March 11, 2024 • 48 mins
The pharmaceutical space is characterized by extreme uncertainty. You never know what drugs are going to pan out. The lead time for development is extremely long. Market size is inherently unknowable. And the regulatory and pricing climate is constantly changing. So, how does a company decide where to invest its cash? On this episode, we speak with Moderna's chief financial officer, Jamey Mock, about how he views the problem. He explains the process by which the vaccine maker chooses which bets to make, how changing fortunes within the stock market affect corporate decision-making and the role of the government in accelerating progress and de-risking investment.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, Radio News.
Speaker 2 (00:18):
Hello and welcome to another episode of the Odd Lots podcast.
I'm Tracy Alloway and I'm Joe.
Speaker 3 (00:22):
Why isn't thal Joe?
Speaker 2 (00:24):
Do you know much about MODERNA?
Speaker 4 (00:26):
Well, I had.
Speaker 3 (00:27):
Heard the name for maybe a few years, and then
they became household name some point in twenty twenty when
they were ahead of the race to develop a COVID vaccine.
Then it became massive, and then I don't know much
beyond that.
Speaker 2 (00:41):
Yeah, for me, this is a company that kind of
came out of nowhere during the pandemic, and as you're right,
it kind of shot into household name territory. Here's my
other question. Do you know what a CFO does?
Speaker 5 (00:54):
What?
Speaker 3 (00:55):
That is a great question, actually, because I mean, I
guess I would say yes in this sense that I
think they're the ones who are sort of watching the financing,
helping to make capital allocation decisions, although I imagine that
the CEO also has that. I think the CFO is
(01:15):
the one primarily involved in putting together the earnings and
you know, communicating the finance side, specifically the analyst. But
I guess I only partly know what a CFO does
to me.
Speaker 2 (01:27):
The thing I always think when I hear CFO I
always think they're the hard ones. Sorry, They're the ones
that answer the hard questions on the on the earnings calls.
That's what they do.
Speaker 4 (01:38):
I love that. I think that, yes, that's right.
Speaker 3 (01:40):
The CEO is like, oh, we get to these great
products and blah blah. And then like someone asked a
really technical question about like well if your borrow will
get this above so far and margins and they're like,
I'm going to bring the CFO in the answer this.
Speaker 2 (01:51):
Then yeah, exactly. Well, I'm pleased to say today we do,
in fact have the perfect guest to answer the question
of what is modern and also what does a CFO
actually do. We are going to be speaking to the
CFO of MODERNA, Jamie Mack. Jamie, thank you so much
for coming on on thoughts.
Speaker 5 (02:09):
Hi, Tracy and Joe, thank you for having me. It's
a pleasure to be here with you.
Speaker 2 (02:13):
So maybe just to begin, can you give us the
sort of elevator pitch summary of what it is that
MODERNA does and full disclosure, I was in Hong Kong
for a few years of the pandemic, so I missed
a lot of the vaccine conversation here in the US.
There was a very different vaccine conversation that was happening
in Hong Kong and in mainland China at the time.
(02:36):
But what is it that you actually do and how
is it that you have become a household name in
a relatively few short years.
Speaker 5 (02:44):
Well sure, so, first I found your introduction quite entertaining.
The CFO actually in our business because we are very
much a science business, which I'll get into.
Speaker 4 (02:55):
It's actually our president and CEO.
Speaker 5 (02:57):
That get the really tough questions. But I get to
my own share as well, which we can get into.
Speaker 3 (03:02):
But the CEO has to answer the tough biology questions.
Speaker 4 (03:07):
Well, he's quite good at it. He's he was part
you employee number one and.
Speaker 5 (03:13):
Has been here and built this business for thirteen years
so and he's got a science background, so he's quite
good at it. And then our president, Stephen Hoague is
a doctor by trade, so obviously they answered most of
the scientific questions.
Speaker 4 (03:25):
But so Maderna is obviously known.
Speaker 5 (03:28):
Due to how we help the global community with COVID,
but it's really much more than that. It is a
platform company revolving around MR and a which really makes
the proteins in a body, and those proteins can help
either fight infectious diseases and prevent against any kind of
infectious disease, or be a therapy, and we can get
(03:49):
into the segments that we're in, but it can be
in oncology, it can be a rare disease. And we
actually believed, and that was the principal belief in the
company is if this platform can work, it's going to
be able. Since it's part of your natural body, it's
going to be able to help solve many different therapeutic
areas in the body.
Speaker 4 (04:07):
And so that's a little bit about Maderna.
Speaker 5 (04:09):
In over the last thirteen years, we've built a pipeline
of forty five drug candidates. Obviously we're known for covid,
but also in other respiratory diseases. We hope to launch
our second drug this year, RSV, which became pretty well
known last year as it had a pretty significant spike,
but also in flu and other respiratory diseases. And then
(04:30):
in oncology we've got an exciting cancer therapy that we
are excited about rare diseases and other latent diseases. So
that's a little bit about Maderna. We've been around since
twenty eleven. We've got almost six thousand employees. We're based
out of Cambridge, Massachusetts, but have.
Speaker 4 (04:45):
Some facilities all across the globe, and we've got quite
an exciting pipeline ahead of us. That was excellent.
Speaker 3 (04:51):
All right, Now, what does the CFO or you specifically?
What is your job within the company?
Speaker 5 (04:58):
So my CFO role is really not that different than
many other CFOs. It's just you know, in a different space.
And I think there's principally four different areas. One is
the foundation, which is controllership, so that's accurate books and records.
That's safeguarding our assets, and that's got to be foundational and.
Speaker 4 (05:16):
An absolute given.
Speaker 5 (05:17):
The second is allocating capital, and we can talk about
that some more, but what is the envelope where we
going to spend it? How much goes into our investment
in our R and D pipeline, how much goes into capital.
Speaker 4 (05:28):
Expenditure and S G and A.
Speaker 5 (05:30):
The third is to support decision making across the company
and train our teams to understand how to measure return
on investment and how to think through decisions that are
made every single day, thousands of decisions across the company
every single day. And then the last is stakeholder management
and with whether it's investors, employees, the board of directors, customers, partners, suppliers.
Speaker 4 (05:53):
You know.
Speaker 5 (05:53):
That's how I think about it, which really isn't too
different from my prior role. Is it's a CFO of
a different company or in my opinion, and many of
the CFOs that are out there, how they operate every day.
Speaker 2 (06:04):
So you mentioned that the CFO role is kind of
uniform across companies, but I have to imagine there are
some aspects of the pharma industry that make it a
little bit different, and one of them has to be
I guess the lead times in developing new treatments and
new medicines, and perhaps the risk as well. So you
might spend ten years developing this one thing and then
(06:27):
you find out at the very end that it has
an awful side effect or that the regulators aren't going
to approve it. How does that aspect of the business,
that uniqueness, feed into the CFO role.
Speaker 5 (06:39):
Yeah, you're absolutely right, And maybe just to talk about
that process we call it, you know, we take a
drug from pure research to kind of pre clinical which
doesn't go into a human body, and you're kind of
testing how it works in the animals, and then it
gets into an IMD process or a new drug candidate,
and there are phase one, phase two, phase three, and
you're right, I mean, the probability is success from basic
(07:02):
research all the way through not only getting it launched
with the FDA in the United States as an example,
but there's healthcare regulators all across the globe, and.
Speaker 4 (07:11):
Then commercial success as well.
Speaker 5 (07:12):
So there's a ton of risk that goes into it,
and that's what we spend our time doing. And we
as a platform company believe that. You know, we've been
studying the science of mr anda in different verticals. A
vertical might be respiratory vaccines, as I mentioned, and if
we know that our mr and a platform can work
with COVID, then we have a high conviction that it
(07:35):
can work with RSP and a high conviction that it
can work with through another.
Speaker 4 (07:38):
Respiratory and so we derisk that throughout the process.
Speaker 5 (07:41):
We do it in basic research, we do it in
pre clinical, we do it in phase one trials, phase
two trials, and all those trials are just more patients.
So you might start with literally ten to fifteen patients
in phase one and then.
Speaker 4 (07:53):
A respiratory trial.
Speaker 5 (07:54):
Our RSP trial for phase three was thirty seven thousand patients.
And you just continue to assess what is the risk
and what is the capabilities, And so that's what we
spend a ton of time doing when we think about
allocating capital to our pipeline and our next drug candidates.
Speaker 3 (08:09):
Talk to us a little bit more about that. I
think you said you had forty or forty something various
candidates in the pipeline. Obviously it'd be nice to have
unlimited money and work on all of them. You know,
when you are thinking about capital allocation, R and D allocation,
et cetera, Like, what are the factors that go into
(08:33):
making these decisions?
Speaker 5 (08:35):
Sure, yeah, there's a lot, but I'll kind of summarize
it into a few, which is getting back to that
sense of risk and comparing it to our capabilities. So
I mentioned we have higher conviction and respiratory vaccines, so
therefore it's much easier to place bets and further dollars
behind respiratory vaccines. We are currently hoping to de risk
(08:58):
our latent vaccine therapeutic area. We've recently de risked our
oncology area, which we call individualized antigen therapy, which is
a mouthful, but in essence it helps stimulate key.
Speaker 4 (09:11):
Sales to attack cancer.
Speaker 5 (09:13):
And so when we look through it, we say, okay,
what is the mRNA capabilities? Have we derisked this area?
And therefore, you know, every step of the way, allocate
more dollars.
Speaker 4 (09:23):
So that's number one. Number two is we look at
the size of the opportunity.
Speaker 5 (09:26):
So this really isn't any different than any business case
for any company in any industry.
Speaker 4 (09:30):
You know, respiratory vaccines is a very large market.
Speaker 5 (09:32):
We think it's a thirty billion dollar market between flue, covid,
rsv SO, and there's only a few players, and there's
a very high barrier to entry because you have to
test so many patients and those trials are quite expensive.
Third is what's the competition and what's our commercial capabilities?
Will we be successful? Will we have something that differentiates
our product versus another product? And then the fourth is timing,
(09:55):
particularly when you're we're still a relatively young biotech company.
Speaker 4 (09:59):
Thirteen years old is not that old in the grand
scheme of.
Speaker 5 (10:02):
Things, and so therefore we have to understand Okay, what's
our cash balance? You know, how much revenue and profit
are we going to be generating in the next few years.
And therefore we want to turn over the portfolio to
not just be a COVID company, but to be a
multi drug company in various different areas. And so therefore
we look at, well, is this going to start generating
revenue in twenty twenty five, twenty twenty six, or some
(10:23):
of these won't be till twenty thirty five. So we
have to kind of balance all those things to make
sure that we have a sustainable company and bring the
most drugs to market with the highest probability of success.
Speaker 2 (10:34):
So one thing that always interests me in these types
of conversations is the decision on allocating resources. And we're
talking about okay, thirteen years old, still relatively small in
the grand scheme of large pharma companies. But you have
a lot of people, you have a decent amount of money,
it seems, how do you decide where to put that
(10:55):
money to work? And I guess how granular do those
decisions actually get. Is there like a line item for
R and D expenses every year and it's just like
a big bundle and then there are people who are
specifically dedicated to dividing that up or would you, as CFO,
be like, I'm going to give X amount to this
(11:16):
project and why amount to this other developmental treatment.
