Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.
Speaker 2: We are only scratching the surface in one more patient
Speaker 2: switch reading, and it takes quite some time to scale
Speaker 2: manufacture and trinket through many more millions of pieces.
Speaker 1: This is the man in charge of Europe's most valuable company,
Speaker 1: Novo Nordisk and its blockbuster diabetes and obesity drugs of
Speaker 1: Zembec and Mogovi both contain the key ingredient sea BlueTide,
Speaker 1: revolutionizing the weight loss market and generating billions in sales.
Speaker 1: Celebrities have helped their popularity. Sore Sharon Osbourne, Chelsea Handler,
Speaker 1: and Elon Musk have all publicly talked about taking the
Speaker 1: zepig Orrigovie, and they've had further backing from Oprah Winfrey.
Speaker 1: It's a global phenomenon, reaching millions on social media apps,
Speaker 1: including TikTok, but it's not without controversy, including possible side effects,
Speaker 1: high prices, and the company's lobbying efforts, receiving criticism around
Speaker 1: the world world, and in some cases patients might also
Speaker 1: need to take the drugs indefinitely to avoid regaining the weight.
Speaker 1: Chief executive Las Freugljogensen says obesity is a disease and
Speaker 1: things a company will learn from its growing number of patients.
Speaker 2: When I asked the scientists, they say, pology and mechanism
Speaker 2: will tell you that it's quite treatment. My personal view
Speaker 2: is that you will also here learned that patients are
Speaker 2: much different and they'll be different avenues, so we'll have
Speaker 2: to build a portfolio of interventions.
Speaker 1: On this episode of Leaders with Laqua, I traveled to
Speaker 1: the firm's headquarters in Copenhagen, Denmark. I asked Lars Feugair
Speaker 1: Jogensen about the global sensation, how he's navigating the company's
Speaker 1: meteoric rise, and the sweeping changes they could bring across
Speaker 1: a range of industries. Lurs, thank you so much for
Speaker 1: being on Bloomberg with us.
Speaker 2: That sine thanks for having me.
Speaker 1: I mean, after decades of research basically and over finds
Speaker 1: a molecule that changes everything in terms of weight loss drugs.
Speaker 1: Were you taken by surprise at the appetite actually for
Speaker 1: these drugs and how mainstream they are?
Speaker 2: Yeah, I would actually say that many surprises when you
Speaker 2: get products like that. It starts with surprises in the
Speaker 2: innovation because there are many shots being made on goal
Speaker 2: and most fail and the winner is often the one
Speaker 2: that surprises people the most.
Speaker 1: So why do you think this. I guess surprise or
Speaker 1: success was unexpected. Did it capture something in society that
Speaker 1: you weren't ready for.
Speaker 2: I think we have seen first many decades of our
Speaker 2: company was focused on type one diabetes. Then because of
Speaker 2: lifestyle changes, perhaps genetics, there was an increase in type
Speaker 2: two dia beats. But for many years type two the
Speaker 2: beats was not intensively treated. Then there was a so
Speaker 2: called uk PDS started that really showed that you need
Speaker 2: to treat typetuta beats to prevent commobidities, and that increased
Speaker 2: the diabetes marked a lot. Now we are kind of
Speaker 2: seeing the same with obesity that for years we felt
Speaker 2: that perhaps obesity is not a real disease, not something
Speaker 2: you should treat, but that's now being established that actually
Speaker 2: by understanding the underlying courses of obesity, that there's a
Speaker 2: lot of a lot of play, for instance genetics, but
Speaker 2: now also innovations that can actually treat the disease, help
Speaker 2: people reduce weight and prevent the commodities. So I think
Speaker 2: it's a repeat in a way of what happened with
Speaker 2: type two diabetes, and that then suddenly opens a market
Speaker 2: that turns out to be way bigger than the diabetes market.
Speaker 1: How difficult is it to have a lifelong treatment? And again,
Speaker 1: how do you see that changing?
Speaker 2: I think we are yet to learn how patient journeys
Speaker 2: will be much different. Some will be on lifelong treatment,
Speaker 2: Some will have, say progressive obesity that will keep you
Speaker 2: put more and more weight on and they'll need more
Speaker 2: and more eificacious medicine. But perhaps also be some who
Speaker 2: we're actually being on treatment for some time almost prevents them,
Speaker 2: and they'll have a different trajectory. I don't think we
Speaker 2: have seen much of this yet. When I asked the
Speaker 2: scientists I'm not a scientist myself, they say, but bylity
Speaker 2: and mechanism will tell you that it's chronic treatment. My
Speaker 2: personal view is that we will also here learn that
Speaker 2: patients are much different and there'll be different avenues, so
Speaker 2: we'll have to build a portfolio of interventions. Lifestyle will
Speaker 2: also play into for some of them, and I think
Speaker 2: we can help many patients get down to a weight
Speaker 2: that they can maintain and live the life they want
Speaker 2: to live and avoid many comobilities for the healthcare systems.
