Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio News.
Speaker 2: This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Jonathan Ferrow, along
Speaker 2: with Lisa Bromwitz and Amrie Hordern. Join us each day
Speaker 2: for insight from the best in markets, economics, and geopolitics
Speaker 2: from our global headquarters in New York City. We are
Speaker 2: live on Bloomberg Television weekday mornings from six to nine
Speaker 2: am Eastern. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify or
Speaker 2: anywhere else you listen, and as always on the Bloomberg
Speaker 2: Terminal and the Bloomberg Business app. So here's the latest
Speaker 2: ABC News confirming Vice President Kamala Harrison former President Donald
Speaker 2: Trump have agreed to a President and Your debate on
Speaker 2: September tent. The two sides hitting the campaign trail in
Speaker 2: full force today, Harris holding a rally in Phoenix as
Speaker 2: Trump heads to Montana. Jeanette Lowis Tratiguez joined us now
Speaker 2: for Moreette, this has been agreed. September tenth is the
Speaker 2: day on ABC. I just wander, from your perspective, who
Speaker 2: is most at risk? Go aga into that.
Speaker 3: I think that Trump is a little bit more worried
Speaker 3: about his positioning since Harris has gotten into the race
Speaker 3: and is now the Democratic nominee.
Speaker 4: So I think he is actually looking at.
Speaker 3: This to try to have a similar a similar debate
Speaker 3: as he had on June twenty seventh against President Biden.
Speaker 4: So I think there's more risk there.
Speaker 3: What we're definitely seeing since Harris has gotten into the
Speaker 3: race is a lot more momentum on the Democratic side.
Speaker 3: You've seen the national polls a three point five percentage
Speaker 3: point move from Trump, who had been up about three
Speaker 3: percentage points to now Harris being up just about a
Speaker 3: half a percentage point. In the swing states that matter
Speaker 3: for this election, you've seen a move of more than
Speaker 3: two point five points in Harris's direction. So now we
Speaker 3: really do have a fifty to fifty race where it
Speaker 3: could be a very close calm November, and I think
Speaker 3: he really wants to use the debate to try to
Speaker 3: rehighlight and be able to attack Harris on some of
Speaker 3: the key issues that he thinks are un lacking.
Speaker 5: Now, Jenette. He also yesterday in his press conference, Donald
Speaker 5: Trump floated to other debate who was more at risk
Speaker 5: of having more debate time when it comes to not
Speaker 5: just on this ABC News one, but Trump was floating
Speaker 5: an NBC News debate as well as a Fox News debate.
Speaker 4: You know, it's interesting.
Speaker 3: So obviously, I think the June twenty seventh debate that
Speaker 3: was probably a bit of a surprise to many people.
Speaker 3: You know, usually the incumbent president does lose their presidential debate,
Speaker 3: but that was just quite a different debate than I
Speaker 3: think anyone was expecting.
Speaker 4: Trump could be more.
Speaker 3: Disciplined in the debates, as we saw in the June
Speaker 3: twenty seventh debate, but at the same time, there could
Speaker 3: be you know, different reactions, kind of like what we
Speaker 3: had in his press conference yesterday, where that could actually
Speaker 3: hurt him. Now, if Harris is also on the defensive
Speaker 3: and he's actually get able to get a lot of blows,
Speaker 3: that can hurt her, So debates can actually be quite
Speaker 3: up in the air. I think that's why we also
Speaker 3: kind of want to see what happens at this first debate,
Speaker 3: and if that means we want more than one usually,
Speaker 3: but obviously we do have three. So I think Trump
Speaker 3: is now trying to go back to that traditional mode.
Speaker 3: But that's also a lot in a couple of weeks
Speaker 3: right before the election, so we'll see what happens.
Speaker 5: We also heard from Kamala Harris yesterday, the Vice president
Speaker 5: talking about the fact that her team has scheduled or
Speaker 5: she's asking her team to schedule a sit down interview
Speaker 5: before the end of the month. Unclear if that means
Speaker 5: it's going to be scheduled for August or potentially September,
Speaker 5: but there was also reporting that they would maybe want
Speaker 5: to sit her down with her feet pee pick Governor Wallas.
Speaker 5: Do you get a sense that the campaign is trying
Speaker 5: to shield her from some of these more direct confrontations
Speaker 5: with journalists.
Speaker 3: You know, I think it's unclear. I think one of
Speaker 3: the things that this has been a very fast campaign,
Speaker 3: so it's only been three weeks. I think to some extent,
Speaker 3: she might be still trying to get her feet under
Speaker 3: her and make sure that she kind of knows what.
