Over the past year, Gilead has been subjected to one nasty setback after the next. But it hasn’t even dented Daniel O’Day’s pay package.

True, his base pay is down a tad, from $1.7 to $1.65 million, according to the SEC filing. The non-equity incentive comp also dipped. But those stock awards and options jumped by more than $1.5 million in value, allowing the Roche vet to see his total compensation edge up from $19 million to $19.2 million, give or take a few bucks.

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 142,700+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

SIGN UP LOG IN

A little more than a week after bluebird’s CFO announced a quick exit as the company flagged an alarm about its ability to survive, the biotech’s longtime leader — Nick Leschly — is touting a $170 million deal designed to carry his spinout past the current carnage on Wall Street.

2seventy bio sold close to 14 million shares $TSVT to raise the cash, which the company is careful to point out will land on top of the $362 million stash the biotech ended the year with. Add in its Abecma revenue, where they’re partnered with Bristol Myers Squibb, and the crew is promising that they have the funds to weather the storm and get to 2025.

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 142,700+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

SIGN UP LOG IN

Biogen CEO Michel Vounatsos is betting on success. But he’s keeping one hand firmly on the budget axe in case the cards stay cold. And he’s ready to chop as hard as necessary to keep the bottom line in shape.

In a fireside chat on Monday during the Cowen conference, Vounatsos repeatedly hit on the company’s campaign to overturn the punishing initial Medicare decision denying broad coverage of Aduhelm (aducanumab), insisting that Biogen can make a good case for access, promising both added clinical data as well as real world evidence. But unless things start to go its way — on Aduhelm and the upcoming lecanemab readout as well as the so-far commercially awkward zuranolone readout — the CEO stands ready to cut where he can’t add revenue.

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 142,700+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

SIGN UP LOG IN

Bayer execs covered all the major pocketbook issues you’d expect in its Q4 call with analysts today. But clearly the invasion of Ukraine — and the widening global crisis that has developed as bombs fall on a civilian population — has captured their attention. And it became a central focus in their presentation today.

“Before we go into the business performance,” Bayer CEO Werner Baumann said, “let me start with what is certainly top of mind for all of us. With the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the geopolitical order is shaken and we are deeply shocked and concerned with what is happening to the Ukrainian people. This war is no less than a threat to our freedom and democracy and we at Bayer condemn in the most vigorous way, this Russian attack.”

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 142,700+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

SIGN UP LOG IN

J&J has choreographed a legal dance that has taken the pharma giant straight into the waiting arms of a US senator. And the lawmaker has got some moves of his own.

Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL) took to the Senate floor to excoriate J&J’s use of the Texas two-step move to escape a mountain of litigation surrounding claims that the pharma giant’s talc-based baby powder was laced with asbestos, triggering ovarian cancer or mesothelioma. It spun out those assets into a separate company last fall, then promptly filed for bankruptcy of the new company, looking to shield the giant corporation from a mob of angry litigants bristling with more than 38,000 lawsuits threatening billions in potential judgments.

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 142,700+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

SIGN UP LOG IN

Last fall, with the world grappling — not all that well — with a global pandemic, anything might have seemed possible for the newly minted billionaires running Moderna. Their stock was trading north of $450 a share and the company was flying high as its mRNA vaccine offered a radically new and disruptive tech for pandemics to come.

In the previous summer, Moderna had already leapfrogged the likes of GlaxoSmithKline in market cap — breaking the $100 billion mark — to enter the exclusive territory of Big Pharma players in the top 15. And some analysts were comparing it to Tesla, the electric automaker that seemed blissfully separated from financial reality.

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 142,700+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

SIGN UP LOG IN

Moderna just picked up its first-ever full BLA approval for its celebrated Covid-19 vaccine, and did it at what most everyone in the business would say was a blindingly fast 5 months from their application filing. But one of the big questions some people had after the news hit was why, after Pfizer and their partner BioNTech were able to move in a little more than half that time, did the FDA choose to wait here?

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 142,700+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

SIGN UP LOG IN