Lilly's 2013 profit forecast tops expectations

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Eli Lilly and Co. unveiled a better-than-expected 2013 earnings forecast Friday, in part because the pharmaceutical company expects growth from several established drugs to help make up for revenue lost to generic competition.

The Indianapolis drug developer saw sales for its all-time best-selling drug, the antipsychotics Zyprexa, crater in 2012 after it lost U.S. patent protection. Lilly will take another hit next December when it loses patent protection for its current top seller, the antidepressant Cymbalta.

But company executives told analysts Friday morning they still expect Cymbalta and another product that loses patent protection in 2013, the insulin Humalog, to help drive revenue growth along with products like the cancer treatment Alimta and the erectile dysfunction drug Cialis.

Lilly also expects more growth from Japan, developing countries and its animal health business.

All told, the drugmaker forecast 2013 adjusted earnings of between $3.75 and $3.90 per share on a range of $22.6 billion to $23.4 billion in revenue.

That topped analyst expectations, on average, for earnings of $3.72, according to FactSet. Analysts also expected $22.87 billion in revenue.

Company shares climbed $1.86, or 3.7 percent, to $51.58 in midday trading Friday, while broader indexes rose less than 1 percent.

Lilly said it expects operating expenses will be flat or drop slightly compared with 2012, and that was slightly better than what Edward Jones analyst Judson Clark expected.

He called Lilly's 2013 forecast "a pleasant surprise," but he also noted that plenty of long-term concerns remain. Lilly won't feel the brunt of the Cymbalta patent loss until 2014, and Clark expects the company's earnings to shrink then. What remains to be seen, he said, is whether the drugmaker is willing to preserve its dividend and cut expenses enough to tame that loss.

"We think the real question marks are in 2014," he said.

Lilly also expects to counter the patent expirations by developing new drugs, and the company said Friday it has 13 experimental drugs in late-stage testing, the last phase before a company seeks regulatory approval.

Lilly reiterated on Friday that it expects at least $3 billion in net income and revenue of at least $20 billion through 2014. It also expects to keep paying shareholders a dividend and to complete a $1.5 billion share repurchase program this year.

Zyprexa once brought in more than $5 billion in annual revenue for Lilly, but its sales sank 66 percent through the first nine months of 2012 after generic competition entered the market. The company also expects revenue from Cymbalta, which topped $4 billion in 2011, to start falling in this year's fourth quarter.

Humalog, Lilly's best-selling insulin, brought in about $1.4 billion in total revenue in 2011, but that product may take less of a sales hit after it loses U.S. patent protection in May because it's a biologic drug made from living cells instead of a chemical formula. Those are harder for generic drugmakers to replicate.

The company cannot expect to replace blockbuster drug revenue with another round of blockbusters, said WBB Securities analyst Steve Brozak. He said Lilly's success will depend on a combination of drug development, partnerships with other companies and acquisitions that help stoke its product pipeline.

But that approach will be difficult because other drugmakers also are facing patent expirations and will be competing with Lilly on those deals.

"If (Lilly executives) think that business as usual applies, their shareholders are going to vote with their sell orders," he said.

The company reports fourth-quarter and 2012 results Jan. 29.


  • Lilly is Back, thank goodness
    Given Lilly mgmt successfully navigated through this past field of land minds, sounds like Brozak has an interest in driving down the value of the stock, as "business as usual" couldnt be a modus operandi given that they weathereed the incredible beating they just took. Yeah, its not over Steve, but Duh?

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. Of what value is selling alcoholic beverages to State Fair patrons when there are many families with children attending. Is this the message we want to give children attending and participating in the Fair, another venue with alooholic consumption onsite. Is this to promote beer and wine production in the state which are great for the breweries and wineries, but where does this end up 10-15 years from now, lots more drinkers for the alcoholic contents. If these drinks are so important, why not remove the alcohol content and the flavor and drink itself similar to soft drinks would be the novelty, not the alcoholic content and its affects on the drinker. There is no social or material benefit from drinking alcoholic beverages, mostly people want to get slightly or highly drunk.

  2. I did;nt know anyone in Indiana could count- WHY did they NOT SAY just HOW this would be enforced? Because it WON;T! NOW- with that said- BIG BROTHER is ALIVE in this Article-why take any comment if it won't appease YOU PEOPLE- that's NOT American- with EVERYTHING you indicated is NOT said-I can see WHY it say's o Comments- YOU are COMMIES- BIG BROTHER and most likely- voted for Obama!

  3. In Europe there are schools for hairdressing but you don't get a license afterwards but you are required to assist in turkey and Italy its 7 years in japan it's 10 years England 2 so these people who assist know how to do hair their not just anybody and if your an owner and you hire someone with no experience then ur an idiot I've known stylist from different countries with no license but they are professional clean and safe they have no license but they have experience a license doesn't mean anything look at all the bad hairdressers in the world that have fried peoples hair okay but they have a license doesn't make them a professional at their job I think they should get rid of it because stateboard robs stylist and owners and they fine you for the dumbest f***ing things oh ur license isn't displayed 100$ oh ur wearing open toe shoes fine, oh there's ONE HAIR IN UR BRUSH that's a fine it's like really? So I think they need to go or ease up on their regulations because their too strict

  4. Exciting times in Carmel.

  5. Twenty years ago when we moved to Indy I was a stay at home mom and knew not very many people.WIBC was my family and friends for the most part. It was informative, civil, and humerous with Dave the KING. Terri, Jeff, Stever, Big Joe, Matt, Pat and Crumie. I loved them all, and they seemed to love each other. I didn't mind Greg Garrison, but I was not a Rush fan. NOW I can't stand Chicks and all their giggly opinions. Tony Katz is to abrasive that early in the morning(or really any time). I will tune in on Saturday morning for the usual fun and priceless information from Pat and Crumie, mornings it will be 90.1