Speaker 1: I mean, we also heard from some of the food
Speaker 1: companies that the chief executives of some of the big
Speaker 1: groups are having crisis talks. And actually, does this mean
Speaker 1: that there's going to be a wider adoption of these drugs?
Speaker 1: Does it mean that people are going to eat an
Speaker 1: drink thirty percent less? Do you see it really changing
Speaker 1: our societies?
Speaker 2: I think there'll be many changes, But I think with
Speaker 2: that also comes opportunities. They'll perhaps be a different preference
Speaker 2: for snacking, so I think we still need to eat,
Speaker 2: so maybe perhaps a bit less of the unhealthy snacking
Speaker 2: and a preference for more the healthy stuff. So I
Speaker 2: think for companies it's also about, you know, following the
Speaker 2: trend and evolving your business and moving to where the
Speaker 2: market is. And I think there is probably, say an
Speaker 2: eighty twenty perspective here, like in many other sectors, that
Speaker 2: you will have a few patients who are really heavy consumers,
Speaker 2: and if those are also those who then start up treatment,
Speaker 2: I think they'll be a relative bigger impact on some
Speaker 2: of these companies. But I was say, in general, I
Speaker 2: think it's a bit hyped when we see their actions.
Speaker 2: We see because we are only scratching the surface in
Speaker 2: the number of patients we are treating, and it takes
Speaker 2: quite some time to scale manufacturing to get to many
Speaker 2: more millions of patients.
Speaker 1: Hollywood has also adopted actually you know your weight loss drugs?
Speaker 1: Is that a good or a bad thing.
Speaker 2: We now have a situation where social media, you know,
Speaker 2: is filled with communication around our products, and that's a
Speaker 2: complete new for us. We have focused on educating physicians.
Speaker 2: In most countries we cannot do direct to consumer advertisement
Speaker 2: and in all countries is really important for us. We
Speaker 2: get physicians to understand which products are approved for type
Speaker 2: tuta biders, which are proved for obesity, what's a mechanism
Speaker 2: and how should they be used? And when we see
Speaker 2: at you get data from insurance companies, et cetera, we
Speaker 2: can see the profile of those who use our medicines.
Speaker 2: We can see that they are on areas people with
Speaker 2: a very high BMI, well above thirty. So that is
Speaker 2: actually also the approved label. So we feel comfortable about that.
Speaker 2: It is people in need of medical intervention to treat
Speaker 2: serious obesity situations.
Speaker 1: But you've become such a phenomenon and the you know
Speaker 1: their means and you're right, it's all over social media
Speaker 1: and some are saying, look, the problem with this is
Speaker 1: that it could actually lead to more eating disorders, and
Speaker 1: this is probably because of the increase in social media.
Speaker 1: What do former companies do Can they do anything to
Speaker 1: kind of balance this?
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think we have quite spent some time on
Speaker 2: understanding what what does this mean, what's what's the breath
Speaker 2: of it? And we've come to realize that we cannot
Speaker 2: control social media. We try to be present and get
Speaker 2: our messaging in. But then all our medicines they take
Speaker 2: a physician writing a script. So we really focus on
Speaker 2: the physician to make sure that they understand what are
Speaker 2: the mechanisms, who are the appropriate patients, what's that labor
Speaker 2: And then I think we have to also trust that
Speaker 2: the physicians they do what is right for their patient,
Speaker 2: and they should for sure not prescribe for people living.
Speaker 1: With the even sold coming up. I asked ls for
Speaker 1: Galiogensen about criticism the company has faced over its prices,
Speaker 1: with some analysts predicting the weight loss drug industry could
Speaker 1: be worth one hundred and fifteen billion dollars a year. Globally.
Speaker 1: More than one billion people are thought to be abest
Speaker 1: It's a crucial market for weight loss drug makers like
Speaker 1: Nova Nordisk, but challenges remain. The company's patents expire in
Speaker 1: the US and the EU at the end of the
Speaker 1: next decade, and rival drugs are already emerging like zet
Speaker 1: bound by Eli Lilly I also achieved executive Galijoginsen about
Speaker 1: regulatory pressures and future growth. So how do you think
Speaker 1: about pricing? Again, you must have gone some difficult questions
Speaker 1: from governments. But also this goes back to innovation.