Speaker 5 (11:22):
Yeah, So at the high level, we work with the
executive team and the board to understand what is the
envelope of capital will give to R and D in
that example, because we also have to give capital to SGNA,
We have to give capital to capital expenditures, and historically
over the last couple of years, we had bought back shares,
(11:42):
although we've stopped buying backshares at this point because we
primarily want to.
Speaker 4 (11:45):
Invest in this pipeline.
Speaker 5 (11:47):
So after that, so once you size the envelope in
terms of, Okay, here's how much I'm willing to spend.
As an example, in twenty twenty four, we think we'll
spend approximately four and a half billion dollars. So then
the next step is, Okay, you have forty five drug candidates,
which ones why? Which is what I just kind of
talked through in terms of capabilities and the size of opportunities.
But just to maybe give a little bit more flavor,
a drug is not so simple, even COVID as an example,
(12:11):
you know, there's different patient populations. So there's the immunal compromised,
there's age sixty plus, there's age fifty to fifty nine,
there's age eighteen to forty nine, there's you know, I
think six to eighteen. And then there's pediatrics as well,
which all take a different level of testing and regulatory
(12:32):
oversight because there are different types of patients and the
bodies react in different ways, and the regulators want you
to study different things. So a lot of the actual
details is under Okay, yes, we've said we're going to
go with an RSV vaccine, where are we going to
start and how much will that cost?
Speaker 4 (12:48):
And right now we've said age is sixty and over.
Speaker 5 (12:52):
But then we might look at pediatrics because RSPA is
often hitting quite materially or significantly younger population. And so
that's kind of the next level of allocation, which is
you size the envelope, You then pick a program the
You then say which patient populations or indications are you
going to go after. Another example is oncology. So I
talked about this product that we have and we are
(13:13):
starting with adjuvant melanoma, and because adjuvant melanoma really in
immunooncology really seems to work quite well, and we are
kind of bundled with immunooncology and stimulating it even more.
Speaker 4 (13:25):
And so we started there and it's you know, right now.
Speaker 5 (13:28):
The data that we've released is quite positive over three
years and improves the life of a patient's success in
terms of recurrence or death by fifty percent, which is
outstanding in terms of cancer. And then you've got to
figure out, well, there's you know, loads of different cancer types,
where will this product work best? And that's what we
try to determine every single day as we get more
(13:49):
and more specific underneath that envelope the capital.
Speaker 3 (14:07):
What is the process by which I mean I have
to imagine that with e within each internal candidate, the
various scientists, the various teams, like they probably want more
for their the specific thing that they're working on. What
is this sort of internal process? Is it a sort
of is it an internal lobbying process? That's sort of
(14:31):
what I imagine my head where they come to you
and they're like, look, we believe that we can do this,
and if we could increase the R and D on
this thing, then we believe that we can maybe get
it to market or get to the next stage of
trials faster than X. Like, what is sort of your
internal process for working with the various champions of different
potential products where they make the case that they could
(14:52):
use money in a productive way.
Speaker 4 (14:54):
Yeah.
Speaker 5 (14:55):
So, first and I tell every industry, we could certainly
spend a lot more than four and a half billion dollars,
and that is a wonderful thing, because the minute we
run out of ideas and pipelines, we're in trouble and
we'll stop growing.
Speaker 4 (15:07):
So it is definitely a hot debate, I would say,
in terms of where we're going to allocate our capital.
But let me just give you maybe I'd say three
processes that we run. Great.
Speaker 5 (15:20):
So, first off, we have twice a year a look
at our entire portfolio and we call it a strategy
review to understand, Okay, let's make these decisions, given the envelope,
the capital we have, let's prioritize these things and we
pull together.
Speaker 4 (15:34):
It's extremely cross functional. It is even within R and D.
Speaker 5 (15:39):
There are many different functions within R and D, and
we bring in all of those people that are product
specialists or epidemiologists or development specialists, et cetera. We bring
in the finance team to obviously run the financials and
understand the reward, the commercial team to understand the size
of the opportunity, and we debate and say, okay, strategically,
as a company, if we want to be this year,
(16:01):
we think we'll be four billion in sales. If we
want to get to I'll just make it up a number,
say ten billion dollars in sales by twenty twenty seven.
And if that's a priority, that's not the only priority,
but that is a priority to say, okay, let's have
that lens on it.
Speaker 4 (16:16):
Number one. Number two, here's another lens.
Speaker 5 (16:18):
We want to diversify our revenue streams, so we don't
want to be solely a respiratory business. So we've got
to make sure we are investing in other latent areas,
latent disease areas or oncology that we also want to
bring to market, and we have those strategic and that
kind of sets the foundation.
Speaker 4 (16:33):
Then. So that's process one that happens twice.
Speaker 5 (16:35):
A year, and we figure out which products we want
to fund in theory, and that's what we start co
operating too. But then there's underlying research and clinical trials
that are going on every single day, and there's report
outs and you might get different data, different answers that
actually changes that and that is a very well governed
process that we call a stage gay process. And as
(16:57):
an example, you know, I myself have to approve whether
we go to a phase three trial because those are
very expensive, as I mentioned earlier, so you know, but
there are gates into even before it gets into the
clinical there's gates in the research area, in pre clinical area,
and then there's gates before you go to phase one,
phase two, phase three, and those you know, we have
a theory based on the strategy of what we wanted
(17:19):
to invest in, but new data.
Speaker 4 (17:21):
Comes out and you have to adjust to it.
Speaker 5 (17:23):
So I'd say that's kind of the second process that
is highly governed. So you have this top level strategy,
then you have actual data that's coming through that is
well governed. And then the last thing is particularly on
how much we're going to spend and whether we go
and spend more on these phase three trials. We actually
take it to a subcommittee of the board, so the
Board of Directors, which we have some scientists and doctors
that are on our board and oversee it and have
(17:44):
a lot of experience also govern Yeah, we think it's worse.
We get it, we get the strategy. If it's into
our strategy, we understand the risks, and we think you
should move forward. So those are kind of three different
processes in terms of how we govern our product strategies.
Speaker 2 (17:58):
Where does the money actually come from? And I realized
like maybe maybe there's some obvious answers here. You are
a publicly traded company, but this is a really capital
intensive business. And I was looking on the Bloomberg terminal earlier.
It doesn't seem like you have any bonds, which is
kind of unusual nowadays. Where does that like funding mix
(18:22):
actually come from.
Speaker 5 (18:23):
Yeah, so I'll chase the answer that question in the industry,
but also the specific to us because we're a little
bit different. Sure, so specific to us, we actually, because
of COVID and how successful our vaccine was to help
support the global population, we're actually sitting on thirteen billion
dollars in cash. That is very unique to a biotech company.
So we are quite fortunate. And as an example, we
(18:46):
said this year we're going to actually burn through four
billion dollars in cash. So we believe in this platform
so much that we need to advance the next set
of pipeline of drug candidates.
Speaker 4 (18:54):
And we have a plan all the way for the
next three.
Speaker 5 (18:57):
To five years that we're actually going to go from
thirteen billion to nine billion in the year twenty twenty
four because we think it's the right thing to do.
And then we said we're going to do it a
little bit again, that we're going to burn another two
to three billion in twenty twenty five before breaking even
in twenty twenty six as we'd launch new drugs. So
that's a bit unique in the biotech world, I would
say broadly though for the sector, there are various avenues
(19:18):
that obviously public investors, capital markets, like you said, there
are some government projects with Barta Covid as an example,
the US government helped fund some of the COVID research
and development of our product, and so there are different
government agencies across the globe that you can tap into.
Speaker 4 (19:34):
There are other companies.
Speaker 5 (19:35):
So before we were you know, before Covid, we had
no we had no products that had ever been approved,
and so we started in twenty eleven and in twenty
sixteen we actually went to a different company, company called Merk.
I'm sure you've heard of them, and they actually helped
fund our oncology product because it is in conjunction with
(19:55):
their product k Trudea. So that's another outlet for capital
that you can part with a collaboration where you know,
a company like Mark gave us I think two hundred
and fifty million dollars back in twenty sixteen to launch
this product and advance the science that is now so
fruitful come twenty twenty four. And then the last one
is just foundations, and we tap into foundations as well,
(20:17):
not as much now that we have a fair amount
of funding ourselves, but Bell and Melinda Gates as an example,
we were working with them on certain infectious disease vaccines.
So those are kind of the areas. So it's capital markets,
it's the government, it's other companies and collaborations that might
fund it, and then there's foundations as well.
Speaker 3 (20:36):
Let's talk about the role of the government. One of
the extraordinary things, and you know, Operation Warp Speed was
sort of this incredible endeavor that involved upfront money and
also advanced purchasing agreement so that once you got the
vaccine to market that you had guaranteed sales talk to
us just about the math of Operation Warp Speed, what
(21:00):
it meant for Maderi NA, and then specifically the power
of the advanced purchase agreements and whether that is a
model that you see being replicated going forwards, like a
sort of a way of de risking the entire process.
Speaker 4 (21:14):
Sure.
Speaker 5 (21:14):
Yeah, as you and I spoke beforehand, Joe, I wasn't
here during COVID. I joined the company at the end
of twenty twenty two, in September of twenty two, so
I've been here for eighteen months, so I obviously am
aware of what went on, but I don't know all
the intimate details. So I'll give you my general opinion
and impression, and you know it works. Me. I forget
the exact money, but I think it might be in
the range of a billion dollars. Don't quote me on that.
(21:36):
It's in our disclosures. You can actually pull it up
and get the exact numbers. But it was not insignificant.
And I think this is an example of a terrific
public private partnership that actually did great for the world.
And to put that into perspective, and it wasn't just
the funding. By the way, we can get into it.
There was so much help throughout the entire process in
(21:57):
twenty twenty in many different areas, shippings, et cetera. A
lot of red tape to cut through, but it actually
proves that in one year we went from COVID that
came out, we identified the vaccine in two days, and.
Speaker 4 (22:12):
We got it approved from market in eleven months.
Speaker 5 (22:15):
That is unparalleled in the pharmaceutical biotech industry. And so
it shows you the art of the possible. There is
good reason why things are regulated because there's safety concerns
and we have to do that, but it also shows
you that you can accelerate this timeline if you cut
through some red tape for something that has been very powerful,
very safe and effective and really has changed the world
(22:37):
in a very rapid way. So I'm a huge believer
in the success of that. In terms of the APA SEAH,
I mean to think about our situation. We had zero
revenue and we were asked to go invest literally hundreds
and billions of dollars to get this over the hump.
It was a make or break decision for us. I mean,
we were sitting there going we were public company. You
(23:00):
could run out of cash and a heartbeat, and so
we you know, we needed a partner to help take
that risk, and ultimately it worked out and worked very well.
Speaker 4 (23:09):
So the APAs to your second part of your question
there were.
Speaker 5 (23:12):
Very important because we had to know that if we're
going to go invest all this money and in our infrastructure,
forget about the research and development, we have to bring
on six different manufacturing partners across the globe. We had
to go make purchase commitments for inventory in the billions
of dollars with part you know, to say, hey, we
need we need to make a lot of COVID doses
over a billion on that time period that we made
(23:34):
a billion doses as this and we had that was a.
Speaker 4 (23:36):
Lot of risk.
