Soliciting Materials

 

SCHEDULE 14A

Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of the

Securities Exchange Act of 1934

(Amendment No.      )

 

Filed by the Registrant ¨                            Filed by a Party other than the Registrant x

Check the appropriate box:

 

¨ Preliminary Proxy Statement

 

¨ Confidential, for Use of the Commission Only (as permitted by Rule 14a-6(e)(2))

 

¨ Definitive Proxy Statement

 

¨ Definitive Additional Materials

 

x Soliciting Material Pursuant to § 240.14a-12

 

 

Biogen Idec Inc.

 

(Name of Registrant as Specified In Its Charter)

 

 

Carl C. Icahn

Alexander J. Denner

Richard C. Mulligan

Thomas F. Deuel

David Sidransky

Mayu Sris

Eric Ende

Jeffrey Meckler

Icahn Partners LP

Icahn Partners Master Fund LP

Icahn Partners Master Fund II LP

Icahn Partners Master Fund III LP

High River Limited Partnership

Barberry Corp.

Hopper Investments LLC

Icahn Offshore LP

Icahn Onshore LP

Icahn Capital LP

IPH GP LLC

Icahn Enterprises Holdings L.P.

Icahn Enterprises G.P. Inc.

Beckton Corp.

 

(Name of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement, if other than the Registrant)

 

Payment of Filing Fee (check the appropriate box):

 

x No fee required.

 

¨ Fee computed on table below per Exchange Act Rule 14a-6(i)(4) and 0-11.

 

  1) Title of each class of securities to which transaction applies:

 

  

 
  2) Aggregate number of securities to which transaction applies:

 

  

 
  3) Per unit price or other underlying value of transaction computed pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 0-11 (set forth the amount on which the filing fee is calculated and state how it was determined):

 

  

 
  4) Proposed maximum aggregate value of transaction:

 

  

 
  5) Total fee paid:

 

  

 

 

¨ Fee paid previously with preliminary materials.

 

¨ Check box if any part of the fee is offset as provided by Exchange Act Rule 0-11(a)(2) and identify the filing for which the offsetting fee was paid previously. Identify the previous filing by registration statement number, or the Form or Schedule and the date of its filing.

 

  1) Amount Previously Paid:

 

  

 
  2) Form, Schedule or Registration Statement No.:

 

  

 
  3) Filing Party:

 

  

 
  4) Date Filed:

 

  

 

 


On May 11, 2009, the Participants (as defined below), distributed a presentation to stockholders of Biogen Idec Inc. It is attached hereto as Exhibit I and is incorporated herein by reference.

SECURITY HOLDERS ARE ADVISED TO READ THE PROXY STATEMENT AND OTHER DOCUMENTS RELATED TO THE SOLICITATION OF PROXIES BY CARL C. ICAHN, ALEXANDER J. DENNER, RICHARD C. MULLIGAN, THOMAS F. DEUEL, DAVID SIDRANSKY, MAYU SRIS, ERIC ENDE, JEFFREY MECKLER, ICAHN PARTNERS LP, ICAHN PARTNERS MASTER FUND LP, ICAHN PARTNERS MASTER FUND II LP, ICAHN PARTNERS MASTER FUND III LP, HIGH RIVER LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, BARBERRY CORP., HOPPER INVESTMENTS LLC, ICAHN OFFSHORE LP, ICAHN ONSHORE LP, ICAHN CAPITAL LP, IPH GP LLC, ICAHN ENTERPRISES HOLDINGS L.P., ICAHN ENTERPRISES G.P. INC., BECKTON CORP. (COLLECTIVELY, THE “PARTICIPANTS”) AND CERTAIN OF THEIR RESPECTIVE AFFILIATES FROM THE STOCKHOLDERS OF BIOGEN IDEC INC. FOR USE AT ITS ANNUAL MEETING WHEN AND IF THEY BECOME AVAILABLE, BECAUSE THEY WILL CONTAIN IMPORTANT INFORMATION, INCLUDING INFORMATION RELATING TO THE PARTICIPANTS IN ANY SUCH PROXY SOLICITATION. WHEN AND IF COMPLETED, A DEFINITIVE PROXY STATEMENT AND A FORM OF PROXY WILL BE AVAILABLE TO STOCKHOLDERS OF BIOGEN IDEC INC. FROM THE PARTICIPANTS AT NO CHARGE AND WILL ALSO BE AVAILABLE AT NO CHARGE AT THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION’S WEBSITE AT HTTP://WWW.SEC.GOV. INFORMATION RELATING TO THE PARTICIPANTS IN A POTENTIAL PROXY SOLICITATION IS CONTAINED IN EXHIBIT II HERETO.


