He's fine except when people get down on their knees for the left. Can't blame him for that. Right?
Vaccine News
- Thread starter Pirata
- Start date
Does that mean he does like it when people are getting down on their knees or doesn't? When does the kinky towel play start. Not that there's anything wrong with that, just not my thing.
As far as I'm concerned I have no problem kneeling for God, and I would hope all people do. When people kneel for the left or the right, it's a problem. A lot of people kneeling for the left in today's world. Why would bring up kinky play out of that?
Hi, Switzerland here....
Merge stated Pfizer did not take funding from OWS, which was disputed with the “commitment” statements. Merge is right - fact.
Merge asked how OWS helped Pfizer as he disputed point 1 - thorough evidence provided by Section 112. Merge did not dispute, think he thanked Section 112.
Curious if this goes another 3 pages, but this is surely passing the time as I wait for a dinner order.
Merge stated Pfizer did not take funding from OWS, which was disputed with the “commitment” statements. Merge is right - fact.
Merge asked how OWS helped Pfizer as he disputed point 1 - thorough evidence provided by Section 112. Merge did not dispute, think he thanked Section 112.
Curious if this goes another 3 pages, but this is surely passing the time as I wait for a dinner order.
Yeah, basically about right. Unfortunately with text, there is a bit that gets lost in interpretation.
My only real criticism was that 85's first pose was entirely made up. He gave credit to OWS for funding the research and manufacturing which Pfizer did not receive.
Section112 provided the answer that the FDA has fast tracked the approval process. That's great. Was hoping for a little more detail like federal concurrent validation of results which doesn’t normally happen (I made that up) but I haven’t been able to find out what it did specifically outside of the funding.
What It appears OWS did was reduce the risk to Pharma companies and fund manufacturing for the drugs before they were approved. I think those steps are great and make a lot of sense... but Pfizer wasn't a part of that.
What OWS accomplished in relation to Pfizer was ensure that the US would be in the front of the line to get the vaccine when it was ready to go. In relation to others who took the funding, it funded the research and manufacturing to speed up the process. All good stuff. I would be in favor of a reward system like this for any major drug innovation. I wasn’t looking to say this admin doesn’t deserve credit. I think they did everything they could to provide the opportunity for a company to create a vaccine. Just happened that it appears Pfizer probably didn’t need OWS but many other companies probably did.
You're so full of shit. I never said that. The research and development of the vaccine was essentially completed. The $2 Billion had nothing to do with that...go back an read.
I mean... that was your post. Pfizer did not receive funding.
their risks were not shared with the government like the other companies who would have still been paid of their vaccine was never approved.
Any bank would gladly front Pfizer the $2 billion for distribution expenses for an FDA approved vaccine. So OWS saved Pfizer the interest expense of 3.25%
Its pretty simple. OWS didn’t provide any support or money for the research. The R&D part of the vaccine was essentially done. What OWS did provide was assistance to fast track it through the clinical trial process with the FDA (9 months vs. 6-7 years) and a guaranteed purchase order of $2 billion once it got through the accelerated trials. Call it whatever you like, funding, incentives, dollars, etc, it is real money. What we don’t know is the price per dose premium that OWS is paying Pfizer. I can tell you having worked directly with the FDA/BARDA on a therapy; they paid a 10x premium for it. If you don’t think that type of incentive would not help Pfizer versus them going out and trying to market, negotiate contracts and sell it, then I don’t know what to tell you.
As Pirata said earlier, companies need to redirect resources from other products, projects and efforts to make this happen. They need to be incentivized, funded, paid, whatever, to do that. Merge is just doing his normal trolling BS. That’s all he’s got.
If that's the case, you should have started there and not talked about funding and manufacturing.
Also, what was the mechanism in OWS which fast tracked this faster than a typical fast tracked drug at the FDA?
So Pfizer comes up with a vaccine, fairly rapidly by the way... (Amazing they were able to handle the resource shifting for that... Lol) Completes phase 2 trials and believes it looks good. They are well on their way to being the first to market for a vaccine that hundreds of millions of people will want.... And they need a promise of less than 5% of their annual revenue to shift resources from there? Really?
Sorry. That's just speculation and rather absurd speculation at that. Maybe it was that extra 20m doses from Canada that really made the deal attractive for them and push through to get it done.
First of all, I would suggest you go back and read Section112 posts on the fast tracking of the trials. He did a great job articulating the OWS impact.
