From below:
Pfizer has not seen the same level of public scrutiny as Moderna,
accused of price-gouging and delaying deliveries. Analytics firm
Airfinity this week predicted Pfizer will sell $54.5 billion worth of
coronavirus vaccine next year, almost twice the value of Moderna's sales.
Excerpts from:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pfizer–BioNTech_COVID-19_vaccine
Funding
According to Pfizer, research and development for the vaccine cost close
to US$1 billion.[142]
BioNTech received a US$135 million investment from Fosun in March 2020,
in exchange for 1.58 million shares in BioNTech and the future
development and marketing rights of BNT162b2 in China.[143][100]
In April 2020, BioNTech signed a partnership with Pfizer and received
$185 million, including an equity investment of approximately $113
In June 2020, BioNTech received €100 million (US$119 million) in
financing from the European Commission and European Investment
Bank.[147] The Bank's deal with BioNTech started early in the pandemic,
when the Bank's staff reviewed its portfolio and came up with BioNTech
as one of the companies capable of developing a COVID‑19 vaccine. The
European Investment Bank had already signed a first transaction with
BioNTech in 2019.[148][149]
In September 2020, the German government granted BioNTech €375 million
(US$445 million) for its COVID‑19 vaccine development program.[150]
Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla said he decided against taking funding from the
US government's Operation Warp Speed for the development of the vaccine
"because I wanted to liberate our scientists [from] any bureaucracy that
comes with having to give reports and agree how we are going to spend
the money in parallel or together, etc." Pfizer did enter into an
agreement with the US for the eventual distribution of the vaccine, as
with other countries.[151]
Economics
Pfizer reported revenue of US$154 million from the BNT162b2 vaccine in
2020.[146]
In July 2020, the vaccine development program Operation Warp Speed
placed an advance order of US$1.95 billion with Pfizer to manufacture
100 million doses of a COVID‑19 vaccine for use in the United States if
the vaccine was shown to be safe and effective.[21][241][242][243][244]
By mid-December 2020, Pfizer had agreements to supply 300 million doses
to the European Union,[245] 120 million doses to Japan,[246] 40 million
doses (10 million before 2021) to the United Kingdom,[128] 20 million
doses to Canada,[247] an unspecified number of doses to Singapore,[248]
and 34.4 million doses to Mexico.[249] Fosun also has agreements to
supply 10 million doses to Hong Kong and Macau.[250] The Hong Kong
government said it would receive its first batch of 1 million doses by
the first quarter of 2021.[251]
End Wikipedia article excerpt.
NB: Cost of development: $1 billion. $54.5 billion in sales.
Profiteering at the expense of a continuing worldwide pandemic and lack
of worldwide herd immunity?
End NB.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/secret-vaccine-contracts-governments-pfizer-165436379.html?.tsrc=fp_deeplink
Washington Post
In secret vaccine contracts with governments, Pfizer took hard line in
push for profit, report says
Adam Taylor
Tue, October 19, 2021, 9:54 AM
The coronavirus vaccine developed by Pfizer and BioNTech has proven a
success. First to receive emergency use approval in the United States,
the Pfizer shot has become the world's most popular, with 3.5 billion
purchased. Sales could double in 2022, according to projections.
But the rapid proliferation of the vaccine, under contracts negotiated
between the company and governments, has unfolded behind a veil of
strict secrecy, allowing for little public scrutiny of Pfizer's
burgeoning power, even as demand surges amid new negotiations for one of
the world's most sought-after products.
Subscribe to The Post Most newsletter for the most important and
interesting stories from The Washington Post.
A new report by Public Citizen, a consumer rights advocacy group that
gained access to a number of leaked, unredacted Pfizer contracts,
released Tuesday sheds light on how the company uses that power to
"shift risk and maximize profits," the organization argues.
The Manhattan-based pharmaceutical giant has maintained tight levels of
secrecy about negotiations with governments, over contracts that can
determine the fate of populations. The "contracts consistently place
Pfizer's interests before public health imperatives," said Zain Rizvi,
the researcher who wrote the report.
Public Citizen found common themes across contacts, including not only
secrecy, but also language to block donations of Pfizer dose. Disputes
are settled in secret arbitration courts, with Pfizer able to change the
terms of key decisions, including delivery dates, and demand public
assets as collateral.
Sharon Castillo, a spokesperson for Pfizer, said that confidentiality
causes were "standard in commercial contracts" and "intended to help
build trust between the parties, as well as protect the confidential
commercial information exchanged during negotiations and included in
final contracts."
Both Pfizer and Moderna, another U.S. company that developed a vaccine
using breakthrough mRNA technology, are facing pressure from critics who
accuse them of building a "duopoly." Though Pfizer did not accept
government funding through Operation Warp Speed, it received huge
advance orders from the United States. It opposed an intellectual
property waiver that could have meant the sharing of its technology.
Experts who reviewed the terms of contracts with foreign governments
suggested that some demands are extreme. Contracts reached with Brazil,
Chile, Colombia and the Dominican Republic saw states government
"immunity against precautionary seizure of any of [their] assets."
"It's almost as if the company would ask the United States to put Grand
Canyon as collateral," said Lawrence Gostin, a professor of public
health law at Georgetown University.
The company rejected that logic. "Pfizer has not interfered and has
absolutely no intention of interfering with any country's diplomatic,
military, or culturally significant assets," Castillo said. "To suggest
anything to the contrary is irresponsible and misleading."
Some contract demands appear to have slowed vaccine rollouts. At least
two countries walked away from negotiations and publicly criticized the
company's demands. However, both later reached agreements with Pfizer.