Speaker 2: Most products are priced according to the value they bring,
Speaker 2: and I feel really good about the value of our
Speaker 2: medicines what they bring to the individual patient, but are
Speaker 2: also the value to the healthcare system. And we have
Speaker 2: today healthcare systems around the world who were typically designed
Speaker 2: for acute care, but finding that eighty percent of the
Speaker 2: cost in the healthcare system is linked to chronic care.
Speaker 2: And we have a portfolio of products that are really
Speaker 2: addressing some of the chronic diseases of our day and age, diabetes, obesity,
Speaker 2: and the commobidities that follows that. We know that there
Speaker 2: are projections that say by twenty to thirty five, the
Speaker 2: World Obesiti Federation predicts that the cost burden to society
Speaker 2: will be four trillion dollars of the people living with obesity,
Speaker 2: and that course is going to a large degree be
Speaker 2: taken up by healthcare systems who are already struggling today
Speaker 2: eating populations, you know, shortage of labor, A lot of
Speaker 2: workers left the healthcare systems during the pandemic after the pandemic.
Speaker 2: So being articulating, what is actually value of the medicine
Speaker 2: we have and if you invest in that, Yes, there
Speaker 2: is a cost upfront, maybe we can discuss how we
Speaker 2: you know, we deal with that, but there is actually
Speaker 2: tremendous value in terms of preventing cost and keeping people
Speaker 2: out of hospital.
Speaker 1: But this is a crucial moment because your prices will
Speaker 1: probably go down as you have more competitors coming in.
Speaker 1: We know if ELI lately, you know, Amgin could be
Speaker 1: a competitor. And so this is I guess the crucial
Speaker 1: time where we have to make investment decisions when prices
Speaker 1: are high and you have more cash coming in. Is
Speaker 1: that right? Is that how you view it?
Speaker 2: Yes, to put a bit of color around it. The
Speaker 2: same forecast predicts that there'll be say a billion people
Speaker 2: living with obesity in thirty to thirty five. We are
Speaker 2: perhaps serving one or two million of them today, So
Speaker 2: there's a huge market opportunity and there's place for more.
Speaker 2: And then you're right that in most markets, when you
Speaker 2: get more competition, and also over time, pricing moves down
Speaker 2: because you start treating those who accept, say the higher
Speaker 2: price point in the US, that's commercial insurance, and then
Speaker 2: over time you get broader access and you get to
Speaker 2: patients paying a lower price. So if you just take
Speaker 2: our leading diabetes product in the US since launch in
Speaker 2: twenty eighteen, the price we get after rebates, discount, et cetera,
Speaker 2: is some forty percent lower than when we launched. That's
Speaker 2: often not mentioned in the say the political debate. Instead,
Speaker 2: the list price is mentioned, which is not actually what
Speaker 2: we book in our account because that's after rebates.
Speaker 1: V US is such a large market, would you ever
Speaker 1: deal list or even change headquarters to the US.
Speaker 2: That's unlikely. We are controlled by a foundation that's anchored
Speaker 2: in Denmark. We have a lot of say, footprint in Denmark.
Speaker 2: Having said that, we do invest and expand a lot globally.
Speaker 2: Most of what we sell in the US we also
Speaker 2: produce in the US, So in many aspects we are
Speaker 2: as much a US company as we are a Danish company,
Speaker 2: but the headquarter, the corporate headquarter is based in Denmark.
Speaker 2: For the foreseble future.
Speaker 1: You think of Denmark and really now you think of
Speaker 1: Novo because of the size of revenues, which is I
Speaker 1: think bigger than GDP. Is that uncomfortable.
Speaker 2: I think maybe the perspective should be corrected a bit
Speaker 2: because there's this comparison about our market cap with the
Speaker 2: Danish GDP, and we all know that GDP is an
Speaker 2: economic flow matrix for the flow on a yearly basis,
Speaker 2: and the market cap is the total value of the company.
Speaker 2: I'm sure if we compare the market cap of No
Speaker 2: Noise with the market cap of everything that's in Denmark,
Speaker 2: we would be tiny. But of course there's also the
Speaker 2: point that with our expansions, our you know, more than
Speaker 2: thirty thousand per years in Denmark, huge capex investment, we
Speaker 2: are fueling the GDP growth and you know we take
Speaker 2: that quite seriously. So the jobs we create I don't
Speaker 2: think will disappear again. And now we talk about expanding
Speaker 2: in the US, it doesn't come in the shape a
Speaker 2: form of moving activities from dinner to the US. It's
Speaker 2: growth in the US. So we will be careful and
Speaker 2: respectful in how we grow, so we can do that
Speaker 2: in a sustainable way, and.
