What exactly is happening with AstraZeneca?

26-01-2021 03:47PM

The Torygraph is in full defensive mode.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/01/26/spiteful-vaccine-supranationalism-cant-distract-covid-scandal/

The vaccine super nationalism that will sink the EU.

Hardly, if anything the strong response here will make the EU stronger. The EU is often too weak.

26-01-2021 03:52PM

noodler wrote: »

Untrue.

Any evidence to support that?

We will have paid Pfizer more as there one is approved but we have not paid half the bill for any APA where the company has not got regulatory approval.

This says the EU paid 336M upfront.

https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/ASTRAZENECA-PLC-4000930/news/AstraZeneca-EU-locks-horns-with-AstraZeneca-on-vaccine-deliveries-amid-supply-shock-32267213/

Another EU official told Reuters AstraZeneca had received an upfront payment of 336 million euros ($409 million) when the EU sealed a deal with the company in August for at least 300 million doses and an option for another 100 million - the first signed by the bloc to secure COVID-19 shots.

noodler · 26-01-2021 03:53PM

emmalynn19 wrote: »

Reading here it says theyve contracts for up to 400 million doses.

https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20210123-astrazeneca-says-covid-19-vaccine-deliveries-to-europe-will-be-lower-than-expected

We've paid them €290 million at €1.78 per dose I think.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/22/south-africa-paying-more-than-double-eu-price-for-oxford-astrazeneca-vaccine

I don't see how the order value necessarily relates to the price paid tbh.

But I take the point. As the cheapest vaccine by far maybe we paid a much higher proportional upfront cost for astra than any of the others.

Edit: also the 1.78 per dose you quote is AFTER the up front r&d coat is accounted for. So if we believe we paid half the order up front then the cost per dose would be around 3 euro.

3 euro X 400m doses = 1.2bn euro. So the EU at most would have paid what, a third of the cost up front? (If articles are correct)

26-01-2021 03:55PM

And here from Reuters in August.

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-health-coronavirus-eu-vaccine-price/eu-pays-336-million-euros-to-secure-astrazenecas-potential-covid-19-vaccine-idUKKBN25N25J?edition-redirect=uk

Another EU official told Reuters AstraZeneca had received an upfront payment of 336 million euros ($409 million) when the EU sealed a deal with the company in August for at least 300 million doses and an option for another 100 million - the first signed by the bloc to secure COVID-19 shots.

26-01-2021 03:56PM

FileNotFound wrote: »

Your probably right - also Pharma do authorisations and HA contracts all the time - they tend to be good at knowing what they can and cannot do.

Political machines are generally a bit rubbish on this end.

Still think that X% of the lost delivery will reappear from the new UK stock.

Or maybe AIFA will step in and stop shipments... Who knows.

I would go as far as to say it is politicians getting involved they know very little about and then doing what they are good at (using public opinion) to get their way.

my money is on extra deliveries appearing out of thin air. The original 60% reduction was probably the opening shot of a negotiation anyway. I can't see the full 100% being delivered in March, because we are too far in to Q1 now and the approval hasn't been given.

They just need to find a number that AZ can actually do and makes the politicians look good.

FileNotFound · 26-01-2021 03:58PM

I wonder is there now confusion between the 300+ million we payed AZ to support R&D and the actual purchase of the drug.

As i understand it the research money was a gift for all intents and purposes. Could be very wrong, just seems odd. Payment for medicines is not usually processed until import to market is complete?

noodler · 26-01-2021 03:59PM

FileNotFound wrote: »

I wonder is there now confusion between the 300+ million we payed AZ to support R&D and the actual purchase of the drug.

As i understand it the research money was a gift for all intents and purposes. Could be very wrong, just seems odd. Payment for medicines is not usually processed until import to market is complete?

No, it's not a gift. It is definitely taken off the order bill. It's been stated in our own dail and on commission website.

Melanchthon · 26-01-2021 04:02PM

trellheim wrote: »

Your guess is as good as mine. However AZ delay is going to throw a massive monkey wrench in all EU27 vaccination dates, pushing us all to the right on dates. Hence of course angry politics

Oh I get that , I just don't get some of the behaviour,l.
Vetoing any attempt to have astra zeneca released from central stockpile to the individual countries before approval to expedite roll-out (I know the legalistic reason for this but it seems like it could have been worked around easily even by just having astra zeneca sub-let part of the Pfizer storage warehouse or something).

