Well, this "tweeting" is going to take a little getting used to. Cannot be very wordy. [Insert your snickering Luddite quips/jokes here.]
I may just stick to blogging, thus:
. . . .A day behind me, but Peter Loftus runs essentially same story -- on the Sanofi Intervet Call Option -- including FTC analysis quotes. Cool!
[Dow Jones' Mr. Loftus, then:]
. . . .Antitrust issues would resurface, however. The FTC previously identified poultry vaccines and certain cattle drugs as segments where the combined market share of Merial and Intervet/Schering-Plough would be too large. In the U.S, for example, Merial and Intervet Schering-Plough together account for about 75% of poultry vaccine sales, the FTC said. . . .
Such issues might be sorted out when Merck goes through the FTC prior-approval process if Sanofi exercises its option. The FTC said in documents last year the prior-approval provision was designed "to preserve the remedial benefits" of Merck's sale of its Merial stake to Sanofi, citing a "high likelihood" that Merck and Sanofi would combine their animal-health assets again. . . .
Fascinating. [My story, of yesterday.]
3 comments:
Poultry's the biggest problem, we all know that. Cattle is possibly a problem, though I don't there's as much overlap as you might think at first glance (in the U.S. -- globally there are more issues). But I think Lilly or Bayer would demand more than JUST poultry to get the deal done. My completely unscientific guess is that the "new" merial will be about 60-65% of what it would be without any divestitures.
Great insight -- thanks!
Namaste
As you can see, I made the above great anonymous comment a post of its own, overnight -- with one or two additional observations, on my part.
With Loftus getting the concept of the story pushed into the WSJ this morning, people may start to take a more critical look at what the deal really means.
Namaste
Post a Comment