Speaker 5 (23:37):
We needed to know that we were going to get
some return otherwise, you know, we were going to turn
upside down.
Speaker 4 (23:41):
So APAs were important.
Speaker 5 (23:44):
I believe that a partnership can work quite well, and
in this example, I think it works extremely well. I
get that there needs to be regulation for many different reasons,
but I think that shows you the art of the possible,
both in public private partnerships as well as what can
happen when you really try to expectegulatory process here's.
Speaker 2 (24:01):
One thing I always wonder when it comes to CFOs
and their sort of daily life. But Joe has a
line that I think it actually came from Neil Data
and you co opted it. But the stock market is
not the economy. But it's not not the economy. And
when share prices go up, that means there's more availability
of funding for companies in general. So first of all,
(24:24):
how closely do you watch the moderna stock price? Is
that like the first thing you look at when you
come into the office every morning.
Speaker 4 (24:34):
I mean I certainly monitor it quite a bit. Yes,
I do. It's important. I mean it's one of the
key stakeholders.
Speaker 5 (24:40):
And one that I know most importantly own, which is
our investors.
Speaker 4 (24:44):
So I have to make sure I'm watching that. And
so yes, I actually watch it in a fair amount.
Speaker 2 (24:49):
And then okay, what do you think when it starts
going down? Is there like a thought process in your
head that says, oh, we need to think about specific
things that we could be doing to boost shares or
do you start thinking, well, you know, there are other
things going on in the economy, interest rates are going up.
That sort of thing. I just wonder, you know, put
(25:11):
us inside your mind for a second. As a CFO,
when you look at a share price, what is happening
in your head?
Speaker 4 (25:17):
Yeah? I try.
Speaker 5 (25:18):
I try to assess for really rapid movement, what is
going on? You know, day to day, stock's going to
jump all that, you know, a little bit up, a
little bit down, a little bit.
Speaker 4 (25:27):
That happens all the time.
Speaker 5 (25:29):
So I try to assess, Okay, Number one, is it
a specific event for us? A news item, whether it's
a regulatory update on a clinical trial, or whether we
give you know, guidance on financials or whatever it might be.
Speaker 4 (25:43):
Is it a specific event? Did we do it well?
You know, we take that quite.
Speaker 5 (25:47):
Seriously, and did we communicate it well where we clear
do people get it to investors get it? And even
if they get it, you know, if it's bad news,
the stock may go down, but they understand it and
there's a natural you know, implication to that. Or if
the stock goes up, they are clearly understanding the message
of what we're trying to say.
Speaker 4 (26:03):
So I try to understand Number one, is there a
specific event for us?
Speaker 5 (26:06):
The everyday events in terms of just the global economy
and interest rates worry me less. We're fortunate as I
mentioned to have thirteen billion dollars in cash.
Speaker 4 (26:15):
We don't take it lightly. We try to understand what that.
Speaker 5 (26:18):
Means for us over the coming years in terms of, Okay,
what's going to happen from a demand perspective, or you know,
the cash in the bank will return interest, And so
we obviously are cognizant on the of the implications on
our company, but overall, we're I think we spend the
most time focusing on our investors understanding the long term
opportunity for our company.
Speaker 4 (26:38):
And I think that's what's critical for many companies. And
it is hard to.
Speaker 5 (26:42):
Have investors really look at the long term, and you know,
different portfolio managers, investors have a different view on what
is long term, whether that's twenty four months, five years,
ten years, And we try to make sure that people.
Speaker 4 (26:55):
Understand what is the opportunity ahead and.
Speaker 5 (26:58):
Actually if they are saying it back to us, then
at least they understand it and they might make a
different decision, might wait for it, you know, and we
try to understand what does that mean in terms of
their buying behavior.
Speaker 4 (27:09):
But that's what we.
Speaker 5 (27:10):
Spend the most time doing, is to under just make
sure our investors understand our long term strategy and do
they believe in where we're going.
Speaker 3 (27:33):
It does seem like for companies in some areas that
when a stock is moving lower or maybe higher, but
when this dog is moving lower, that there is an
impulse to course correct in some way. And so you
saw this, for example, I think within big tech, where
we saw this pretty big sell off in twenty twenty
two and a bunch of companies seem to get the
(27:54):
message like, oh, you know what, we really need to
slow our hiring, or maybe we shouldn't bet the entire
company on virtual reality goggles, and we need to cut
our research in this area. That there is this message
about something, and then you see the layoffs and they're like, look,
we've done much better about reducing our cash burned, et cetera.
Do you take a signal I mean, I get there
(28:14):
are certain things that are out of your control that
you have a long term message that you want to
tell the shareholders. But do you take a signal from
larger moves in the market that say, look, the investors
want to see X, and we need to course correct
in some way or another in order to align our goals.
Speaker 4 (28:32):
That's a great question.
Speaker 5 (28:33):
So I think, if there's a big move, and we
should be doing this all the time, but there's something
to listen to, and so I'll just take myself out
of Maderna. I mean, if you're a CFO and your
stock goes down twenty percent, that is a substantial amount
of investors saying it is less valuable. Something's going on,
And I think what you have to listen for is
(28:55):
do we already know that or is it something that
we really have We got to think differently about. So
is our revenue line not going to be what we
think it's going to be? And the investors are ahead
of us because they see something in the marketplace that
is changing. And if that's the case, then sometimes I
mean I take our conversations with investors as a two
way learning.
Speaker 4 (29:13):
I learned from them.
Speaker 5 (29:14):
They give me their thoughts on what they think that
where the market's going, where we're positioned, how we're positioned,
how successful they think we're going to be, just as
much as I try to tell them our view. And
so it is a two way learning. And especially when
there's a huge market move or significant market move, they're.
Speaker 4 (29:29):
Telling you something.
Speaker 5 (29:31):
The question of what you have to sift through is
did we already know that and therefore just stay the
course on strategy, or is it something that, hey, we
might need to think differently about and perhaps we're wrong
on one of our assumptions. So that's how I deal with,
you know, particularly significant moves in the share price.
Speaker 2 (29:47):
So in the course of prepping for this interview, I
was doing, you know, some casual research into MODERNA and
pharma in general, and I stumbled on this article from
Science I think it was from March twenty twenty, so
right in the heart of the pandemic, and it opens
with a discussion of the gartment hype cycle and this
(30:09):
idea that you know, people get really excited about a
new technology. You see share prices of these tech companies
go through the roof, and then there's some adjustment process
or reality kind of sets in the shar's fall, and
then slowly there's a recovery as people kind of enter
realistic productivity and use of these new technologies. And looking
(30:30):
at the MODERNA share price since March of twenty twenty,
it really does look like a gartment hype cycle. Like
if you're going to choose a textbook example, it's kind
of this, So I guess my question is, like, how
do you balance people getting really enthusiastic about new technological
breakthroughs and all these new treatments we have in the pipeline.
(30:53):
I mean, I don't think you're working on this specifically,
but GLP one weight loss drugs are obviously something that's
kind of burst in to the public consciousness recently. How
do you balance that excitement and the hype versus like
the reality of putting these in production and again, going
back to the timelines that you were discussing the idea
(31:14):
of long term investment, like, don't get too excited. It's
going to take a while for these to enter the market,
and then it's going to potentially take even longer for
them to filter through in an efficient way.
Speaker 5 (31:26):
I think in those cases, I don't know every single case,
but I'm a little closer to the Maderna case. Let's say,
I think it shows the art of the possible, and
I think people understand what could be from Maderna. And
to your point, maybe there's a little over exuberance at
a particular period and time, and I think that's where
I go to what we should be doing, which is
(31:47):
to not tell people that that's still not a real
possibility someday. Well, let's go through the timeline, let's go
through the risks and opportunities, and let's walk it through
our you know, as best to our ability in a
public way.
Speaker 4 (32:00):
Here's what we believe and what.
Speaker 5 (32:02):
Could happen when and after that, investors have to model
their own cashlowds. That's what a stock price is is
ultimately what they think the company's worth from.
Speaker 4 (32:11):
A cashloaw perspective. So I think it's a delicate.
Speaker 5 (32:14):
Balance of we still believe what MODERNA can be and
it should be someday in terms of being able to
solve so many therapeutic areas as a platform company that
can run the same technology through a manufacturing plant, and
so therefore the marginal cost of arguing with drugs should
go down substantially.
Speaker 4 (32:32):
But there's a timeline for that.
Speaker 5 (32:33):
There are regulators, and there's a timeline, and there's only
so much in development as expensive, and so we try
to be as transparent as possible with that, And I
don't know, I guess that's my belief is we sh
just to always make sure people understand what could happen someday,
but also give them the best assumptions possible.
Speaker 4 (32:50):
To the best of your ability over the relative near term.
Speaker 3 (32:54):
Maderna is a according to the Bloomberg right now, I'm
looking at a thirty seven billion dollar company. But obviously
this sort of accelerated development of the COVID vaccine, allowing
life to get back to normal in a maybe a
period of time that was much shorter than people expected.
You know, obviously orders of magnitude more valuable to the
(33:16):
global economy than perhaps what Maderna specifically accrued. And I
guess that's why you know, we had Operation warp Speed.
It certainly seems like in theory you could say the
same thing about other vaccines, other pharma products that are
in the works. You know, I don't know how much
money is lost to the flu every year, but it
would be probably very great for the economy if no
(33:38):
one got the flu anymore, or colds or any other
sort of sicknesses that disrupted our life. Do you think
like I've been a little surprised, you know that after
the Operation Warp Speed experience, we haven't seen more announcements
like hey, let's do an operation warp speed for X
or Y, or maybe they have been and I just
(33:58):
missed the stories like have you seen any follow up
on like, Hey, this model did something powerful, Let's do
it again, let's derisk it, Let's have the government step
in with this investment and guaranteed purchase agreements. Like have
people taken lessons from Operation Warp Speed and applied it
potentially to other areas?
Speaker 5 (34:18):
I think you see some minor examples of that. But
I also just think that COVID was such a significant
event that affected the entire global population that it warranted
both you know, resources from a time perspective as well
as money perspective. And that's not to say that these
other ones don't, but it just it was a crisis.
(34:38):
And so you know, there are areas in oncology that
I think there's additional funding going behind.
Speaker 4 (34:44):
I think people learning. Okay, rare disease, I hear a
lot of talk.
Speaker 5 (34:48):
Again, I am not a scientist, I am not a regulator,
So take it with a grain of salt. But rare
disease as an example, it's rare by nature, so it's
difficult to say it's difficult to actually get enough patients
in data to progress fast because of the regulatory processes,
(35:08):
and I think the regulators acknowledge that and say, hey,
if I only have I'm going to make it up
one hundred patients in the United States. This might take
ten years, but I can already tell in two years
in a phase one trial it's making a significant impact
on fifteen patients. And these are life threatening diseases. It's
worth taking the risk.
Speaker 4 (35:27):
So it might not be at.
Speaker 6 (35:29):
The same speed and emphasism as operation warp speed, but
I have seen a couple areas in oncology and rare disease,
and maybe that's quite honestly, that's where I am personally
spending time, so I see those things, and maybe it's
happening in other areas, but I'm just not as knowledgeable
as all other therapeutic areas.
Speaker 5 (35:48):
But I do see it a little bit more in
oncology and rare disease. Again, not the same as operation
warp speed, but I have seen it change people's minds
and perspectives a little bit.
