Market Report Source

Overview

Introduction
This analysis examines the historical and forecast performance for Gilead in the ethical pharmaceutical sector. The profile encompasses global company strategy, portfolio and pipeline analysis and assessment of financial performance, with 1-6 year sales forecasts for key drugs. An interactive forecasting and analysis tool provides continually updated quantitative and qualitative information.

Reasons to Purchase
Benchmark Gilead’s performance against key rivals in the ethical pharmaceutical sector
Understand how Gilead’s growth rate will slow as next generation products cannibalize predecessor product sales”

Table of Contents

CHAPTER 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Key findings

Historical and forecast ethical sales performance

Therapeutic strategy

Launch and expiry outlook

Externalization, geographic and molecule type strategies

Externalization strategy

Geographic strategy

Molecule type strategy

SWOT analysis

Strengths

Weaknesses

Opportunities

Threats

CHAPTER 2 CORPORATE HISTORY

Key findings

Background

Key corporate developments

M&A history

Myogen

Corus

Raylo Chemicals

M&A strategy

Current management team

CHAPTER 3 HISTORICAL PERFORMANCE

Key findings

Introduction

Revenue and growth rate analysis, 2002–05

Revenue and growth rate vs. peer set

Product analysis, 2002–05

Growth drivers

Operating revenue and cost analysis, 2002–05

Operating revenue/cost analysis

CHAPTER 4 FORECAST PERFORMANCE

Key findings

Introduction

Revenue and growth rate, 2005–11

Product analysis, 2005–11

Growth drivers

Growth resistors

Therapy area analysis, 2005–11

Infectious disease

Cardiovascular

Therapy area focus

Launches and expiries analysis, 2005–11

Launch portfolio

Core portfolio

Expiry portfolio

Launch/core/expiry configuration

Externalization analysis, 2005–11

Geographic analysis, 2005–11

Molecule type analysis, 2005–11

CHAPTER 5 KEY PRODUCTS AND COMPETITORS

Key findings

Infectious Disease

Atripla

Truvada

Viread

Cardiovascular

ambrisentan

R&D pipeline

CHAPTER 6 APPENDIX

IMS vs. company-reported data reconciliation

References

Abbreviations

TABLE OF TABLES

Table 1: Gilead Corporate Executive Committee

Table 2: Peer set overview

Table 3: Operating revenue/cost analysis ($m), 2002–05

Table 4: Operating cost ratio analysis (% of total revenues), 2002–05

Table 5: Product portfolio overview, sales ($m), 2005–11

Table 6: Therapy area overview, sales ($m), 2005–11

Table 7: Launch portfolio overview, sales ($m), 2005–11

Table 8: Core portfolio overview, sales ($m), 2005–11

Table 9: Expiry portfolio overview, sales ($m), 2005–11

Table 10: Externally developed portfolio, 2005–11 ($m)

Table 11: Molecule type overview, sales ($m), 2005–11

Table 12: Atripla: overview

Table 13: Atripla: sales forecast ($m), 2005–11

Table 14: Atripla: newsflow

Table 15: Truvada: overview

Table 16: Truvada: sales forecast ($m), 2005–11

Table 17: Truvada: newsflow

Table 18: Viread: overview

Table 19: Viread: sales forecast ($m), 2005–11

Table 20: Viread: newsflow

Table 21: ambrisentan: overview

Table 22: ambrisentan: sales forecast ($m), 2005–11

Table 23: ambrisentan: newsflow

Table 24: Gilead’s R&D pipeline (Phase I–registration)

Table 25: Gilead’s indication broadening pipeline (Phase I–registration)

TABLE OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Historical and forecast ethical sales performance (% CAGR), Gilead and Biotech peer set

Figure 2: Therapeutic focus vs. Biotech peer set (%), 2005

Figure 3: Launch, core and expiry, absolute sales growth, 2005–11 (sales as % of 2005 sales), Gilead

Figure 4: Launch, core and expiry, absolute sales growth, 2005–11 (sales as % of 2005 sales), peer set

Figure 5: Molecule type, externalization and geographic market dependency (%) vs. peer set, 2005

Figure 6: Molecule type, externalization and geographic market dependency (%) vs. peer set, 2011

Figure 7: SWOT analysis of Gilead

Figure 8: Revenue & growth rate (ethical sales) ($m), 2002–05

Figure 9: Ethical revenue ($m) and growth rate (%) vs. peer set, 2002–05

Figure 10: Growth drivers/resistor products of historical revenue performance ($m), 2002–05

Figure 11: Operating revenue/cost analysis ($m), 2002–05

Figure 12: Operating cost ratio analysis (% of total revenues), 2002–05

Figure 13: Operating cost ratio vs. peer set, 2002–05

Figure 14: Ethical revenue ($m) and growth rate (%), 2005–11

Figure 15: Top five products by sales ($m), 2005

Figure 16: Top five products by sales ($m), 2011

Figure 17: Growth drivers and resistors by product, 2005–11

Figure 18: Key strategic products, sales ($m), 2005–11

Figure 19: Ethical sales by therapy area ($m), 2005–11

Figure 20: Growth drivers and resistors by therapy area (%), 2005–11

Figure 21: Ethical sales by therapy area (%), 2005–11

Figure 22: Therapy area focus compared with peer set (% total ethical sales), 2005

Figure 23: Therapy area focus compared with peer set (% total ethical sales), 2011

Figure 24: Launch schedule, sales ($m), 2005–11

Figure 25: Core products sales growth ($m), 2005–11

Figure 26: Expiry schedule, sales ($m), 2005–11

Figure 27: Launch, core and expiry, sales ($m), 2005–11

Figure 28: Launch, core and expiry, absolute sales growth, 2005–11 (sales as % of 2005 sales), Gilead

Figure 29: Launch, core and expiry, absolute sales growth, 2005–11 (sales as % of 2005 sales), peer set

Figure 30: Externalization dependency, sales ($m), 2005–11

Figure 31: Growth drivers and resistors, externally vs. internally discovered products, sales ($m), 2005–11

Figure 32: Externalization dependency vs. peer set, % total sales, 2005

Figure 33: Externalization dependency vs. peer set, % total sales, 2011

Figure 34: Geographical sales breakdown ($m), 2005–11

Figure 35: Growth drivers and resistors by geography, sales ($m), 2005–11

Figure 36: US dependency vs. peer set, % total sales, 2005

Figure 37: US dependency vs. peer set, % total sales, 2011

Figure 38: Growth drivers and resistors by molecule type, sales ($m), 2005–11

Figure 39: Molecule type sales breakdown ($m), 2005–11

Figure 40: Biologics dependency vs. peer set, % total sales, 2005

Figure 41: Biologics dependency vs. peer set, % total sales, 2011

Figure 42: IMS vs. company-reported ethical sales discrepancy ($m), 2005

Figure 43: IMS vs. company-reported ethical sales forecast growth rates (%), 2005–11