PDA

Vollständige Version anzeigen : Biotech: Lehman hält den Genomic-Bereich für überbewertet !


Ralph
02.02.2001, 19:18
Genomics Shares Slide as Lehman Calls Sector Overvalued

The brokerage house points out that these companies are years from having actual profit-making products.

By Dane Hamilton
Staff Reporter


Lehman Brothers shouldn't expect any Valentine's Day cards from genomics investors.

In a distinctly bearish note, the brokerage said Wednesday that the genomics sector could be 30% to 50% overvalued and that these companies have a long way to go to show that their technologies can bring new drugs to market.

While the findings may come as little surprise to long-term investors in biotech and pharmaceuticals, it's likely to jar some companies that have built up huge valuations on the promise that genetic research holds for new drugs. Indeed, leading genomics outfits saw their shares slide Wednesday: Millennium (Nasdaq: MLNM - news) dropped $2.75, or 5.2%, to $50.12, Incyte (Nasdaq: INCY - news) slipped 44 cents to $27.88 and Celera (NYSE: CRA - news) dropped $2.75, or 5.3%, to $49.01.

Companies like those, while well off last year's highs following the much-ballyhooed mapping of the human genome, still sport multibillion-dollar valuations. That's way too optimistic, Lehman said in a report that was co-authored by McKinsey , the consultant. Genomics companies and their big drug company partners won't be reaping "fruit" in the form of new drugs or late-stage prospects before 2005, they said.

Ah, the Space
"Despite the recent pullback in the shares of genomics technology companies, we believe the space may still be overcapitalized by 30%-50%," said Lehman analysts Rachel Leheny and Joe Dougherty. "We also worry that there is an underappreciation of the challenges these companies will face, notably rapid technology change and short product lifecycles."

The brokerage took pains to point out that it wasn't downgrading the whole genomics sector to a sell, and that it still has some favorities. Companies like Human Genome Sciences (Nasdaq: HGSI - news) , Genentech (NYSE: DNA - news) , Curagen (Nasdaq: CRGN - news) , Immunex (Nasdaq: IMNX - news) , Tularik (Nasdaq: TLRK - news) and Corixa (Nasdaq: CRXA - news) have built up substantial capability in genetics that will likely form the basis for profitable new drugs in the future, the brokers said.

The Lehman-McKinsey report drew skepticism from some investors who have watched genomics stock values evaporate in the last year. "This would have been a great call a year ago," says Carl Gordon, portfolio manager for OrbiMed Partners , which holds a selection of genomics and biotech stocks. "These stocks have been trashed since then."

But Tony Butler, who heads the Lehman healthcare team, said the study was conceived last summer when valuations were still healthy. And while many cooler heads have warned that genomics companies would have to jump through many hoops to show they can demonstrate their promise, the Lehman is among the first to issue a comprehensive analyses based on scores of interviews with industry players.

Wait and See
The Lehman-McKinsey report said investors should expect few results in the form of new drugs before 2005 for genome companies, most of which still sell their databases to big pharmaceutical companies in return for royalties on sales and other revenue.

And it said drug companies are going to have to spend a lot more money in genomics to bring forth new drugs, particularly since much of the technology offered by genomic companies is still unproven. At minimum, companies will have to plow $100 million or more into their genomic drug discovery technologies, a cost that could be prohibitive to any but the largest drug companies.

Still, the brokerage says that even with additional research and development spending, U.S. pharmaceutical companies on average are likely to meet their goal of 15% annual earnings growth in the next four years on traditional drug discovery technologies alone. After that, the brokerage forecasts 16% average annual earnings growth for big pharma companies as the benefits of genetic research begin to bear new drugs.

Butler said there was no particular failure of genomic-based drugs that prompted the brokerage's bearish near-term outlook on the industry. But he said that SmithKline Beecham (NYSE: GSK - news) , which pioneered big drug company investment in genomics through an alliance with Human Genome Sciences nearly five years ago, has little to show for its efforts. It has since merged with Glaxo.

"SmithKline was a leader, but you don't see a late-stage pipeline [of genomic drugs], so where's the disconnect?" asks Butler. The company, which was among the first to hype the promise of the human genome as a rich source of new drugs, claimed previously to have 300 promising drug targets from the human genome.

Still, some investors said they knew all along that it would take a while for genetic research to bear fruit. The industry aims to first find the promising genes that control the production of proteins that control life processes then manipulate them for a desired therapeutic goal. So far, however, the industry has borne only ancillary benefits in the form of diagnostic tools that may show propensity to certain diseases or in drugs that work only in patients with certain genetic makeups, such as Genentech's breast cancer drug Herceptin.

