What exactly is happening with AstraZeneca?

HalfAndHalf · 26-01-2021 01:00PM

Donald Trump wrote: »

I didn't see anything (other than posters here) blaming the UK.

The EU handed over money which funded the production of the vaccine. The implication I'm getting is that AZ might have decided they already had the EU money and after the vaccine was produced, decided to send it to others.

Let's use the Australia as the hypothetical example of another potential buyer (they are only a buyer - not a conspirator). Australia hadn't taken the risk of prepaying for much vaccine as they wanted to let others take the risk. So today Australia rings all three of AZ and Pfizer and Moderna and say "we're in the market for 100m vaccines. When can any of you deliver them". Pfizer says "yeah, no problem but it'll be a month". Moderna says "yeah, we can do that but it'll be six weeks before we clear backorders".

AZ realises it has 100m in it's warehouse that the EU has prepaid for. But it also knows that if it can ship that to Australia tomorrow that it will get their business. It already has the EU captive because it has their money. So they tell Australia "we can have it to you tomorrow".

In my hypothetical example above, Australia is not at fault. It would have just gone to the company and bought vaccines. It would be the company that was messing.

The issue with your hypothetical is that AS have already informed Australia that their initial delivery will be short, due to the exact same reasons the EU deliveries will.

26-01-2021 01:00PM

Renault 5 wrote: »

They are not getting what they paid for.

They paid for X amount of doses to be made and stored until approval as highlighted in the contract.

AZ agreed that they would make and store the doses so they will be ready for roll out once approved.

Now that the EU is ready to approve they are asking where the amount if Initial doses are.

The response from AZ is

could you show us the relevant section of the contract that details the delivery schedule?

Donald Trump · 26-01-2021 01:00PM

Aegir wrote: »

when you read that and the Spiegal article, it looks like the EU have made a complete balls of this and seem to think that stamping their foot and banging tables is miraculously going to make vaccines materialise. A vaccine that they still haven't actually approved for use and have told member states that under no circumstances are they to take pre deliveries of.

So do you think they shouldn't have signed the contact and prepaid to facilitate the production?

Or that they should have signed a contract for more?

Think of it as Goldilock's porridge. They must have been too hot, too cold, or just right. You say it's not the latter so which of the former do you think?

You're very bitter against the EU for some reason?

Purple Papillon · 26-01-2021 01:01PM

Will GPS and Pharmaists be able to vaccinate using the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines?

I can potentially see an issue with vaccinating the over 65s+. EMA hasn't approved the vaccine for the over 65±.

The AstraZeneca was going to be a game changer for the vaccines. It is easier to transport due to the storage conditions. It would allow rural locations for administering the vaccines. It would be more easily accessible for people who may not drive and be able to drive into a vaccine clinic. It does throw a spanner into the works in the vaccination programme somewhat particularly when it comes to the over 65s+ living alone in communities.

is_that_so · 26-01-2021 01:02PM

greyday wrote: »

https://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/the-planning-disaster-germany-and-europe-could-fall-short-on-vaccine-supplies-a-3db4702d-ae23-4e85-85b7-20145a898abd

Its worth reading just to see how disjointed the EU response has been, does anyone seriously believe Ireland on its own could not have sourced 10 million vaccines by now to vaccinate the whole Country if allowed go its own route?

It's also got quite a bit of Captain Hindsight in it and it's very German-centred. The EU were not to know who were the wrong suppliers and taking a swing at the EMA is dumbing down what they do. Can't say that vaccine alliance idea has anybody's interests at heart except their own. The EU idea has always been about solidarity and had there been no current issues they'd be highly praised. Pfizer are also down temporarily but 60% is a huge shortfall which really is on AZN.

Is there some blame on the EU? Quite probably but in such a novel scenario mistakes are likely to happen.

Are countries to blame? Some probably are, in their planning and promises. More limited supplies were expected for this part of the year anyway.

mick087 · 26-01-2021 01:02PM

Aegir wrote: »

when you read that and the Spiegal article, it looks like the EU have made a complete balls of this and seem to think that stamping their foot and banging tables is miraculously going to make vaccines materialise. A vaccine that they still haven't actually approved for use and have told member states that under no circumstances are they to take pre deliveries of.

