Customisable watchlists with full streaming quotes from leading exchanges, such as LSE, NASDAQ, NYSE, AMEX, Bovespa, BIT and more.
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Stock Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gsk Plc | GSK | London | Ordinary Share |
| Price Change | Price Change % | Share Price | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3.00 | 0.23% | 1,303.00 | 08:36:05 |
| Open Price | Low Price | High Price | Close Price | Previous Close |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1,300.00 | 1,300.00 | 1,309.50 | 1,300.00 |
| Industry Sector |
|---|
| PHARMACEUTICALS & BIOTECHNOLOGY |
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 17/11/2024 14:12 by jubberjim I had this sell off attributed to the legal difficulties currently being experienced by AZN big wigs in China,this was then followed by the appointment of a Health Secretly in the USA who is as deluded as trump.I will just bide my time conserve my funds and top up when I feel it is appropriate but not at this present moment in time. 'This too shall pass'. But my holdings might take a beating in the meantime. Grow some fellow investors. |
Posted at 15/11/2024 13:59 by fuji99 Pharmaceutical companies were the main FTSE 100 losers. GSK was down 3.2%, Croda International lost 2.9%, and AstraZeneca was down 2.5%."The announcement of vaccine-sceptic Robert F Kennedy Junior as health secretary pick for the incoming Trump administration has spooked investors in the sector, with US drug companies also seeing their shares come under significant pressure overnight," explained Mould. "The impact on the sector is hard to judge fully at this stage but, at the very least, it will cause a good deal of uncertainty.". |
Posted at 31/10/2024 09:57 by halfpenny Everyone is marking them Down Down Down!Smart Investors target price 1000p How Soon How Low its a disaster!! |
Posted at 30/10/2024 09:22 by halfpenny Will 1400 hold!! I doubt it...then massive falls as Investors wake up and Sell Sell SellDo You Feel Lucky!!! |
Posted at 25/10/2024 08:58 by cumnor Big investors have little real confidence in Emma imo. For such an important UK bellwether GSK needs a CEO who is promoting the company, out there, getting IIs on board. Look at how protective the French Government is of their companies like Sanofi.Despite a string of small positive RNSs over the past two years-none of which are mega, but incrementally should be driving the bottom line and dividend increases, which is what GSK is all about, we hear little. Emma is not pushing hard enough-or just seems to lack the authority (unlike Pascal Soirot at AZN) to gain the markets respect. No mainstream publicity whatsoever regarding the latest filling for treating UTIs. While these things do not bring the recurring revenue of Statins etc they can have a profound impact on the lives of many women with recurring infections and a rare, new antibiotic is significant and should be news. Where is the marketing-although it's still awaiting the FDAs approval-which could at least bolster GSK's profile for trying? |
Posted at 23/10/2024 13:10 by hpcg I'm invested so I think it can turn around. There is some promise and focus in the pipeline. If they did anything suicidal like increase the dividend I would be out immediately.Different sector, but SSE has significantly improved its performance since it rebased its dividend, twice. Not only that but my tax bill on reinvesting has also halved. Dividend reinvestment is an absolutely insane concept really, just keep the money inside the company, job done. Spit out 1 or 2% so investors can cover costs, no more. |
Posted at 23/10/2024 12:26 by hpcg It is the comparison with AZN which is stark. It pays out much less, always has, but is a 2-bagger over 10 years, without reinvesting dividends. Pharma investors need to understand that as a business it is no different to a mining, company, oil company, for that matter any trading company; there is no infinite pipeline of revenue, assets have to be renewed all the time. |
Posted at 10/10/2024 15:41 by geckotheglorious GSK update eases investors’ fears as focus turns to vaccinesFTSE 100 pharmaceutical giant resolves legal case over Zantac drug as concern shifts to uptake of firm's key vaccines. Relief for GSK investors after the drugs giant moved to end two years of Zantac litigation uncertainty was today balanced by near-term worries over the uptake of key vaccines. GSK shares reached early afternoon 5% or 70p higher at 1528p, below the initial 10% uptick predicted by Jefferies analysts following last night’s disclosure. Jefferies said the settlement of 93% of Zantac liability cases for $2.2 billion is equivalent to about 40p a share and compared with its own $2 billion-$3.5 billion estimate. GSK, which admitted no liability, intends to fund the costs from existing financial resources and said there will be no impact on its “growth agenda or investment plans”. Its dividend policy for a payout equivalent to 40%-60% of earnings is unchanged, it told City analysts. Having noted higher previous product liability settlements in the pharma industry, UBS said the value of the GSK agreement should be a positive surprise to investors. It said: “We see the settlement as a clear positive, removing a major overhang and uncertainty for investors.” The bank pointed out that the remaining 7% of cases were outstanding because the company had chosen to approach the 10 largest plaintiff firms as a priority. The process is set to conclude by the end of the first half of 2025. Like counterparts at Jefferies, UBS warned that other factors may continue to hang over GSK’s valuation despite the removal of Zantac uncertainty. UBS said these near-term challenges included weak uptake for the respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) product Arexvy and increasing competition in long-acting HIV prevention. It also flagged slower-than-expected uptake of shingles vaccine Shingrix in China. Launched in the third quarter of 2023 and available in major retail pharmacies, Arexvy generated £244 million in sales in the first six months of the year. It had two-thirds of the retail vaccination share in the second quarter, but demand decreased overall in line with anticipated respiratory virus seasonality patterns. UBS has a Neutral stance and price target of 1,580p, while Jefferies had a price target of 2,000p prior to yesterday’s legal developments. The US bank said: “Concerns linger over sales expectations for RSV vaccine Arexvy in both the second half and 2025 given recent slow US RSV vaccine uptake and data supporting an every three year re-vaccination schedule. “In addition, investors continue to debate the sustainability of the Shingrix franchise, given US sales declines and potential concerns around uptake in China.” GSK is due to post third-quarter results on 30 October, having upgraded full-year guidance in July as new launches in oncology boosted sales growth in its Specialty Medicines division. Turnover is now expected to grow by between 7% and 9% and core earnings per share in the range of 10% and 12%. It recently paid a 15p a share quarterly dividend as part of plans to distribute 60p a share across the year. Shore Capital points out that shares trade on a forward looking multiple of 8.1 times, a significant discount to peers and below the 12 times that GSK has historically commanded. It believes shares deserve to be at 2,200p. Analyst Sean Conroy expects that the Zantac developments will serve as a clearing event for GSK and be broadly well received. He added: “This now provides an excellent opportunity for the shares to properly re-rate and allow people to refocus their attention on the improving growth outlook GSK has been delivering since the demerger of Haleon" |
Posted at 22/9/2024 13:59 by xtrmntr Earlier this month, authorities in China arrested five AstraZeneca (AZN) employees as part of an investigation into data privacy violations and imports of unlicensed medications.The group acknowledged the arrests in a statement, but declined to offer any further information. While there's no indication the legal action could impact sales, investors are bound to view these developments as evidence of escalating tensions between western drugmakers and the Chinese state.This month, US legislators also backed a bill that limits American companies from doing business with Chinese Communist Party-owned entities, which can be key links in the supply chain. Until recently, the pharmaceutical industry remained relatively insulated from the simmering trade war between China and the US. According to the Atlantic Council, a think tank, US imports of China-made medicines grew nearly 500 per cent from $2.1bn (£1.6bn) to $10.3bn between 2020 and 2022. The same can't be said for tariff-hit electric vehicles or aerospace components. However, suspicion is growing on the part of the US and its European allies, and measures to reduce or restrict Chinese pharmaceutical imports are gaining momentum. Whether this will ultimately hobble collaboration and innovation is an important question, particularly for AstraZeneca. R&D advantagesChina is increasingly important to the pharma giant and not just because of its sizeable consumer market. "We also intend to leverage our Chinese presence for cell therapy," chief executive Pascal Soriot told analysts at a May investor day. "In the early phase of clinical development, you can move much faster than anywhere else in the world." The country's government began reforming its drug approvals process in 2015, with the aim of fast-tracking the development of innovative medicines. Western pharmaceutical groups have taken note of the country's supportive regulatory regime and moved to acquire smaller biotech companies with promising pipelines. Early this