What exactly is happening with AstraZeneca?

Donald Trump

brickster69 wrote: »

Pointless talking about the terms of the contract that we do not know or probably will not see.

However the EU in effect had a deal agreed with AZ a month after the UK which would of put it further ahead than now.

https://www.euractiv.com/section/coronavirus/news/coalition-of-countries-aims-to-keep-covid-19-vaccine-manufacturing-in-europe/

Then it was decided the EU itself would handle negotiations on behalf of the bloc as a whole. They then spent an extra two months accomplishing the same result.

AZ are the suppliers. They signed up to deliver something. They had two extra months there to figure out what they could and could not realistically supply.


If Switzerland and AZ signed a contract today for delivery of 100m vaccines next week and the Swiss hand over a couple of hundred million quid, AZ can't turn around next week when they fail to deliver them and say "ah yeah, but other people signed their contract a few months ago so we actually don't have any for you. Thanks for the money though"

Melanchthon

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

AZs own words;

https://www.astrazeneca.com/content/astraz/media-centre/press-releases/2020/astrazeneca-to-supply-europe-with-up-to-400-million-doses-of-oxford-universitys-vaccine-at-no-profit.html



Note that is dated 13 June 2020. Two months before the contract was signed, they agreed to deliveries starting by the end of 2020. They were clearly working to that schedule before the contract was actually signed. If timeline had changed by the time of contract signing in August, AZ should have had amendments made. Clearly AZ are letting the EU down and almost certainly breaching the contract.

They were working with a different body, the Europe’s Inclusive Vaccines Alliance, it's in the link itself, it's why presumably this issue is white hot politically in Germany and other countries at the minute, the EU delayed signing the deal by two months.
They were talking but nothing was signed and I would presume no funding was given before signing right?

Like your post is actually backing up the criticism of the EU.

Ok none of us have seen the documents but according to the CEO's statements they didn't need to amend the documents because the contract they signed was "best efforts only" with no exclusivity right?

Donald Trump

mick087 wrote: »

Such times like this emergenices measures are required Europe is in a mess with the virus.
IMO the world does seem to be pinning its hope on this Oxford vaccine this seems to be cheap and easier to transport. Again IMO the EU is not handling this well.

Right. But this hypothetical, yet unformed and with no processes or mandate to be formed, body which would decide on things for everyone from Offaly to Ottawa to Orlando to Beijing to Buenos Aires to Lagos would do a good job.


But the EU trying to coordinate, with their decades of public infrastructure, and representatives from all of the countries who have worked together on years, is a bad idea.

mick087

Tenzor07 wrote: »

Just seems Bizarre under the circumstances that this sort of "petulance" is happening with one of the big pharma companies, shows you the power they have over the world..

When a company is holding the key to preventing further economic/social/human damage to the World, then surely all commercial concerns should be abandoned and Wartime levels of production should be in place...

In World war 2 factories were commandeered to make munitions, with the 100,000 of thousands who've died due to Covid I think it's time to step up here and get this vaccine production into overdrive..

I agree with all this.
Its totally bizzarre we all seem to be in the hands of such large companies.
Its not only pharma companies you have social media to such large powerful organizations.


IMO this vaccine should of been rolled out to every country who wanted it at the same time in equal amounts. As you say during the second world war things happened in Europe over night factories were commandeered people garden gates taken away.


To me it seems alot of the experts and counties are pinning the hopes on the Oxford one because of price to produce it. They sell it for 3 euro a pop i believe. the other vaccines i have read about cost a lot more with some being difficult to move travel.

Melanchthon

fly_agaric wrote: »

Yes, this all seems to have emerged very suddenly in the news, I mean the vaccine is expected to be approved for use very, very soon in the EU.

Without getting into all the "rah rah GB great/EU bad - Hail Brexit" bollox that poisons discussion...why hasn't it come out publically before that the company is having problems?

It seems they are quite a way off being able to supply the numbers of doses they promised.

Astra Zeneca having issues about production isn't new news though, it probably wasn't reported as much here but AFAIK the first UK order was massively lower than expected.

