Good morning, Harry!
Truthfully, not much, I hate to say. I can't help it. When you investigate and analyze their annual reports, R&D pipeline, SEC reports, etc., you can see the marketing "ploys", ya know what I mean?
Like Marg, maybe it's because I've sat on the darn Boards of a medical corp. before, but they TRAINED me how to eye the competitor and forecast the possible future financial strategies that they are going to use. (And I do the same thing for the Union now, too. Especially if we are in an adversarial labor relationship with a company.) Sometimes you can see the handwriting on the wall.
That's not to say that some of these drugs themselves aren't useful - of course they are. It's the "presentation" of the drug to the public that is questionable. But..............truthfully..........when you REALLY dig, you can
get down to the real story about the CRABS.
And here's an inflammatory statement, and I've been keeping it to myself, and before anyone yells at me, this is just purely my own opinion and I can't recall and say now how I came to this conclusion (I dug around and read a few things here and there), but..............I wouldn't get overly excited about Antegren, either. There's a reason, remember, why they suddenly started using and testing Antegren as a combination drug, instead of just a sole MS therapy in and of itself.
But, I have been known to be wrong before, of course. And I'm sure not ALL companies are flat out "corrupt", but do they all use the same corporate tactics and strategies? Sure they do. There's a saying in the business: "It's just a numbers game." (I used to hate hearing that.)
EDIT: Harry, yes, I think I agree about the Merck situation. If they get out of this one, it'll be a pure miracle.
SECOND EDIT: And as I think I mentioned somewhere else here, that would hit me doubley (is that a word?) hard, as our Union represents the employees at Merck. At some point, we'll have to get involved to try to save our members' jobs (I would think). That's what we Unions do, ya know!