What exactly is happening with AstraZeneca?

McGiver · 27-01-2021 12:27PM

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Waffling on about the EU signing after UK is just a smokescreen for those looking to have a go at the EU and/or distract from the UKs dismissal handling since the start of the pandemic.

This. It's the europhobes in the UK using this situation to destabilise the EU, armies of trolls and bots are on it. Peston, and the BCC, and teh gutter press and Telegraph, who the Tory Brexit party have either in control or under influence, are on it. And simpletons in the EU hear it, because they are frustrated, unhappy or what not and want to release their anger on someone and the EU is the easiest target, as always.

And this, of course, was 100% expected, that the current toxic UK regime would be trying to spin and spin, run PR campaings and support eurosceptics/fascists etc. across the EU to sow distrust and disunity. The fact they do this at the time of this unprecedented crisis where people are dying is truly disgraceful.

I'd bet that the current toxic version of Tories support the PiS and Orban in the background for the same reasons described above .:cool:

MrMusician18 · 27-01-2021 12:29PM

Melanchthon wrote: »

Ok I am not a business man and I won't pretend to know contract law but people seem to be deliberately missing the point here because of their political beliefs.

Say I sign a contract with Sony and hand over a wedge of cash that I will get a thousand Playstation 5's guaranteed by Christmas and to set up a factory that will make Playstation 5's to help fullfil my order.
Then three months later my neighbor signs a contract for a thousand Playstation 5's and a factory to help produce Playstations, but Sony gets back to them and say thats grand, we will make our best efforts to fulfill your order.

The first contract is both earlier and has stronger terms that Sony would have to fulfill ahead of the best effort contract right? The neighbor might be annoyed but they signed a contract without the guarantee because they were slower.

It will be interesting to see if the contract does get published because it should settle there arguments.

It would depend on the definition of best efforts. A best efforts clause was likely included to mitigate risk associated with failed manufacturing, bad batches and the like, not diversion of stock.

Without seeing the contracts, we are all guessing though.

Leroy42 · 27-01-2021 12:33PM

There is clearly more to this than any of us know, or can know.

But, IMO, it boils down to power-play between massive organisations. One the one hand you have an EU, looking to reassert its authority after the damage of Brexit and faced with a demand for a solution across the bloc.

On the other, you have a pharma company looking to both protect its assets and revenue streams but also looking at the increasingly tough rules that are being put in place by the EU.

Take for example the autorisation of the vaccine. The UK deemed it necessary to fast track the process and adjusted the process to get it done. The EU have stuck to their process, demanding more evidence from the company to prove the vaccine.

If I was AZ, I know which one the two systems I would prefer to be operating in. This strikes me as nothing more than AZ putting it power across to the EU, letting them know where the power really lies.

Now, one can take either side, but IMO it is worrying how much power companies like AZ have and how they are able to drive even an organisation like the EU. This is about far more than this vaccine.

Melanchthon · 27-01-2021 12:36PM

McGiver wrote: »

This. It's the europhobes in the UK using this situation to destabilise the EU, armies of trolls and bots are on it. Peston, and the BCC, and teh gutter press and Telegraph, who the Tory Brexit party have either in control or under influence, are on it. And simpletons in the EU hear it, because they are frustrated, unhappy or what not and want to release their anger on someone and the EU is the easiest target, as always.

The funny thing is the posters here that won't ever here a bad thing said about the EU are trying to claim the moral and factual highground.
Earlier in the thread the Peston twitter post about signing dates was called out as being incorrect fake news, with no links to documents to counter his point.

Then it turns out the Peston post was actually broadly correct and there was a 3 month gap, what happens here, people double down on it being fake news despite it being broadly correct.
And its the other people that are the simpletons

:rolleyes:

CIARAN_BOYLE · 27-01-2021 12:38PM

Leroy42 wrote: »

There is clearly more to this than any of us know, or can know.

But, IMO, it boils down to power-play between massive organisations. One the one hand you have an EU, looking to reassert its authority after the damage of Brexit and faced with a demand for a solution across the bloc.

On the other, you have a pharma company looking to both protect its assets and revenue streams but also looking at the increasingly tough rules that are being put in place by the EU.

Take for example the autorisation of the vaccine. Both the UK and the US deemed it necessary to fast track the process and adjusted the process to get it done. The EU have stuck to their process, demanding more evidence from the company to prove the vaccine.

If I was AZ, I know which one the two systems I would prefer to be operating in. This strikes me as nothing more than AZ putting it power across to the EU, letting them know where the power really lies.