"There are a lot of misconceptions when it comes to genomic investing," says Meb Faber, chief technology officer for GenomicsFund , a $30 million Maryland fund that buys only companies like Affymetrix (Nasdaq: AFFX - news) , Human Genome Sciences and Myriad Genetics (Nasdaq: MYGN - news) . "Many investors expect it to be a short-term process, but it still takes 10 years and a half-billion dollars to bring a drug to market. Genomics increases the targets, but you still have to develop the drug from there."
***********************************************************

Mit dem heutigen Tag stehen die Bios auch technisch an einem Scheideweg -um nicht zu sagen Abgrund .... ein kleiner Schritt noch für MLNM, HGSI oder PDLI (alles meine Favoriten) ..... und der Ofen wäre erstmal aus.

Mir scheint, dass auch Lehman etwas ungeduldig wegen den Ergebnissen geworden ist.

Ralph, vermutlich doch noch seine Kauflimits sehend


<font size=1>[Dieser Beitrag wurde von Ralph am 02.02.2001 editiert.]</font>

Trüffelschwein
03.02.2001, 16:07
Ich finde es sehr merkwürdig, daß Lehman Brothers den angeblichen Mißerfolg der Kooperation HGSI und Glaxo-SmithKline Beecham als Argumentationshilfe benutzt, und dennoch HGSI zum erklärten Liebling macht.

Warum dann auch noch ausgerechnet Curagen ein Liebling ist, der ja nun wirklich einen reinen Genomics Play darstellt, bleibt mir auch schleierhaft. Nichts gegen Curagen an sich, gute Firma, Kooperation mit Bayer, aber wieso sollen die mehr Erfolg haben als Millennium? Desgleichen HGSI. Und auf welchen Bewertungskriterien fußt die angebliche Überbewertung?

Für mich ist dieser Report interessengelenkt und keineswegs objektiv. Nur schlimm, daß solche Machwerke die Kurse so stark bewegen können.

Ich fürchte nun auch, daß MLNM die 20er noch mal sieht. Sobald sie unter 40 $ fallen, werde ich sie erstmal verkloppen. Jammerschade!

Ciao, Trüffelschwein

Ralph
03.02.2001, 16:26
Hi Trüffelschwein,

interessensgelenkt ist diese Artikel mit Sicherheit .... vielleicht hat sich auch Lehman zu schnell zu viel von den Biotechs erwartet.

Letztlich sind sie aber damit auch ein Opfer ihrer selbst geworden, denn man hat in 2000 kräftig nachgeholfen, die Erwartung auf extrem hohem Niveau zu halten. Man ja war schon fast dabei, aus sämtlichen Nachschlagewerken, Krankheiten wie Krebs, Parkinson etc. zu löschen, denn das Medikament dagegen, war ja schon fast entwickelt.

Das dies Jahre -vielleicht sogar Jahrzehnte- dauern kann, wollte damals natürlich keiner hören.

Dass dies Werte, mit soviel "Zukunft" in sich, trifft, in einer Zeit, wo die Zukunft alles andere als klar ist, ist auch wieder nachvollziehbar .... es wird auch wieder die Zeit kommen, wo es in die andere Richtung gehen wird.

Ich hoffe, Du kommst halbwegs ungeschoren mit Deiner MLNM davon ... vielleicht nach einem zu erwarteten Bounce aussteigen. Die Analyse findest Du in der "Chart-Corner".

Danach muss man erstmal weitersehen ! ..... wirklich schade, aber es eröffnet dem "denkenden" Investor natürlich auch wieder Chancen.

Good luck

Ralph

Trüffelschwein
05.02.2001, 05:07
Eine Diskussion der Lehman Brothers Studie von Raging Bull:

The Lehman Brothers Life Sciences group recently teamed up with McKinsey &
Co. (a consultant) to evaluate the economic impact of genomics on
Biopharmaceutical drug development and R&D productivity. The group spent
3-4 months interviewing over 40 industry experts, R&D executives,
corporate executives, science and medical leaders, and patent lawyers.

The joint effort produced a comprehensive report that was released and
discussed this past Wednesday (http://www.webcast.lehman.com). To be
clear, genomics refers to drug discovery technologies involving genetic
databases, DNA microarrays and single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP)
analysis.

The report concludes that while the long-term potential for drug discovery
using genomic technologies warrants optimism among Biopharmaceutical firms
and investors, the proliferation of novel drug targets will engender
higher research expenditures and bring more biologicals into clinical
studies that ultimately fail. The report forecasts that drug firms moving
toward genomics for drug discovery efforts will simply spend more monies
to bring a therapeutic to market. Not until 2010 will genomics bear its
promised fruit: more approved drugs at a cheaper cost. Finally, the
short-term possibility of more drugs failing clinical trials (greater
attrition) may negatively impact investors, many with the impression that
new scientific technologies will quickly bring forth a myriad of approved
drugs. Such investors will be propelled to move investments toward
established drug firms with valuations based upon late-stage clinical
trials and proven revenue streams from approved drugs.