It’s not “absurd” at all about redirecting resources. Let me illustrate some simple math. Let’s say it normally costs Pfizer 50 cents/dose to produce a vaccine that they sell for $2.00. Let’s say for argument sake that raw materials/production costs are twice that for other vaccines ($1.00). For the COVID vaccine OWS comes to them and commits to pay them $20.00/dose. You have an accounting degree so you hopefully understand contribution margin and profit.
In addition, OWS (most likely BARDA) sends that first $2 billion check once the doses are produced, so Pfizer is getting that money up front, and not having to work with hundreds/thousands of insurers, hospitals, or other buyers to bill, collect, etc. Once again, you should understand the tremendous benefit of that. Efficiencies, lower distribution costs and cash flow.
Pfizer also doesn’t have to worry about price gouging complaints because OWS has established the premium price and who is going to bitch about the government for grossly overpaying for something. Do you think they would be able to charge that kind of a premium given the bad press they would get, not to mention what competitors would do. And if I recall from the article you posted, the government it’s also committing to future batches of the vaccine.....So more highly profitable revenue.
Finally, because I know you have this propensity to accuse me of “making things up”, I want to confirm that I do not know Pfizer’s actual costs and those numbers were purely illustrative. But I do have firsthand knowledge of the multiple that 0WS/BARDA is incentivizing companies to redirect resources. The 10x example I used is actually conservative to what we have experienced.
Last edited:
Yes, we established that. It was Anna Nalick. She sounds a bit like Jewel and I made the mistake.
I like both their voices.
I'm aware of why this deal makes sense for Pfizer. Present value of $2 billion at once is greater than what they would otherwise receive over time also helps protect against potential (though unlikely) obsoletion if the virus goes away on it's own. Pfizer has said they are currently pricing below market rates. For comparison, Moderna said they are pricing their vaccine at $32-$37. Not sure why you think Pfizer would be significantly below that? Pfizer has had agreements with the US, Canada, the UK and Japan. We committed to buying about a third of the first 300m doses of the vaccine. I don't think it would be accurate to suggest that those other countries combined played a bigger role in the development than we did. Right?
The incentive of Pfizer to move quickly is still because of market demand. The market is going to demand billions of doses of a vaccine. If Pfizer is early to market, they have commitments for another billion doses to be purchased in 2021. If they are late to market, they could lose out on that potential. I think if you are making the OWS funding argument, it would probably be more appropriate to say that Pfizer is moving faster because they are competing against companies who were funded by the government who would have otherwise been slower to market.
The FDA has a process for fast tracking drugs and have had that in place, right? What was he difference between the normal FDA fast track process and the OWS fast track process? Or are they one in the same? I am not doubting they are different. I have no idea if they are or not. and again... I am not saying OWS 100% did not make this faster. I am just discussing how it worked.
OWS is not the FDA. It is a special task force that is meant to work with all government agencies, manufacturers, and distributors to speed the process. FDA, CBER, BARDA, CDC, etc.
There is a big difference in projecting market demand based on a bunch of variables versus having that commitment of doses and cash (funding) delivered at time of manufacture all at once. You should know that. I will guarantee that Pfizer is making considerably more per dose via OWS, then they would have on their own.
Ahh the classic Merge playbook. When your argument falls apart, dig your heals in and call people names from the safety of your keyboard. A true man of courage.
Go have a lavender soak and maybe Solo can come over and give you a hug, unless of course SHUSA is your new b_tch.
he didnt call you a name in his post once. he just stated that you are who you said you are. and judging by response you seem much worse.
youre the only one who called someone a name and you did so because your argument fell apart. LOL! classic. im sorry they whipped you back then bud i like those singers too.
Yes. I understand all of that, but none of that is the reason why things went faster between July and November.
Pfizer's top Vaccine right now is Prevnar 13 which has a market price of about $150 per dose and they made $5 billion in 2019. Why do you think the normal market price of their Covid Vaccine would be less than $20 per dose?
Last edited:
I haven't really made an argument.
I just pointed out why another seemed flawed and asked for the detail in how this went faster because of OWS. Didn't realize that would ruffle so many feathers.
Though, I've never seen the right leaning folk on this board race to support socialism in pharmaceutical innovation instead of the free market though. That has been kind of fun.
When you said talking to me was like whipping the kids in school... were you not behind a keyboard?
Not sure where you're going with that. I'm acting like the tough guy?