German government sources briefing against its effectiveness.

This happening when this vaccine is apparently one of the keystones of the program where quickest rollout possible is vital.

beachhead · 26-01-2021 04:10PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

The news has been full of stories about AstraZeneca having slashed their initial vaccine deliveries to the EU by 60% and the knock on fallout from that. But what’s either being buried in all the reporting, or simply hasn’t been reported at all, is what exactly happened? What’s the reason for the delay? Technical, logistical, commercial, etc?

I assumed it was similar to what was happening with Pfizer, which is essentially an issue of manufacturing capacity being reduced by an upgrade to their production facility. But what seems odd about the AstraZeneca situation is the anger directed towards them from officials and leaders, plus public statements that “They must honour their delivery commitments”, indicating that this isn’t an act-of-God type mishap in manufacturing, but an act of incompetence and/or willful reneging on the agreement - perhaps their capacity has remained the same but they’ve “bumped” the EU’s order in priority because others are paying more, or something along these lines?

Does anyone know what exactly the situation is? I can’t seem to find anything beyond extremely vague statements at the moment.

It's all old news by now-26-01-21.But Astra Zeneca had to update/install new manufacturing equipment to cope with the demand for the specific covid vaccine.There is no other conspiracy afoot.Also,they gave their stock of vaccines to the UK who paid more for it and ordered it before the EU.The germans in particular are upset by that.It's called business.If the 27(really the germans and french)had got their fingers out earlier the present situation wouldn't have happened.

Joe_ Public · 26-01-2021 04:12PM

Aegir wrote: »

I would go as far as to say it is politicians getting involved they know very little about and then doing what they are good at (using public opinion) to get their way.

my money is on extra deliveries appearing out of thin air. The original 60% reduction was probably the opening shot of a negotiation anyway. I can't see the full 100% being delivered in March, because we are too far in to Q1 now and the approval hasn't been given.

They just need to find a number that AZ can actually do and makes the politicians look good.

What exactly would there be to negotiate? They're supposed to be having production issues, arent they, so why would they be still playing games over the amounts to be distributed. Wouldn't they be saying this is the total amount we can actually deliver, whether thats 50% or 60% or whatever. Presumably the eu will have to take whatever that capacity is. Or is there another string to these apparently ongoing "negotiations" we're missing. The speculation in all of this makes for very tentative understanding.

Call me Al · 26-01-2021 04:13PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

And here from Reuters in August.

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-health-coronavirus-eu-vaccine-price/eu-pays-336-million-euros-to-secure-astrazenecas-potential-covid-19-vaccine-idUKKBN25N25J?edition-redirect=uk

Another EU official told Reuters AstraZeneca had received an upfront payment of 336 million euros ($409 million) when the EU sealed a deal with the company in August for at least 300 million doses and an option for another 100 million - the first signed by the bloc to secure COVID-19 shots.

The CNN Paris correspondent is reporting that billions of euros was rolled out by EU to companies specifically to facilitate the company develop their production line so that we would hit the ground running once the vaccine was licensed by the EMA.

So if this was the understanding with last August's transactions, and AZ are simply shrugging their shoulders now, then they certainly have huge questions to answer. What have they done with this money?

26-01-2021 04:19PM

Joe_ Public wrote: »

What exactly would there be to negotiate? They're supposed to be having production issues, arent they, so why would they be still playing games over the amounts to be distributed. Wouldn't they be saying this is the total amount we can actually deliver, whether thats 50% or 60% or whatever. Presumably the eu will have to take whatever that capacity is. Or is there another string to these apparently ongoing "negotiations" we're missing. The speculation in all of this makes for very tentative understanding.

Negotiation was probably the wrong phrase, but I would guess they knew it wouldn’t be well received so went in low, on the basis they could increase it.

Allocating supplies must be a bit of a juggling act when you have lots of big customers all wanting the same thing and you want to supply them all

FileNotFound · 26-01-2021 04:20PM

noodler wrote: »

No, it's not a gift. It is definitely taken off the order bill. It's been stated in our own dail and on commission website.

