Xconomy writes that smaller competitors in rare disease niche's are on balance happy about Sanofi's decision to buy Genzyme for its presence in this area of therapeutics. They believe that more investment in the area is good for everyone - patients and drug company competitors alike as it brings more attention and investment.
I found it interesting that there didn't seem to be too much fear (expressed in the article anyway) that smaller competitors would have trouble competing versus Sanofi's bigger pockets. Quite the contrary, Shire's spokesman expressed the opinion that the whole area woudl benefit from increased investment. What's more? They didn't seem intimidated at all on the prospect of competing for deals with its richer new big brother in the field.
The Shire spokesman opined that smaller companies like itself were often more flexible in negotiating terms that were fairer and were more open to forging alliances. They didn't feel a need to force a particular deal structure -- and also felt they could be more nimble in evaluating deals and moving to close them quicker.
This brought to mind a couple of thoughts. One - just look at how long Sanofi and Genzyme danced around before this deal closed. Two - Kevin Kinsella's recent comments regarding predatory big pharma tactics. Will these work in an environment where competition for the deal exists and where one party is willing to be more flexible on its terms? Maybe Shire has something here. Bring on the money and the interest.
Posted by Bruce Lehr March 3rd 2011.