Aspects of the contracts are not uncommon, including the reliance on
arbitration courts and clauses designed to companies legal protections.
Pfzier's price for vaccines, as low as $10 per dose in Brazil, appeared
to be lower than some competitors.
"Pharma companies have concerns," said Julia Barnes-Weise, director of
the Global Healthcare Innovation Alliance Accelerator. "One of them is,
especially for a not-yet-approved vaccine, that they could be held
liable for any injury that that vaccine seems to have caused."
- - -
Pfizer has formalized 73 deals for its coronavirus vaccine. According to
Transparency International, a London-based advocacy group, only five
contracts have been formally published by governments, and these with
"significant redactions."
"Hiding contracts from public view or publishing documents filled with
redacted text means we don't know how when vaccines will arrive, what
happens if things go wrong and the level of financial risk buyers are
absorbing," said Tom Wright, research manager at the Transparency Global
Health Program.
Much of what is known about Pfizer's contracts has come out in leaks,
often through journalism from local outlets or international ones,
including the Bureau of Investigative Journalism.
Public Citizen analyzed an unredacted draft agreement between the
company and Albania, as well as unredacted final documents from Brazil,
Colombia, the Dominican Republic, Peru and the European Commission.
Redacted documents published by Chile, the United States and Britain
provide further context, though they are missing key details.
The contract reached with Brazil prohibits the government from making
"any public announcement concerning the existence, subject matter or
terms of [the] Agreement" or commenting on its relationship with Pfizer
without the prior written consent of the company.
"This is next-level stuff," said Tahir Amin, an intellectual property
lawyer who co-founded I-Mak, a nonprofit global health organization.
Pfizer exerted control over the supply of vaccines after contracts were
signed. The Brazilian government was restricted from accepting donations
of Pfizer vaccines or making its own donations. Pfizer also included
clauses in contracts with Albania, Brazil and Colombia that it could
unilaterally change delivery schedules in the case of shortages.
In contracts with Brazil, Chile, Colombia, the Dominican Republic and
Peru, governments were required to sign a document that says they
"expressly and irrevocably waives any right of immunity which either it
or its assets may have or acquire in the future." The first four were
also required to waive immunity against "precautionary" seizure of their
assets.
Public Citizen found contracts that required governments "to indemnify,
defend and hold harmless Pfizer" from and against any and all suits,
claims, actions, demands, damages, costs and expenses related to vaccine
intellectual property.
- - -
Pfizer has not seen the same level of public scrutiny as Moderna,
accused of price-gouging and delaying deliveries. Analytics firm
Airfinity this week predicted Pfizer will sell $54.5 billion worth of
coronavirus vaccine next year, almost twice the value of Moderna's sales.
One official from a country in the midst of negotiations with Pfizer,
who was not authorized to speak on the matter, said that their country
found Pfizer difficult to negotiate with, but reliable in the delivery
of vaccines.
Like Moderna's, Pfizer's vaccine has been found to be highly effective
against the Delta variant and to provide long-lasting immunity. From the
leaked documents, it appears to have offered lower prices to its vaccine
to poorer countries that had less leverage.
Castillo said that Pfizer had committed to a tiered pricing approach,
with wealthier nations paying about the cost of a takeout meal per dose
and lower-middle-income countries offered prices at a not-for-profit
price. Some 99 million doses had reached low- lower-middle-income
countries so far and the company "substantial increase in shipments to
these countries through the end of the year."
Contract terms related to sovereign immunity may have been an attempt to
cover for some risks over which the company has little control,
including the use of new, unapproved vaccines in partner countries where
the company has little oversight over storage and distribution. Pfizer
may have been worried about opportunistic lawsuits in countries where it
had not filed patents, Barnes-Weise said.
Though some countries, including the United States, have laws that
provide indemnification to vaccine manufacturers, most do not.
However, Transparency International argued that at least four contracts
or drafts it examined went "much further" than other vaccine developers,
with "more of the risk onto national governments, and away from the
developer, even if missteps are made by the developer or supply chain
partners, and not just if there is a rare adverse effect of the vaccines."
Suerie Moon, co-director of the global health center at the Graduate
Institute of International and Development Studies in Geneva, said that
restrictions on donations were "appalling" and "counter to the goal of
getting vaccines as quickly as possible to those who need them."
Castillo said Pfizer is not currently pursuing legal action against any
government related to its coronavirus vaccine.
At least two countries that initially backed out of negotiations with
Pfizer later returned. In January, Brazil publicly said Pfizer was
insisting on "unfair and abusive" contractual terms, pointing to these
confidentiality clauses. Just months later, Brazil signed a $1 billion
contract with the drug giant for 100 million doses. Public Citizen says
that the signed contract, later leaked, contained many of the provisions
that it once opposed.
Argentina also rejected early negotiations with Pfizer, with the
country's former health minister publicly said it "behaved very badly"
and demands that did not comply with its law. The country later agreed
to purchase 20 million doses. The unredacted contract has not been released.
Covax, a World Health Organization-backed vaccine sharing initiative,
has only purchased a relatively modest 40 million doses directly from
Pfizer, with reports of disputes during subsequent negotiations. Covax
later reached an agreement with the United States for the country to buy
and redistribute 500 million Pfizer doses to low-income countries
through Covax.
In its report, Public Citizen called on the U.S. government to use its
leverage to force Pfizer to take a different approach, including
requiring the company to share technology and intellectual property so
other manufacturers can produce the vaccine.
"The global community cannot allow pharmaceutical corporations to keep
calling the shots," said Rizvi. "The Biden administration can step up
and balance the scales."