Speaker 2 (35:57):
I wanted to ask an operational question, which is how
important is distribution to the pharma business. And one of
the reasons I ask is because we recorded an episode
with the Celsius CEO and energy drinks are clearly a
very different business to pharma, but one thing maybe they
have in common is that a lot of your success
(36:18):
depends on actually getting into stores. And obviously, with medicines,
we are not talking about getting into stores. We're talking
about getting into hospitals and pharmacies and doctors' offices, and there,
I imagine you have to face some pretty stiff competition
from competitors like Pfizer or a Glaxo Smith Klein. So
(36:39):
how important is that and how do you how does
that process actually work? What are the discussions like when
it comes to distribution.
Speaker 4 (36:46):
Yeah, I would say I think distribution is very important.
Speaker 5 (36:49):
I think there are other important factors in terms of
making sure that medication reaches a patient, but distribution, I mean,
when I think about it, number one, it's got to
be there at the right time. So take walking into
CBS and wanting a flu shot. If CBS does not
have the flu shot available, there's a chance that you
might not go back for it. And so the importance
(37:11):
of being having the supply in the market when a
patient wants and needs it is extremely important, and distribution plays.
Speaker 4 (37:17):
A role in that.
Speaker 5 (37:18):
There's also many different things that you have to work
through in terms of storage. So some products are required
to be refrigerator stable, some are required to be frozen
at a certain temperature, some are required to be frozen
at a very cold temperature, and making sure that the
distribution network has that as well. So the conversation largely
revolves around that, what can they do to make sure
that we have the right amount of products in the
(37:40):
right channels and buy channels for our industry that means
pharmacies and or doctor's offices, and there's other places to
put it as well, you.
Speaker 4 (37:48):
Know, but that's largely what that conversation does. And I would.
Speaker 7 (37:52):
Say there is some differentiation in the marketplace from a
competitive standpoint, but I wouldn't say different Distribution specifically is
the number one variable for a differentiation between competition.
Speaker 3 (38:05):
Tracy mentioned earlier. But the hot thing, it seems inform
right now that people are really excited about is gop
one drugs and weight loss, and if a company has
something in that category that investors get really excited and
bid up the stock. You know, imagine things go in
(38:25):
and out of style at various times, and people are
really excited about one particular category. Do you feel that
pressure that is like, Okay, this is the hot thing
right now weight loss, and we've you know, suppressed people's
appetite with an injection. Do you feel that pressure and
does that come from investors? Like are you playing in
the space? Do one of your forty products? Is it
(38:47):
going to be potentially related to this category? And I'm curious, like,
you know, you mentioned that sort of two way conversation.
You're telling investors about your pipeline, they're telling you what
they expect. Does this sort of flavor of the month
or flavor of the year when it comes to what's
hot in drugs play into those conversations?
Speaker 4 (39:05):
Not really, not for us, not from what I've heard
from investors.
Speaker 5 (39:09):
I have seen it in other industries for sure, where
and maybe it's just because there's a hot new product
that is really core and central, that could be core
and central to somebody's strategy, but they're missing it GLP
versus what we've laid out is not core and central
to our strategy. And so therefore investors understand that and
quite frankly, rarely.
Speaker 4 (39:29):
Ask about it. Okay, we're in the same yeah, so
just not as applicable to our company.
Speaker 2 (39:33):
You worked at GE for a long time before going
on to Motejarna. I think there was another company in between.
But one thing I'm really curious about is are there
overlaps between pharma and something like the aircraft business. I
have to imagine that both of those industries have really
long lead times that you have to manage, and as
(39:54):
part of that, you also have to manage investor expectations.
Speaker 4 (39:58):
They are so similar.
Speaker 5 (40:01):
So let me paint the aviation business that I worked
in for GE, which was I was in the commercial
engines division, Commercial Engines and Services. So think of you
know the seven three seven maps, a partnership with a
company out of France and GE called CFM. Is the
is the engine on that aircraft? And so when I
was a CFO there, you're making bets on product families
(40:25):
that will be on aircraft for literally forty years. And
these are substantial investments. We're talking two three billion dollars
for a company to invest.
Speaker 4 (40:34):
In, and you have to make the right bet. Are
you on the right.
Speaker 5 (40:38):
Aircraft because you know, you can put an engine on
a bad aircraft and your engine might be great, but
if nobody buys aircraft, it's irrelevant. So not only do
you need to make the best engine, you need to
put it on the right aircraft, people need to buy it,
and then you need to obviously do everything else well.
From an execution standpoint.
Speaker 4 (40:52):
That is no different here.
Speaker 5 (40:53):
I mean, we are making you know, I mentioned our
RSV product as an example, thirty seven dollars in patients.
It's in the hundreds of millions of dollars from an
investment perspective.
Speaker 4 (41:05):
But once it's ready, and if it's there.
Speaker 5 (41:06):
You know that rspeed vac scene probably won't be tweaked
too much. Maybe a little bit of tweaking over time, but.
Speaker 4 (41:13):
We've just cleared a high barrier of entry. Where as
of right now there's only two competitors, and in the aviation.
Speaker 5 (41:19):
Space there's there's largely three competitors. So they're very similar
and so the funding. So let's just give an example,
maybe give you a specific example. When I was at Aviation,
you think through that three billion dollar program, and we
had what we called risk and revenue share partners, which
was somebody to say, hey, we can't invest in six
product families times three billion dollars each. We're going to
have to have some partners that they'll make part of
(41:41):
the engine and they'll help invest in the technology and
they can share in the commercial rewards. That can be
very similar in pharmabiotech. So I mentioned Mark in our partnership.
They funded two hundred and fifty million dollars back in
twenty sixteen and additional moneys since thereafter, and.
Speaker 4 (41:56):
They owned fifty percent of that program. So when you're.
Speaker 5 (41:59):
Thinking about pulling together this entire pipeline across many different
therapeutic areas and they all cost a lot of money
to develop, you need partnerships, and then you know that
that partnership can provide more than just money.
Speaker 4 (42:11):
In the case of Merk, they are great from a
commercial perspective.
Speaker 5 (42:14):
They sell the leading oncology drug and the planet, and
the same in the aviation plant world. You've got to
have people that might make the best part of the
engine that you're talking about to improve fuel consumption. So
they're very similar models one that I think about quite
a bit. And on top of that, maybe the last
thing I'd say is they're both highly regulated. I already
mentioned the biotech space, but aviation, as you know, the
(42:35):
FAA and other agencies across the globe highly regulate the
aviation space to make sure that it is very safe
to fly aircraft across the globe.
Speaker 3 (42:43):
I just have one last question, and I get you know,
for a sort of young company, growth company, you know,
macro may not affect you as it may affect a
more mature company. But I'm just curious, like, when the
FED raises rates dramatically, what does that mean for company
like ours?
Speaker 5 (43:01):
Well, for us, again, we're a bit unique because we
have thirteen billion dollars solid into it our way and
maybe how I think about it for other companies ways,
but that might not have be fortunate to thirteen billion.
Thirteen billion we have I forget the exact number invested
in bonds, but primarily invested in bonds, and so we
look at duration, We look.
Speaker 4 (43:21):
At you know, what does that investment portfolio want to
look like. We're not there to make money on that asset.
Speaker 5 (43:25):
We are there to preserve capital to invest in what
is core to us, which is our R and D
and everything that we've spoken about today. But we look at, okay,
what's that mean? And you know, what's the duration we
should be taking out? Which is a happy problem to
have for us. I would say, I would say, you know,
for a company that is sitting on you know, one
and a half years of cash burn, and you're just
(43:48):
sitting there saying, Okay, you know, I'm about chech. I'm
not revenue yet, I'm not revenue generating yet. I've got
one and a half years of cash burn, you know,
in terms of cash on my balance sheet? What does
this mean? And what do I need to do? You know,
am I going to make it? You know how interest
rates affect me? Should I reposition myself?
Speaker 4 (44:05):
Do I What do I need from a death perspective?
Speaker 5 (44:08):
You know, it's just such a different animal in terms
of surviving that time period in a different way.
Speaker 2 (44:15):
All Right, Jamie Mock, CFO of Moderna, thank you so
much for coming on all thoughts. That was a really
interesting conversation. I feel like I understand MODERNA now and
also the role of CFO a little bit better.
Speaker 4 (44:27):
Well, thank you, Tracy angel I really enjoyed it and
it was a pleasure. Amazing you both.
Speaker 2 (44:43):
So, Joe, that was really interesting and kind of surprisingly
thematic in a lot of ways. It seemed to touch
on a bunch of recent things we've been talking about,
like aviation.
Speaker 3 (44:54):
Mike, Yeah, I wasn't expecting that.
Speaker 2 (44:56):
Yeah, Like distribution, although I take his point that that
isn't I guess, a main source of competitive differentiation. But
I'm glad I've finally got the chance to ask a
CFO what he thinks when he sees the share price
going down. I always wanted to ask that.
Speaker 3 (45:11):
Yeah, No, I mean I think it's really interesting. I mean,
at the end of the day, like, right, any company
can talk about their vision or their roadmap, et cetera,
But when investors are selling your stock. I think I
appreciated his fourth rightness that like you have to take
that seriously on some level, like it seems like there's
(45:31):
only so far any company can go in terms of
staying on one path if investors don't like the path.
Speaker 2 (45:39):
Yeah, And just on that note, I also thought it
was really interesting his discussion of I guess encouraging investors
to think over the long term, and also the idea
that everyone has a different definition of what the long
term actually is. And I suspect those definitions have been
getting shorter in recent years. But you know, it can
range for twenty four months to like ten years, And
(46:01):
how do you actually convince people to stay with the company,
be excited about the product offering and the pipeline, but
not get too excited and expect that immediacy for things
that take a particularly long time to develop.
Speaker 3 (46:19):
Totally, you know, the I was not expecting him to
like draw those analogies between pharma development and commercial engines,
but it makes so much sense because obviously you have this,
you know, this huge runway, no pun intended, and then
you're locked in for a long time and the product
isn't going to change after that until you're really taking
(46:39):
this sort of like extremely long uncertain bet. I also
really like to description of the processes that they have
in place for internal capital allocation. You know, you have
like forty different processes and that like competition element between
the different subject areas.
Speaker 2 (46:56):
Yeah, absolutely, shall we leave it there.
Speaker 3 (46:59):
Let's leave it there, all right.
Speaker 2 (47:00):
This has been another episode of the Audlots podcast. I'm
Tracy Alloway. You can follow me at Tracy Alloway and.
Speaker 3 (47:06):
I'm Joe Wisenthal. You can follow me at the Stalwart.
Follow our producers Kerman Rodriguez at Kerman Arman, Dashel Bennett
at Dashbot, and Kilbrooks at Kelbrooks. Thank you to our
producer Moses Ondem from our Oddlots content. Go to Bloomberg
dot com slash odd Lotshere we have transcripts, a blog,
and a newsletter, and you can chat about all of
our episodes with fellow listeners in the discord twenty four
(47:29):
to seven discord dot gg slash odlock.