For long-term Biopharmaceutical investors, and individuals familiar with
genomics research, the Lehman/McKinsey report is not a shocking
revelation. The report correctly describes genomic technologies as
providing investigators with greater numbers of potential drugs and drug
targets. While it is true that large drug firms are paying great sums of
money to sequester potential drug candidates, Lehman purports that more
drugs will enter clinical trials and ultimately fail Phase II studies (the
test for efficacy) because investigators simply no longer take the time to
fully explore all of the functional intricacies of their newly discovered
biologicals. But, are these likely scenarios for drug development?

Investigators will certainly derive many potential drugs and drug targets
from genomics studies. However, there is no way to put one-tenth, or
maybe one-twentieth, of potential therapeutics into clinical trials. Why
not? The cost of performing a clinical trial is too great and most
companies do not possess the financial resources to host more than a few
trials. So, when a company hands over scores of drug targets to another,
there’s no way to enter all of those targets into clinical trials. Given
a large number of drug targets, companies then need the proper “screening”
techniques (target validation) to choose the best drug to move forward.
Although Lehman recognizes the necessity of target validation, the report
brushes aside the potential for improving "screening" techniques thereby
allowing for a company to pursue the best targets with the best chances of
progressing through clinical trials. Lehman believes that genomics will
cause companies to pursue more products rather than refine development to
a limited number of drugs. Target validation is really the crux for
genomics -- the proper screening techniques will eliminate potential drugs
from even progressing beyond the laboratory experimental stage as well as
enhance a drug's success in clinical trials.

The report is not an attack on Biotech companies or genomics, but
Millennium Pharmaceuticals (MLNM, $43) is a major genomics company that
falls within the scope of the report's criticisms. Millennium, the
premier company harnessing small molecule drugs, has five-year $450
million contracts with Aventis (AVE, $78) and Bayer to provide a few
hundred drug targets relevant to inflammatory diseases, cancer,
cardiovascular disease and viral infections. Surely, not all 225 drug
targets that Millennium hands over to Aventis will be put into clinical
trials. In addition, all of the genes or small molecules found to be
associated with a disease does not guarantee that it is the cause of the
disease. What Millennium and its partners are doing is applying as many
screening techniques as possible to focus on only a handful of targets and
advance those into clinical trials.

Currently, Millennium has six of its own drugs in either Phase I or Phase
II studies, with several more small molecules getting set to enter
clinical studies later this year. Successful advancement of any of these
molecules into Phase III studies in the next few years will show that
genomics technologies can be productively applied to drug development. One
aspect that Lehman is correct about though, is that the cost to develop a
fully integrated genomics effort can reach $70-100 million per year, which
will prohibit many drug firms from pursuing the technology.

While the Lehman/McKinsey report is of a bearish nature, Lehman continues
to favorably recommend several stocks. Which companies are
well-positioned for future drug development? First, those companies that
are performing late-stage clinical trials and possess a revenue stream
from marketable drugs will fare well because they are more focused on
development rather than research. Second, in the Biotech realm, those
companies that can barter their technologies (in lieu of big cash outlays)
and form alliances in drug discovery efforts appear to have a good chance
to succeed. For example, companies willing to generate monoclonal
antibodies in exchange for target validation analysis seem set to prosper.
Lehman believes that the best-positioned companies include: Genentech
(DNA, $62) and Immunex (IMNX, $30) because of their advanced genomics
capabilities; Human Genome Sciences (HGSI, $55), CuraGen (CRGN, $37) and
Tularik (TLRK, $29) because of their integration of genomics and strong
molecular biology; and Abgenix (ABGX, $39) and Corixa (CRXA, $24) because
of their proven success in bartering to access needed technologies.

The Lehman/McKinsey report set out to analyze R&D productivity. So far,
there does not appear to have been much progress in advancing
genomics-derived small molecule drugs through Phase III clinical trials,
and it does not look like there will be in the next five years. In
addition, there are huge costs associated with mining for drug targets and
the return on those costs does not look terribly appealing. The report
almost makes the reader believe that drug discovery is better off using
"traditional biology" rather than new genomic techniques. Of course, that
doesn't make much sense either. As always, the industry simply needs to
look for ways to improve productivity and get a better return on their
research investments.

(C) Copyright 2001 The Bull Market Biotech Investor