Time Is Money: Is There A Better Way To Value Asset Duration In Biopharma Deal-Making?
Time is the least considered driver of asset valuations in life sciences – and may be a factor behind the low level of M&A deals so far this year. ICON’s Andy Smith provides some advice to the C-suite and business development managers on strategies to clarify the duration aspect in risk-sensitive transaction negotiations.
You may also be interested in...
Five companies in big pharma’s top 20 have come through mergers in the past 10 years or so that changed them significantly. As measured by standard financial performance parameters, the processes at Takeda and Teva (and to some extent, at Allergan) seem relatively smooth and productive. Those at Pfizer and Merck don’t. But it depends on how you look at the numbers.
Mid-cap biotech companies Alexion and United Therapeutics both missed fourth-quarter sales expectations and although Intercept beat analysts' estimates with $13.4m in sales, does that justify a $3bn valuation?
Debt-fueled acquisitions helped Teva, Shire and Allergan report well-received fourth-quarter earnings. But sector circumstances have changed since 2016 and the ability to grow by debt-funded acquisition is now severely restricted.