Now, one can take either side, but IMO it is worrying how much power companies like AZ have and how they are able to drive even an organisation like the EU. This is about far more than this vaccine.

The us haven't approved astra zenaca I'm not sure you can say that fast tracked the process to get it done.

MrMusician18 · 27-01-2021 12:38PM

Leroy42 wrote: »

There is clearly more to this than any of us know, or can know.

But, IMO, it boils down to power-play between massive organisations. One the one hand you have an EU, looking to reassert its authority after the damage of Brexit and faced with a demand for a solution across the bloc.

On the other, you have a pharma company looking to both protect its assets and revenue streams but also looking at the increasingly tough rules that are being put in place by the EU.

Take for example the autorisation of the vaccine. Both the UK and the US deemed it necessary to fast track the process and adjusted the process to get it done. The EU have stuck to their process, demanding more evidence from the company to prove the vaccine.

If I was AZ, I know which one the two systems I would prefer to be operating in. This strikes me as nothing more than AZ putting it power across to the EU, letting them know where the power really lies.

Now, one can take either side, but IMO it is worrying how much power companies like AZ have and how they are able to drive even an organisation like the EU. This is about far more than this vaccine.

AZ won't be approved in the usa until April to my knowledge.

This is a money and terms dispute. It looks like one side has taken a liberal interpretation of a contract to hide behind because of an inability to deliver. Remember, they have revised down projected deliveries, so they once agreed to the original levels.

I've seen this a few times in contractual disputes. It can go either way when arbitrated.

McGiver · 27-01-2021 12:39PM

mick087 wrote: »

Yes the society we have created is a free market you are correct.
Yes i can use my vote to help change my national government.

And the national government votes in/selects its EU commissioner (i.e. an EU Minister). When national government is changed so is its commissioner. Hope you get it - finally.

Remind me - when was the last time you could change any of national Minister directly? :pac:

mick087 · 27-01-2021 12:40PM

Joe_ Public wrote: »

AZ not able to cope with demand obviously but would be interesting to know when they first came to that realisation. If, as we keep hearing, they're in it on a not for profit basis - which i dont think is the case but anyway - why then couldn't they have sought help from others on the manufacturing side or agreed a deal to license another manufacturer to help cope with supply? Why, if profit isnt a motive, is it so vital they keep it all in house? I'm not asking you specifically btw, just in general.

I agree it does seem AZ is not able to cope with demand

The Oxford vaccine was reported as a non for profit vaccine for poorer countries if memory serves me correct. My understanding is the vaccine sells for 3 euro a dose compared to other doses selling between 20 to 40 euro. If this correct then i would except to a certin point its not all about profit with this particular vaccine. But such big companies IMO never do anything for free.

AZ do seem to have many questions to answer and like everyone else on here i could only give my best guess which is they cannot cope with demand. If they cannot cope with demand the EU showing us the contract is of no help. Yes the EU have a contract yes it seems AZ have broken the terms.

The EU also need to answer why they ordered the vaccine later and why is it taking so long to approve the Oxford one surely this virus is a call for emergency actions.

Donald Trump · 27-01-2021 12:40PM

Leroy42 wrote: »

Now, one can take either side, but IMO it is worrying how much power companies like AZ have and how they are able to drive even an organisation like the EU. This is about far more than this vaccine.

I don't see them as having any real power other than they convinced the EU to sign up to an agreement and are now apparently not going to be able to fulfill it.

The power may revert to the power of the stone in the old "you can't get blood out of a stone" idiom.

Melanchthon · 27-01-2021 12:40PM

noodler wrote: »

Where has this new accusation come from?

Its factual, the first UK delivery came from the European factory. It was still hit by being much reduced.

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/health-pharma/supply-of-covid-vaccine-doses-held-up-by-manufacturing-delays-1.4430676

Edit: In case my other links in previous post weren't good enough sources

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-health-coronavirus-britain-astrazenec-idUKKBN27K2GU

lucernarian · 27-01-2021 12:43PM

MrMusician18 wrote: »

AZ won't be approved in the usa until April to my knowledge.

This is a money and terms dispute. It looks like one side has taken a liberal interpretation of a contract to hide behind because of an inability to deliver. Remember, they have revised down projected deliveries, so they once agreed to the original levels.

I've seen this a few times in contractual disputes. It can go either way when arbitrated.

This is interesting. Though it's worth noting that the EU can stop their produce being exported and this would be valid under international law from what little I know on reading the subject and WTO rules etc. I feel like the EU have set up a fait accomplici.

fly_agaric · 27-01-2021 12:44PM

Melanchthon wrote: »

Astra Zeneca having issues about production isn't new news though, it probably wasn't reported as much here but AFAIK the first UK order was massively lower than expected.