Sorry for the Russia Today link but it's broadly accurate
https://www.rt.com/uk/505744-britain-vaccine-covid19-delays-lockdown/

https://www.ft.com/content/6ccff5f5-834d-43b7-84e4-82ec3bb3ab06

The thing is the UK signed earlier and got a better contract because of this, it also experienced the delivery problems earlier when the politics were less heated.

Tenzor07

mick087 wrote: »

To me it seems alot of the experts and counties are pinning the hopes on the Oxford one because of price to produce it. They sell it for 3 euro a pop i believe. the other vaccines i have read about cost a lot more with some being difficult to move travel.

I don't see the EU wanting to buy the Russian and Chinese vaccines? As AZ are letting everyone down with their issues..

More proof that politics is more important than saving lives...

Godot.

How long have the EU known about this is the big question. The national politicians were certainly in the dark anyway.

If they knew about the situation a long time, but kept the national governments in the dark after a pathetic deflection attempt at AZ then heads will roll eventually (in about 18 months after a prolonged bureaucratic inquiry).
Whereas if they were truly only informed just before the weekend then AstraZeneca have had a PR disaster and it's more than a little fishy.

Pete_Cavan

Melanchthon wrote: »

They were working with a different body, the Europe’s Inclusive Vaccines Alliance, it's in the link itself, it's why presumably this issue is white hot politically in Germany and other countries at the minute, the EU delayed signing the deal by two months.
They were talking but nothing was signed and I would presume no funding was given before signing right?

Like your post is actually backing up the criticism of the EU.

Ok none of us have seen the documents but according to the CEO's statements they didn't need to amend the documents because the contract they signed was "best efforts only" with no exclusivity right?

The EU Commission took over from the IVA but that only relates to where the vaccines go after production. AZ still had committed to producing vaccines for a client (who got a bit bigger but that was no concern of theirs). The fact still remains that they signed the contract with the EU Commission but are now failing to honour their obligations under the contract.

The "best efforts only" thing protects AZ if issues outside their control arise which make it impossible for them to fulfill their commitments, it does not mean they can make up how much they supply the EU as they go along. For example, if there aren't enough vials available for them to meet the original supply timelines, then their "best efforts" would be to supply in line with vial production. The EU gave them hundreds of millions upfront to avoid such issues.

mick087

Donald Trump wrote: »

Right. But this hypothetical, yet unformed and with no processes or mandate to be formed, body which would decide on things for everyone from Offaly to Ottawa to Orlando to Beijing to Buenos Aires to Lagos would do a good job.


But the EU trying to coordinate, with their decades of public infrastructure, and representatives from all of the countries who have worked together on years, is a bad idea.

Then maybe we should have an informed with a process and mandate body which would decide on things for everyone from Offaly to Ottawa to Orlando to Beijing to Bueno.

IMO what ever the EU mandate is is clearly not working on this vaccine issue.

Donald Trump

Melanchthon wrote: »

Astra Zeneca having issues about production isn't new news though, it probably wasn't reported as much here but AFAIK the first UK order was massively lower than expected.

The thing is the UK signed earlier and got a better contract because of this, it also experienced the delivery problems earlier when the politics were less heated.

Signing an earlier contract does not allow AZ to start an effective Ponzi scheme where they could entice new prepaying buyers into contracts, which AZ know they cannot fulfill, in order to use those prepaid funds to fulfill the earlier obligations.


Perhaps if AZ had been more upfront then the EU would have put their chips in with another provider.

Mullaghteelin

Melanchthon wrote: »

Astra Zeneca having issues about production isn't new news though, it probably wasn't reported as much here but AFAIK the first UK order was massively lower than expected.

Sorry for the Russia Today link but it's broadly accurate
https://www.rt.com/uk/505744-britain-vaccine-covid19-delays-lockdown/

https://www.ft.com/content/6ccff5f5-834d-43b7-84e4-82ec3bb3ab06

The thing is the UK signed earlier and got a better contract because of this, it also experienced the delivery problems earlier when the politics were less heated.