Speaker 4: Her policy positions are.
Speaker 3: So there could be some of that in part of
Speaker 3: the delay as to really be doing more of these interviews.
Speaker 3: But I think also she's kind of has the momentum
Speaker 3: at this point now.
Speaker 4: She is a better debater.
Speaker 3: She is better in front of the camera, I think
Speaker 3: than she has been in the past, So I think
Speaker 3: that does have a benefit for her, But there could
Speaker 3: be other factors that I'm not quite sure exactly what
Speaker 3: they may be, but I think this is something that
Speaker 3: the Trump campaign is now trying to latch onto to
Speaker 3: try and make that saying that she won't show up
Speaker 3: in front of the press, she won't do interviews, and
Speaker 3: she won't take.
Speaker 4: Questions to that.
Speaker 1: She's been vice president for about four years now, Is
Speaker 1: it a problem she doesn't yet know her policies?
Speaker 4: Well?
Speaker 3: I think it's also just, you know, as a vice president,
Speaker 3: she's trying to toe the line of what the president
Speaker 3: Biden wanted right now. You know, we've seen that she's
Speaker 3: not taking necessarily the same positions that she took as
Speaker 3: a candidate in the twenty twenty cycle, so things like fracking,
Speaker 3: she's trying to like moderate her position on Israel a
Speaker 3: little bit. I think these are the things that she
Speaker 3: wants to really make sure she has really ironed out better,
Speaker 3: because obviously we know in this new cycle that people
Speaker 3: love to take anything that you say and then kind
Speaker 3: of spin it. So I think she also wants to
Speaker 3: make sure she does have her messaging down. But she
Speaker 3: does also have a risk there that if she's actually
Speaker 3: not showing up in in front of the press, she's
Speaker 3: not able to answer questions and talk about our policies.
Speaker 3: That can also be a risk for her campaign as well.
Speaker 2: Janet, just before you go, quite clearly the vice president
Speaker 2: is driving enthusiasm at the top of the ticare how
Speaker 2: is sent in House? Rice is evolving since Spiden dropped
Speaker 2: out and she stepped up.
Speaker 3: Yeah, So one of the biggest things that we've seen
Speaker 3: is that since Biden got off the ticket and Harris
Speaker 3: is now the new nominee, we've seen the odds of
Speaker 3: a Republican sweep drop quite a bit. They were fifty
Speaker 3: five percent on July sixteenth, They're now down to thirty
Speaker 3: two percent this morning. And you also have twenty five
Speaker 3: percent odds of a Democratic sweep and twenty five percent
Speaker 3: odds of divided government in the scenario of a Democratic president,
Speaker 3: Democratic House.
Speaker 4: And a Republican Senate. I think what's interesting about.
Speaker 3: This cycle is is that you could have divided government
Speaker 3: under either scenario whoever wins the presidency, just because the
Speaker 3: margins are so tight right now in the House and
Speaker 3: the Senate. So, for instance, if Harris is getting a
Speaker 3: lot of momentum, the Democrats only need a net four
Speaker 3: seats to win the House, and those are seats that
Speaker 3: are also in states like Alabama, and there's one seat
Speaker 3: in Alabama, there's seats in California and New York and
Speaker 3: New Jersey. The Democrats do have an opportunity to flip
Speaker 3: this cycle. So if she has momentum, even if she
Speaker 3: doesn't win the presidency, there is still a possibility the
Speaker 3: Democrats could have control of the House. On the flip side,
Speaker 3: the Senate does look like it's going to move to
Speaker 3: the Republicans because you have a center or mansion no
Speaker 3: longer running in West Virginia. I think that becomes a
Speaker 3: Republican pickup. And then also John Tester is currently down
Speaker 3: in the state of Montana, so that could be another pickup.
Speaker 4: So there is this.
Speaker 3: Interesting dynamic where we could have divided government no matter what.
Speaker 3: So I think that that's something that we need to
Speaker 3: look forward to because it's obviously going to have big
Speaker 3: implications for what policies can be enacted next year, and
Speaker 3: particularly as we're talking about the debate. I'm sorry, it's
Speaker 3: about taxes and the debt ceiling debate.
Speaker 2: Jeanette got it, just fantastic. ANCIL always do not load
Speaker 2: their astrtigus days that I says Donald Trump using a
Speaker 2: Marijuanca news conference to express frustration at the Federal Reserve.
