical drug company, concerned about patient well-being; and a company that invests heavily in its pipeline in order to continue to develop products directed to address unmet needs. You would be amazed at how much that can be distorted in the press if the reporter has a negative agenda. As for Gretchen, I do not think she has any special agenda. It was simply a newsworthy story on a hot topic and to a minor degree, Celgene's patent attorneys singled out the Company with its "ethics/shorting" dismissal filing (which it lost), rather than focusing only on defending the specific patents in question. |
return to message board, top of board |