Do you not understand the difference between revenue and profit? Market price means nothing...profitability is driven by contracts, rebates, etc. Pharma has a convoluted pricing process by design. You’re making some wild assumptions without really knowing anything as to how the market works. Like you are making things up....
smh... I was just giving an example because we don't have the data and asking why you were comfortable with a guarantee it will be above market given that Moderna said they are coming in around $32-$37 per dose.
We may have paid a premium to get it before other countries though Pfizer said other countries would not get it for less than than the US paid. Seems to suggest that $20 per dose was the market price for the first 500 million doses. Time will tell on that one.
And I was explaining how the OWS/BARDA funding actually works which is a huge incentive with massive benefits.
I think another thing people are overlooking is the competition that was accelerated from OWS.
While it was financial incentive for everyone to get to a vaccine quickly OWS had the effect of allowing more players to get in game either sooner or in a bigger way than they would have been able to without it. I believe that had effect on Pfizer's efforts as well as everybodys.
While it was financial incentive for everyone to get to a vaccine quickly OWS had the effect of allowing more players to get in game either sooner or in a bigger way than they would have been able to without it. I believe that had effect on Pfizer's efforts as well as everybodys.
I don't view OWS as socialism.
The motivation behind OWS was two fold.
One aspect is health and combating Covid.
The other aspect is getting the economy back on track.
The health benefit is obvious. Economic benefit also helps the government with tax revenues.
You can apply that logic to any socialist program.
If this is what gets Pharma moving - Lets do it.
Text of S. 627 (113th): Medical Innovation Prize Fund Act (Introduced version) - GovTrack.us
Text of S. 627 (113th): Medical Innovation Prize Fund Act as of Mar 20, 2013 (Introduced version). S. 627 (113th): Medical Innovation Prize Fund Act
www.govtrack.us
I will write my representatives today to ask them to push this during Biden's first term based on the success of the OWS model.
Yes, It is what we have posting all along. That is the big picture.
If you go back about a year you have big pharma with a portfolio of efforts. I don't think Covid was high on the list. When it hit, they evaluated the risk reward of shifting resources to address it. You LOLed that. Pharma are big ships. They don't turn around fast. OWS was one of many factors to consider how fast to turn. Pfizer chose to take advantage of one component of OWS. It moved the needle for than the 1-2 months you suggested.
I didn't laugh at the idea they would shift resources. I laughed at the idea that they wouldn't have done so without a purchase order. It's really not hard to prove that considering that is exactly what they did before Operation Warp Speed began.
Pfizer and BoiNTech announced their partnership in creating a vaccine planned for distribution in 2020 On April 9, 2020. Whatever resource shifting they needed to move to accomplish that was already in place. Hard to support the idea that OWS was the incentive for them to do so when OWS wasn't a thing for another 5 weeks.
To believe that Pfizer would not be where they are today without OWS, you have to believe that they were able to develop a vaccine they felt good about in 3 months and then that vaccine was not a priority for them after that. That take is just really not supportable.
Like I said, I think OWS was good. I think they did exactly what they should have done. When this is over, I think we will be in a better position because the government was willing to take on the risk that may have been a barrier to some companies.
I think when someone asks as Hoopsfan did, "Did Operation Warp Speed have contribute to this?"
A much better response would be "Hard to say, but probably did to an extent" rather than Yes or No.
You are once again making stuff about stuff you know little about. When you have that large of a predictable and committed number of doses (at a premium price), you can more accurately ramp up production and make capital investments faster with more certainty. Once again, given personal experience, it is unequivocally, Yes.
Pfizer paid BioNTech $185 million upfront with a promise to pay an additional $600 million at certain milestones. Pfizer has access to all of the money they needed which is entirely evident that they did not participate in the development and manufacturing portion of OWS. If they needed that money to be first to market, they would have taken it.
They got through stage two trials without an agreement with OWS...
So your contention is that Pfizer is paying out $750 million for a vaccine which they announced they expect will be out by the end of the year in April... but the only reason they are going to reach their goal is because of a purchase order of a completed product? Does Japan get more credit than OWS does since they are buying more than we are?
Some accountant....you keep repeating the same nonsense. No one ever said “it was the only reason”. Just stop; you’re embarrassing yourself.
lol...Go on with your socially funded healthcare. I like it. Hope it is a model for the future.
His implication was quite apparent.
What gives you cause to be the great defender of Merge?
Last edited:
Rest assured Pfizer knew about OWS long before it was announced. Good odds they had a role in shaping it.
Similar threads