Speaker 2: The comments echoing of Wall Street Journal report back in
Speaker 2: April saying that Trump's allies are drawing up plans to
Speaker 2: blunt the Fed's independence should he win a second term,
Speaker 2: a report that Trump's team has since pushed back on.
Speaker 2: Repeatedly joined US Now to discuss his Republican Congressman Frendshill
Speaker 2: of Arkansas Congressman, I'm going to start with a really
Speaker 2: dangerous question. What is the former president talking about?
Speaker 6: Well, Jonathan, great to be with you. I think every
Speaker 6: president in the modern era has certainly criticized the FED
Speaker 6: and lashed out and trying to have more control over
Speaker 6: the FED. But since World War Two, having FED independence
Speaker 6: is important. We want to try to have price stability.
Speaker 6: That's their mission. I wish they focused only on the
Speaker 6: price stability, but nonetheless that's their mission. And over my
Speaker 6: time in public life, I've seen presidents try to influence
Speaker 6: the FED through moral suasion by calling them over to
Speaker 6: the Oval office. Baker and Ronald Reagan with Valen Green
Speaker 6: span for the nineteen eighty four A vote election year.
Speaker 6: But the bottom line is the FED can appoint, be
Speaker 6: able to have fled's chairman appointed by the President to
Speaker 6: the Senate confirms that position. The House and Senate conduct
Speaker 6: major oversight over the operate fat Well, there is political tension.
Speaker 5: There, Congressman. We heard from Jared Bernstein, of course, from
Speaker 5: the White House director of the chair of the White
Speaker 5: House Council of Economic Advisors. He tweeted this yesterday saying
Speaker 5: history cannot be clear regarding the lasting and damaging inflationary
Speaker 5: consequences of ignoring this lesson, of reversing the hard earned
Speaker 5: progress of the past half century. So you agree with
Speaker 5: the White House that the FED should remain completely independent, Well,
Speaker 5: I agree with.
Speaker 6: The record of history that the FED should be independent.
Speaker 6: That's a central bank tenet that the FED should generally,
Speaker 6: the central bank of a country should be independent of
Speaker 6: the fiscal authority or or the legislator of brench to
Speaker 6: protect the price stability. And as I say, since World
Speaker 6: War Two, when we had actually Treasury representation on the
Speaker 6: FED board, that's been done informally through the appointment process
Speaker 6: to make sure the President's pleased with whoever the chair is,
Speaker 6: and the Senate confirmation process, and there have been times
Speaker 6: during tension where there's been White House meetings with FED
Speaker 6: chairs or White House influence. Richard Nixon famously trying to
Speaker 6: influence Arthur Burns during the nineteen seventy two election cycle,
Speaker 6: the Jim Baker and Ronald Reagan antidote that I just mentioned.
Speaker 6: But structurally it's maintained its independence, and I think that's important.
Speaker 5: So let's talk about some of the FED policy. When
Speaker 5: the Foreign President was talking about this yesterday, that he
Speaker 5: would potentially have a better gut feeling or interest rate
Speaker 5: should be, he said that heat chair Powell tends to
Speaker 5: be a little bit lead on things. He gets things
Speaker 5: a little bit too early and a little too late,
Speaker 5: and he says he would have this feeling potentially he'd
Speaker 5: be a better FED chair because of that. Do you
Speaker 5: agree with where the FED is right now or do
Speaker 5: you think they should be cutting and if so, do
Speaker 5: you think it'll be political for them to take this cut?
Speaker 5: In September, well Sherman Bella says they're data dependent.
Speaker 6: I think that's good, But I think the way to
Speaker 6: avoid these kinds of fights without much assurance of what
Speaker 6: direction of the other is to have a rules based
Speaker 6: monetary policy, the so called John Taylor Rule from Stanford University.
Speaker 6: John and I work together on the White House Staff
Speaker 6: in the nineties. The so called Taylor Rule would make
Speaker 6: a range of mathematical recommendations on the targeting of short
Speaker 6: rate rates by the FED. As opposed to it being
Speaker 6: just a group of individuals on the Board of Governors
Speaker 6: deciding that, or as Jim Grant refers to it, a
Speaker 6: PhD standard, we would actually have a rules based standard.
Speaker 6: Some others want to go back to a gold standard.
Speaker 6: But a rules based standard would have a range of
Speaker 6: guidance to the Fed of whend to cut and how
Speaker 6: much to cut, and that would take some of this
Speaker 6: instinct out of it.
