My Pharma Reviews

Source: https://x.com/deedydas?s=20

Look at the chart, it is striking. $1 invested equally across US-listed companies the moment an Indian-origin CEO took the helm would have compounded to $58 by May 2026 against $7.7 for the S&P 500. A 30.3% CAGR versus 14.2%. Yay for Indian-origin talent! There is an obvious caveat though. This is a tech-heavy portfolio in a tech-dominated cycle. But dismissing it entirely as a sector artifact misses the point. I am also not celebrating in borrowed glory. I am wondering why these individuals ended up running American companies instead of Indian ones? To me, the data describes what Indian human capital looks like when it operates without the constraints Indian institutions impose on it.Billionaire Michael Milken’s dataset is a proxy for what governance liberation does to human capital. On this episode of The relevant lesson for Indian pharma isn’t “hire more Indian-Americans” but “what would your strategy look like if your professional managers had the same mandate and equity stake as a Satya Nadella?” That question should make pharma promoters sit up and think. Listen in 👆

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit mypharmareviews.substack.com

Indian pharma is rapidly showing that obesity and diabetes are commercially distinct markets, even when the underlying molecule is the same. Torrent’s launch of Sembolic for diabetologists and Semalix for wellness clinics is a clear example of one API, two different market positions. Alkem has taken a similar approach with Semasize and Obesema. This reflects a deliberate market-architecture strategy.

Novo’s “Ozempic pill” move is best understood as a franchise-consolidation play. Strategically, it shifts the basis of competition from molecule availability to branded category ownership as oral semaglutide diffuses through the market. Novo is trying to ensure that awareness accrues to the Ozempic franchise rather than to semaglutide as a generic ingredient. In the Indian context, that is meaningful because generic proliferation is likely to do the heavy lifting on category creation - normalizing oral GLP-1 use, reducing physician hesitation, and broadening patient familiarity.

The upside for Novo is stronger capture of demand as the market scales. The downside is that a unified Ozempic identity can compress internal segmentation, making it harder to maintain a clear premium boundary between broad metabolic therapy and a distinct obesity franchise. So the move improves brand leverage, but raises the execution burden on portfolio architecture.

In this episode of “My Pharma Reviews - the Podcast”, I discuss whether Novo can convert a generics-built market into a premium obesity franchise. Listen in!

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit mypharmareviews.substack.com

Kiran Mazumdar-Shaw just made two of the biggest bets of her career simultaneously. A $5.5 billion merger collapsing generics and biosimilars into one entity. And a niece with a Stanford cancer biology PhD named as her eventual successor.

The merger logic is sound. Nobody else sits at the intersection of biosimilar insulins and generic GLP-1s at global scale. And on succession? Claire Mazumdar’s entire intellectual identity is built around original drug discovery. Bicara Therapeutics is a tumour immunology company doing hard science.

So is Biocon signalling that its next chapter looks less like affordable replication and more like genuine innovation? Or is Claire simply inheriting the machine as-is, and her R&D DNA is incidental? Will be interesting to see what determines Biocon’s valuation story for the next decade. As I talk about in today’s episode of “My Pharma Reviews - The Podcast”, right now the answer is deliberately ambiguous. Listen in.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit mypharmareviews.substack.com

With every passing day, the GLP-1 story in India seems like a character test. Every structural condition for a super-cycle exists in the opportunity. We have between 101 million to 212 million diabetics, a March 2026 patent expiry on semaglutide, a 34% CAGR domestic anti-obesity market, and oral formulations about to eliminate the cold chain barrier entirely. What is missing is not capital, not manufacturing capability, not distribution reach. What is missing is the willingness to hold an ambition the size of the opportunity.

The Indian generic industry’s response has been to file generics, supply APIs, and distribute for MNCs. While this is not wrong, it is just small. As I said before, the durable GLP-1 opportunity is not in the molecule, it is in owning the metabolic patient via adherence platforms, chronic care pathways, disease management built around a decade-long relationship.