There are one or two posts asking why we haven't heard of this before now. There certainly have been murmurings for a while in foreign media outlets, but there is no way our own media will have reported anything that may have cast the EU in a bad light. Our news is far too carefully managed for that.

noodler

mick087 wrote: »

Then maybe we should have an informed with a process and mandate body which would decide on things for everyone from Offaly to Ottawa to Orlando to Beijing to Bueno.

IMO what ever the EU mandate is is clearly not working on this vaccine issue.

It's amazing how things change.

It's been just over two months since the Pfizer results came out and the possibility of a vaccine became real for many but now some feel the whole thing is being botched.

emmalynn19

https://twitter.com/ShonaMurray_/status/1354383478167654400?s=20

Tiernster7

Tuppence , EU are trying to maximise what is delivered in February and March. AZ are trying to minimise expectations. They've already agreed to go a week earlier and have moved from 40% of expected to 50% of expected. EU feel more can be done and that will probably be the result albeit still well short of original expectation.

mick087

Tenzor07 wrote: »

I don't see the EU wanting to buy the Russian and Chinese vaccines? As AZ are letting everyone down with their issues..

More proof that politics is more important than saving lives...

Yes your right there seems no rush or the Russian or Chinese vaccine.


I was was watching the RT news yesterday and yes i know its the Russian sky news but they claimed Hungary have been looking into getting the Russian vaccine if the EU don't hurry up and sort this out.

AZ issues could easily be sorted there is no reason emergency measures could not happen ie factories nationalized by governments.

Trouble with this is people have investments and want a dividends, investors don't want to bank roll a vaccine as profit is more important than saving lives.

listermint

So they're using EU factories to fulfill UK orders but not using non EU factories to fulfill EU orders all whilst being subsidized by the EU money for most of the existing manufacturer.

. hmm

emmalynn19

Someones telling porkie pies here. CEO of AZ gave an interview yesterday, EU claiming he has now breached NDA and should go the whole hog and publish the contract.

SheepsClothing

listermint wrote: »

So they're using EU factories to fulfill UK orders but not using non EU factories to fulfill EU orders all whilst being subsidized by the EU money for most of the existing manufacturer.

. hmm

Do we have any evidence that this is the case?

mick087

noodler wrote: »

It's amazing how things change.

It's been just over two months since the Pfizer results came out and the possibility of a vaccine became real for many but now some feel the whole thing is being botched.

People are scared.
Many people on the front line and on low pay see a vaccine as hope.
Many people on this thread will be working from home safe.
The vaccine is a big issue its the light t life.


AZ are not able to cope with demand it would seem

There so many things that can be done to speed up process if the will was there from a world wide effort.

Donald Trump

Mullaghteelin wrote: »

There are one or two posts asking why we haven't heard of this before now. There certainly have been murmurings for a while in foreign media outlets, but there is no way our own media will have reported anything that may have cast the EU in a bad light. Our news is far too carefully managed for that.

How would it show the EU in a bad light if a private company didn't meet its targets a few months ago? They've had the intervening times to fix their issues. Wasn't there an issue with Pfizer one week when they said they were going to do something to correct an issue which would decrease supply for a week, but that they would catch up - and they did.



AZ has only informed the EU this week that they wouldn't have what is promised.


What did you expect should have been done? RTE to be publishing "EU are are shower of wasters" all through December? Because their supplier was likely going to let them down?

Donald Trump

mick087 wrote: »

Yes your right there seems no rush or the Russian or Chinese vaccine.


I was was watching the RT news yesterday and yes i know its the Russian sky news but they claimed Hungary have been looking into getting the Russian vaccine if the EU don't hurry up and sort this out.

AZ issues could easily be sorted there is no reason emergency measures could not happen ie factories nationalized by governments.

Trouble with this is people have investments and want a dividends, investors don't want to bank roll a vaccine as profit is more important than saving lives.

It's a free market dude. You can buy shares in AZ tomorrow. Ticker is AZN. Then you can use your voting power to help put people in charge who will give it away for free or whatever you want.

mick087

listermint wrote: »

So they're using EU factories to fulfill UK orders but not using non EU factories to fulfill EU orders all whilst being subsidized by the EU money for most of the existing manufacturer.

