Drug companies will stop a cure hitting the market

[gmonasco]

I would agree they want to improve treatments, but only new products that require constant use and purchasing, not one off cure treatments.

But since, according to you, they haven't actually developed any of those treatments, how could they possibly know whether they're one-off or continuous use treatments?

i see what you did there, very mature quoting half of a sentence, who are you fox news?

Once the drivel is eliminated, there's not much left to quote.

i dont need to prove there is anything better out there to be correct in saying that everytime they say such an such is potentially a few years from market..that nothing happens, can you dispute that

Yes, it's eminently disputable. The overwhelming majority of medical treatments fail to pan out early in the development process, well before the clinical trial stage. Those failures don't mean "nothing happened"; you just assume nothing happened because you didn't hear about it.

my reaction to your confidence in the transparency of a big corporation

Thereby once again demonstrating your ignorance of what the term "public record" means.

[jman91]

But since, according to you, they haven't actually developed any of those treatments, how could they possibly know whether they're one-off or continuous use treatments?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0

[gmonasco]

According to Merck's latest 10-K filing, in 2011 their Propecia sales brought in $447 million. By way of comparison, Singulair alone brings in over 12 times as much revenue to Merck as Propecia does.

Replicel's stated initial price point is $15,000. That means that if only 29,800 people availed themselves of a Replicel "cure" in the first year, it would bring in as much money as Merck's annual worldwide sales of Propecia. And Merck's Propecia sales figures will certainly plummet once their patent on finasteride as a MPB treatment expires next year.

Which do you think has the greater financial potential?

[2020]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0

reported as a troll.

[gmonasco]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0

Translation: I have no coherent argument to make, so I will resort to acting like a spoiled child who can't have his way.

[2020]

exactly....

This is what makes Merck money:

singulair: 3.5 billion
Cozaar, Hyzaar: 3.1 billion
Fosamax: 3.1 billion
Zocor : 2.8 billion
.....

do you think Merck even cares about their 400 million ( 3% from their total profits if only you were to count those 4 products I've listed) from Propecia whose sales will certainly crash in 2013 after its patent expires.

So there you have it: IT MAKES NO FINANCIAL SENSE for Merck to buy up all those companies that have the cure for hair loss.

[gmonasco]

So there you have it: IT MAKES NO FINANCIAL SENSE for Merck to buy up all those companies that have the cure for hair loss.

Or anybody else. The pharmaceutical industry isn't one monolithic entity; it's a group of multiple, competing companies. Even if Company X doesn't want to see a hair loss cure on the market because it might cut into sales of one of their existing products, there's no motivation for every other pharmaceutical company to act similarly. They'd all love to put out something that would stomp all over a competitor's product.

[jman91]

reported as a troll.

come on where's your sense of humour, i'm hardly trolling.



and gmonanco, we'll have to agree to disagree, sorry if you found that offensive. I am not going to waste any more time arguing with someone who, in my opinion at least, is desperate to ignore the bigger picture. for the record I hope I am wrong just like the rest of us would like to see baldness be a thing of the past

[2020]

and gmonanco, we'll have to agree to disagree, sorry if you found that offensive. I am not going to waste any more time arguing with someone who, in my opinion at least, is desperate to ignore the bigger picture. For the record i hope i am wrong just like the rest of us would like to see baldness be a thing of the past

read my latest post.

It simply makes no sense for anyone to spend billions of dollars to prevent the hair loss cure from coming into the market.

You lost this argument. Thanks for playing.

[jman91]

read my latest post.

It simply makes no sense for anyone to spend billions of dollars to prevent the hair loss cure from coming into the market.

You lost this argument. Thanks for playing.

It does not take a genius to realise drug companies make money out of creating treatments whether or not they come to market. This is the reason they do spend money and genuinely try to come up with stuff. You see curing baldness and making money from curing baldness are not the same thing.

When they are successful and create a real promising treatment that looks like a cure, a bigger player comes in and buys them out either by giving them money for the patent or buy buying the company out. I am not saying this is always going to be the case but I believe its happening often and is a result of the greedy capitalist system and its exploitation of the medical industry.

[2020]

It does not take a genius to realise drug companies make money out of creating treatments whether or not they come to market.

what?? Wouldn't they LOSE money since they spent so much of it on research and development for that particular treatment??

When they are successful and create a real promising treatment that looks like a cure, a bigger player comes in and buys them out either by giving them money for the patent or buy buying the company out. I am not saying this is always going to be the case but I believe its happening often and is a result of the greedy capitalist system and its exploitation of the medical industry.

what are you trying to say??? If Replicel came up with a cure, someone would buy it out in order to keep that treatment off the market? WHY!!?!

[gmonasco]

When they are successful and create a real promising treatment that looks like a cure, a bigger player comes in and buys them out either by giving them money for the patent or buy buying the company out

That's just absurd. No one company is such a big player in the hair loss market that by pursuing such a strategy they wouldn't end up spending as much money buying up all those patents and companies then they were taking in from sales of their existing hair loss treatments.

[jman91]

what?? Wouldn't they LOSE money since they spent so much of it on research and development for that particular treatment??

no they get given the money for the patent, or they get bought out by Johnson & Johnson etc



what are you trying to say??? If Replicel came up with a cure, someone would buy it out in order to keep that treatment off the market? WHY!!?!

yes, if replicel came up with a cure, the big guys with vested interests in propecia, rogaine etc would buy them out or buy the patent off them. to get all the people who would otherwise be on the big 3 to go out and spend money on a cure.. the market price would have to be as low as $20,000 i think that's a probably high estimate but anyway... now someone like me who uses $1600 hairloss products a year is worth a lot more to them (roughly $50,000) assuming i continue with treatment until I am 50 yrs old so its a no brainer to them, keep the one off cure out of the market as it equals over 50% reduction in profits

[jman91]

That's just absurd. No one company is such a big player in the hair loss market that by pursuing such a strategy they wouldn't end up spending as much money buying up all those patents and companies then they were taking in from sales of their existing hair loss treatments.

a broken clock is still right twice a day my friend

[gmonasco]

a broken clock is still right twice a day my friend

And you're right two fewer times per day than a broken clock is.