Speaker 1: So Congressmen, given that, and this is a criticism, other
Speaker 1: people have said that the FED needs more of a framework.
Speaker 1: They don't have reliable framework at this moment. Do you
Speaker 1: think that's something that should be mandated in for the FED?
Speaker 1: Would you like to see something along those lines.
Speaker 6: I would like to see a rules based framework. And
Speaker 6: when Chairman Powell was before the Committee a few weeks ago,
Speaker 6: I asked him the status of their reassessment of their
Speaker 6: very famous decision in August of twenty twenty, in the
Speaker 6: middle of a pandemic, to just let inflation run a
Speaker 6: little hotter than two percent, knowing that they could rein
Speaker 6: it in which I think.
Speaker 1: Is a.
Speaker 6: Strong presumption that I don't know that's based in fact
Speaker 6: as we've witnessed since twenty twenty one. I think that
Speaker 6: is an opportunity for the Fed to reassess using a
Speaker 6: rules based framework for their monetary policy.
Speaker 2: A Congressman, since we last spoke, this race has changed
Speaker 2: a lot, particularly in the last month. Can you talk
Speaker 2: to me about how you see things evolving right now
Speaker 2: when it comes to the issues. I think the impression
Speaker 2: that a lot of people have that are coming on
Speaker 2: this program right now is that we're not really talking
Speaker 2: about those so much. It feels like we're talking about
Speaker 2: the enthusiasm, the vibes, and the improvement that we're seeing
Speaker 2: on the Democratic ticket since the sitting president dropped down
Speaker 2: of the race. When it comes to the issues, I
Speaker 2: know that you're very, very focused still, Congressman, on immigration,
Speaker 2: Can you walk us through the things that you're concerned
Speaker 2: about and do you think the former president is doing
Speaker 2: a decent job of prosecuting the case?
Speaker 6: Well? First, let's start there. I think to win this election,
Speaker 6: it's a great opportunity for President Trump to be re elected.
Speaker 6: I think his policies are much more in alignment of
Speaker 6: my views are on the economy and national security, and
Speaker 6: particularly border security. But we've got to stay focused on
Speaker 6: the issues and get off some of the personalities here.
Speaker 6: Let's focus on the issues, and I think your President
Speaker 6: Trump and his vice president nominee JD. Evans focus on
Speaker 6: the issues of national security, the border, community, policing, inflation.
Speaker 6: They went and they went hands down on the border.
Speaker 6: What I'm the most concerned about by the horrible Biden
Speaker 6: policy of an open border is not just the millions
Speaker 6: of people he's allowed in the country that we don't
Speaker 6: have a full instinct of what to do about or
Speaker 6: how to handle it, and swamping our border patrol system,
Speaker 6: but the number of terrorists, people on the tear watch
Speaker 6: lists that are in this country. And we've asked a
Speaker 6: Chairman Turner of the Intelligence Committee, Chairman Grain of the
Speaker 6: Homeland Security, and I have persistently for months asked for
Speaker 6: this administration and the FBI and Homeland Security to tell
Speaker 6: us where these people encountered on the terror watch list
Speaker 6: are in this country, what has happened to them? And
Speaker 6: when you think about millions of god aways, how many
Speaker 6: more people are in the country that we don't know
Speaker 6: about that we did not encounter. I find this very
Speaker 6: concerning in light of the Pakistani comments about the Trump
Speaker 6: assassination attempt, of the continuing Iranian documented Iranian influence in
Speaker 6: the country on assassinations, in the recent Philadelphia discovery of
Speaker 6: an isis K network that was operating the country having
Speaker 6: come across our open border.
Speaker 5: Kamorsman, if you're so concerned about the border, why did
Speaker 5: the Republicans then ditch this idea of the legislation that
Speaker 5: was circuling starting in the Senate with Langford when it
Speaker 5: came to border security.
Speaker 6: Well, first we passed HR two, which is the preferred
Speaker 6: approach for House Republicans on both immigration reform and border security.
Speaker 6: We got it passed, we sent it to the Senate,
Speaker 6: there was no action on it. Senator Langford did a
Speaker 6: good work trying to find consensus in the Senate, but look,
Speaker 6: he was still facilitating thousands of people, undocumented people coming
Speaker 6: in the border. He was not taking the concrete steps
Speaker 6: that we put in HR two. So I think Am Marie.
Speaker 6: That was the key difference for Speaker Johnson, for House Republicans,
Speaker 6: and that's why that bill did not proceed in the center.