year, AstraZeneca completed its $1.2bn buyout of Shanghai-based Gracell Biotechnologies, a developer of cell therapies for cancer and autoimmune diseases. Switzerland's Novartis (CH:NOVN) picked up kidney disease specialist SanReno, also based in Shanghai, at around the same time.However, both companies have also had to take steps to safeguard their China operations from the impact of ongoing trade tensions with the US. Soriot told journalists on the sidelines of AstraZeneca's investor day that the firm was taking steps to build a China-only supply chain to get ahead of any future disruptions. Meanwhile, Novartis has been reviewing its relationships with China-based manufacturing and contract research partners in case US lawmakers bar them from working together. Biosecurity concernsLast week, the House of Representatives passed the so-called Biosecure Act by 306 to 81 votes. The bill effectively prohibits US federal agencies from ordering products with "biotechnology companies of concern" in the supply chain meaning those deemed to pose a threat to national security. Five firms with alleged ties to the Chinese Communist Party, including widely-used manufacturer WuXi AppTec, have been named in the bill, which would need to pass in the Senate to become law. It has also been reported that weight-loss drugmaker Eli Lilly (US:LLY) is seeking alternative suppliers in case its China operations are stalled. The company, along with many other US and EU drugmakers, relies on WuXi to make key ingredients for its products. Despite this hawkish turn, it appears China is still keen to license and distribute innovative drugs made by European companies. GSK (GSK) announced last week that the country's Centre for Drug Evaluation had granted breakthrough therapy status to Blenrep and BorDex, a combination designed to target drug-resistant blood cancer. This means the medicines will enjoy an expedited approval process because studies have shown they may be more effective than available alternatives.GSK's presence in China is much smaller than AstraZeneca's largely because a court found its sales staff had been bribing doctors to prescribe its medicines in 2014. The scandal resulted in a fine of £300mn and a prison sentence for the firm's former head of Chinese operations. However, relations have improved in recent years, with the company inking a $3bn deal with domestic biotech Zhifei for distribution of its shingles vaccine in late 2023. It seems legal issues and import restrictions may not fully restrict the global trade in medical innovations. |
Posted at 05/7/2024 19:08 by xtrmntr It has been a turbulent few months for GSK (GSK) and its investors. The group hiked earnings guidance in May after a strong first quarter, only to see its shares tumble a few weeks later following an inauspicious ruling in the litigation cases relating to heartburn drug Zantac. Now it appears a revised recommendation from US health regulators will hurt sales of one of the company's key vaccines, Arexvy.The jab is designed to protect adults against RSV, a common respiratory virus that can cause serious illness in vulnerable individuals. Both Pfizer (US:PFE) and Moderna (US:MRNA) have produced competitor vaccines, although Arexvy was the first on the market. Last year, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) advised everyone over 60 to get immunised against RSV which was seemingly good news for market leader GSK.However, after reviewing the data, a CDC committee said vaccines should be restricted to the 75-plus cohort, with exceptions for 60-74 years olds with pre-existing conditions. "This move was characterised by one speaker as protecting 'the worried well' from any risks," said UBS analyst Jo Walton. "And if it turns out that re-boosting is not possible, [the decision] keeps the vaccine for use only when a patient is most likely to get a benefit."GSK had also hoped US health authorities would endorse Arexvy for 50-59-year-olds after a recent Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for this group. But no such support materialised. According to UBS, this means interested patients would probably have to self-fund their vaccinations at a list price of $300 (£236). Jabs that receive the CDC's seal of approval tend to receive some level of insurance coverage, meaning patients can access them at reduced rates.At present, there isn't enough data on Arexvy's durability for regulators to endorse booster doses and this is crucial for predicting future earnings. Once the results of ongoing trials are published, it's possible that the CDC could expand its recommendations to include vulnerable people in additional age brackets. Brokers are seemingly divided over the longer-term impact of last week's decision, with one Citi analyst stating peak sales of the jab would now "fall materially".Meanwhil |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions
Hot Features
Premium