. hmm

I believe its also manufactured in the UK they have a site or sites there as well as Europe.
I believe the UK was investing long before the EU


https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/uk/uk-to-invest-further-84m-in-coronavirus-vaccine-trials-1.4255765

mick087

Donald Trump wrote: »

It's a free market dude. You can buy shares in AZ tomorrow. Ticker is AZN. Then you can use your voting power to help put people in charge who will give it away for free or whatever you want.

Yes the society we have created is a free market you are correct.
Yes i can use my vote to help change my national government.

noodler

listermint wrote: »

So they're using EU factories to fulfill UK orders but not using non EU factories to fulfill EU orders all whilst being subsidized by the EU money for most of the existing manufacturer.

. hmm

Where has this new accusation come from?

Donald Trump

mick087 wrote: »

Yes the society we have created is a free market you are correct.
Yes i can use my vote to help change my national government.

I was referring to your investor voting power.


Anyone can buy shares in that company or any other. There are possibly other similarly minded people to yourself who would like to set up an organisation to develop and give away free vaccines for these threats. You can be an "investor" and put your money into those instead of putting it into the more "commercial" ones if you like. No point moaning about the ones who invest in AZ etc. if you are not prepared to put your money into the other ones. Even if you don't have much to spate, I am sure that every little helps!

Joe_ Public

mick087 wrote: »

People are scared.
Many people on the front line and on low pay see a vaccine as hope.
Many people on this thread will be working from home safe.
The vaccine is a big issue its the light t life.


AZ are not able to cope with demand it would seem

There so many things that can be done to speed up process if the will was there from a world wide effort.

AZ not able to cope with demand obviously but would be interesting to know when they first came to that realisation. If, as we keep hearing, they're in it on a not for profit basis - which i dont think is the case but anyway - why then couldn't they have sought help from others on the manufacturing side or agreed a deal to license another manufacturer to help cope with supply? Why, if profit isnt a motive, is it so vital they keep it all in house? I'm not asking you specifically btw, just in general.

Melanchthon

McGiver wrote: »

Brexiters can't open the EU commission website?


https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/SPEECH_21_211

You may wish to call Mr Keersmaecker if unsure.

The above press release I hope stops these speculations. We the EU, funded development of the AZ vaccine, we signed a contract and preordered 300M doses. AZ is now reneging on that contract. End of the story.

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

AZ committed to a particular delivery schedule at the time of contract signing (or possibly even before that as an understanding had already been reach, without full contract signing). AZ were fully aware of their other commitments to other customers at that time of EU contract signing.

When the EU signed relative to the UK is irrelevant, AZ made specific commitments to the EU at that time. If AZ couldn't meet those commitments at the time of signing, they shouldn't have signed up or had schedules adjusted accordingly.

This is a clear breach of contract, simple as that. Waffling on about the EU signing after UK is just a smokescreen for those looking to have a go at the EU and/or distract from the UKs dismissal handling since the start of the pandemic.

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

"To the best of their ability" doesn't mean you can send vaccines elsewhere. If they have the ability to supply more vaccines to the EU, which seems to be the case, then they are clearly required to do that. Diverting supply elsewhere is not acting "to the best of their ability".

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

The EU Commission took over from the IVA but that only relates to where the vaccines go after production. AZ still had committed to producing vaccines for a client (who got a bit bigger but that was no concern of theirs). The fact still remains that they signed the contract with the EU Commission but are now failing to honour their obligations under the contract.

The "best efforts only" thing protects AZ if issues outside their control arise which make it impossible for them to fulfill their commitments, it does not mean they can make up how much they supply the EU as they go along. For example, if there aren't enough vials available for them to meet the original supply timelines, then their "best efforts" would be to supply in line with vial production. The EU gave them hundreds of millions upfront to avoid such issues.

Ok I am not a business man and I won't pretend to know contract law but people seem to be deliberately missing the point here because of their political beliefs.