Speaker 2 (47:32):
And if you enjoy Oddlots, if you like it when
we talk to CFOs about what they actually do on
a daily basis, then please leave us a positive review
on your favorite podcast platform. And remember, if you are
a Bloomberg subscriber, you can listen to all of our
episodes absolutely ad free. All you need to do is
connect your Bloomberg account to Apple Podcasts. Thanks for listening
Speaker 5 (48:10):
In
Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, Radio News.
Speaker 2 (00:18):
Hello and welcome to another episode of the Odd Lots podcast.
I'm Tracy Alloway and I'm Joe.
Speaker 3 (00:22):
Why isn't thal Joe?
Speaker 2 (00:24):
Do you know much about MODERNA?
Speaker 4 (00:26):
Well, I had.
Speaker 3 (00:27):
Heard the name for maybe a few years, and then
they became household name some point in twenty twenty when
they were ahead of the race to develop a COVID vaccine.
Then it became massive, and then I don't know much
beyond that.
Speaker 2 (00:41):
Yeah, for me, this is a company that kind of
came out of nowhere during the pandemic, and as you're right,
it kind of shot into household name territory. Here's my
other question. Do you know what a CFO does?
Speaker 5 (00:54):
What?
Speaker 3 (00:55):
That is a great question, actually, because I mean, I
guess I would say yes in this sense that I
think they're the ones who are sort of watching the financing,
helping to make capital allocation decisions, although I imagine that
the CEO also has that. I think the CFO is
(01:15):
the one primarily involved in putting together the earnings and
you know, communicating the finance side, specifically the analyst. But
I guess I only partly know what a CFO does
to me.
Speaker 2 (01:27):
The thing I always think when I hear CFO I
always think they're the hard ones. Sorry, They're the ones
that answer the hard questions on the on the earnings calls.
That's what they do.
Speaker 4 (01:38):
I love that. I think that, yes, that's right.
Speaker 3 (01:40):
The CEO is like, oh, we get to these great
products and blah blah. And then like someone asked a
really technical question about like well if your borrow will
get this above so far and margins and they're like,
I'm going to bring the CFO in the answer this.
Speaker 2 (01:51):
Then yeah, exactly. Well, I'm pleased to say today we do,
in fact have the perfect guest to answer the question
of what is modern and also what does a CFO
actually do. We are going to be speaking to the
CFO of MODERNA, Jamie Mack. Jamie, thank you so much
for coming on on thoughts.
Speaker 5 (02:09):
Hi, Tracy and Joe, thank you for having me. It's
a pleasure to be here with you.
Speaker 2 (02:13):
So maybe just to begin, can you give us the
sort of elevator pitch summary of what it is that
MODERNA does and full disclosure, I was in Hong Kong
for a few years of the pandemic, so I missed
a lot of the vaccine conversation here in the US.
There was a very different vaccine conversation that was happening
in Hong Kong and in mainland China at the time.
(02:36):
But what is it that you actually do and how
is it that you have become a household name in
a relatively few short years.
Speaker 5 (02:44):
Well sure, so, first I found your introduction quite entertaining.
The CFO actually in our business because we are very
much a science business, which I'll get into.
Speaker 4 (02:55):
It's actually our president and CEO.
Speaker 5 (02:57):
That get the really tough questions. But I get to
my own share as well, which we can get into.
Speaker 3 (03:02):
But the CEO has to answer the tough biology questions.
Speaker 4 (03:07):
Well, he's quite good at it. He's he was part
you employee number one and.
Speaker 5 (03:13):
Has been here and built this business for thirteen years
so and he's got a science background, so he's quite
good at it. And then our president, Stephen Hoague is
a doctor by trade, so obviously they answered most of
the scientific questions.
Speaker 4 (03:25):
But so Maderna is obviously known.
Speaker 5 (03:28):
Due to how we help the global community with COVID,
but it's really much more than that. It is a
platform company revolving around MR and a which really makes
the proteins in a body, and those proteins can help
either fight infectious diseases and prevent against any kind of
infectious disease, or be a therapy, and we can get
(03:49):
into the segments that we're in, but it can be
in oncology, it can be a rare disease. And we
actually believed, and that was the principal belief in the
company is if this platform can work, it's going to
be able. Since it's part of your natural body, it's
going to be able to help solve many different therapeutic
areas in the body.
Speaker 4 (04:07):
And so that's a little bit about Maderna.
Speaker 5 (04:09):
In over the last thirteen years, we've built a pipeline
of forty five drug candidates. Obviously we're known for covid,
but also in other respiratory diseases. We hope to launch
our second drug this year, RSV, which became pretty well
known last year as it had a pretty significant spike,
but also in flu and other respiratory diseases. And then
(04:30):
in oncology we've got an exciting cancer therapy that we
are excited about rare diseases and other latent diseases. So
that's a little bit about Maderna. We've been around since
twenty eleven. We've got almost six thousand employees. We're based
out of Cambridge, Massachusetts, but have.
Speaker 4 (04:45):
Some facilities all across the globe, and we've got quite
an exciting pipeline ahead of us. That was excellent.
Speaker 3 (04:51):
All right, Now, what does the CFO or you specifically?
What is your job within the company?
Speaker 5 (04:58):
So my CFO role is really not that different than
many other CFOs. It's just you know, in a different space.
And I think there's principally four different areas. One is
the foundation, which is controllership, so that's accurate books and records.
That's safeguarding our assets, and that's got to be foundational and.
Speaker 4 (05:16):
An absolute given.
Speaker 5 (05:17):
The second is allocating capital, and we can talk about
that some more, but what is the envelope where we
going to spend it? How much goes into our investment
in our R and D pipeline, how much goes into capital.
Speaker 4 (05:28):
Expenditure and S G and A.
Speaker 5 (05:30):
The third is to support decision making across the company
and train our teams to understand how to measure return
on investment and how to think through decisions that are
made every single day, thousands of decisions across the company
every single day. And then the last is stakeholder management
and with whether it's investors, employees, the board of directors, customers, partners, suppliers.
Speaker 4 (05:53):
You know.
Speaker 5 (05:53):
That's how I think about it, which really isn't too
different from my prior role. Is it's a CFO of
a different company or in my opinion, and many of
the CFOs that are out there, how they operate every day.
Speaker 2 (06:04):
So you mentioned that the CFO role is kind of
uniform across companies, but I have to imagine there are
some aspects of the pharma industry that make it a
little bit different, and one of them has to be
I guess the lead times in developing new treatments and
new medicines, and perhaps the risk as well. So you
might spend ten years developing this one thing and then
(06:27):
you find out at the very end that it has
an awful side effect or that the regulators aren't going
to approve it. How does that aspect of the business,
that uniqueness, feed into the CFO role.
Speaker 5 (06:39):
Yeah, you're absolutely right, And maybe just to talk about
that process we call it, you know, we take a
drug from pure research to kind of pre clinical which
doesn't go into a human body, and you're kind of
testing how it works in the animals, and then it
gets into an IMD process or a new drug candidate,
and there are phase one, phase two, phase three, and
you're right, I mean, the probability is success from basic
(07:02):
research all the way through not only getting it launched
with the FDA in the United States as an example,
but there's healthcare regulators all across the globe, and.
Speaker 4 (07:11):
Then commercial success as well.
Speaker 5 (07:12):
So there's a ton of risk that goes into it,
and that's what we spend our time doing. And we
as a platform company believe that. You know, we've been
studying the science of mr anda in different verticals. A
vertical might be respiratory vaccines, as I mentioned, and if
we know that our mr and a platform can work
with COVID, then we have a high conviction that it
(07:35):
can work with RSP and a high conviction that it
can work with through another.
Speaker 4 (07:38):
Respiratory and so we derisk that throughout the process.
Speaker 5 (07:41):
We do it in basic research, we do it in
pre clinical, we do it in phase one trials, phase
two trials, and all those trials are just more patients.
So you might start with literally ten to fifteen patients
in phase one and then.
Speaker 4 (07:53):
A respiratory trial.
Speaker 5 (07:54):
Our RSP trial for phase three was thirty seven thousand patients.
And you just continue to assess what is the risk
and what is the capabilities, And so that's what we
spend a ton of time doing when we think about
allocating capital to our pipeline and our next drug candidates.
Speaker 3 (08:09):
Talk to us a little bit more about that. I
think you said you had forty or forty something various
candidates in the pipeline. Obviously it'd be nice to have
unlimited money and work on all of them. You know,
when you are thinking about capital allocation, R and D allocation,
et cetera, Like, what are the factors that go into
(08:33):
making these decisions?
Speaker 5 (08:35):
Sure, yeah, there's a lot, but I'll kind of summarize
it into a few, which is getting back to that
sense of risk and comparing it to our capabilities. So
I mentioned we have higher conviction and respiratory vaccines, so
therefore it's much easier to place bets and further dollars
behind respiratory vaccines. We are currently hoping to de risk
(08:58):
our latent vaccine therapeutic area. We've recently de risked our
oncology area, which we call individualized antigen therapy, which is
a mouthful, but in essence it helps stimulate key.
Speaker 4 (09:11):
Sales to attack cancer.
Speaker 5 (09:13):
And so when we look through it, we say, okay,
what is the mRNA capabilities? Have we derisked this area?
And therefore, you know, every step of the way, allocate
more dollars.
Speaker 4 (09:23):
So that's number one. Number two is we look at
the size of the opportunity.
Speaker 5 (09:26):
So this really isn't any different than any business case
for any company in any industry.
Speaker 4 (09:30):
You know, respiratory vaccines is a very large market.
Speaker 5 (09:32):
We think it's a thirty billion dollar market between flue, covid,
rsv SO, and there's only a few players, and there's
a very high barrier to entry because you have to
test so many patients and those trials are quite expensive.
Third is what's the competition and what's our commercial capabilities?
Will we be successful? Will we have something that differentiates
our product versus another product? And then the fourth is timing,
(09:55):
particularly when you're we're still a relatively young biotech company.
Speaker 4 (09:59):
Thirteen years old is not that old in the grand
scheme of.
Speaker 5 (10:02):
Things, and so therefore we have to understand Okay, what's
our cash balance? You know, how much revenue and profit
are we going to be generating in the next few years.
And therefore we want to turn over the portfolio to
not just be a COVID company, but to be a
multi drug company in various different areas. And so therefore
we look at, well, is this going to start generating
revenue in twenty twenty five, twenty twenty six, or some
(10:23):
of these won't be till twenty thirty five. So we
have to kind of balance all those things to make
sure that we have a sustainable company and bring the
most drugs to market with the highest probability of success.
Speaker 2 (10:34):
So one thing that always interests me in these types
of conversations is the decision on allocating resources. And we're
talking about okay, thirteen years old, still relatively small in
the grand scheme of large pharma companies. But you have
a lot of people, you have a decent amount of money,
it seems, how do you decide where to put that
(10:55):
money to work? And I guess how granular do those
decisions actually get. Is there like a line item for
R and D expenses every year and it's just like
a big bundle and then there are people who are
specifically dedicated to dividing that up or would you, as CFO,
be like, I'm going to give X amount to this
(11:16):
project and why amount to this other developmental treatment.
Speaker 5 (11:22):
Yeah, So at the high level, we work with the
executive team and the board to understand what is the
envelope of capital will give to R and D in
that example, because we also have to give capital to SGNA,
We have to give capital to capital expenditures, and historically
over the last couple of years, we had bought back shares,
(11:42):
although we've stopped buying backshares at this point because we
primarily want to.
