Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Folok Dutta's avatar

Hi Arun Ji. Thanks for your addition. In line with other commentaries, what we have written is from a business risk perspective.

The fact that some competitors have newer technologies which gives them a cost advantage is a fact. By some estimates, generic Ibuprofen still amounts to 1/3 rd of Solara’s revenue and including Ibuprofen derivatives is close to 45%. The later part was stated in the concall.

Whether the promoter focuses on branded pharma is different. But the fact still remains that close to half of sales comes directly/indirectly from Ibuprofen. Hence continued pricing pressure has high likelihood of hurting margins even in the future.

The promoter may/may not spin stories about diversifying. Till the time he doesn’t we have to be critical given this disadvantage compared to competitors.

That is the perspective it was written from. Hope it clarifies.

Expand full comment
Arun Chery Jacob's avatar

Regarding major takeaways point 2. You ought to have given more context. Mr Arun mentioned about not chasing new tech has two main reasons 1. His statement from the conference call implies that the newer tech caters to generics while they cater to branded pharma with a 25 year relationship. This statement implies better price realization from their existing customers. 2. Higher cost of regulatory compliance if new tech adopted.

To me what you wrote, implied a structural shift in ibuprofen market (which maybe the case - not fully investigated). Do you think this has any material negative impact on their ibu business?

Expand full comment

No posts