Crucell « Terug naar discussie overzicht

quote:

ron banged schreef:

Expecting it to have a 13 euro handle some time next week, and it could go down to 13 even as it touches the highs of 2008 pre market meltdown.

Finally...Do not give management any more shares to squander,make them earn their money by building the business...not buying somebody else's

quote:

Kelewan schreef:

Minderheidsdeelneming Galapagos steelt ondertussen de show, maar – zoals oudje ongetwijfeld direct wilde opmerken – in financieel opzicht betekent dat weinig voor de Crucellaandeelhouders (voorzover die niet ook direct in Galapagos zitten).

quote:

wous schreef:

MeawandMoo1 schreef;

De stilte in combinatie met de relatief beperkte voortgang van programma's in het algemeen, brengt een beeld met zich mee dat ook Crucell het niet weet.
Voor "the largest independent vaccine player" toch enigszins teleurstellend

////////////////////////////////////

Juist ja , en hoe verklaar je dan de J&J deal ?
Die weten heus wel waar ze aan beginnen .
Ik heb er alle vertrouwen in .

quote:

ron banged schreef:

...

quote:

harvester schreef:

Dat het stil is rond Crucell heeft denk ik te maken met het prospectus dat ter goedkeuring bij de AFM ligt inzake de J+J deal.

Als de AFM de goedkeuring verleend heeft, dan kan Crucell beschikken over het geld.

Crucell kan wel al transacties in de maak hebben, waar zij pas hun handtekening op zetten als de AFM zijn werk gedaan heeft.

Hopelijk zal het DSB gedoe niet te veel mankracht vergen van AFM en schieten ze een beetje op.

Verder komen op 3 november dus over 12 werkdagen de 3e kwartaalcijfers uit.

quote:

maxen schreef:

(ben het inhoudelijk meestens oneens)

quote:

ron banged schreef:

Finally add in the latest WHO contract debacle...and you pumpers who claim that it was what was expected...that market share was to drop to 33% of world demand..need to wake up. Crucell claims they are the reliable supplier, and that is the most important thing. But then why did the WHO give 66% of the contracts to unproven contractors? Why couldn't you even maintain 50% share of the non-Indian Pakistan market for pentavalent vaccines?

quote:

Cybertom schreef:

[quote=ron banged]

Finally add in the latest WHO contract debacle...and you pumpers who claim that it was what was expected...that market share was to drop to 33% of world demand..need to wake up. Crucell claims they are the reliable supplier, and that is the most important thing. But then why did the WHO give 66% of the contracts to unproven contractors? Why couldn't you even maintain 50% share of the non-Indian Pakistan market for pentavalent vaccines?
[/quote]

Als we het dan toch over domme opmerkingen hebben. Er komen nog meerder tranches, welke door Crucell duidelijk zijn aangegeven en er is ook gezegd dat de 50% niet behouden zal blijven en dat is ook helemaal niet erg, want de markt groeit hard, waardoor het aantal te verkopen doses toch nog zeer significant zal stijgen. Kortom, gelul van niks.

quote:

z0n0p schreef:

Of zoals Kruimer in juni zei:

"Two words about Quinvaxem.

We introduced this product in 2006. We sold 6.3 million doses and we’re the only competitor at that time with Glaxo having the major share of the market. The market increased very rapidly in the next couple of years and in the tender period, which goes to three years from 2007 to 2009 we were awarded $0.5 billion worth of contracts by the United – by UNICEF and the Pan American Health Organization. At price of 360 per dose, that translates into a large number of doses and you work out the numbers, last year we sold just shy of 40 million doses and this year we should see a significant uptick in the volume and the revenue that is derived from this product.
The next tender period, which is from 2010 to 2012, we have submitted the bid for, the outcome of that bid is confidential and won't be known until the fourth quarter. But we’re very confidential – very confident that due to our low cost, our impeccable service record, 100% reliability of supply and the fact that at this moment we own 50% of the world market for this, with Glaxo being number two. We held a very strong position.
In the meantime there are two other Indian manufacturers that have qualified. India wrote our a tender very recently with a very short time period to submit and basically I think it’s a clever way to keep the Indian market to the Indian suppliers, which in a way is good for us because that draws away the excess capacity from Indian suppliers towards the Indian market. That market there is 50 million doses per year and the western – the other market is about 150 million. So at this moment in 2008 (red: moet zijn 2009!) only about half of the market demand that UNICEF has forecasting has been fulfilled".