Speaker 4 (11:45):
Invest in this pipeline.
Speaker 5 (11:47):
So after that, so once you size the envelope in
terms of, Okay, here's how much I'm willing to spend.
As an example, in twenty twenty four, we think we'll
spend approximately four and a half billion dollars. So then
the next step is, Okay, you have forty five drug candidates,
which ones why? Which is what I just kind of
talked through in terms of capabilities and the size of opportunities.
But just to maybe give a little bit more flavor,
a drug is not so simple, even COVID as an example,
(12:11):
you know, there's different patient populations. So there's the immunal compromised,
there's age sixty plus, there's age fifty to fifty nine,
there's age eighteen to forty nine, there's you know, I
think six to eighteen. And then there's pediatrics as well,
which all take a different level of testing and regulatory
(12:32):
oversight because there are different types of patients and the
bodies react in different ways, and the regulators want you
to study different things. So a lot of the actual
details is under Okay, yes, we've said we're going to
go with an RSV vaccine, where are we going to
start and how much will that cost?
Speaker 4 (12:48):
And right now we've said age is sixty and over.
Speaker 5 (12:52):
But then we might look at pediatrics because RSPA is
often hitting quite materially or significantly younger population. And so
that's kind of the next level of allocation, which is
you size the envelope, You then pick a program the
You then say which patient populations or indications are you
going to go after. Another example is oncology. So I
talked about this product that we have and we are
(13:13):
starting with adjuvant melanoma, and because adjuvant melanoma really in
immunooncology really seems to work quite well, and we are
kind of bundled with immunooncology and stimulating it even more.
Speaker 4 (13:25):
And so we started there and it's you know, right now.
Speaker 5 (13:28):
The data that we've released is quite positive over three
years and improves the life of a patient's success in
terms of recurrence or death by fifty percent, which is
outstanding in terms of cancer. And then you've got to
figure out, well, there's you know, loads of different cancer types,
where will this product work best? And that's what we
try to determine every single day as we get more
(13:49):
and more specific underneath that envelope the capital.
Speaker 3 (14:07):
What is the process by which I mean I have
to imagine that with e within each internal candidate, the
various scientists, the various teams, like they probably want more
for their the specific thing that they're working on. What
is this sort of internal process? Is it a sort
of is it an internal lobbying process? That's sort of
(14:31):
what I imagine my head where they come to you
and they're like, look, we believe that we can do this,
and if we could increase the R and D on
this thing, then we believe that we can maybe get
it to market or get to the next stage of
trials faster than X. Like, what is sort of your
internal process for working with the various champions of different
potential products where they make the case that they could
(14:52):
use money in a productive way.
Speaker 4 (14:54):
Yeah.
Speaker 5 (14:55):
So, first and I tell every industry, we could certainly
spend a lot more than four and a half billion dollars,
and that is a wonderful thing, because the minute we
run out of ideas and pipelines, we're in trouble and
we'll stop growing.
Speaker 4 (15:07):
So it is definitely a hot debate, I would say,
in terms of where we're going to allocate our capital.
But let me just give you maybe I'd say three
processes that we run. Great.
Speaker 5 (15:20):
So, first off, we have twice a year a look
at our entire portfolio and we call it a strategy
review to understand, Okay, let's make these decisions, given the envelope,
the capital we have, let's prioritize these things and we
pull together.
Speaker 4 (15:34):
It's extremely cross functional. It is even within R and D.
Speaker 5 (15:39):
There are many different functions within R and D, and
we bring in all of those people that are product
specialists or epidemiologists or development specialists, et cetera. We bring
in the finance team to obviously run the financials and
understand the reward, the commercial team to understand the size
of the opportunity, and we debate and say, okay, strategically,
as a company, if we want to be this year,
(16:01):
we think we'll be four billion in sales. If we
want to get to I'll just make it up a number,
say ten billion dollars in sales by twenty twenty seven.
And if that's a priority, that's not the only priority,
but that is a priority to say, okay, let's have
that lens on it.
Speaker 4 (16:16):
Number one. Number two, here's another lens.
Speaker 5 (16:18):
We want to diversify our revenue streams, so we don't
want to be solely a respiratory business. So we've got
to make sure we are investing in other latent areas,
latent disease areas or oncology that we also want to
bring to market, and we have those strategic and that
kind of sets the foundation.
Speaker 4 (16:33):
Then. So that's process one that happens twice.
Speaker 5 (16:35):
A year, and we figure out which products we want
to fund in theory, and that's what we start co
operating too. But then there's underlying research and clinical trials
that are going on every single day, and there's report
outs and you might get different data, different answers that
actually changes that and that is a very well governed
process that we call a stage gay process. And as
(16:57):
an example, you know, I myself have to approve whether
we go to a phase three trial because those are
very expensive, as I mentioned earlier, so you know, but
there are gates into even before it gets into the
clinical there's gates in the research area, in pre clinical area,
and then there's gates before you go to phase one,
phase two, phase three, and those you know, we have
a theory based on the strategy of what we wanted
(17:19):
to invest in, but new data.
Speaker 4 (17:21):
Comes out and you have to adjust to it.
Speaker 5 (17:23):
So I'd say that's kind of the second process that
is highly governed. So you have this top level strategy,
then you have actual data that's coming through that is
well governed. And then the last thing is particularly on
how much we're going to spend and whether we go
and spend more on these phase three trials. We actually
take it to a subcommittee of the board, so the
Board of Directors, which we have some scientists and doctors
that are on our board and oversee it and have
(17:44):
a lot of experience also govern Yeah, we think it's worse.
We get it, we get the strategy. If it's into
our strategy, we understand the risks, and we think you
should move forward. So those are kind of three different
processes in terms of how we govern our product strategies.
Speaker 2 (17:58):
Where does the money actually come from? And I realized
like maybe maybe there's some obvious answers here. You are
a publicly traded company, but this is a really capital
intensive business. And I was looking on the Bloomberg terminal earlier.
It doesn't seem like you have any bonds, which is
kind of unusual nowadays. Where does that like funding mix
(18:22):
actually come from.
Speaker 5 (18:23):
Yeah, so I'll chase the answer that question in the industry,
but also the specific to us because we're a little
bit different. Sure, so specific to us, we actually, because
of COVID and how successful our vaccine was to help
support the global population, we're actually sitting on thirteen billion
dollars in cash. That is very unique to a biotech company.
So we are quite fortunate. And as an example, we
(18:46):
said this year we're going to actually burn through four
billion dollars in cash. So we believe in this platform
so much that we need to advance the next set
of pipeline of drug candidates.
Speaker 4 (18:54):
And we have a plan all the way for the
next three.
Speaker 5 (18:57):
To five years that we're actually going to go from
thirteen billion to nine billion in the year twenty twenty
four because we think it's the right thing to do.
And then we said we're going to do it a
little bit again, that we're going to burn another two
to three billion in twenty twenty five before breaking even
in twenty twenty six as we'd launch new drugs. So
that's a bit unique in the biotech world, I would
say broadly though for the sector, there are various avenues
(19:18):
that obviously public investors, capital markets, like you said, there
are some government projects with Barta Covid as an example,
the US government helped fund some of the COVID research
and development of our product, and so there are different
government agencies across the globe that you can tap into.
Speaker 4 (19:34):
There are other companies.
Speaker 5 (19:35):
So before we were you know, before Covid, we had
no we had no products that had ever been approved,
and so we started in twenty eleven and in twenty
sixteen we actually went to a different company, company called Merk.
I'm sure you've heard of them, and they actually helped
fund our oncology product because it is in conjunction with
(19:55):
their product k Trudea. So that's another outlet for capital
that you can part with a collaboration where you know,
a company like Mark gave us I think two hundred
and fifty million dollars back in twenty sixteen to launch
this product and advance the science that is now so
fruitful come twenty twenty four. And then the last one
is just foundations, and we tap into foundations as well,
(20:17):
not as much now that we have a fair amount
of funding ourselves, but Bell and Melinda Gates as an example,
we were working with them on certain infectious disease vaccines.
So those are kind of the areas. So it's capital markets,
it's the government, it's other companies and collaborations that might
fund it, and then there's foundations as well.
Speaker 3 (20:36):
Let's talk about the role of the government. One of
the extraordinary things, and you know, Operation Warp Speed was
sort of this incredible endeavor that involved upfront money and
also advanced purchasing agreement so that once you got the
vaccine to market that you had guaranteed sales talk to
us just about the math of Operation Warp Speed, what
(21:00):
it meant for Maderi NA, and then specifically the power
of the advanced purchase agreements and whether that is a
model that you see being replicated going forwards, like a
sort of a way of de risking the entire process.
Speaker 4 (21:14):
Sure.
Speaker 5 (21:14):
Yeah, as you and I spoke beforehand, Joe, I wasn't
here during COVID. I joined the company at the end
of twenty twenty two, in September of twenty two, so
I've been here for eighteen months, so I obviously am
aware of what went on, but I don't know all
the intimate details. So I'll give you my general opinion
and impression, and you know it works. Me. I forget
the exact money, but I think it might be in
the range of a billion dollars. Don't quote me on that.
(21:36):
It's in our disclosures. You can actually pull it up
and get the exact numbers. But it was not insignificant.
And I think this is an example of a terrific
public private partnership that actually did great for the world.
And to put that into perspective, and it wasn't just
the funding. By the way, we can get into it.
There was so much help throughout the entire process in
(21:57):
twenty twenty in many different areas, shippings, et cetera. A
lot of red tape to cut through, but it actually
proves that in one year we went from COVID that
came out, we identified the vaccine in two days, and.
Speaker 4 (22:12):
We got it approved from market in eleven months.
Speaker 5 (22:15):
That is unparalleled in the pharmaceutical biotech industry. And so
it shows you the art of the possible. There is
good reason why things are regulated because there's safety concerns
and we have to do that, but it also shows
you that you can accelerate this timeline if you cut
through some red tape for something that has been very powerful,
very safe and effective and really has changed the world
(22:37):
in a very rapid way. So I'm a huge believer
in the success of that. In terms of the APA SEAH,
I mean to think about our situation. We had zero
revenue and we were asked to go invest literally hundreds
and billions of dollars to get this over the hump.
It was a make or break decision for us. I mean,
we were sitting there going we were public company. You
(23:00):
could run out of cash and a heartbeat, and so
we you know, we needed a partner to help take
that risk, and ultimately it worked out and worked very well.
Speaker 4 (23:09):
So the APAs to your second part of your question
there were.
Speaker 5 (23:12):
Very important because we had to know that if we're
going to go invest all this money and in our infrastructure,
forget about the research and development, we have to bring
on six different manufacturing partners across the globe. We had
to go make purchase commitments for inventory in the billions
of dollars with part you know, to say, hey, we
need we need to make a lot of COVID doses
over a billion on that time period that we made
(23:34):
a billion doses as this and we had that was a.
Speaker 4 (23:36):
Lot of risk.
Speaker 5 (23:37):
We needed to know that we were going to get
some return otherwise, you know, we were going to turn
upside down.
Speaker 4 (23:41):
So APAs were important.
Speaker 5 (23:44):
I believe that a partnership can work quite well, and
in this example, I think it works extremely well. I
get that there needs to be regulation for many different reasons,
but I think that shows you the art of the possible,
both in public private partnerships as well as what can
happen when you really try to expectegulatory process here's.
