Did We Hear This Biotech's Last Earnings Call Ever?

I doubt many investors or analyst on Onyx Pharmaceuticals' (UNKNOWN: ONXX.DL  ) conference call last week were most interested in the sales of the company's oncology drugs in the second quarter. Instead, they wanted to know whether Onyx would be sold and, if so, for how much.

They didn't get it.

The best Onxy CEO Tony Coles could offer was that there are "multiple parties currently engaged in discussions."

The front-runner to acquire Onyx appears to be Amgen (NASDAQ: AMGN  ) , given that it made the initial bid that triggered the auction process, and media outlets have cited unnamed sources that say the bid is $130 per share.

Shares currently trade a little below the rumored $130 takeout price. There doesn't seem to be much confidence that there are "multiple parties" that will come in and top Amgen. Or even just one. At one point after the initial unsolicited bid, Onyx traded above $136.

The other possibility is that investors think Amgen will demand a higher price than $130, but they also see a decent chance that talks will break off -- which could send shares down sharply -- so investors are demanding more of a premium for taking on that risk.

A compromise?
When two parties can't work out an acquisition price, the disagreement on the value of the takeout target is almost always based on its future revenue potential. The seller has lofty goals; the buyer isn't quite sure the drugs can hit those goals.

The solution is to hold back part of the deal as a contingent value right, or CVR. Both sides end up happy, with the seller getting paid if the goals are met and the buyer willing to shell out more if it ends up getting more than it expected.

AstraZeneca (NYSE: AZN  ) , for instance, held back more than a quarter of the potential payment to shareholders of Omthera Pharmaceuticals when it bought the company. The phase 3 trials for its lipid lowering drug, Epanova, were successful, but the drug's sales potential is still in question. Amarin's (NASDAQ: AMRN  ) competing fish oil, Vascepa, was off to a slow start when AstraZeneca announced the purchase back in May, and it looks like AstraZeneca made a good choice hedging its bet; in the second quarter, sales of Vascepa amounted to just $5.5 million.

For Onyx, Amgen could offer $130 and give investors a CVR that paid a few bucks if its cancer drug Nexavar hits certain annual revenue targets and/or if its blood cancer drug Kyprolis gains approval as a first-line setting. CVRs can pretty much be tailored to cover whatever is holding up the price.

My guess
And that's all it really is at this point, a guess. Onyx is no longer an investment; it's a guess as to who is going to win at the bargaining table.

A $130 per share, the offer looks like a fairly good deal for Amgen. But Onyx might not have much bargaining power left, with Pfizer (NYSE: PFE  ) dropping out a few weeks ago and Bloomberg reporting that Novartis is now out. I'm not sure there really are "multiple parties" left.

It would be helpful to know why Pfizer and Novartis aren't interested in buying, but we'll probably never get the full story. If the problem is fit -- Pfizer, for instance, has a drug that competes with Nexavar -- rather than price, it might give Onyx the courage to hold on for more.

My guess is that if $130 without a CVR becomes the final offer, it'll be hard for Onyx's board to turn it down, considering it's a 50% premium on the price before Amgen made its initial offer. The upside from here doesn't look tempting given the downside risk that a deal won't go through, however small it may be.

If you want to swing for the fences rather than dink around with arbitrage on acquisition deals, check out this incredible tech stock that's growing twice as fast as Google and Facebook, and more than three times as fast as Amazon.com and Apple. Watch our jaw-dropping investor alert video today to find out why The Motley Fool's chief technology officer is putting $117,238 of his own money on the table, and why he's so confident this will be a huge winner in 2013 and beyond. Just click here to watch!


Read/Post Comments (1) | Recommend This Article (4)

Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

  • Report this Comment On August 14, 2013, at 11:00 AM, yazzbro wrote:

    Another Foolish article from Motley Fool. The AZN buying of OMTH is not looking so good now. OMTH has no hope for any kind of patents, has no hope for an NCE and isn't any better than Lovaza. The only think I can see AZN wanting OMTH for is to protect Crestor with a combo drug. AMRN's Vascepa works way better than Lovaza, has a better safety profile, AMRN is engaged in combo studies was we speak.(Phase 1 studies looked awesome). Vascepa has 22 patents and counting, they are most likely going to get the 200-500Trig market with their Anchor indication(a huge market). I think AZN missed the boat with AMRN. They went the cheap route and like they say, you get what you pay for. But as of right now they spent half a $billion on a drug that isn't even as good as what is out there already.

    And to address the low sales numbers A.) Drug launches are usually pretty slow to get going. B.) AMRN has only 275 reps out there. C.) Sales are growing week to week and are on track to have over 10K scripts a week by year end taking ownership of a big portion of the market share away from Lovaza and Niacin. So to say, that AZN made a wise choice buying OMTH over AMRN well I would really reconsider that statement. If anything it was a desperate attempt to stay competitive in the statin market. Good luck with that AZN.

Add your comment.

Sponsored Links

Leaked: Apple's Next Smart Device
(Warning, it may shock you)
The secret is out... experts are predicting 458 million of these types of devices will be sold per year. 1 hyper-growth company stands to rake in maximum profit - and it's NOT Apple. Show me Apple's new smart gizmo!

DocumentId: 2593998, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 9/20/2014 6:01:50 PM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...


Advertisement