Massive Firings at Merck--8,500 Heads Roll...

General Discussion Media & Awareness
#1

Bloomberg reporting today that:

"Merck & Co., the second-biggest U.S. drugmaker by sales, will fire 8,500 workers and revamp its research and development after seeing new medicines delayed by U.S. regulators.

“The positions eliminated are in addition to 7,500 job cuts Merck had already announced, the Whitehouse Station, New Jersey -based company said in a statement today. The firings now equal about 20 percent of the global workforce, and will cut across the entirety of Merck, including R&D, sales and management.”

The full story here:

bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-0 … earch.html

#2

If Merck is supposed to be a Drug company, and drugs are supposed to heal people or save lives, one can easily draw conclusions about Merck based on Ken Frazier’s comments…

The company will place more emphasis on developing drugs with the most sales potential, which means getting the business side to work more closely with researchers, Frazier said. “Our goal, and it’s Roger’s goal, is to completely align the thinking in R&D with the thinking inside what’s called commercial in the company,” he said in an interview.

What? No mention of People and how Merck can help them?

#3

Their commercial approach is what got us in this shit.

#4

That’s exactly what I thought this morning when I read the news.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, Merck & Co. is not Goldman Sachs.

Profits can NOT be the sole motivating factor in running Merck.

People and their health and well-being must always come first.

I mean, even AIRLINES understand that and do their best to assure us they are doing their best to keep us safe.

Is that too much to ask?

#5

Unfortunately this is all too predictable

We all know Merck are only interested in commercial sales and making as much money as possible with no second thought for the consumer!

#6

That, as we learned the hard way, is true.

#7

Finally(!) someone in the media telling it like it is about Kenneth C. Frazier:

MarketWatch columnist Al Lewis writes:

‘"The combination of slowing growth in key markets, combined with research disappointment and regulatory delays requires us to change how we’re going to move forward,’ Frazier said during a conference call on Tuesday.

“But if you look backward, Merck has been through the same scandals as many other big drug companies over the years, from overbilling Medicaid to deploying deceptive marketing tactics. It also has paid $5.8 billion to deal with lawsuits from people who took Vioxx, a widely prescribed arthritis drug that killed the pain, but allegedly caused heart attacks and strokes, too.”

The full story here:

marketwatch.com/story/merck- … 2013-10-02

And bravo, Mr. Lewis!

#8

More piling on Merck, this time by Forbes.

Simon King, executive editor of Britain’s FirstWorld Pharms, writes:

“Concurrent to cost cutting initiatives, Pfizer CEO Ian Read continues to entertain the notion of a ‘value-enhancing’ split, which has also helped to drive stock performance. Since Read was appointed CEO at Pfizer, its share price has grown 66 percent versus 39 percent growth for the S&P 500. Since Kenneth Frazier was appointed CEO of Merck, its share price has grown by 34 percent versus growth of 35 percent for the S&P 500.”

Read the full story here-- and of course weigh in on the comments section:

forbes.com/sites/simonking/2 … d-the-axe/

#9

Merck’s rating cut today by Wall Street investment bank:

"Merck (MRK) is cut to Hold from Buy as Jefferies says the magnitude of share repurchases and cost-savings was ‘less than hoped for.’ Although MRK may “divest or JV either (or both) its Consumer or Animal Health units, this alone is not reason enough … to leave the shares on a Buy rating … considering the pressures on Januvia growth [and] poor R&D productivity.”

Sounds like Merck is running out of tricks to boost profitability:

seekingalpha.com/currents/post/1 … c_readmore

#10

More fallout:

“Shares of Merck are down 0.4%, likely because of an analyst downgrade at Jefferies. The firm lowered its rating on the stock from buy to hold and cut its price target on the stock from $53 to $50. Jefferies said deteriorating business fundamentals and a smaller-than-expected cost-cutting program were two of the main reasons for the change.”

That from The Motley Fool:

fool.com/investing/general/2 … nions.aspx

Interesting to note the phrase “smaller-than-expected cost-cutting program.” Now, it would seem, Merck is between a rock and hard place:

If it does NOT cut further, it may not survive.

If it DOES cut further, investors will bail out.

Hmm…

#11

I just hope Merck has enough money left to compensate their victims.

#12

Don’t laugh, but I’m sure their CFO is busy as we speak calculating all the potential payouts Merck will be legally obliged to make in the coming years.

The days of spending $2 billion to fend off Vioxx litigation are over.

#13

More reaction from Wall Street to Merck’s cost-cutting move.

The Philadelphia Inquirer is reporting:

“Bernstein Research analyst Tim Anderson, who has graduate degrees in medicine and business, has long told clients of the great history of Merck research and development and even upgraded his outlook on the stock as late as 2009, after it bought Schering-Plough. But on Monday, he told clients he has downgraded the outlook from ‘outperform’ to ‘market-perform… We are lowering our price target on MRK from $53 to $50.’”

The full story here:

philly.com/philly/blogs/phil … nment.html

Barclays, too, appears to be tired of Merck, downgrading the stock from Overweight to Equalweight:

streetinsider.com/Downgrades … body&app=n

Meanwhile, MRK is trading at 46.7, down more than a point – its lowest since July 10 of this year.

#14

Add Seeking Alpha to the mix of Merck Naysayers:

“Merck - Little Appeal Despite Recently Announced Cost Cuts”

The story here:

seekingalpha.com/article/1744272 … e_readmore

#15

The latest on Merck’s downsizing:

Merck Cuts 600 Sales Reps as Part of its Ongoing Reorganization

Maybe now that they’ve been axed, more Merck sales reps will become whistle-blowers.

The full story here:

blogs.wsj.com/pharmalot/2014/07/ … anization/

#16

They should fire their unskillfull scientists.

#17

…and their CEO.

Merck needs to be run by a human man (or woman) of medicine.

Not a pipsqueak little lawyer who believes it’s OK to kill your own customers (as long as the stock price rises).