Meanwhile, Hengrui is in Phase 3 with a next-generation dual agonist showing 18% weight loss. Innovent got a novel GCG/GLP-1 molecule approved in China last year, the world's first. One-third of all global pharma licensing deal spending in H1 2025 involved Chinese-origin drugs. China is not waiting for the patent cliff. China is building the next one.

I spoke to senior people inside Indian pharma companies who track this market closely. What I found wasn't strategic disagreement. It was vertigo. The scale of the GLP-1 category disorients them before they have even begun to act. That is not a capital problem but an imagination problem. Which is why the dominant strategic posture of Indian generic pharma is to file, manufacture, and wait for the price war.

Listen in!

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit mypharmareviews.substack.com

Indian pharma is a $55B market today. It will be $130B by 2030. But, most mid-tier companies in 2026, are still running by 2015 rules. I just dropped a new podcast episode breaking down the five structural truths that will separate the compounders from the also-rans in Indian pharma over the next decade.

Here’s what we cover:

1. Digitization is permanent and the real cost of delay isn’t technology spend, it’s data. Tata 1mg went from 19% to 31% e-pharmacy market share in 12 months. That gap compounds.

2. The customer has changed — the patient, the physician and the institution, the family, the influencers are all transforming simultaneously. Most companies are managing one of the three.

3. The macro isn’t a headwind, it is a restructuring. 954 NLEM formulations. 17,000 Jan Aushadhi stores. ₹2,000+ crore in generic sales in FY25 alone. This is policy architecture, not a cycle.

4. Compounds, competitors, consumers — all shifting. Sun Pharma’s specialty business now out-earns its generics in the US. Zepto is delivering medicines in 10 minutes. The category boundaries pharma assumed as protective are all gone.

5. The window to consolidate leadership is open — but not indefinitely.

Three screening questions I walk through in the episode:

→ Do you have pricing power that NLEM can’t reach?

→ Do you own a data asset that compounds?

→ Is your cost structure built for a price-regulated world?

Would love to hear what you’d push back on. Listen in.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit mypharmareviews.substack.com

When Narayana Murthy forced out Vishal Sikka, Infosys’ CEO, he sealed the company’s fate. Sikka wanted to invest $1B in OpenAI. That stake would be worth $45B today. While the money is very attractive, more importantly, it would set India’s leading IT company to redefine that industry and probably save millions of jobs while inspiring hundreds of start ups to build better. The lesson is about what happens when founders confuse the model that built their industry with the model that will define its future.

Indian pharma is running the same risk. We built a world-class generics industry on manufacturing arbitrage and regulatory navigation. Brilliant execution but the ceiling is visible - USFDA pressure, China competition, DPCO constraints, generic price erosion in the US.

The Sikkas of Indian pharma exist - in biologics, in novel discovery, in platform chemistry - but the institutional gravity (and inertia) of a promoter-controlled, generics-benchmarked industry is immense. The question every pharma CXO and capital allocator should be asking is “are we scaling yesterday’s model, or building tomorrow’s?” Listen in.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit mypharmareviews.substack.com

The acceleration of generic semaglutide launches in India is rightly celebrated as a triumph of affordable access but it also highlights a darker fact. In this high‑stakes, price‑war category, adherence to regulation and quality standards is not a cost, it is a moat.

For Indian majors, strict regulatory compliance, device‑quality discipline, and transparent pharmacovigilance are not just compliance boxes but are the foundation of trust that separates opportunists from genuine long‑term therapy builders. When patient‑level complaints about pen clicking issues, needle jams, and “cheaper‑feeling” reusable devices surface, the differentiator becomes how seriously a company takes these signals and how quickly it responds.

In this environment, stakeholder experience for physicians, pharmacists, patients, and even investors, is the true competitive edge. Transparent engagement, clear communication on device‑sourcing, robust training, and proactive risk‑mitigation create a top‑class customer experience that’s hard to copy. That’s where Indian pharma can move beyond “cheap semaglutide” and build a reputation for reliable semaglutide, turning compliance and quality into a powerful brand moat and reinforcing the line between short‑term opportunists and long‑term therapy builders.

