@PerryGlasenberg Agreed and nor did I say that. However, it doesn’t state after the courts ruling they provided an option to keep YUTREPIA in PH-ILD. Simply because they made an offer prior to the ruling doesn’t mean it was a fair offer. This is just UTHRs attempt to control the narrative.
@PerryGlasenberg Doesn’t provide much clarity as it says prior to the ruling that would keep YUTREPIA in PH-ILD. After the ruling UTHR clearly didn’t want what was better for patients. UTHR prioritized stockholders over stakeholders don’t know what the offer was prior so can’t say who was greedy.
@Gripltandripit I’d say it shows just how confident RJ is in L606! It provides stability with PAH cash flow to fund ongoing studies and payoff damages. Additionally PAH will continue to take share. The bonus in the meantime is that YUTREPIA will certainly get some continued usage in ILD. $LQDA
@DeepValuePlay@_Ceiv@Omnitrader69 Asking for a 6 day extension one would think they have to be close on something. Otherwise I’d think they’d ask for more time, heck Andrews took 15 months. Don��t think he’d have batted an eye if they said we need a month.
@MowryKris@zipjet@mbamcnulty@og_Kool_Rod So $UTHR would be the only company with a monopoly in an indication with a merger? FTC really does very little look at Meta or Google for that matter. Significantly larger corporations with clear monopolies that have been operating as such for decades
@og_Kool_Rod@mbamcnulty Agreed on Monopoly but Judges ruling basically guarantees that monopoly will continue. Feel like whether UTHR gets a royalty or not Andrew’s ruling prevents competition in the future. Either way UTHR benefits and restricts future competition. Especially if L606 is infringing to
@mbamcnulty@og_Kool_Rod Why wouldn’t they just try to acquire $LQDA? At that point they are acknowledging the drug will be very successful in the future and they can clearly tell it has hurt their earnings power in PAH and PH-ILD.
$LQDA $UTHR stipulated to a meeting time and place. They agreed to disagree and went on there merry way. After years of back and forth what would give anyone hope something changed within one week. No way they agreed to a royalty or a royalty % after all the back and forth.
$LQDA bulls Anybody read $UTHR IR PR. Our immediate priority is ensuring that no patient goes without the therapy they need, and we are ready to support a seamless transition to Tyvaso or Tyvaso DPI should PH-ILD be removed from the Yutrepia label said Michael Benkowitz 🤣 a joke
@InsiderHawk@MartinShkreli Would be considered insider trading. Judge ordered them to work on an agreement with United. That is the definition of insider information as not everyone is privy to what is going on behind those closed doors.
@zipjet@vrotjan If what Jeffries said about L606 infringing in PH-ILD is the most frustrating part. I say that thinking some sort of royalty (obviously LQDA will appeal infringement ruling and UTHR will probably appeal royalty ruling if we get to that point). Obviously a lot up in the air
@MichelleLe02 So $LQDA would continue selling to new patients. When it come off PH-ILD more patients are left switching to a drug that isn’t as affective and has worse side effects??? If it continues selling into PH-ILD I can’t see a world in which they would say okay in six months it’s off.
@zipjet@Bkclaims So Based on Jeffries report L606 would still be viewed as infringing on claim 1. Ph-ILD patients wouldn’t have access to L606? Value becomes useless in that indication and patients are the real losers. Understand it can replace YUTREPIA in PAH but seems like a monopoly for UTHR