Here are a couple of points about the points made about my points in my "If I were in charge" post.
.
It's generally true that any company that is not progressing is regressing. BTI is engaging more pharmas, and, having recently started new programs with MedImmune and UCB, is establishing new and serious contacts with multiple pharmas. These actions are in line with my hopes but there are no apparent commitments associated with them. My thoughts are strictly that BTI should look like any other biotech - it should be actively pursuing the goal of taking good technologies to market. That means establishing IND status wherever possible and then beginning the process of designing and entering clinical trials. That's BTI's business and it's what BTI should be doing.
.
Herceptin is going off-patent in 2014 so it's unlikely that Roche can find a subsitute with patent protection before then. However, time is passing and although Roche is engaged in suitable replacements, there may nevertheless be a shorter path to FDA approval for BT2111 than for Roche's candidates. Plus, however effective the Roche replacements might turn out to be, if they can't cross the BBB then BT2111 could have very long-lasting value. I think BT2111 is a big enough threat that Roche may not want to see it in BTI's or another company's hands. My point is that BTI should be illustrating a desire to do something with BT2111, now, unless there are business or scientific conditions that don't support this. Here's a link to a Forbes article about Roche and Herceptin: http://onforb.es/UfEGkA.
.
Whether Shire is a candidate to be acquired by another pharma or not should be irrelevant to BTI. BTI has to act according to its own timetable and plans, not Shire's and certainly not about hypotheticals.
.
It is not a matter of public record whether BTI and Shire are engaged in "intense" discussions. If they are and if this is known by other pharmas, and if those other pharmas haven't also engaged BTI, then BTI should be moving ahead with a very visible business plan as I have suggested. If BTI has potential value for most pharmas then BTI should be very active in making sure the other pharmas understand that value. Moving ahead with programs shows that BTI is proactive, that it's not waiting for anybody and it will convince the pharmas that their competitors are watching. If BTI goes quiet then the pharmas may very well think that BTI is in bed with another pharma and may figure they're too late to the party. Scare them all, I say.
.
About breaking markets up into regional licenses - I'm all for that. BTI is already very complex with a future of multiple drug programs indicated. Implementing a complex business plan could very well cause a pharma to step up so that the pharma could implement its own business plan. I have always felt that pharmas would rather implement their own development and business strategies with the Transcend program than having BTI do it. That's the biggest reason why I think BTI should be very active in advancing Transcend program so that the pharmas realize they're losing control over its future.
.
jdstox
.