Abbott + St. Jude Medical: What does it mean for med tech innovators?

 

By Amy Siegel, S2N Health

We awoke yesterday to news of yet another med tech mega-merger, with acquisitive Abbott ponying up $25B for St. Jude Medical, even before the ink is dry on Abbott’s $6B takeover of Alere (though that deal may be on the rocks). Fair to say that consolidation in med tech is firmly a trend, with this deal following a string of other big fat $1B+ global weddings:

Deal	Area	Deal Value	Year
Medtronic+Covidien	Various	$50B	2015
Abbott+St. Jude	Cardiovascular	$25B	2016
Zimmer+Biomet	Orthopedics	$13B	2014
BD+CareFusion	Patient Care	$12.2B	2014
St. Jude+Thoratec	Cardiovascular	$3.4B	2015
Wright-Tournier	Orthopedics	$3.3B	2014
Stryker+Sage Products	Patient Care	$2.8B	2016
Hill-Rom+Welch Allyn	Patient Care	$2.0B	2015
Cardinal+Cordis (JNJ)	Cardiovascular	$1.9B	2015
Smith & Nephew+Arthrocare	Orthopedics	$1.7B	2014
Boston Scientific+AMS	Urology	$1.6B	2015

The rationale behind these mergers is well understood; med tech is under intense price pressure from health system all over the world, and increased scale helps both the sides of these companies’ ledgers by lowering operating costs and enhancing negotiation leverage with customers.  Then of course there are other incentives like tax inversions, though that window may be closing (see failed “Pfizergan” deal). 

In the press releases announcing these deals, there is often lip service paid to the positive impact on innovation, the story being that greater scale and efficiencies equal more money to spend on internally and externally developed new technologies. “The combined business will have a powerful pipeline ready to deliver next-generation medical technologies,” says Abbott CEO Miles White.  Omar Ishrak, Medtronic’s CEO, made a similar statement back in 2014: “Medtronic has consistently been the leading innovator and investor in U.S. medtech, and this combination will allow us to accelerate those investments.”

It is too soon to evaluate Medtronic’s follow-through on this promise; they have made a few notable early stage investments since the Covidien acquisition including Lazarus Effect, Twelve and Medina Medical. The legitimate concern of emerging med tech executives, though, is the loss of one more potential acquirer out there, which lessens the chance of an earlier and/or richer competitive deal, and therefore makes the fundraising road even rougher than it already is.  In addition, these big acquisitions tend to distract organizations and slow down active discussions for several months or longer as a result of personnel changes, shifting business development strategies, and general chaos. 

While a good number of the large M&A deals have been concentrated in the cardiovascular and orthopedic segments, which have been plagued by large, heavily mature product categories, we should expect to see more consolidation generally given the forces at work in the healthcare market.  Looking across the industry, the number of now seemingly small-ish $1B+ revenue companies is striking (see below chart). In an “eat or be eaten” world, these smaller market players may be hungry for deals to enhance their own valuations; emerging med tech companies should consider casting a wider net in the search for strategic partners.  Ultimately, the established medical device companies cannot merge and synergize their way to top line growth, and will continue to look externally for innovation. 

*Most recent annual filings

Sources: company financial filings, MDDI Top 100 Medical Device Companies of 2015

The post Abbott + St. Jude Medical: What does it mean for med tech innovators? appeared first on MassDevice.

from MassDevice http://ift.tt/26BO2Ph