Gift may be the wrong term.

If the vaccine did not succeed it was a gift.

If the vaccine succeeds - you say we get it off the bill.

So as things stand the vaccine is yet to legally succeed so technically its all grey??????

I am just wondering is this 300+ million what people are talking about as prepayment as i doubt AZ see it like that.

26-01-2021 04:22PM

Call me Al wrote: »

The CNN Paris correspondent is reporting that billions of euros was rolled out by EU to companies specifically to facilitate the company develop their production line so that we would hit the ground running once the vaccine was licensed by the EMA.

So if this was the understanding with last August's transactions, and AZ are simply shrugging their shoulders now, then they certainly have huge questions to answer. What have they done with this money?

It isn’t for R&D as such, it is to increase capacity in the supply chains. This isn’t something you simply throw money at, although it does help.

FileNotFound · 26-01-2021 04:23PM

Call me Al wrote: »

The CNN Paris correspondent is reporting that billions of euros was rolled out by EU to companies specifically to facilitate the company develop their production line so that we would hit the ground running once the vaccine was licensed by the EMA.

So if this was the understanding with last August's transactions, and AZ are simply shrugging their shoulders now, then they certainly have huge questions to answer. What have they done with this money?

Did they ever give AZ the money?

Catalent are doing most of the production for AZ in pre existsing facilities. So not sure where these billions would have gone?

Joe_ Public · 26-01-2021 04:27PM

Aegir wrote: »

Negotiation was probably the wrong phrase, but I would guess they knew it wouldn’t be well received so went in low, on the basis they could increase it.

Allocating supplies must be a bit of a juggling act when you have lots of big customers all wanting the same thing and you want to supply them all

I would imagine it might be alright. What other parties outside of EU are being dealt short on their original contract?

26-01-2021 04:27PM

FileNotFound wrote: »

Gift may be the wrong term.

If the vaccine did not succeed it was a gift.

If the vaccine succeeds - you say we get it off the bill.

So as things stand the vaccine is yet to legally succeed so technically its all grey??????

I am just wondering is this 300+ million what people are talking about as prepayment as i doubt AZ see it like that.

The amount of diversion on this thread. The EU didn't "gift" a vaccine manufacturing company some money so they could go ahead and spend it at will. It obviously came with conditions.

FileNotFound wrote: »

Did they ever give AZ the money?

Catalent are doing most of the production for AZ in pre existsing facilities. So not sure where these billions would have gone?

Yes they got the money. As the reports said.

26-01-2021 04:33PM

Joe_ Public wrote: »

I would imagine it might be alright. What other parties outside of EU are being dealt short on their original contract?

The EU isn't being dealt short, it just isn't to the original estimate schedule.

All we know from other countries is that the supply situation is "Tight" or "Lumpy" to quote two UK ministers.

Call me Al · 26-01-2021 04:34PM

FileNotFound wrote: »

Did they ever give AZ the money?

Catalent are doing most of the production for AZ in pre existsing facilities. So not sure where these billions would have gone?

Going by these press releases yes they did.

https://www.astrazeneca.com/media-centre/press-releases/2020/astrazeneca-to-supply-europe-with-up-to-400-million-doses-of-oxford-universitys-vaccine-at-no-profit.html

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_20_1438

Call me Al · 26-01-2021 04:36PM

Aegir wrote: »

The EU isn't being dealt short, it just isn't to the original estimate schedule.

All we know from other countries is that the supply situation is "Tight" or "Lumpy" to quote two UK ministers.

Tight or lumpy doesnt equate to 60% less.
Have other countries had their supply restricted to this extent?

26-01-2021 04:42PM

Call me Al wrote: »

Tight or lumpy doesnt equate to 60% less.
Have other countries had their supply restricted to this extent?

We have no idea of that, maybe they are, but haven't made it as public.

It seems the Germans are not happy with the progress, so are putting pressure on the EU, who are in turn pointing the finger at AZ.

It probably means Germany haven't gone as quick as they would like, but it also means countries like Romania and Slovenia get access to vaccines earlier than they otherwise would have.

26-01-2021 05:02PM

Aegir wrote: »

We have no idea of that, maybe they are, but haven't made it as public.

