Lilly shares trade down after fourth-quarter profits falls

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Shares of Eli Lilly and Co. dipped in morning trading after the drugmaker reported a dip in fourth-quarter earnings and a steep dive in sales of its newest drug, Effient.

Indianapolis-based Lilly’s stock price fell as much as 3 percent at one point this morning to $35.27.

Profit dropped 10 percent to $999 million in the quarter ended Dec. 31, down from $1.12 billion in the same period a year earlier. Those totals exclude the impact of Lilly’s agreement to sell its Lafayette manufacturing plant in October 2009 and its purchase of ImClone Systems in November 2008.

On the same basis, Lilly’s fourth-quarter profit per share was 91 cents, down from $1.02 a year ago.

Wall Street analysts expected a profit of 92 cents per share, excluding the extraordinary items, according to a survey by Thomson Financial network.

Lilly’s stock price has been depressed for more than a year as investors and analysts have taken a show-me attitude about Lilly’s pipeline of experimental drugs, which the company is counting on to replace five blockbuster drugs that will lose sales to cheaper generics starting this year and running to 2014.

Effient, a blood thinner Lilly launched in late summer, was supposed to fill a large chunk of the multibillion-dollar gap those drugs will leave. But in the fourth quarter, the drug’s worldwide sales went from bad to worse.

Lilly and its partner, Japan-based Daichii Sankyo Co. Ltd., sold just $3.8 million of Effient in the fourth quarter, down from $22.6 million in the third quarter.

"For all the attention this product has received over the past few years, the first six months of sales are very underwhelming," Bernstein analyst Dr. Tim Anderson said in a Thursday morning research note, according to the Associated Press.

Lilly officials have pleaded for patience for Effient, saying the first step has been to get Effient on the approved formularies of U.S. health insurers and European national health programs.

“Even considering all of that, I would think you would be disappointed to the early results of the product,” Catherine Arnold, a Credit Suisse analyst, said during a conference call with Lilly executives this morning.

Goldman Sachs analyst Jami Rubin asked Lilly CEO John Lechleiter when Lilly would “reset expectations” for Effient.

But Lechleiter said Lilly remains confident the drug will turn out to be a success.

“We feel just as good about Effient today as we did when we launched the product,” Lechleiter responded. He added, “I’m very reluctant to say after six months we can say this or we can say that. We’re going to stay with it.”

In prepared remarks, Lechleiter highlighted Lilly’s performance for all of 2009, during which Lilly’s profits rose 16 percent to $4.85 billion, or $4.42 per share.

For 2010, Lilly reaffirmed its profit forecast of $4.65 to $4.85 per share.

In the fourth quarter, Lilly’s sales rose by 14 percent to $5.9 billion. The growth was driven mainly by higher prices in the United States and by higher volume in the rest of the world.

Its cancer drug Alimta continued to be the fastest-growing product, with fourth-quarter sales rising 64 percent to $523.6 million.

Excluding the impact of Lilly’s extraordinary events, the company would have earned a profit of $915.4 million, or 83 cents per share. In the fourth quarter a year ago, Lilly recorded a loss of $3.6 billion, or $3.31 per share.


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. These liberals are out of control. They want to drive our economy into the ground and double and triple our electric bills. Sierra Club, stay out of Indy!

  2. These activist liberal judges have gotten out of control. Thankfully we have a sensible supreme court that overturns their absurd rulings!

  3. Maybe they shouldn't be throwing money at the IRL or whatever they call it now. Probably should save that money for actual operations.

  4. For you central Indiana folks that don't know what a good pizza is, Aurelio's will take care of that. There are some good pizza places in central Indiana but nothing like this!!!

  5. I am troubled with this whole string of comments as I am not sure anyone pointed out that many of the "high paying" positions have been eliminated identified by asterisks as of fiscal year 2012. That indicates to me that the hospitals are making responsible yet difficult decisions and eliminating heavy paying positions. To make this more problematic, we have created a society of "entitlement" where individuals believe they should receive free services at no cost to them. I have yet to get a house repair done at no cost nor have I taken my car that is out of warranty for repair for free repair expecting the government to pay for it even though it is the second largest investment one makes in their life besides purchasing a home. Yet, we continue to hear verbal and aggressive abuse from the consumer who expects free services and have to reward them as a result of HCAHPS surveys which we have no influence over as it is 3rd party required by CMS. Peel the onion and get to the root of the problem...you will find that society has created the problem and our current political landscape and not the people who were fortunate to lead healthcare in the right direction before becoming distorted. As a side note, I had a friend sit in an ED in Canada for nearly two days prior to being evaluated and then finally...3 months later got a CT of the head. You pay for what you get...