Speaker 2: Congressman, we have to do this more often, sir. It's
Speaker 2: going to catch up. And I promise if you I
Speaker 2: say this every single year Razorbacks football, We're going to
Speaker 2: make it happen this winter. Okay, going to make it happen.
Speaker 2: All right, Thank you, sir. The Congressman French Shill of Arkansas.
Speaker 2: Deborah Netshirt of Jennison, expecting to growth to continue for Lily,
Speaker 2: writ in this thanks to a significant ramp up in
Speaker 2: manufacturing capacity, uptake is going to increase dramatically in twenty
Speaker 2: twenty six to twenty eight. This will translate into significant
Speaker 2: sales and earning acceleration. Debra's joining us now to walk
Speaker 2: us through all this and expand and give us detailed
Speaker 2: Deborah in a way that I think we've been lacking
Speaker 2: over the last few weeks or so. Welcome to the program.
Speaker 2: I think for many people, and I'll speak for myself
Speaker 2: when it comes to Novo versus Lily, I don't know
Speaker 2: what the difference is, what the drugs are and what
Speaker 2: the real distinction is between the two companies is Debora.
Speaker 2: Can you help us with that? What is the distinction
Speaker 2: between those two firms and the treatments and the drugs
Speaker 2: that they're putting out to market.
Speaker 7: Sure, well, thank you very much for having me. It
Speaker 7: really does feel like they are part of the same
Speaker 7: conversation lately and thought about as one company, doesn't it.
Speaker 4: So Lily we'll start with Lily.
Speaker 7: Lily is a little bit more of a diverse company
Speaker 7: than Novo. They have a huge business and diabetes and obesity,
Speaker 7: as we've talked about and as everyone knows, but they
Speaker 7: also have been incredibly successful in oncology and immunology and
Speaker 7: are just launching a new drug for Alzheimer's. But because
Speaker 7: of the sheer size of the diabetes and obesity business,
Speaker 7: a lot of the rest of Lily doesn't not get
Speaker 7: talked about. The main drugs for Lily are ze Bound
Speaker 7: and Manjaro. Is that Bound is marketed for obesity, whereas
Speaker 7: Munjaro is marketed for diabetes. Novo is a little bit
Speaker 7: more of a diabetes pure play. They've had a very
Speaker 7: long They've had a long tenure in diabetes with a
Speaker 7: big insulin business, turning to the golps. They have ozebic
Speaker 7: for diabetes, they have ribeltis, and then they also have
Speaker 7: a GOV which is their obesity drug.
Speaker 1: I also understand the difference between those obesity drugs themselves.
Speaker 1: For example, one of the big criticisms of Novo was
Speaker 1: you have this drug that comes out and it allows
Speaker 1: people to lose weight, but you have a problem where
Speaker 1: people are losing muscle mass that in a way they're
Speaker 1: almost becoming less healthy because of that. Who is at
Speaker 1: the forefront of addressing that issue.
Speaker 7: Well, I think I think the jury is out whether
Speaker 7: or not the muscle mass is really an issue right now.
Speaker 7: We need longer term data on obesity, which we don't
Speaker 7: yet have. I think the one thing that you should
Speaker 7: think about is we at Jennison really focus on the
Speaker 7: long term, and if you look at the long term
Speaker 7: data from diabetes, we're not seeing any adverse events related
Speaker 7: to this difference between muscle and fat laws. So I
Speaker 7: think we just need a little bit more time and
Speaker 7: a little bit more data to see whether or not
Speaker 7: this is a long term issue with these drugs.
Speaker 1: And in the meantime, I mean the adoption and even
Speaker 1: just the addressable market for these drugstebra is really big.
Speaker 1: Since the nineteen seventies, the United States has had an
Speaker 1: up trend in obesity rates. Are we about to witness
Speaker 1: a wholesale societal shift where for the first time really
Speaker 1: since the Great Depression, that obesity rates are going to
Speaker 1: start to fall.
Speaker 7: It would be really great if we could do if
Speaker 7: we could see that because there is such a large
Speaker 7: downstream effect of obesity on other body systems. One of
Speaker 7: the most interesting things about the gops is just the
Speaker 7: number of different diseases that they are having an impact on.