Then who gets how many vaccines becomes a legal question for the courts,
because they are not gonna deliver what they said on time.

BredonWimsey · 26-01-2021 01:04PM

Donald Trump wrote: »

So do you think they shouldn't have signed the contact and prepaid to facilitate the production?

Or that they should have signed a contract for more?

Think of it as Goldilock's porridge. They must have been too hot, too cold, or just right. You say it's not the latter so which of the former do you think?

You're very bitter against the EU for some reason?

might be a poster from the UK :pac:

is_that_so · 26-01-2021 01:04PM

Purple Papillon wrote: »

Will GPS and Pharmaists be able to vaccinate using the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines?

I can potentially see an issue with vaccinating the over 65s+. EMA hasn't approved the vaccine for the over 65±.

The AstraZeneca was going to be a game changer for the vaccines. It is easier to transport due to the storage conditions. It would allow rural locations for administering the vaccines. It would be more easily accessible for people who may not drive and be able to drive into a vaccine clinic. It does throw a spanner into the works in the vaccination programme somewhat particularly when it comes to the over 65s+ living alone in communities.

AstraZeneca is assumed to be the main vaccine because of the storage requirements. We may need to adapt temporarily but we seem to have a level of flexibility built into our plan.

greyday · 26-01-2021 01:05PM

Donald Trump wrote: »

So do you think they shouldn't have signed the contact and prepaid to facilitate the production?

Or that they should have signed a contract for more?

Think of it as Goldilock's porridge. They must have been too hot, too cold, or just right. You say it's not the latter so which of the former do you think?

You're very bitter against the EU for some reason?

They should have signed sooner like the UK and USA who now have enough does to keep their vaccination programs progressing, 5 months after the USA signed Pfizer contract the EU with the vaccine on the brink of approval sign contract and then were pressed by owners of BioNtech to double their order but refused, maybe you have a blind spot for the EU?

CIARAN_BOYLE · 26-01-2021 01:06PM

ypres5 wrote: »

is there anything the EU can do to get them to honour their contract? that's ridiculous

The EU is talking about steps like making it illegal to export vaccines from the eu without eu approval but if the factories have problems that's not going to do anything.

The eu can also talk about activating damages clauses in the contracts but that's not going to make more vaccines.

26-01-2021 01:08PM

Donald Trump wrote: »

So do you think they shouldn't have signed the contact and prepaid to facilitate the production?

Or that they should have signed a contract for more?

Think of it as Goldilock's porridge. They must have been too hot, too cold, or just right. You say it's not the latter so which of the former do you think?

it looks pretty clear that rather than replacing the negotiations that France, Germany Italy and Spain were having with AZ, the EU should have just expanded them to the entire EU.

Instead they appear to have stepped in, delayed everything on the basis that "We are the eu and you will do as we say".

Donald Trump wrote: »

You're very bitter against the EU for some reason?

so any criticism of the eu is bitter?

Hamsterchops · 26-01-2021 01:10PM

Might be a silly question, but why can't Astra Zeneca just build a bigger production line?

What's the catch to upping production?

greyday · 26-01-2021 01:13PM

Hamsterchops wrote: »

Might be a silly question, but why can't Astra Zeneca just build a bigger production line?

What's the catch to upping production?

It takes time, you can't just magic up a new production line overnight.

Donald Trump · 26-01-2021 01:13PM

greyday wrote: »

They should have signed sooner like the UK and USA who now have enough does to keep their vaccination programs progressing, 5 months after the USA signed Pfizer contract the EU with the vaccine on the brink of approval sign contract and then were pressed by owners of BioNtech to double their order but refused, maybe you have a blind spot for the EU?

Why do you think signing sooner would have made any difference?

When you sign a contract, you have deliverables based on what the other side promises to deliver. If AZ concludes "well if you prepay X-million Euros then we can have Y-million doses available in, say, 4 months".

How do you think that signing that one month earlier would have made that 4 month window possible? If AZ signed something that they could not deliver on, then that is up to them.