Sorry for the Russia Today link but it's broadly accurate
https://www.rt.com/uk/505744-britain-vaccine-covid19-delays-lockdown/

https://www.ft.com/content/6ccff5f5-834d-43b7-84e4-82ec3bb3ab06

Thanks for the links.

Melanchthon wrote: »

The thing is the UK signed earlier and got a better contract because of this, it also experienced the delivery problems earlier when the politics were less heated.

The patriotic politics around Brexit etc. are making that more relevant than it really is here IMO - the EU must be shown to fail in comparison, it is overdue for the long awaited collapse into chaos you realise, and post Brexit UK most be shown to be world beating in tackling this virus.

The core issue is really did the company stiff the EU (and of course us, as in Ireland for any posting here who may be confused...we did not exit the EU) somehow, don't believe that can be answered yet.

I think the EU has done an okay job as regards vaccine procurement, esp. given there were no prior no EU mechanisms in place for doing this, or coordinating on many other public health problems of this pandemic that affect all the member states.

I can see benefit of emergency approval of vaccines and going faster as the UK has, arguments for which may be stronger now than a few months ago, but can also see there are strong arguments against + drawbacks with that approach.

27-01-2021 12:46PM

McGiver wrote: »

This. It's the europhobes in the UK using this situation to destabilise the EU, armies of trolls and bots are on it. Peston, and the BCC, and teh gutter press and Telegraph, who the Tory Brexit party have either in control or under influence, are on it. And simpletons in the EU hear it, because they are frustrated, unhappy or what not and want to release their anger on someone and the EU is the easiest target, as always.

And this, of course, was 100% expected, that the current toxic UK regime would be trying to spin and spin, run PR campaings and support eurosceptics/fascists etc. across the EU to sow distrust and disunity. The fact they do this at the time of this unprecedented crisis where people are dying is truly disgraceful.

I'd bet that the current toxic version of Tories support the PiS and Orban in the background for the same reasons described above .:cool:

and covid was all about Bill Gates wanting to implant chips in to us via 5G I suppose :eek:

Tij da feen · 27-01-2021 12:46PM

Melanchthon wrote: »

Its factual, the first UK delivery came from the European factory. It was still hit by being much reduced.

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/health-pharma/supply-of-covid-vaccine-doses-held-up-by-manufacturing-delays-1.4430676

Edit: In case my other links in previous post weren't good enough sources

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-health-coronavirus-britain-astrazenec-idUKKBN27K2GU

How long can the vaccines be stored for after production? Seeing as the vaccine still doesn't have approvals in the EU (until Friday) I'm not surprised they were using what they had available then in the UK.

If the vaccines were storable until now, then the ones that shipped EU -> UK should be replaced from the UK plant.

McGiver · 27-01-2021 12:47PM

Melanchthon wrote: »

Then it turns out the Peston post was actually broadly correct and there was a 3 month gap, what happens here, people double down on it being fake news despite it being broadly correct.

Link please. "Broadly"

And even if true 3 month gap is irrelevant and is used to throw crap on the EU. It's a red herring.

It has nothing to do with the fact that we, the EU, funded R&D and production of AZ (0.5 billion), pre-ordered vaccines, which the AZ are unable to deliver on.

hotmail.com · 27-01-2021 12:47PM

A suspicious package at a vaccine factory in North Wales has disrupted manufacturing. The bomb squad attending the scene, according to the BBC.

Joe_ Public · 27-01-2021 12:48PM

mick087 wrote: »

I agree it does seem AZ is not able to cope with demand

The Oxford vaccine was reported as a non for profit vaccine for poorer countries if memory serves me correct. My understanding is the vaccine sells for 3 euro a dose compared to other doses selling between 20 to 40 euro. If this correct then i would except to a certin point its not all about profit with this particular vaccine. But such big companies IMO never do anything for free.

AZ do seem to have many questions to answer and like everyone else on here i could only give my best guess which is they cannot cope with demand. If they cannot cope with demand the EU showing us the contract is of no help. Yes the EU have a contract yes it seems AZ have broken the terms.

The EU also need to answer why they ordered the vaccine later and why is it taking so long to approve the Oxford one surely this virus is a call for emergency actions.

Thats correct. The original concept was fundamentally based on it being open license too so that obviously only changed when AZ, at the instigation of Bill Gates, was brought on board.

The deal with AZ is that once the pandemic is officially declared over, by the WHO presumably, then they will be free to set a higher price and start generating a profit. So it's not really in their interests to have any delays in roll out, as it's going to cost them money. So while i applaud oxford for their original vision, granting exclusive rights to one pharma firm was always a compromise of that original goal.

