Indecent disclosures
AFTER gloves, a slew of listed and unlisted companies have jump on the bandwagon to procure and distribute Covid-19 vaccine for Malaysia. The vaccines are largely sourced from pharmaceutical producers based in China and Taiwan.
So far, no company has come up with an estimated price tag for sourcing the vaccine except for Metronic Global Bhd.
Metronic Global, which has signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with Medigen Vaccine Biologics Corp of Taiwan, expects to achieve a profit of Rm180mil from the “fill and finish” and distribution of the vaccine.
Following a query from the regulators, the company stated that the profit is derived based on a 30% margin from the sales price of the vaccine that is estimated at US$50 (RM203) each. It expects to bring in three million vaccines from Taiwan, subject to regulatory approvals of the local pharmaceutical authorities.
It’s simply perplexing how a company would dare issue a statement on potential profit and margins that are unrealistic and get away with it.
Firstly, profit numbers are price-sensitive information and should not have been disclosed when the agreement is only at the MOU stage. Secondly, a 30% margin on vaccine distribution business could be ambitious considering that there are many other vaccines from more established pharmaceutical companies that are going to hit the market.
And some of it is even far cheaper than US$50. For instance, the vaccine being produced by Astrazeneca-oxford University is less than US$8 and meant specifically for developing nations.
And finally, Metronic Global has not even got regulatory approvals, which may be difficult, and yet is already making a public statement on potential profit.
Obviously, the statement was meant to catch the eye of speculators looking for companies with an exposure to the vaccine theme. And rightly, Bursa Malaysia forced the company to make additional disclosures with the view of enlightening investors of the true state of affairs.
However, shouldn’t the company’s principal office bearers be subjected to some kind of reprimand or warning considering that profits are sensitive information and should not have been disclosed at all in the first place?