Suppose that you are getting quotes to build a house and builder 1 tells you 200k and I'll start it in 6 months, and the builder 2 tells you 180k and I'll start it in 4 months but I'll need a deposit of 50k. You go with builder 2.

18 months later there is no work done and you find out that builder 2 knew they already had a backlog of two full years work at the time you agreed and has since even taken on and completed additional other work.........what good would agreeing with them a month earlier have done?

26-01-2021 01:14PM

BredonWimsey wrote: »

might be a poster from the UK :pac:

I am an Irish resident, with no relatives that work for the HSE, I am not on first name terms with any of my TDs and make up part of the "Squeezed middle" that funds this country.

The chances of my family getting the vaccine this year were already small, now the EU commission putting their politics before all else has made that possibility even smaller.

Leroy42 · 26-01-2021 01:15PM

But AZ agreed the deal and took the money. To now claim that they have to honour early contracts is perfectly fine, but they knew of those contracts when they signed the EU contract.

The issue the Eu has is that the EU seem to be taking the bulk of the limitations on production. But that is unfair since AZ agreed to provide X amount. They cannot, simply just tell the EU that due to issues on their side they can't deliver, but can for other countries.

It is an unforeseen issue, then the issue should impact everyone, not just the last people to sign the contracts

Purple Papillon · 26-01-2021 01:18PM

is_that_so wrote: »

AstraZeneca is assumed to be the main vaccine because of the storage requirements. We may need to adapt temporarily but we seem to have a level of flexibility built into our plan.

The AstraZeneca does appear to be the main hope to get us out from this pandemic. A problem might occur in that it won't be approved for the over 65s. Parts of communities might go unvaccinated due to an older population not being able to transport into a vaccination clinic with pfizer/moderna vaccines.

If data emerges showing that the AstraZeneca stops transmission of the virus, we would be in a better position then.

Donald Trump · 26-01-2021 01:20PM

Aegir wrote: »

it looks pretty clear that rather than replacing the negotiations that France, Germany Italy and Spain were having with AZ, the EU should have just expanded them to the entire EU.

Instead they appear to have stepped in, delayed everything on the basis that "We are the eu and you will do as we say".

Are you perhaps a little confused. The issue is not that there is not a contract. The issue is that the contract is not being fulfilled.

Aegir wrote: »

i
so any criticism of the eu is bitter?

No, but the apparent eagerness to jump on everything that can be twisted into some sort of criticism of the EU comes across very much as bitterness. Only letting you know. You might not be bitter.

I for one am very glad that there is a coordinated approach being taken. We all remember when the pandemic started and in the US they delegated it to the state level and it resulted in States having to fight against each other to overpay for scarce PPE.

titan18 · 26-01-2021 01:23PM

greyday wrote: »

It takes time, you can't just magic up a new production line overnight.

They're meant to have been producing and stockpiling though for ages. How did they not know, and where's that stockpile gone?

trellheim · 26-01-2021 01:23PM

The issue is that the contract is not being fulfilled

Since the APA is not public we do not know. Anyone saying otherwise bar AZ or the Commission is not telling the truth.

greyday · 26-01-2021 01:25PM

Donald Trump wrote: »

Why do you think signing sooner would have made any difference?

When you sign a contract, you have deliverables based on what the other side promises to deliver. If AZ concludes "well if you prepay X-million Euros then we can have Y-million doses available in, say, 4 months".

How do you think that signing that one month earlier would have made that 4 month window possible? If AZ signed something that they could not deliver on, then that is up to them.

Suppose that you are getting quotes to build a house and builder 1 tells you 200k and I'll start it in 6 months, and the builder 2 tells you 180k and I'll start it in 4 months but I'll need a deposit of 50k. You go with builder 2.

18 months later there is now work done and you find out that builder 2 knew they already had a backlog of two full years work at the time you agreed and has since even taken on and completed additional other work.........what good would agreeing with them a month earlier have done?

5 months difference of signing for the vaccine and then refused to order more even when suggested strongly by owners of Germany company BioNtech.