Speaker 1: That's also increasing supply with new factories.
Speaker 2: Yeah, we have made huge investment decisions and these are
Speaker 2: you know, billion dollar commitments per year, and it takes
Speaker 2: four or five years to build some of these facilities
Speaker 2: and welckily started already years back. So we have more
Speaker 2: and more lines kicking in on an ongoing basis, but
Speaker 2: some of them will also be kicking.
Speaker 1: In in the future. Are you also looking for acquisitions.
Speaker 2: Yes, we are. We are in the unique situation that
Speaker 2: most of the products we have came from our in
Speaker 2: house on the efforts, which is a bit unusual compared
Speaker 2: to some of our peers. We expect to carry on
Speaker 2: with that, but we can also see that we can
Speaker 2: complement that by some acquisitions. So typically it would be
Speaker 2: Early States bio check, where they have great science, we
Speaker 2: have disease understanding, We have the infrastructure, so we can
Speaker 2: express that science in a better way than they can
Speaker 2: do on their own. So merging makes a perfect marriage,
Speaker 2: and some of the party is bigger than what each
Speaker 2: can do on their own.
Speaker 1: Former companies having a harder time after COVID there seems
Speaker 1: to have been an explosion of not trusting pharmaceutical companies,
Speaker 1: even you know, vaccines being questioned. Have you felt any backlash?
Speaker 2: Yes, And to me, that's a really, really sad situation
Speaker 2: to be in because had it not been for some
Speaker 2: of the you know, very innovative small biotechs who came
Speaker 2: up with vaccines and then teaming up with some of
Speaker 2: the largest forces of our industry to in record time
Speaker 2: get approval and scaling manufacturing, I think the world would
Speaker 2: have looked much different today. And I respect that some
Speaker 2: who do not like vaccines, but the majority of us
Speaker 2: had a number of shots and that led to a
Speaker 2: lot of debate about our patents really needed. And unless
Speaker 2: we have you know, an ability to patent innovation, there's
Speaker 2: not going to be any innovation, so there will be
Speaker 2: no new products. So I think there's something about equality
Speaker 2: how we distribute products, and honestly, I think a lot
Speaker 2: of the rich countries ended up grabbing products for their
Speaker 2: own population at the expense of some of the developing
Speaker 2: countries who do not get access. That then leads to
Speaker 2: a debate whether IP is the right way to go,
Speaker 2: But that for me, is the wrong discussion we have
Speaker 2: to figure out how can with social atarity in a
Speaker 2: way where we actually acknowledge that the whole world needs
Speaker 2: the benefit in a fair way. But if you take
Speaker 2: the incentive away from innovation, we're all weigh off.
Speaker 1: Coming up Las four, gad Joginsen tells me about his
Speaker 1: leadership style at the helm of Europe's most valuable company.
Speaker 1: The market value of Novnordisk is bigger than the Danish economy,
Speaker 1: and its philanthropic foundation is now the world's largest, with
Speaker 1: more than double the assets of the Gates Foundation. I
Speaker 1: asked Lars for Regal Jogensen how he handles a company's
Speaker 1: success and his approach to corporate culture. Are you enjoying
Speaker 1: success or is it with it? Does it also bring
Speaker 1: a lot of responsibility?
Speaker 2: I to go as CEO at a time where Asia
Speaker 2: price had just been cut by forty percent, we were
Speaker 2: in no growth or no single digit growth, and it's
Speaker 2: much harder to invest in the business do things you
Speaker 2: want to do compared to what the opportunities are today.
Speaker 2: So I enjoy that, but obviously it also comes with
Speaker 2: many challenges about how to sustain the success of a company.
Speaker 2: Let's enjoyed success or what kind.
Speaker 1: Of leader are you or what kind of leader? Would
Speaker 1: your employees say you are?
Speaker 2: Well, you should ask them. I hope they would say
Speaker 2: that I'm authentic, I'm relative easy to read. I would
Speaker 2: also hope they say that I'm curious because I'm another
Speaker 2: specialist in anything. But I found that there has not
Speaker 2: been yet a problem in the company we couldn't solve
Speaker 2: if we actually mobilized the right people. So I'm born
Speaker 2: with a big nose and big ears, and I use
Speaker 2: the attributes of that eas and every day to collect, say,
Speaker 2: opinions from the company, and then it's my role to
Speaker 2: combine it into an opinion together with my team and
Speaker 2: make sure that we make the right choice.