Speaker 7: Seen a positive cardiovascular risk reduction in morbidity immortality. We've
Speaker 7: seen an impact on liver disease called MASH. We've seen
Speaker 7: positive impacts on slapapnia. We've seen positive impacts on kidney
Speaker 7: disease and other types of cardiovascular diseases. So hopefully, as
Speaker 7: time goes on and these gops are adopted, we'll see
Speaker 7: this downstream effect take place. I think the thing to
Speaker 7: focus on is since the obesity mids have come out,
Speaker 7: we've really been supply constrained, and both Lily and Novo
Speaker 7: have made really positive strides on supply and are going
Speaker 7: to be exiting twenty twenty four with significantly more supply
Speaker 7: than they've ever had before.
Speaker 5: There's been a ton of enthusiasm, but you say utilization
Speaker 5: isn't even close in terms of percentage of these drugs
Speaker 5: in the market. Where do you see this going in
Speaker 5: terms of percentage of the next five ten years.
Speaker 7: I mean significantly higher than we are now. We're really
Speaker 7: still only in the single digits when you think about obesity,
Speaker 7: so we have a long.
Speaker 4: Way to go.
Speaker 2: There's a lot of people, Debora, as you know, trying
Speaker 2: to develop second derivative trades around this story, and I
Speaker 2: just wonder for you and the team what the process
Speaker 2: is that you go through to develop those kind of trades.
Speaker 2: I can save you from our perspective on this program.
Speaker 2: We've had everyone from talking about the snack business all
Speaker 2: the way through to the airline business and talking about
Speaker 2: the savings on fuel costs of all things, Debora, if
Speaker 2: the average passenger loses some weight, how are you thinking
Speaker 2: about those second derivative trades?
Speaker 7: Well, when we think about when we think about the
Speaker 7: second derivative trades, we're really focused on any I'm looking
Speaker 7: at drugs that can actually move the pup forward, not
Speaker 7: really be similar to where we are now.
Speaker 4: For the obesity market, we.
Speaker 7: Believe is going to be incredibly different and segregated in
Speaker 7: lots of different ways in ten to fifteen years from now.
Speaker 7: And by that I mean there's going to be different
Speaker 7: types of drugs and different types of administration profiles and
Speaker 7: and timelines. And you take the drug for people that
Speaker 7: need to lose different amounts of weight, so there will
Speaker 7: be a lot more options.
Speaker 4: If you need to lose twenty five.
Speaker 7: Percent of your body weight or ten percent of your
Speaker 7: body weight, there's going to be a drug for you.
Speaker 7: There's also going to be a lot of combination drugs
Speaker 7: for patients who have comorbid conditions. So we're really paying
Speaker 7: attention to companies that are going to be able to
Speaker 7: move the puck forward and find a differentiation. The thing
Speaker 7: that's really interesting is even Lily, when they were on
Speaker 7: their second quarter call yesterday talking about the amount of
Speaker 7: R and D that they are doing that Novo's doing,
Speaker 7: they haven't stopped with these Neither of these companies have
Speaker 7: stopped with developing drugs and R and D. They are
Speaker 7: still pedaled to the middle to try to develop the
Speaker 7: next best thing. If you look at what's happened with
Speaker 7: supply and just the sheer number of clinical trials an
Speaker 7: a newcomer coming into this market is going to need
Speaker 7: to spend a significant amount of money on both R
Speaker 7: and D and manufacturing to really play. So it's not
Speaker 7: only about can you develop a drug that has weight
Speaker 7: loss that is better? It's what else does this drug do?
Speaker 7: How is it different than what we have? Is it
Speaker 7: more tolerable? Is the administration profile more favorable? And then
Speaker 7: also can you develop a really broad phase three program
Speaker 7: and afford to develop a really broad Phase three program
Speaker 7: to demonstrate efficacy across as many diseases as both Lily
Speaker 7: and Novo have and are.
Speaker 4: Continuing to And then can you.
Speaker 7: Build manufacturing and scale it up and build supply to
Speaker 7: really be able to be a meaningful entrant.
Speaker 4: In this market.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's not easy. That so, Deborah, appreciate your time
Speaker 2: and place. We've got to make this happen. I have
Speaker 2: no doubt we'll be talking again soon. Debonnat shut There
Speaker 2: of Jennison Associates. This is the Bloomberg Sevenants podcast, bringing
Speaker 2: you the best in markets, economics, angio politics. You can
Speaker 2: watch the show live on Bloomberg TV weekday mornings from
Speaker 2: six am to nine am Eastern. Subscribe to the podcast
Speaker 2: on Apple, Spotify, or anywhere else you listen, and as always,
Speaker 2: on the Bloomberg Terminal and the Bloomberg Business app.