Like everything else it is first come first served when issues arise, you might show us the contract stipulation which says that the EU gets preference to receive vaccines before all those Countries who ordered and paid before the EU for the vaccines.
I am betting you wont show that part of the contract because it does not exist.

ypres5 · 26-01-2021 01:25PM

titan18 wrote: »

They're meant to have been producing and stockpiling though for ages. How did they not know, and where's that stockpile gone?

I do vaguely remember AZ saying there were millions of doses stockpiling since last year back when they were promising the sun moon and stars

CIARAN_BOYLE · 26-01-2021 01:25PM

titan18 wrote: »

They're meant to have been producing and stockpiling though for ages. How did they not know, and where's that stockpile gone?

That's the problem.

The eu commissioner said yesterday that they asked the question and weren't satisfied by AZ's answer.

fly_agaric · 26-01-2021 01:27PM

Aegir wrote: »

I am an Irish resident, with no relatives that work for the HSE, I am not on first name terms with any of my TDs and make up part of the "Squeezed middle" that funds this country.

What an odd rant that has nothing to do with the thread.:pac:

26-01-2021 01:29PM

Donald Trump wrote: »

Are you perhaps a little confused. The issue is not that there is not a contract. The issue is that the contract is not being fulfilled.

Maybe you could supply us with a copy of that contract? The EU seem reluctant to. https://corporateeurope.org/en/2021/01/eu-ombudsman-starts-inquiry-opaque-handling-commission-covid-19-vaccine-contracts

Donald Trump wrote: »

No, but the apparent eagerness to jump on everything that can be twisted into some sort of criticism of the EU comes across very much as bitterness. Only letting you know. You might not be bitter.

you can, of course provide evidence of this claim?

Donald Trump wrote: »

I for one am very glad that there is a coordinated approach being taken. We all remember when the pandemic started and in the US they delegated it to the state level and it resulted in States having to fight against each other to overpay for scarce PPE.

that's nice.

26-01-2021 01:31PM

fly_agaric wrote: »

What an odd rant that has nothing to do with the thread.:pac:

you clearly did read my full post as you went to the trouble of deleting the relevant bit. Here, I will add it for your benefit.

Aegir wrote: »

The chances of my family getting the vaccine this year were already small, now the EU commission putting their politics before all else has made that possibility even smaller.

I believe that is relevant.

FileNotFound · 26-01-2021 01:32PM

Hamsterchops wrote: »

Might be a silly question, but why can't Astra Zeneca just build a bigger production line?

What's the catch to upping production?

Takes years to build test and approve a production line.

People seem to have no idea the levels of care required for approval in Pharma.

To support covid vaccines the production of other drugs using the same technologies was simply put on hold.

Donald Trump · 26-01-2021 01:33PM

greyday wrote: »

5 months difference of signing for the vaccine and then refused to order more even when suggested strongly by owners of Germany company BioNtech.

Like everything else it is first come first served when issues arise, you might show us the contract stipulation which says that the EU gets preference to receive vaccines before all those Countries who ordered and paid before the EU for the vaccines.
I am betting you wont show that part of the contract because it does not exist.

I think that there are two things that maybe you don't fully understand. I will try to clear it up.

The first issue is not that there is not a contract. It is that an agreement was made, a contract was signed, money was handed over, but the product is now not going to be delivered.
You see, perhaps if AZ had been honest up front, the EU might have instead invested its money in a different company.

The other issue is that you may not understand the idea of a contract. If I sign a contract with you to do something, the conditions of that contract are not voided because I later find out that you already signed other contracts before mine. "first come first served" has no legal basis when a contract is in place.

Banana Republic 1 · 26-01-2021 01:36PM

When the dust I settled with AZ I think it will be very obvious that the government had no plan B. They had to dragged kicking and screaming into the green lighting mask wearing in public and now the border and quarantine thing like a disgraced TD from the Dail.

is_that_so · 26-01-2021 01:38PM

Banana Republic 1 wrote: »

When the dust I settled with AZ I think it will be very obvious that the government had no plan B. They had to dragged kicking and screaming into the green lighting mask wearing in public and now the border and quarantine thing like a disgraced TD from the Dail.

It's a HSE plan, not a government one. The only function of government here was to supply money. BTW do you have that Plan B to hand?

What exactly is happening with AstraZeneca?

Comments