Speaker 1: So does a perfect leader in twenty twenty four need
Speaker 1: to be a visionary or a problem solver?
Speaker 2: I would say, if I have to solve the problems,
Speaker 2: it's a problem because if examined, when COVID nineteen arrived,
Speaker 2: we decided to close down, say the offices we kept manufacturing,
Speaker 2: and the border is running and we all went home,
Speaker 2: and what you do well, you need to establish a
Speaker 2: crisis response team to deal with that. So the first
Speaker 2: decision I made was I should not be part of
Speaker 2: that why I was a bit out of a loop
Speaker 2: for a couple of days. But I knew if I
Speaker 2: put myself into that, I would become the bottleneck in
Speaker 2: the company and the company would suddenly have lost its CEO.
Speaker 2: So I asked our CEFO to share that and then
Speaker 2: I could still, you know, be there for everybody, and
Speaker 2: people could come to me and check in, and I
Speaker 2: could try to get a view for what are oil
Speaker 2: companies doing, what's happening and and and give them some input.
Speaker 2: So if the CEO turns into the problem solve with
Speaker 2: the company, I think the company needs another CEO.
Speaker 1: Have you changed as a CEO?
Speaker 2: I believe I have. I when I I was promoted,
Speaker 2: I took a step up in the team, So I
Speaker 2: went from over night being colleague to being the leader
Speaker 2: of the team. And I think they would tell me
Speaker 2: today that they would have liked me maybe to a
Speaker 2: bit quicker act like the boss, But for me it
Speaker 2: was not natural to just be say bussy after one night.
Speaker 2: So I think I've been growing into the role and
Speaker 2: I feel more comfortable today in actually listening to my guts,
Speaker 2: which is a combination of your own feelings but also
Speaker 2: your experiences and earlier say what I believe in, and
Speaker 2: that creates clarity for an organization with more than sixty
Speaker 2: thousand people.
Speaker 1: And so Saturday mornings, I understand you have off.
Speaker 2: Yeah, Saturday is always a day where powered down. So
Speaker 2: I run at a relative high pace thout the week,
Speaker 2: try to wrap things up, and Saturday is a quiet
Speaker 2: day for me in terms of work. And I start
Speaker 2: typically by playing tennis with my wife. We'll go for
Speaker 2: a swim all year round. After that, have a nice lunch,
Speaker 2: and then I'm onto a good trajectory for the weekend.
Speaker 2: And then Sunday I try to prepare for the coming weeks.
Speaker 2: But through a weekend I would send ather no emails
Speaker 2: of very few emails, because I want to drive a
Speaker 2: culture where all gets an opportunity to spend the weekend
Speaker 2: as they fancy. And I think what we do is
Speaker 2: so difficult and it takes so much creative thinking to
Speaker 2: succeed that if you're always on, always busy, the bandwidth
Speaker 2: of your reflection is just too narrow. And I generally
Speaker 2: believe that Monday mornings I'm a better leader than I am,
Speaker 2: say Friday afternoon. I also take all my vacations. I
Speaker 2: generally believe I'm a much better CEO right after a
Speaker 2: vacation than I am before vacation.
Speaker 1: What's your best piece of advice you've ever received, and
Speaker 1: what's the worst piece of advice you've ever received.
Speaker 2: The best advice would probably be give people a fair
Speaker 2: chance to succeed, and most can actually do much better
Speaker 2: than the belief themselves. And perhaps also you believe based
Speaker 2: on say, short term performance. So trust people and give
Speaker 2: them what is needed for them to succeed. You'll see
Speaker 2: people succeeding. The worst piece would be something that was
Speaker 2: influenced by, say politics or spinning facts. I'm hyper allergic
Speaker 2: to politics and where you try to take advantage of
Speaker 2: a position. So I've had one experience during my career
Speaker 2: where I gave my record resignition because somebody, a close colleague,
Speaker 2: actually completely twisted some facts. We had just agreed how
Speaker 2: to approach. Then we met with our shared boss and
Speaker 2: my colleague just turned it around. I said, okay, anteqrity
Speaker 2: so so holy for me that if people play tricks,
Speaker 2: you know, it's not my game whatever. So I just said, okay,
Speaker 2: this is it. I'm out here. But we sorted we
Speaker 2: shorted out, I still stayed so so so any advice
Speaker 2: that is not based on honesty, decency, and you know,
Speaker 2: following the facts, I have a really hard time.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much for your time today.
Speaker 2: Thank you