Speaker 2 (24:01):
One thing I always wonder when it comes to CFOs
and their sort of daily life. But Joe has a
line that I think it actually came from Neil Data
and you co opted it. But the stock market is
not the economy. But it's not not the economy. And
when share prices go up, that means there's more availability
of funding for companies in general. So first of all,
(24:24):
how closely do you watch the moderna stock price? Is
that like the first thing you look at when you
come into the office every morning.
Speaker 4 (24:34):
I mean I certainly monitor it quite a bit. Yes,
I do. It's important. I mean it's one of the
key stakeholders.
Speaker 5 (24:40):
And one that I know most importantly own, which is
our investors.
Speaker 4 (24:44):
So I have to make sure I'm watching that. And
so yes, I actually watch it in a fair amount.
Speaker 2 (24:49):
And then okay, what do you think when it starts
going down? Is there like a thought process in your
head that says, oh, we need to think about specific
things that we could be doing to boost shares or
do you start thinking, well, you know, there are other
things going on in the economy, interest rates are going up.
That sort of thing. I just wonder, you know, put
(25:11):
us inside your mind for a second. As a CFO,
when you look at a share price, what is happening
in your head?
Speaker 4 (25:17):
Yeah? I try.
Speaker 5 (25:18):
I try to assess for really rapid movement, what is
going on? You know, day to day, stock's going to
jump all that, you know, a little bit up, a
little bit down, a little bit.
Speaker 4 (25:27):
That happens all the time.
Speaker 5 (25:29):
So I try to assess, Okay, Number one, is it
a specific event for us? A news item, whether it's
a regulatory update on a clinical trial, or whether we
give you know, guidance on financials or whatever it might be.
Speaker 4 (25:43):
Is it a specific event? Did we do it well?
You know, we take that quite.
Speaker 5 (25:47):
Seriously, and did we communicate it well where we clear
do people get it to investors get it? And even
if they get it, you know, if it's bad news,
the stock may go down, but they understand it and
there's a natural you know, implication to that. Or if
the stock goes up, they are clearly understanding the message
of what we're trying to say.
Speaker 4 (26:03):
So I try to understand Number one, is there a
specific event for us?
Speaker 5 (26:06):
The everyday events in terms of just the global economy
and interest rates worry me less. We're fortunate as I
mentioned to have thirteen billion dollars in cash.
Speaker 4 (26:15):
We don't take it lightly. We try to understand what that.
Speaker 5 (26:18):
Means for us over the coming years in terms of, Okay,
what's going to happen from a demand perspective, or you know,
the cash in the bank will return interest, And so
we obviously are cognizant on the of the implications on
our company, but overall, we're I think we spend the
most time focusing on our investors understanding the long term
opportunity for our company.
Speaker 4 (26:38):
And I think that's what's critical for many companies. And
it is hard to.
Speaker 5 (26:42):
Have investors really look at the long term, and you know,
different portfolio managers, investors have a different view on what
is long term, whether that's twenty four months, five years,
ten years, And we try to make sure that people.
Speaker 4 (26:55):
Understand what is the opportunity ahead and.
Speaker 5 (26:58):
Actually if they are saying it back to us, then
at least they understand it and they might make a
different decision, might wait for it, you know, and we
try to understand what does that mean in terms of
their buying behavior.
Speaker 4 (27:09):
But that's what we.
Speaker 5 (27:10):
Spend the most time doing, is to under just make
sure our investors understand our long term strategy and do
they believe in where we're going.
Speaker 3 (27:33):
It does seem like for companies in some areas that
when a stock is moving lower or maybe higher, but
when this dog is moving lower, that there is an
impulse to course correct in some way. And so you
saw this, for example, I think within big tech, where
we saw this pretty big sell off in twenty twenty
two and a bunch of companies seem to get the
(27:54):
message like, oh, you know what, we really need to
slow our hiring, or maybe we shouldn't bet the entire
company on virtual reality goggles, and we need to cut
our research in this area. That there is this message
about something, and then you see the layoffs and they're like, look,
we've done much better about reducing our cash burned, et cetera.
Do you take a signal I mean, I get there
(28:14):
are certain things that are out of your control that
you have a long term message that you want to
tell the shareholders. But do you take a signal from
larger moves in the market that say, look, the investors
want to see X, and we need to course correct
in some way or another in order to align our goals.
Speaker 4 (28:32):
That's a great question.
Speaker 5 (28:33):
So I think, if there's a big move, and we
should be doing this all the time, but there's something
to listen to, and so I'll just take myself out
of Maderna. I mean, if you're a CFO and your
stock goes down twenty percent, that is a substantial amount
of investors saying it is less valuable. Something's going on,
And I think what you have to listen for is
(28:55):
do we already know that or is it something that
we really have We got to think differently about. So
is our revenue line not going to be what we
think it's going to be? And the investors are ahead
of us because they see something in the marketplace that
is changing. And if that's the case, then sometimes I
mean I take our conversations with investors as a two
way learning.
Speaker 4 (29:13):
I learned from them.
Speaker 5 (29:14):
They give me their thoughts on what they think that
where the market's going, where we're positioned, how we're positioned,
how successful they think we're going to be, just as
much as I try to tell them our view. And
so it is a two way learning. And especially when
there's a huge market move or significant market move, they're.
Speaker 4 (29:29):
Telling you something.
Speaker 5 (29:31):
The question of what you have to sift through is
did we already know that and therefore just stay the
course on strategy, or is it something that, hey, we
might need to think differently about and perhaps we're wrong
on one of our assumptions. So that's how I deal with,
you know, particularly significant moves in the share price.
Speaker 2 (29:47):
So in the course of prepping for this interview, I
was doing, you know, some casual research into MODERNA and
pharma in general, and I stumbled on this article from
Science I think it was from March twenty twenty, so
right in the heart of the pandemic, and it opens
with a discussion of the gartment hype cycle and this
(30:09):
idea that you know, people get really excited about a
new technology. You see share prices of these tech companies
go through the roof, and then there's some adjustment process
or reality kind of sets in the shar's fall, and
then slowly there's a recovery as people kind of enter
realistic productivity and use of these new technologies. And looking
(30:30):
at the MODERNA share price since March of twenty twenty,
it really does look like a gartment hype cycle. Like
if you're going to choose a textbook example, it's kind
of this, So I guess my question is, like, how
do you balance people getting really enthusiastic about new technological
breakthroughs and all these new treatments we have in the pipeline.
(30:53):
I mean, I don't think you're working on this specifically,
but GLP one weight loss drugs are obviously something that's
kind of burst in to the public consciousness recently. How
do you balance that excitement and the hype versus like
the reality of putting these in production and again, going
back to the timelines that you were discussing the idea
(31:14):
of long term investment, like, don't get too excited. It's
going to take a while for these to enter the market,
and then it's going to potentially take even longer for
them to filter through in an efficient way.
Speaker 5 (31:26):
I think in those cases, I don't know every single case,
but I'm a little closer to the Maderna case. Let's say,
I think it shows the art of the possible, and
I think people understand what could be from Maderna. And
to your point, maybe there's a little over exuberance at
a particular period and time, and I think that's where
I go to what we should be doing, which is
(31:47):
to not tell people that that's still not a real
possibility someday. Well, let's go through the timeline, let's go
through the risks and opportunities, and let's walk it through
our you know, as best to our ability in a
public way.
Speaker 4 (32:00):
Here's what we believe and what.
Speaker 5 (32:02):
Could happen when and after that, investors have to model
their own cashlowds. That's what a stock price is is
ultimately what they think the company's worth from.
Speaker 4 (32:11):
A cashloaw perspective. So I think it's a delicate.
Speaker 5 (32:14):
Balance of we still believe what MODERNA can be and
it should be someday in terms of being able to
solve so many therapeutic areas as a platform company that
can run the same technology through a manufacturing plant, and
so therefore the marginal cost of arguing with drugs should
go down substantially.
Speaker 4 (32:32):
But there's a timeline for that.
Speaker 5 (32:33):
There are regulators, and there's a timeline, and there's only
so much in development as expensive, and so we try
to be as transparent as possible with that, And I
don't know, I guess that's my belief is we sh
just to always make sure people understand what could happen someday,
but also give them the best assumptions possible.
Speaker 4 (32:50):
To the best of your ability over the relative near term.
Speaker 3 (32:54):
Maderna is a according to the Bloomberg right now, I'm
looking at a thirty seven billion dollar company. But obviously
this sort of accelerated development of the COVID vaccine, allowing
life to get back to normal in a maybe a
period of time that was much shorter than people expected.
You know, obviously orders of magnitude more valuable to the
(33:16):
global economy than perhaps what Maderna specifically accrued. And I
guess that's why you know, we had Operation warp Speed.
It certainly seems like in theory you could say the
same thing about other vaccines, other pharma products that are
in the works. You know, I don't know how much
money is lost to the flu every year, but it
would be probably very great for the economy if no
(33:38):
one got the flu anymore, or colds or any other
sort of sicknesses that disrupted our life. Do you think
like I've been a little surprised, you know that after
the Operation Warp Speed experience, we haven't seen more announcements
like hey, let's do an operation warp speed for X
or Y, or maybe they have been and I just
(33:58):
missed the stories like have you seen any follow up
on like, Hey, this model did something powerful, Let's do
it again, let's derisk it, Let's have the government step
in with this investment and guaranteed purchase agreements. Like have
people taken lessons from Operation Warp Speed and applied it
potentially to other areas?
Speaker 5 (34:18):
I think you see some minor examples of that. But
I also just think that COVID was such a significant
event that affected the entire global population that it warranted
both you know, resources from a time perspective as well
as money perspective. And that's not to say that these
other ones don't, but it just it was a crisis.
(34:38):
And so you know, there are areas in oncology that
I think there's additional funding going behind.
Speaker 4 (34:44):
I think people learning. Okay, rare disease, I hear a
lot of talk.
Speaker 5 (34:48):
Again, I am not a scientist, I am not a regulator,
So take it with a grain of salt. But rare
disease as an example, it's rare by nature, so it's
difficult to say it's difficult to actually get enough patients
in data to progress fast because of the regulatory processes,
(35:08):
and I think the regulators acknowledge that and say, hey,
if I only have I'm going to make it up
one hundred patients in the United States. This might take
ten years, but I can already tell in two years
in a phase one trial it's making a significant impact
on fifteen patients. And these are life threatening diseases. It's
worth taking the risk.
Speaker 4 (35:27):
So it might not be at.
Speaker 6 (35:29):
The same speed and emphasism as operation warp speed, but
I have seen a couple areas in oncology and rare disease,
and maybe that's quite honestly, that's where I am personally
spending time, so I see those things, and maybe it's
happening in other areas, but I'm just not as knowledgeable
as all other therapeutic areas.
Speaker 5 (35:48):
But I do see it a little bit more in
oncology and rare disease. Again, not the same as operation
warp speed, but I have seen it change people's minds
and perspectives a little bit.