Say I sign a contract with Sony and hand over a wedge of cash that I will get a thousand Playstation 5's guaranteed by Christmas and to set up a factory that will make Playstation 5's to help fullfil my order.
Then three months later my neighbor signs a contract for a thousand Playstation 5's and a factory to help produce Playstations, but Sony gets back to them and say thats grand, we will make our best efforts to fulfill your order.

The first contract is both earlier and has stronger terms that Sony would have to fulfill ahead of the best effort contract right? The neighbor might be annoyed but they signed a contract without the guarantee because they were slower.

It will be interesting to see if the contract does get published because it should settle there arguments.

c.p.w.g.w

Tough few weeks for poor Justin it seems, he has to do a lot of face saving these days.

At least face saving is better than black facing

Renault 5

I have 3 questions.

1. How many doses have been produced so far in the Belgian facility to date.

2. How many doses that were produced are currently in storage within the EU.

3. Where any of the doses produced within the Belgian facility distributed to countries outside of the EU and If so, Who and how many?

Pete_Cavan

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

The "best efforts only" thing protects AZ if issues outside their control arise which make it impossible for them to fulfill their commitments,

That's Force Majuere, usually referred to as an act of god. No one is claiming that from what I can gather.

McGiver

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Waffling on about the EU signing after UK is just a smokescreen for those looking to have a go at the EU and/or distract from the UKs dismissal handling since the start of the pandemic.

This. It's the europhobes in the UK using this situation to destabilise the EU, armies of trolls and bots are on it. Peston, and the BCC, and teh gutter press and Telegraph, who the Tory Brexit party have either in control or under influence, are on it. And simpletons in the EU hear it, because they are frustrated, unhappy or what not and want to release their anger on someone and the EU is the easiest target, as always.

And this, of course, was 100% expected, that the current toxic UK regime would be trying to spin and spin, run PR campaings and support eurosceptics/fascists etc. across the EU to sow distrust and disunity. The fact they do this at the time of this unprecedented crisis where people are dying is truly disgraceful.

I'd bet that the current toxic version of Tories support the PiS and Orban in the background for the same reasons described above .:cool:

MrMusician18

Melanchthon wrote: »

Ok I am not a business man and I won't pretend to know contract law but people seem to be deliberately missing the point here because of their political beliefs.

Say I sign a contract with Sony and hand over a wedge of cash that I will get a thousand Playstation 5's guaranteed by Christmas and to set up a factory that will make Playstation 5's to help fullfil my order.
Then three months later my neighbor signs a contract for a thousand Playstation 5's and a factory to help produce Playstations, but Sony gets back to them and say thats grand, we will make our best efforts to fulfill your order.

The first contract is both earlier and has stronger terms that Sony would have to fulfill ahead of the best effort contract right? The neighbor might be annoyed but they signed a contract without the guarantee because they were slower.

It will be interesting to see if the contract does get published because it should settle there arguments.

It would depend on the definition of best efforts. A best efforts clause was likely included to mitigate risk associated with failed manufacturing, bad batches and the like, not diversion of stock.

Without seeing the contracts, we are all guessing though.

Leroy42

There is clearly more to this than any of us know, or can know.

But, IMO, it boils down to power-play between massive organisations. One the one hand you have an EU, looking to reassert its authority after the damage of Brexit and faced with a demand for a solution across the bloc.

On the other, you have a pharma company looking to both protect its assets and revenue streams but also looking at the increasingly tough rules that are being put in place by the EU.

Take for example the autorisation of the vaccine. The UK deemed it necessary to fast track the process and adjusted the process to get it done. The EU have stuck to their process, demanding more evidence from the company to prove the vaccine.

If I was AZ, I know which one the two systems I would prefer to be operating in. This strikes me as nothing more than AZ putting it power across to the EU, letting them know where the power really lies.

Now, one can take either side, but IMO it is worrying how much power companies like AZ have and how they are able to drive even an organisation like the EU. This is about far more than this vaccine.

Melanchthon

McGiver wrote: »

This. It's the europhobes in the UK using this situation to destabilise the EU, armies of trolls and bots are on it. Peston, and the BCC, and teh gutter press and Telegraph, who the Tory Brexit party have either in control or under influence, are on it. And simpletons in the EU hear it, because they are frustrated, unhappy or what not and want to release their anger on someone and the EU is the easiest target, as always.

