David Moskowitz Quotations

New management might decide to make that choice, to reinvest some of the cash from the dividend back into the company, ... meaningful growth until the end of the decade or later.

What Merck has going for them in this case is that the plaintiffs are still alive. Beyond that, these are the more relevant cases to the plaintiffs because the patients allegedly have taken the drug for more than the 18-month interval. It makes the case more compelling.

It certainly is a bellwether, especially in the New Jersey courts.

Just because we have to study history doesn't mean we can't try to relate it to the current time. Once you start talking about something they're already up on, it draws them in.

President Bush's action, although timely, may be ill advised. For the past three years, both the CDC and the WHO have steadfastly ignored our novel anti-viral approach, which has achieved over 80% treatment success in West Nile virus encephalitis and which should be equally effective against avian influenza. If the WHO had put us in touch with clinicians in Southeast Asia treating avian influenza cases as we've asked for the past three winters, we'd already know by now.

The American people saw unforgettably how federal, state, and local governments failed the people of New Orleans just three weeks ago. What the American people don't realize is how they've all been short-changed for the past three years. Minorities are much more affected by kidney failure than whites. There's a dialysis boom on Indian reservations.

Merck has a precedent of announcing head count reductions and then coming back to the table and cutting even further.

We believe this decision is only worth $1 to $2 in upside to Merck, as this case was known to be relatively weak,

Drug companies have done a poor job managing public relations and they know this. In many cases, the individual drug companies have tried to set examples where they can. This is one area where Bristol has tried to set an example.

The squeeze is coming, ... With this number of cases and these types of awards, the stability of the company is at risk.

A negative outcome in this trial is more magnified than a positive one.

A new warning (on suicidal thoughts) could further add to pressure on the product.

As potential patients, we would want these companies to make incremental improvements. Without it, we would end up only with first-in-class products that are not as good as they could be.

This is really bad. It is such a blatant decision that says Merck did not do the right thing about protecting patients.

They got slammed. The credibility of this company has been damaged and will continue to be so for some time until they can deliver.

The legal victory represents a significant reduction in the risk profile of the company. The company's fending off of this major threat is likely to lift sentiment for the entire large-cap pharmaceutical group through the remainder of 2005.