Lilly’s path to redemption: Turn new drugs into sales

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The numbers this year will be bad for Eli Lilly and Co.; there’s no getting around that.

In the past 2 1-2 years, the Indianapolis-based drugmaker has watched patents expire on not one, but two $5 billion-a-year drugs. That will send Lilly profit tumbling an estimated 32 percent this year.

But 2014 will also give Lilly an opportunity it hasn’t really had for nearly a decade: to grow sales and profit by launching new drugs.

Wall Street analysts say Lilly could win approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for four new drugs: ramucirumab for gastric cancer, necitumumab for lung cancer, and dulaglutide and empagliflozin—both for diabetes.

“We continue to view Lilly as an earnings recovery story and while we do not anticipate near-term outperformance for the stock, we could see a longer-term opportunity for LLY shares to the extent the company is able to successfully commercialize its next-generation product portfolio and maintain cost discipline over the next several years,” Chris Schott, a pharmaceutical analyst at J.P. Morgan, said in a Jan. 30 note to investors.

Since 2005, Lilly has launched just three new drugs—none of them remarkable. The blood thinner Effient, once expected to be a blockbuster, had 2013 sales of $509 million. The diabetes pill Tradjenta, developed by Lilly partner Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH, had sales last year of just $249 million.

Lilly also helped a Japanese firm launch a cholesterol drug, Livalo, in 2010, but that relationship ended.

Some of the things that limited those drugs could hamper Lilly’s new drugs: Competing products, some already in a cheap generic form, do similar things.

Also, state-run health plans in foreign countries and private health plans in the United States are scrutinizing new drugs more aggressively before agreeing to reimburse patients, and narrowing their formularies to favor generic drugs and drugs discounted by the companies that make them.

Also, far more U.S. physicians are now employed by hospital systems, which are also pushing drugmakers to prove their drugs are superior before agreeing to allow their doctors to use them.

All those factors mean it will take Lilly longer to ramp up sales of new drugs—if it’s able to ramp them up at all.

Jami Rubin, a pharmaceutical analyst at Goldman Sachs, expects Lilly’s four new drugs to bring in sales this year of $261 million, with that total rising to $1.9 billion in 2017.

But that same year, Lilly stands to lose its patent on Cialis, its $2 billion-a-year pill for impotence, which would offset gains of the drugs launched this year.

Analysts have been repeatedly impressed with Lilly’s ability to wring additional revenue out of existing products. In the fourth quarter of 2013, for example, Lilly raised U.S. prices 10 percent, helping hold overall revenue fairly flat—even though U.S. patents on its bestseller Cymbalta expired in December.

Lilly will have to apply some of that magic to its new products if it hopes to reverse generally negative views on Wall Street. Twelve of 20 analysts rate Lilly a hold or worse, according to a Thomson/First Call survey.

“Given the still-skeptical view of LLY by the majority of investors, and what still seems to be under-ownership of the name, there is more ‘runway’ left should additional investors turn positive, which itself will be a function of LLY executing on various fronts, the most important of which is its pipeline,” Tim Anderson, a pharmaceutical analyst at Bernstein Research, wrote in a Jan. 31 note to investors.


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...