Skip to content
  • Debatforum
  • Seneste
  • Populære
  • Bruger
Temaer
  • Light
  • Dark

Kollaps
FORSIDEN
Log ind Opret konto

Genmab — September 2020

Planlagt Fastgjort Låst Flyttet Genmab
1.0k Indlæg 1 Posters 0 Visninger
  • Ældste til nyeste
  • Nyeste til ældste
  • Most Votes
Svar
  • Svar som emne
Login for at svare
Denne tråd er blevet slettet. Kun brugere med emne behandlings privilegier kan se den.
  • G Offline
    G Offline
    Goose3
    wrote on sidst redigeret af
    #870

    @LLI: RBC mener at Genmab står med stærke kort og vil vinde voldgift sagen. Årsag deres aftale er lavet inden Halozymes er kommet ind og derfor må det være JJs problem og alle patenter bør være omfattet da stoffet ikke er muligt uden Genmabs stof.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • M Offline
      M Offline
      Mogan
      wrote on sidst redigeret af
      #871

      Lyder rigtigt. Vel også derfor Genmab selv anlægger sagen. God morgen i øvrigt 🙂

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • D Offline
        D Offline
        deleted-user
        wrote on sidst redigeret af
        #872

        @Goose3, tak for det hurtige svar. Jeg støtter vurderingen og tror det juridiske grundlag er solidt og tilstrækkeligt fra Genmabs side og JnJ "blot" tager et wild shot i uafprøvet land, i forsøget på at adskille forløbet i 2 uafhængige forløb - hvilket er problematisk når det ene patent afhænger af det andet patent

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • Helge_LarsenPI-redaktørH Offline
          Helge_LarsenPI-redaktørH Offline
          Helge_LarsenPI-redaktør
          wrote on sidst redigeret af
          #873

          Hansen&LARSEN omkring Genmab: https://www.proinvestor.com/index.php?p=debat_1&postid=87013

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • SolsenS Offline
            SolsenS Offline
            Solsen
            wrote on sidst redigeret af
            #874

            RBC analyse støtter Genmab. De har tilsyneladende set licensatalen og hvis de refererer rigtigt ligner JNJ en taber.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • R Offline
              R Offline
              Raffles
              wrote on sidst redigeret af
              #875

              I artiklen er der faktisk et link til licensaftalen hos Sec.gov! Se under andet afsnit hvor ordet licensaftale er med rød skrift og tryk på dette - så åbnes nyt link. Her kan også ses royaltysatser mv. Jeg havde nok ikke lige regnet med at denne ville blive gjort tilgængelig:-)

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • StockBullS Offline
                StockBullS Offline
                StockBull
                wrote on sidst redigeret af
                #876

                Nemlig 🙂

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • E Offline
                  E Offline
                  E_L
                  wrote on sidst redigeret af
                  #877

                  can you post the link here?

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • JørgenVarnæsJ Offline
                    JørgenVarnæsJ Offline
                    JørgenVarnæs
                    wrote on sidst redigeret af
                    #878

                    Link to agreement - https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1434265/000104746919003334/a2238822zex-10_1.htm

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • E Offline
                      E Offline
                      E_L
                      wrote on sidst redigeret af
                      #879

                      thks

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • R Offline
                        R Offline
                        Raffles
                        wrote on sidst redigeret af
                        #880

                        @EL - yes, but JV was faster. Enjoy the reading:-)

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • G Offline
                          G Offline
                          GeorgeBest
                          wrote on sidst redigeret af
                          #881

                          Dejlig at se RBC aktivt tager stilling til hvad de mener udfaldet bliver. I stedet for skandinaviske analytikere, der bare straks melder ud hvad værst tænkelige scenarie måtte blive...

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • StockBullS Offline
                            StockBullS Offline
                            StockBull
                            wrote on sidst redigeret af
                            #882

                            Ja det er desværre sådan at nogen kun beskriver den det værst tænkelige senarie unde at fremhæve det mest sandsynlige senarie. Man kunne have dem mistænkt for at gøre det med spekulation for øje

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • Helge_LarsenPI-redaktørH Offline
                              Helge_LarsenPI-redaktørH Offline
                              Helge_LarsenPI-redaktør
                              wrote on sidst redigeret af
                              #883

                              Mioklubben i dag: Genmab fra 17-18 min inde i udsendelsen. https://www.euroinvestor.dk/podcast/millionaerklubben-hvordan-ser-fremtiden-ud-for-genmab

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • E Offline
                                E Offline
                                E_L
                                wrote on sidst redigeret af
                                #884

                                I could find more enjoyable things to read @Raffles 😉 I am curious to find out how long this dispute has been going on already...was it already there when the hexacd38 deal was done..

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • E Offline
                                  E Offline
                                  E_L
                                  wrote on sidst redigeret af
                                  #885

                                  I find it hard to find merit for JNJ's case in this document, but then again, i am not a lawyer, and JNJ has a whole army of lawyers...

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • SolsenS Offline
                                    SolsenS Offline
                                    Solsen
                                    wrote on sidst redigeret af
                                    #886

                                    I think the case came up when JNJ paid royalty for Q220 …

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • BulderB Offline
                                      BulderB Offline
                                      Bulder
                                      wrote on sidst redigeret af
                                      #887

                                      According to 14.4 (A) the case must have been running for a while: "Subject to Clauses 14.5 and 14.6, if any Dispute has not been resolved by good faith negotiations or mediation between the Parties pursuant to Clauses 14.2 or 14.3 above or the Parties have not agreed to mediate, then the Parties shall settle the Dispute by submitting the matter to binding arbitration pursuant".

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • BulderB Offline
                                        BulderB Offline
                                        Bulder
                                        wrote on sidst redigeret af
                                        #888

                                        So first negotiation, then mediation and then binding arbitration.

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • E Offline
                                          E Offline
                                          E_L
                                          wrote on sidst redigeret af
                                          #889

                                          I doubt that Solsen. Arbitration is the last step and the step that will make it public.Surely they would have wanted to avoid that

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0

                                          Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.

                                          Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.

                                          With your input, this post could be even better 💗

                                          Tilmeld Log ind

                                          • Log ind

                                          • Har du ikke en konto? Tilmeld

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Debatforum
                                          • Seneste
                                          • Populære
                                          • Bruger