The funny thing is the posters here that won't ever here a bad thing said about the EU are trying to claim the moral and factual highground.
Earlier in the thread the Peston twitter post about signing dates was called out as being incorrect fake news, with no links to documents to counter his point.

Then it turns out the Peston post was actually broadly correct and there was a 3 month gap, what happens here, people double down on it being fake news despite it being broadly correct.
And its the other people that are the simpletons :rolleyes:

CIARAN_BOYLE

Leroy42 wrote: »

There is clearly more to this than any of us know, or can know.

But, IMO, it boils down to power-play between massive organisations. One the one hand you have an EU, looking to reassert its authority after the damage of Brexit and faced with a demand for a solution across the bloc.

On the other, you have a pharma company looking to both protect its assets and revenue streams but also looking at the increasingly tough rules that are being put in place by the EU.

Take for example the autorisation of the vaccine. Both the UK and the US deemed it necessary to fast track the process and adjusted the process to get it done. The EU have stuck to their process, demanding more evidence from the company to prove the vaccine.

If I was AZ, I know which one the two systems I would prefer to be operating in. This strikes me as nothing more than AZ putting it power across to the EU, letting them know where the power really lies.

Now, one can take either side, but IMO it is worrying how much power companies like AZ have and how they are able to drive even an organisation like the EU. This is about far more than this vaccine.

The us haven't approved astra zenaca I'm not sure you can say that fast tracked the process to get it done.

MrMusician18

Leroy42 wrote: »

There is clearly more to this than any of us know, or can know.

But, IMO, it boils down to power-play between massive organisations. One the one hand you have an EU, looking to reassert its authority after the damage of Brexit and faced with a demand for a solution across the bloc.

On the other, you have a pharma company looking to both protect its assets and revenue streams but also looking at the increasingly tough rules that are being put in place by the EU.

Take for example the autorisation of the vaccine. Both the UK and the US deemed it necessary to fast track the process and adjusted the process to get it done. The EU have stuck to their process, demanding more evidence from the company to prove the vaccine.

If I was AZ, I know which one the two systems I would prefer to be operating in. This strikes me as nothing more than AZ putting it power across to the EU, letting them know where the power really lies.

Now, one can take either side, but IMO it is worrying how much power companies like AZ have and how they are able to drive even an organisation like the EU. This is about far more than this vaccine.

AZ won't be approved in the usa until April to my knowledge.

This is a money and terms dispute. It looks like one side has taken a liberal interpretation of a contract to hide behind because of an inability to deliver. Remember, they have revised down projected deliveries, so they once agreed to the original levels.

I've seen this a few times in contractual disputes. It can go either way when arbitrated.

McGiver

mick087 wrote: »

Yes the society we have created is a free market you are correct.
Yes i can use my vote to help change my national government.

And the national government votes in/selects its EU commissioner (i.e. an EU Minister). When national government is changed so is its commissioner. Hope you get it - finally.

Remind me - when was the last time you could change any of national Minister directly? :pac:

mick087

Joe_ Public wrote: »

AZ not able to cope with demand obviously but would be interesting to know when they first came to that realisation. If, as we keep hearing, they're in it on a not for profit basis - which i dont think is the case but anyway - why then couldn't they have sought help from others on the manufacturing side or agreed a deal to license another manufacturer to help cope with supply? Why, if profit isnt a motive, is it so vital they keep it all in house? I'm not asking you specifically btw, just in general.

I agree it does seem AZ is not able to cope with demand


The Oxford vaccine was reported as a non for profit vaccine for poorer countries if memory serves me correct. My understanding is the vaccine sells for 3 euro a dose compared to other doses selling between 20 to 40 euro. If this correct then i would except to a certin point its not all about profit with this particular vaccine. But such big companies IMO never do anything for free.


AZ do seem to have many questions to answer and like everyone else on here i could only give my best guess which is they cannot cope with demand. If they cannot cope with demand the EU showing us the contract is of no help. Yes the EU have a contract yes it seems AZ have broken the terms.