Speaker 2 (35:57):
I wanted to ask an operational question, which is how
important is distribution to the pharma business. And one of
the reasons I ask is because we recorded an episode
with the Celsius CEO and energy drinks are clearly a
very different business to pharma, but one thing maybe they
have in common is that a lot of your success
(36:18):
depends on actually getting into stores. And obviously, with medicines,
we are not talking about getting into stores. We're talking
about getting into hospitals and pharmacies and doctors' offices, and there,
I imagine you have to face some pretty stiff competition
from competitors like Pfizer or a Glaxo Smith Klein. So
(36:39):
how important is that and how do you how does
that process actually work? What are the discussions like when
it comes to distribution.
Speaker 4 (36:46):
Yeah, I would say I think distribution is very important.
Speaker 5 (36:49):
I think there are other important factors in terms of
making sure that medication reaches a patient, but distribution, I mean,
when I think about it, number one, it's got to
be there at the right time. So take walking into
CBS and wanting a flu shot. If CBS does not
have the flu shot available, there's a chance that you
might not go back for it. And so the importance
(37:11):
of being having the supply in the market when a
patient wants and needs it is extremely important, and distribution plays.
Speaker 4 (37:17):
A role in that.
Speaker 5 (37:18):
There's also many different things that you have to work
through in terms of storage. So some products are required
to be refrigerator stable, some are required to be frozen
at a certain temperature, some are required to be frozen
at a very cold temperature, and making sure that the
distribution network has that as well. So the conversation largely
revolves around that, what can they do to make sure
that we have the right amount of products in the
(37:40):
right channels and buy channels for our industry that means
pharmacies and or doctor's offices, and there's other places to
put it as well, you.
Speaker 4 (37:48):
Know, but that's largely what that conversation does. And I would.
Speaker 7 (37:52):
Say there is some differentiation in the marketplace from a
competitive standpoint, but I wouldn't say different Distribution specifically is
the number one variable for a differentiation between competition.
Speaker 3 (38:05):
Tracy mentioned earlier. But the hot thing, it seems inform
right now that people are really excited about is gop
one drugs and weight loss, and if a company has
something in that category that investors get really excited and
bid up the stock. You know, imagine things go in
(38:25):
and out of style at various times, and people are
really excited about one particular category. Do you feel that
pressure that is like, Okay, this is the hot thing
right now weight loss, and we've you know, suppressed people's
appetite with an injection. Do you feel that pressure and
does that come from investors? Like are you playing in
the space? Do one of your forty products? Is it
(38:47):
going to be potentially related to this category? And I'm curious, like,
you know, you mentioned that sort of two way conversation.
You're telling investors about your pipeline, they're telling you what
they expect. Does this sort of flavor of the month
or flavor of the year when it comes to what's
hot in drugs play into those conversations?
Speaker 4 (39:05):
Not really, not for us, not from what I've heard
from investors.
Speaker 5 (39:09):
I have seen it in other industries for sure, where
and maybe it's just because there's a hot new product
that is really core and central, that could be core
and central to somebody's strategy, but they're missing it GLP
versus what we've laid out is not core and central
to our strategy. And so therefore investors understand that and
quite frankly, rarely.
Speaker 4 (39:29):
Ask about it. Okay, we're in the same yeah, so
just not as applicable to our company.
Speaker 2 (39:33):
You worked at GE for a long time before going
on to Motejarna. I think there was another company in between.
But one thing I'm really curious about is are there
overlaps between pharma and something like the aircraft business. I
have to imagine that both of those industries have really
long lead times that you have to manage, and as
(39:54):
part of that, you also have to manage investor expectations.
Speaker 4 (39:58):
They are so similar.
Speaker 5 (40:01):
So let me paint the aviation business that I worked
in for GE, which was I was in the commercial
engines division, Commercial Engines and Services. So think of you
know the seven three seven maps, a partnership with a
company out of France and GE called CFM. Is the
is the engine on that aircraft? And so when I
was a CFO there, you're making bets on product families
(40:25):
that will be on aircraft for literally forty years. And
these are substantial investments. We're talking two three billion dollars
for a company to invest.
Speaker 4 (40:34):
In, and you have to make the right bet. Are
you on the right.
Speaker 5 (40:38):
Aircraft because you know, you can put an engine on
a bad aircraft and your engine might be great, but
if nobody buys aircraft, it's irrelevant. So not only do
you need to make the best engine, you need to
put it on the right aircraft, people need to buy it,
and then you need to obviously do everything else well.
From an execution standpoint.
Speaker 4 (40:52):
That is no different here.
Speaker 5 (40:53):
I mean, we are making you know, I mentioned our
RSV product as an example, thirty seven dollars in patients.
It's in the hundreds of millions of dollars from an
investment perspective.
Speaker 4 (41:05):
But once it's ready, and if it's there.
Speaker 5 (41:06):
You know that rspeed vac scene probably won't be tweaked
too much. Maybe a little bit of tweaking over time, but.
Speaker 4 (41:13):
We've just cleared a high barrier of entry. Where as
of right now there's only two competitors, and in the aviation.
Speaker 5 (41:19):
Space there's there's largely three competitors. So they're very similar
and so the funding. So let's just give an example,
maybe give you a specific example. When I was at Aviation,
you think through that three billion dollar program, and we
had what we called risk and revenue share partners, which
was somebody to say, hey, we can't invest in six
product families times three billion dollars each. We're going to
have to have some partners that they'll make part of
(41:41):
the engine and they'll help invest in the technology and
they can share in the commercial rewards. That can be
very similar in pharmabiotech. So I mentioned Mark in our partnership.
They funded two hundred and fifty million dollars back in
twenty sixteen and additional moneys since thereafter, and.
Speaker 4 (41:56):
They owned fifty percent of that program. So when you're.
Speaker 5 (41:59):
Thinking about pulling together this entire pipeline across many different
therapeutic areas and they all cost a lot of money
to develop, you need partnerships, and then you know that
that partnership can provide more than just money.
Speaker 4 (42:11):
In the case of Merk, they are great from a
commercial perspective.
Speaker 5 (42:14):
They sell the leading oncology drug and the planet, and
the same in the aviation plant world. You've got to
have people that might make the best part of the
engine that you're talking about to improve fuel consumption. So
they're very similar models one that I think about quite
a bit. And on top of that, maybe the last
thing I'd say is they're both highly regulated. I already
mentioned the biotech space, but aviation, as you know, the
(42:35):
FAA and other agencies across the globe highly regulate the
aviation space to make sure that it is very safe
to fly aircraft across the globe.
Speaker 3 (42:43):
I just have one last question, and I get you know,
for a sort of young company, growth company, you know,
macro may not affect you as it may affect a
more mature company. But I'm just curious, like, when the
FED raises rates dramatically, what does that mean for company
like ours?
Speaker 5 (43:01):
Well, for us, again, we're a bit unique because we
have thirteen billion dollars solid into it our way and
maybe how I think about it for other companies ways,
but that might not have be fortunate to thirteen billion.
Thirteen billion we have I forget the exact number invested
in bonds, but primarily invested in bonds, and so we
look at duration, We look.
Speaker 4 (43:21):
At you know, what does that investment portfolio want to
look like. We're not there to make money on that asset.
Speaker 5 (43:25):
We are there to preserve capital to invest in what
is core to us, which is our R and D
and everything that we've spoken about today. But we look at, okay,
what's that mean? And you know, what's the duration we
should be taking out? Which is a happy problem to
have for us. I would say, I would say, you know,
for a company that is sitting on you know, one
and a half years of cash burn, and you're just
(43:48):
sitting there saying, Okay, you know, I'm about chech. I'm
not revenue yet, I'm not revenue generating yet. I've got
one and a half years of cash burn, you know,
in terms of cash on my balance sheet? What does
this mean? And what do I need to do? You know,
am I going to make it? You know how interest
rates affect me? Should I reposition myself?
Speaker 4 (44:05):
Do I What do I need from a death perspective?
Speaker 5 (44:08):
You know, it's just such a different animal in terms
of surviving that time period in a different way.
Speaker 2 (44:15):
All Right, Jamie Mock, CFO of Moderna, thank you so
much for coming on all thoughts. That was a really
interesting conversation. I feel like I understand MODERNA now and
also the role of CFO a little bit better.
Speaker 4 (44:27):
Well, thank you, Tracy angel I really enjoyed it and
it was a pleasure. Amazing you both.
Speaker 2 (44:43):
So, Joe, that was really interesting and kind of surprisingly
thematic in a lot of ways. It seemed to touch
on a bunch of recent things we've been talking about,
like aviation.
Speaker 3 (44:54):
Mike, Yeah, I wasn't expecting that.
Speaker 2 (44:56):
Yeah, Like distribution, although I take his point that that
isn't I guess, a main source of competitive differentiation. But
I'm glad I've finally got the chance to ask a
CFO what he thinks when he sees the share price
going down. I always wanted to ask that.
Speaker 3 (45:11):
Yeah, No, I mean I think it's really interesting. I mean,
at the end of the day, like, right, any company
can talk about their vision or their roadmap, et cetera,
But when investors are selling your stock. I think I
appreciated his fourth rightness that like you have to take
that seriously on some level, like it seems like there's
(45:31):
only so far any company can go in terms of
staying on one path if investors don't like the path.
Speaker 2 (45:39):
Yeah, And just on that note, I also thought it
was really interesting his discussion of I guess encouraging investors
to think over the long term, and also the idea
that everyone has a different definition of what the long
term actually is. And I suspect those definitions have been
getting shorter in recent years. But you know, it can
range for twenty four months to like ten years, And
(46:01):
how do you actually convince people to stay with the company,
be excited about the product offering and the pipeline, but
not get too excited and expect that immediacy for things
that take a particularly long time to develop.
Speaker 3 (46:19):
Totally, you know, the I was not expecting him to
like draw those analogies between pharma development and commercial engines,
but it makes so much sense because obviously you have this,
you know, this huge runway, no pun intended, and then
you're locked in for a long time and the product
isn't going to change after that until you're really taking
(46:39):
this sort of like extremely long uncertain bet. I also
really like to description of the processes that they have
in place for internal capital allocation. You know, you have
like forty different processes and that like competition element between
the different subject areas.
Speaker 2 (46:56):
Yeah, absolutely, shall we leave it there.
Speaker 3 (46:59):
Let's leave it there, all right.
Speaker 2 (47:00):
This has been another episode of the Audlots podcast. I'm
Tracy Alloway. You can follow me at Tracy Alloway and.
Speaker 3 (47:06):
I'm Joe Wisenthal. You can follow me at the Stalwart.
Follow our producers Kerman Rodriguez at Kerman Arman, Dashel Bennett
at Dashbot, and Kilbrooks at Kelbrooks. Thank you to our
producer Moses Ondem from our Oddlots content. Go to Bloomberg
dot com slash odd Lotshere we have transcripts, a blog,
and a newsletter, and you can chat about all of
our episodes with fellow listeners in the discord twenty four
(47:29):
to seven discord dot gg slash odlock.
Speaker 2 (47:32):
And if you enjoy Oddlots, if you like it when
we talk to CFOs about what they actually do on
a daily basis, then please leave us a positive review
on your favorite podcast platform. And remember, if you are
a Bloomberg subscriber, you can listen to all of our
episodes absolutely ad free. All you need to do is
connect your Bloomberg account to Apple Podcasts. Thanks for listening
Speaker 5 (48:10):
In
Hosts And Creators
Joe Weisenthal
Tracy Alloway
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.