Melanchthon · 27-01-2021 12:51PM

fly_agaric wrote: »

Thanks for the links.

The patriotic politics around Brexit etc. are making that more relevant than it really is here IMO - the EU must be shown to fail in comparison, it is overdue for the long awaited collapse into chaos you realise, and post Brexit UK most be shown to be world beating in tackling this virus.

The British Conservative government got a lot of flack from strongly pro-EU outlets like the Guardian and so on for not signing up to the EU plan and claiming it would be a big problem so there is an aspect of setting the record straight there.

I agree that there has been Patriotic politics at play in the UK but the same could be said about the EU, its in a slightly different manner though as their focus has been on trying to divert blame away from the Commission/EU processes, remember the initial group of countries were nearly as quick of the mark as the UK, its better for Germany, France, the Netherlands and Italy voters to be mad at Astra Zeneca/the UK than asking themselves, "hey we could have had a quick deal likely on better terms but the Commission intervened"

titan18 · 27-01-2021 12:52PM

Tij da feen wrote: »

How long can the vaccines be stored for after production? Seeing as the vaccine still doesn't have approvals in the EU (until Friday) I'm not surprised they were using what they had available then in the UK.

If the vaccines were storable until now, then the ones that shipped EU -> UK should be replaced from the UK plant.

They also didn't apply for approval to the EMA until a few weeks ago so you'd have to question did they purposefully not apply as they were having production issues in UK and Europe and said they'd transfer from EU to UK and delay applying for approval so they could use it as an excuse.

27-01-2021 12:54PM

McGiver wrote: »

Link please. "Broadly"

And even if true 3 month gap is irrelevant and is used to throw crap on the EU. It's a red herring.

It has nothing to do with the fact that we, the EU, funded R&D and production of AZ (0.5 billion), pre-ordered vaccines, which the AZ are unable to deliver on.

the British government invested in the R&D long before the EU had even thought about it. https://www.genengnews.com/news/uk-starts-oxford-coronavirus-vaccine-trial-as-germany-green-lights-clinical-trial-for-biontech-and-pfizer/

so err, go away with your "We, the EU2" ****e.

mick087 · 27-01-2021 12:55PM

Leroy42 wrote: »

Now, one can take either side, but IMO it is worrying how much power companies like AZ have and how they are able to drive even an organisation like the EU. This is about far more than this vaccine.

Good post

9db3xj7z41fs5u · 27-01-2021 12:56PM

If I paid a builder for the supplies to do up my kitchen and signed a contract with him, and then he called to say that he was too busy to do my kitchen, and started to use the materials I paid for while doing up my neighbour’s kitchen, I would be very annoyed.

McGiver · 27-01-2021 12:57PM

Aegir wrote: »

the British government invested in the R&D long before the EU had even thought about it. https://www.genengnews.com/news/uk-starts-oxford-coronavirus-vaccine-trial-as-germany-green-lights-clinical-trial-for-biontech-and-pfizer/

so err, go away with your "We, the EU2" ****e.

More red herring. And what? How is this relevant?

Donald Trump · 27-01-2021 01:01PM

McGiver wrote: »

Aegir wrote: »

the British government invested in the R&D long before the EU had even thought about it. https://www.genengnews.com/news/uk-starts-oxford-coronavirus-vaccine-trial-as-germany-green-lights-clinical-trial-for-biontech-and-pfizer/

so err, go away with your "We, the EU2" ****e.

More red herring. And what? How is this relevant?

Poster also seems oblivious to the fact that that money was to Oxford University for research which is a normal practice.
At that stage, Oxford hadn't hitched up with AZ for commercial production

The EU money was to prefund supplies.

Pete_Cavan · 27-01-2021 01:02PM

Aegir wrote: »

That's Force Majuere, usually referred to as an act of god. No one is claiming that from what I can gather.

Its not Force Majuere. Lack of medical vials is not an act of God but could reasonably be used to claim they are making "their best efforts" to supply but can't possibly do so because the availability of vials is outside their control. I'm not saying that is what happened, I was using it as a simple example of "best efforts" in contracts. "Best efforts" doesn't give carte blanche to renege on contractual commitments.

greyday · 27-01-2021 01:05PM

Evan Rich Storefront wrote: »

If I paid a builder for the supplies to do up my kitchen and signed a contract with him, and then he called to say that he was too busy to do my kitchen, and started to use the materials I paid for while doing up my neighbour’s kitchen, I would be very annoyed.