The EU also need to answer why they ordered the vaccine later and why is it taking so long to approve the Oxford one surely this virus is a call for emergency actions.

Donald Trump

Leroy42 wrote: »

Now, one can take either side, but IMO it is worrying how much power companies like AZ have and how they are able to drive even an organisation like the EU. This is about far more than this vaccine.

I don't see them as having any real power other than they convinced the EU to sign up to an agreement and are now apparently not going to be able to fulfill it.


The power may revert to the power of the stone in the old "you can't get blood out of a stone" idiom.

Melanchthon

noodler wrote: »

Where has this new accusation come from?

Its factual, the first UK delivery came from the European factory. It was still hit by being much reduced.

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/health-pharma/supply-of-covid-vaccine-doses-held-up-by-manufacturing-delays-1.4430676

Edit: In case my other links in previous post weren't good enough sources

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-health-coronavirus-britain-astrazenec-idUKKBN27K2GU

lucernarian

MrMusician18 wrote: »

AZ won't be approved in the usa until April to my knowledge.

This is a money and terms dispute. It looks like one side has taken a liberal interpretation of a contract to hide behind because of an inability to deliver. Remember, they have revised down projected deliveries, so they once agreed to the original levels.

I've seen this a few times in contractual disputes. It can go either way when arbitrated.

This is interesting. Though it's worth noting that the EU can stop their produce being exported and this would be valid under international law from what little I know on reading the subject and WTO rules etc. I feel like the EU have set up a fait accomplici.

fly_agaric

Melanchthon wrote: »

Astra Zeneca having issues about production isn't new news though, it probably wasn't reported as much here but AFAIK the first UK order was massively lower than expected.

Sorry for the Russia Today link but it's broadly accurate
https://www.rt.com/uk/505744-britain-vaccine-covid19-delays-lockdown/

https://www.ft.com/content/6ccff5f5-834d-43b7-84e4-82ec3bb3ab06

Thanks for the links.

Melanchthon wrote: »

The thing is the UK signed earlier and got a better contract because of this, it also experienced the delivery problems earlier when the politics were less heated.

The patriotic politics around Brexit etc. are making that more relevant than it really is here IMO - the EU must be shown to fail in comparison, it is overdue for the long awaited collapse into chaos you realise, and post Brexit UK most be shown to be world beating in tackling this virus.

The core issue is really did the company stiff the EU (and of course us, as in Ireland for any posting here who may be confused...we did not exit the EU) somehow, don't believe that can be answered yet.

I think the EU has done an okay job as regards vaccine procurement, esp. given there were no prior no EU mechanisms in place for doing this, or coordinating on many other public health problems of this pandemic that affect all the member states.

I can see benefit of emergency approval of vaccines and going faster as the UK has, arguments for which may be stronger now than a few months ago, but can also see there are strong arguments against + drawbacks with that approach.

McGiver

McGiver wrote: »

This. It's the europhobes in the UK using this situation to destabilise the EU, armies of trolls and bots are on it. Peston, and the BCC, and teh gutter press and Telegraph, who the Tory Brexit party have either in control or under influence, are on it. And simpletons in the EU hear it, because they are frustrated, unhappy or what not and want to release their anger on someone and the EU is the easiest target, as always.

And this, of course, was 100% expected, that the current toxic UK regime would be trying to spin and spin, run PR campaings and support eurosceptics/fascists etc. across the EU to sow distrust and disunity. The fact they do this at the time of this unprecedented crisis where people are dying is truly disgraceful.

I'd bet that the current toxic version of Tories support the PiS and Orban in the background for the same reasons described above .:cool:

and covid was all about Bill Gates wanting to implant chips in to us via 5G I suppose :eek:

Tij da feen

Melanchthon wrote: »

Its factual, the first UK delivery came from the European factory. It was still hit by being much reduced.

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/health-pharma/supply-of-covid-vaccine-doses-held-up-by-manufacturing-delays-1.4430676

Edit: In case my other links in previous post weren't good enough sources

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-health-coronavirus-britain-astrazenec-idUKKBN27K2GU

How long can the vaccines be stored for after production? Seeing as the vaccine still doesn't have approvals in the EU (until Friday) I'm not surprised they were using what they had available then in the UK.