Listen in!

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit mypharmareviews.substack.com

A drug discovered in India. Developed in India. Targeting a disease that still strikes 2.5 lakh Indians every year.

Zydus Lifesciences just received DCGI approval to begin Phase III trials of Zintrodiazine a novel anti-malarial compound active against drug-resistant strains of both P. falciparum and P. vivax. This is a decade-long bet, built on a 2016 collaboration with Medicines for Malaria Venture, on a molecule originally discovered by MMV and AstraZeneca India. It is one of the most significant drug development milestones in Indian pharma in years.

India has world-class manufacturing, deep scientific talent, and government schemes like PLI, PRIP, Biopharma SHAKTI, now pointing in the right direction. What it still lacks is a financial bridge that lets companies recover the cost of novel drug discovery in low-margin therapeutic areas. Without a Priority Review Voucher equivalent, or stronger innovation rewards for neglected disease R&D, Zydus’s bet remains an act of corporate conviction. It is admirable, but not yet a replicable model.

For CXOs allocating R&D capital, investors pricing innovation premiums, and policymakers building India’s next chapter in biopharma, this story deserves your attention.

Listen in!

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit mypharmareviews.substack.com

Sun Pharma’s $11.75 billion acquisition of Organon helps establish that Indian pharma can credibly build a global, specialty‑care platform through bold, cash‑powered M&A. For Indian pharma CXOs and investors, this deal is a reset of sorts. It is no longer “if” but “how and where” the next wave of scale‑creating acquisitions will land, both globally and in domestic consolidation plays like Mankind‑BSV or Torrent‑JB Pharma‑type combinations.

Yet, as balance sheets bulge with cash, there’s a risk that boards will prioritise M&A momentum over long‑cycle innovation, pushing back R&D agendas by years. Will pharma strike a barbell strategy using acquisitions to buy scale and commercial muscle, while ring‑fencing capital to focus on next‑generation pipelines especially in biologics, and specialty care?

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit mypharmareviews.substack.com

Indian pharma built one of the great industrial stories of the last thirty years supplying 20% of the world’s generic medicines and 60% vaccines, by volume and becoming the pharmacy of the world. But every platform eventually needs renewal, not just optimisation.

As two of the sector’s most prominent CEOs step down - Mr. Umang Vohra, who grew Cipla from Rs 14,600 crore to Rs 27,500 crore in revenue over nearly a decade, and Dr. Vikas Gupta, who recently resigned from Alkem - the question isn’t whether they were good stewards. Of course, they were. The question is whether the next chapter of Indian pharma viz biosimilars, AI-driven discovery, specialty markets, digital health, is being built with the same boldness that built the last one.

The Tim Cook debate offers a useful frame. Cook grew Apple from $350 billion to $4 trillion in market cap. Extraordinary stewardship.

Source: https://stratechery.com/2026/tim-cooks-impeccable-timing/

And yet the sharpest critique of his tenure is that he optimised what Jobs created rather than creating what comes next.

Source: https://sharptext.net/2026/tim-cook-personified-big-techs-maturity/

The critique isn’t that Cook failed. By every financial measure, he was extraordinary. It’s that Apple always promised to push the human race forward, and under Jobs, it actually did with the iPod, iPhone, and iPad. They changed how billions of people live.

Cook inherited that kingdom and monetised it brilliantly through services, ecosystem lock-in, and masterful political navigation, but never created the next world-changing thing. He delivered everything except the magic. And for a company that built its entire identity around magic, that absence is the critique.

Indian pharma’s incoming generation of leaders faces exactly that fork. The companies that will define the sector in 2035 are being shaped right now by the bets being made, and the ones being avoided. For CXOs and PE investors thinking about where durable value actually comes from, that’s the only question worth asking. Are You Tim Cook or Satya Nadella? That’s the one question every Indian CXO and their investors should be asking right now.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit mypharmareviews.substack.com