BAYRY - Bayer AG

[Zorrofan]

Looks like the lawsuit overhang is not going away anytime soon. The company has lost several lawsuits so far and the stock has been just hammered.  Anyone buying at these levels or is the lawsuit risk too great?  I'm not a lawyer but I wonder to what extent can losses be contained at the Monsanto level or is this really a potential existential risk.

[valuedontlie]

2 cases at $80m judgement each... only 11,200 cases to go!

WSJ article noted a Susquehanna legal analyst estimated $2.5-4bn total exposure over "many" years... at this rate seems kind of low... can these lawsuits from monsanto bleed into other bayer units? my initial thought would be no...

[Foreign Tuffett]

$2 billion!? At some point the #s just become meaningless. Will obviously be reduced on appeal.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-bayer-glyphosate-lawsuit-stocks/bayer-stock-at-lowest-in-nearly-seven-years-after-2-billion-award-in-roundup-trial-idUSKCN1SK0LQ

Is glyphosate carcinogenic? At first glance the evidence seems mixed at best.

https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/how-toxic-is-the-worlds-most-popular-herbicide-roundup-30308

[Haasje]

There is no evidence it is carcinogenic.

There is one organization IARC that has ranked glyphosate as a probable carcinogenic. That's the same category it ranked red meat.

Here are the top 15 largest class action settlements in U.S. history:

https://www.gjel.com/blog/largest-class-action-settlements.html

[cameronfen]

There is no evidence it is carcinogenic.

There is one organization IARC that has ranked glyphosate as a probable carcinogenic. That's the same category it ranked red meat.

Here are the top 15 largest class action settlements in U.S. history:

https://www.gjel.com/blog/largest-class-action-settlements.html

I don't know much about this but it seems from the article linked that most scientist agree that glyphosate is not carcinogenic, but with everything else in roundup, it can still be extremely harmful and carcinogenic.  I'm not a lawyer but does it matter if something in roundup is causing the cancer or if glyphosate is causing the cancer? 

[StevieV]

"WSJ article noted a Susquehanna legal analyst estimated $2.5-4bn total exposure over "many" years... at this rate seems kind of low... can these lawsuits from monsanto bleed into other bayer units? my initial thought would be no... "

That estimate seems very, very low.  The first three trials have gone terribly for Bayer, and I believe the number of pending case is up over 13,000 now.  I'm pretty confident that Bayer would happily pay $4B all at once this year if it would make this go away.

They really need some outright wins at trial.

[Haasje]

$4 billion is a lot of money given historical settlements. Most of the higher settlements the products were proven to cause harm.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/roundup-of-cancer-evidence-11557876010

[StevieV]

$4 billion is a lot of money given historical settlements. Most of the higher settlements the products were proven to cause harm.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/roundup-of-cancer-evidence-11557876010

My impression is that $4B may be high given the science.  However, Bayer has done terribly in the first three trials.  Not sure why, but I think $2.5-4B is low given how the initial trials have gone.  Also, looks like Bayer has lost about $44B in market cap since the merger.  No way to segregate out how much of that is the due to the litigation, but I expect it is more than $4B.

[peterHK]

The science shows it's fine (the only longitudinal study of it in humans found no cancer).

The issue is that a lot of these are tried in California, where Juries don't have the same burden of proof and can basically rule in the face of every shred of scientific evidence if they want. That's basically what's happened, and when I realized that risk a few months ago after the first case, I sold every share.

[Cigarbutt]

Interesting article summarizing the legal challenge:
https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2019/05/17/526711.htm

Many exposure-to-toxicity lawsuits get sympathy at first level courts and damages typically go down after by a wide margin. However, in this specific case, the context and more solid evidence-based research make the cases more resistant to reverse appellate verdicts.

The 2016 IARC evaluation is a globalist opinion and may not amount to much in an American court but there is underlying uncomfortable evidence for people who had occupational or unusual exposure.
https://www.iarc.fr/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/MonographVolume112-1.pdf

I've followed the Fosamax/Merck case that went to the Supreme Court (decision coming) and agree with the substance of the article about the balance of pre-emption that can be restored to this specific case at the Supreme Court level. So, this will take a long time to figure out.

In any case, I hope that the toxicity is limited because the use of glyphosate has gone up ++, especially in certain areas:
https://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/pnsp/usage/maps/show_map.php?year=2016&map=GLYPHOSATE&hilo=H