If the vaccines were storable until now, then the ones that shipped EU -> UK should be replaced from the UK plant.

McGiver

Melanchthon wrote: »

Then it turns out the Peston post was actually broadly correct and there was a 3 month gap, what happens here, people double down on it being fake news despite it being broadly correct.

Link please. "Broadly"

And even if true 3 month gap is irrelevant and is used to throw crap on the EU. It's a red herring.

It has nothing to do with the fact that we, the EU, funded R&D and production of AZ (0.5 billion), pre-ordered vaccines, which the AZ are unable to deliver on.

hotmail.com

A suspicious package at a vaccine factory in North Wales has disrupted manufacturing. The bomb squad attending the scene, according to the BBC.

Joe_ Public

mick087 wrote: »

I agree it does seem AZ is not able to cope with demand


The Oxford vaccine was reported as a non for profit vaccine for poorer countries if memory serves me correct. My understanding is the vaccine sells for 3 euro a dose compared to other doses selling between 20 to 40 euro. If this correct then i would except to a certin point its not all about profit with this particular vaccine. But such big companies IMO never do anything for free.


AZ do seem to have many questions to answer and like everyone else on here i could only give my best guess which is they cannot cope with demand. If they cannot cope with demand the EU showing us the contract is of no help. Yes the EU have a contract yes it seems AZ have broken the terms.

The EU also need to answer why they ordered the vaccine later and why is it taking so long to approve the Oxford one surely this virus is a call for emergency actions.

Thats correct. The original concept was fundamentally based on it being open license too so that obviously only changed when AZ, at the instigation of Bill Gates, was brought on board.

The deal with AZ is that once the pandemic is officially declared over, by the WHO presumably, then they will be free to set a higher price and start generating a profit. So it's not really in their interests to have any delays in roll out, as it's going to cost them money. So while i applaud oxford for their original vision, granting exclusive rights to one pharma firm was always a compromise of that original goal.

Melanchthon

fly_agaric wrote: »

Thanks for the links.



The patriotic politics around Brexit etc. are making that more relevant than it really is here IMO - the EU must be shown to fail in comparison, it is overdue for the long awaited collapse into chaos you realise, and post Brexit UK most be shown to be world beating in tackling this virus.

The British Conservative government got a lot of flack from strongly pro-EU outlets like the Guardian and so on for not signing up to the EU plan and claiming it would be a big problem so there is an aspect of setting the record straight there.

I agree that there has been Patriotic politics at play in the UK but the same could be said about the EU, its in a slightly different manner though as their focus has been on trying to divert blame away from the Commission/EU processes, remember the initial group of countries were nearly as quick of the mark as the UK, its better for Germany, France, the Netherlands and Italy voters to be mad at Astra Zeneca/the UK than asking themselves, "hey we could have had a quick deal likely on better terms but the Commission intervened"

titan18

Tij da feen wrote: »

How long can the vaccines be stored for after production? Seeing as the vaccine still doesn't have approvals in the EU (until Friday) I'm not surprised they were using what they had available then in the UK.

If the vaccines were storable until now, then the ones that shipped EU -> UK should be replaced from the UK plant.

They also didn't apply for approval to the EMA until a few weeks ago so you'd have to question did they purposefully not apply as they were having production issues in UK and Europe and said they'd transfer from EU to UK and delay applying for approval so they could use it as an excuse.

McGiver

McGiver wrote: »

Link please. "Broadly"

And even if true 3 month gap is irrelevant and is used to throw crap on the EU. It's a red herring.

It has nothing to do with the fact that we, the EU, funded R&D and production of AZ (0.5 billion), pre-ordered vaccines, which the AZ are unable to deliver on.

the British government invested in the R&D long before the EU had even thought about it. https://www.genengnews.com/news/uk-starts-oxford-coronavirus-vaccine-trial-as-germany-green-lights-clinical-trial-for-biontech-and-pfizer/

so err, go away with your "We, the EU2" ****e.