How about if he told you he would do your kitchen if his other jobs went to plan without ANY HOLDUPS, you might be annoyed but you were warned, most rational people would accept they could be let down when you know for a fact the supplier has a lot of prepaid orders to fill before you have even put in an order.....ah but its his fault, same ways its pfizers fault the EU put in their orders 5 months after the USA, Its AZ fault that EU put in their orders later than the UK....feck sake, they messed up and need to accept it.

Melanchthon · 27-01-2021 01:06PM

McGiver wrote: »

Link please. "Broadly"

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/funding-and-manufacturing-boost-for-uk-vaccine-programme

UK 17th of May

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-health-coronavirus-eu-astrazeneca-idUKKCN25A1AW

EU 14th of August

Wow, its almost like the simpletons were actually right :rolleyes: Will you now admit that the Peston tweet wasn't incorrect as originally implied

McGiver wrote: »

And even if true 3 month gap is irrelevant and is used to throw crap on the EU. It's a red herring.

It has nothing to do with the fact that we, the EU, funded R&D and production of AZ (0.5 billion), pre-ordered vaccines, which the AZ are unable to deliver on.

If the contracts get released this will clear this up, but at the minute the claim the CEO of the company is making is that Astra Zeneca only signed best efforts to supply the EU unlike the stronger UK terms because the UK was quicker about signing the contract.
They also claim that the quicker signing of the UK contract meant that though all the plants have had problems, the UK one will be running at closer to capacity quicker. The initial UK delivery was produced by plant based in the EU and we will have to wait to see what the contract fine print says as other posters have pointed out, it was however only 4 million doses, considerably less than the total shortfall for the Q1 deliveries were meant to go to the EU.

So yes the delay in signing is completely relevant, hell thats why Germany, France, the Netherlands and Italy were in agreement before the signing process got delayed until August.

fly_agaric · 27-01-2021 01:06PM

Melanchthon wrote: »

The British Conservative government got a lot of flack from strongly pro-EU outlets like the Guardian and so on for not signing up to the EU plan and claiming it would be a big problem so there is an aspect of setting the record straight there.

I agree that there has been Patriotic politics at play in the UK but the same could be said about the EU, its in a slightly different manner though as their focus has been on trying to divert blame away from the Commission/EU processes, remember the initial group of countries were nearly as quick of the mark as the UK, its better for Germany, France, the Netherlands and Italy voters to be mad at Astra Zeneca/the UK than asking themselves, "hey we could have had a quick deal likely on better terms but the Commission intervened"

I did not know about that (left wing UK media noise about joining the EU vaccine program).

It seems illogical from their "Remainers" given the UK has actually left the EU after all, but then politics generally in the UK seems to make little sense to me as an outside observer since 2016.

As regards a reference to Germany + ad hoc selection of other rich countries with strong industries in this area working together and the EU taking that over later & slowing it down, in fairness I think this had to be a collective effort and the EU is the arena where the member states can organise that.

It could have gotten a lot uglier and more nationalistic than what we've seen so far if this hadn't been done IMO.

9db3xj7z41fs5u · 27-01-2021 01:07PM

greyday wrote: »

How about if he told you he would do your kitchen if his other jobs went to plan without ANY HOLDUPS, you might be annoyed but you were warned, most rational people would accept they could be let down when you know for a fact the supplier has a lot of prepaid orders to fill before you have even put in an order.....ah but its his fault, same ways its pfizers fault the EU put in their orders 5 months after the USA, Its AZ fault that EU put in their orders later than the UK....feck sake, they messed up and need to accept it.

And I presume you have read the contract in full before you have reached your carefully considered conclusions re: the root of the fault?

Did the builder and you reached the agreement that he would use your materials for other people’s kitchens if he could not fulfil the order?

When it comes to it, I would expect that the builder had planned his projects in a realistic fashion. Who wants a builder that over-promises

Donald Trump · 27-01-2021 01:09PM

greyday wrote: »

How about if he told you he would do your kitchen if his other jobs went to plan without ANY HOLDUPS, you might be annoyed but you were warned, most rational people would accept they could be let down when you know for a fact the supplier has a lot of prepaid orders to fill before you have even put in an order.....ah but its his fault, same ways its pfizers fault the EU put in their orders 5 months after the USA, Its AZ fault that EU put in their orders later than the UK....feck sake, they messed up and need to accept it.

How much more vaccine do you think would be available now had they ordered earlier?

Given that they have apparently missed their overall supply targets consistently, and if implications are to be believed, are now only meeting some of those targets from stealing stockpiles promised to others.

What exactly is happening with AstraZeneca?

Comments