They would make it public by agreeing with the EU that they are seeing the same reduction.

It seems the Germans are not happy with the progress, so are putting pressure on the EU, who are in turn pointing the finger at AZ.

It probably means Germany haven't gone as quick as they would like, but it also means countries like Romania and Slovenia get access to vaccines earlier than they otherwise would have.

What now? This is a EU issue. Romania and Slovenia are in the EU.

political analyst · 26-01-2021 05:26PM

The EU was slower than the UK to reach a deal with AstraZeneca. Why?

https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1354019140084916225

noodler · 26-01-2021 05:58PM

political analyst wrote: »

The EU was slower than the UK to reach a deal with AstraZeneca. Why?

https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1354019140084916225

I'm not sure what signing the agreement after the UK has to do with Astra failing to honour the terms of the same agreement.

CIARAN_BOYLE · 26-01-2021 06:03PM

political analyst wrote: »

The EU was slower than the UK to reach a deal with AstraZeneca. Why?

https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1354019140084916225

Does it matter?

Your posting lies that have been debunked multiple times on this forum today.

There was a month between making agreements (May and June) . There also a month between signing contracts (July and August).

As to why the agreement was a month later than the UK I've no idea. Not really sure why. It doesn't matter that much.

Call me Al · 26-01-2021 06:03PM

I thought UK AstraZeneca supply was self-sufficient within their own country?
Someone here said their stock was coming from two factories.

Melanchthon · 26-01-2021 06:23PM

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

Does it matter?

Your posting lies that have been debunked multiple times on this forum today.

There was a month between making agreements (May and June) . There also a month between signing contracts (July and August).

As to why the agreement was a month later than the UK I've no idea. Not really sure why. It doesn't matter that much.

Are you sure that he is lying? This press release would indicate the funding was given on the 17th of May.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/funding-and-manufacturing-boost-for-uk-vaccine-programme

Do you have an article supporting your claim that the first signing for any Oxford/Astra-Zeneca was in July. Note, not a further agreement about 100 million doses. Something that contradicts the funding was given for 30 million doses for delivery by september.

Edit if your directly calling someone a liar give links as thats a hard claim. Yep looked back and you haven't given any proof at all to support your claims

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

Except it's wrong.

The uk didnt sign a deal till July. They had the same agreement Astra zenaca had with eu vaccine alliance before that.

May UK have a pre agreement with AZ
June eu (ivc) have a pre agreement with AZ
July UK sign a final agreement with AZ
August EU sign a final agreement with AZ

mick087 · 26-01-2021 08:38PM

Donald Trump wrote: »

If penicillin had been discovered due to negligence in what was supposed to have been a well managed and controlled experiment for something else, would it not make you a little bit worried about the control procedures in place?

A bit like going for an operation to have your tonsils removed and waking up after the operation to be told "we actually removed your balls instead .... but look on the bright side, we found out afterwards that one of them had early stages of cancer.".
You might steer clear of that surgeon for any future procedures!

A bit like billions would of died if the accidental discovery had not of happened.

Maybe if the EU had of not been so slow to order the vaccine, then with this as you call it accidental vaccine discovery then the final EU death rate might not be so high

brickster69 · 26-01-2021 08:41PM

Astra Zenca's CEO interview

https://www.repubblica.it/cronaca/2021/01/26/news/interview_pascal_soriot_ceo_astrazeneca_coronavirus_covid_vaccines-284349628/

mick087 · 26-01-2021 08:49PM

Inquitus wrote: »

It seems the AZ Vaccine has a few questions over it, none have been properly substantiated, but there are questions on its efficacy for over 65's. Also there are other questions about the UK strategy of holding off on the 2nd vaccine and what impact that also has on efficacy. We'll have to wait to see how this plays out, but it is possible the UK is vaccinating its way not out of a hole, but into one, time will tell!

Its also been said that doing this way you will get a better results with the lasting effect having a longer protection with antibodies.

So with Oxford one they tested different weeks apart and data was shown 12 weeks apart bumps up to more than 90% effective Parts of Canada are now doing it this way.

There was no testing on pfizer except for 3 weeks apart.

The vaccines are in early days

What exactly is happening with AstraZeneca?

Comments