Biogen Idec
Investor Presentation
May 2009
Exhibit I


2
Special note regarding presentation
This presentation includes information based on data found in filings with the SEC, independent
industry publications and other sources.  Although we believe that the data is reliable, we do not
guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this information and have not independently verified any
such information.  We have not sought, nor have we received, permission from any third-party to
include their information in this presentation.
Many of the statements in this presentation reflect our subjective belief.  Although we have reviewed
and analyzed the information that has informed our opinions, we do not guarantee the accuracy of
any such beliefs.
Sections of this presentation refer to the experience of our nominees for director at Biogen Idec Inc.
during their tenure as directors of ImClone Systems Inc.  We believe their experience at ImClone was
a success and resulted in an increase in shareholder value that benefited all shareholders.  However,
their
success
at
ImClone
is
not
necessarily
indicative
of
future
results
at
Biogen
Idec
if
our
nominees
were to be elected to the Biogen Idec Board of Directors.
All stockholders of Biogen Idec are advised to read the definitive proxy statement, the gold proxy card
and other documents related to the solicitation of proxies by the Participants from the stockholders of
the Company for use at the 2009 annual meeting of stockholders of the Company because they
contain important information.  The definitive proxy statement and form of proxy along with other
relevant documents, are available at no charge on the SEC’s website at http://www.sec.gov or by
contacting D.F. King & Co., Inc. by telephone toll free at 1-800-769-4414 or by visiting their website at
http://www.dfking.com/BIIB.  In addition, the Participants will provide copies of the definitive proxy
statement without charge upon request.


3
Agenda
Situation Overview
-
Strategic failures
-
Operational failures
-
Business development failures
-
Research & development failures
Our Qualifications & Proposals
-
Biographies of our nominees
-
ImClone Systems case study
-
Proposals for Biogen Idec


4
We strongly believe Biogen Idec needs better
management
Biogen Idec has a collection of valuable assets
-
AVONEX for relapsing multiple sclerosis and TYSABRI for MS and Crohn’s disease, $2.8B of 2008 sales
-
RITUXAN for B-cell non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and rheumatoid arthritis, $1.1B of 2008 sales
-
Promising pipeline (BG-12, Lixivaptan, ADENTRI, etc.) and biologics manufacturing facilities
Board
and
management
have
failed
to
achieve
the
full
potential
of
Biogen
Idec
-
Biogen –
IDEC merger has not created much value
-
Management has failed shareholders strategically and operationally
-
Weak business development and research & development efforts inhibit company’s prospects
Quality of board and management especially crucial today
-
R&D organization needs to be reinvigorated; Strategic review of pipeline needs to be conducted
-
Cost structure needs to be examined and partner relations need to be revitalized
-
Product sales growth likely to slow
-
Board needs to evaluate possibility of separating assets in order to enhance value
-
Management not aligned with shareholder interests
Electing our directors could maximize shareholder value
-
Our
slate
will
press
hard
for
management
accountability
and
will
provide
experienced
oversight
-
Our
nominees’
experience
with
ImClone
Systems
useful
to
Biogen
Idec
-
Specifically,
we
recharged
partner
relations,
optimized
the
cost
structure
and
rebuilt
the
pipeline
Better management of Biogen Idec assets will
enhance value for all shareholders


5
We believe leadership has failed on many dimensions
Strategic
Biogen
IDEC
merger
has
not created much value
Announced merger
synergies never
materialized
Management turnover
makes consistent strategy
and execution difficult
Operational
Avonex lost US market
leadership
Failed to manage Avonex
product lifecycle
Amevive never lived up to
management hype
TYSABRI goals also overly
aggressive
Five year stock
performance has trailed
peer group
Business Development
Is Biogen Idec defending its
MS franchise?
Is it defending the oncology
franchise?
Management has signed
only a few licensing deals
over last five years
Research & Development
Research and development
productivity worst in peer
group
Lack of R&D focus apparent
when comparing employee
base with peers
Pipeline has failed to show
meaningful progress
Biogen Idec has launched
no new drugs since 2004
Pipeline lacks strategic
focus
PEGYlation is hardly a
breakthrough


6
Biogen and IDEC supposedly merged to accelerate
growth & create shareholder value
Source: Company documents
Key products
Pipeline
Therapeutic focus
2002 financials
Year founded
Employees
Biogen, Inc.
Avonex for relapsing MS
Amevive for chronic plaque psoriasis
Anti-inflammatory products in Amevive
and Antegren (now Tysabri)
6 product candidates in human trials
Focus on neurology and dermatology
Growing expertise in oncology
Revenues of $1,148M
Net income of $242M
1978
2,700 people worldwide
IDEC Pharmaceuticals
Rituxan for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma
Zevalin for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma
Rituxan for new indications
4 product candidates in human trials
Focus on oncology and rheumatology
Growing expertise in autoimmune and
inflammatory diseases
Revenues of $404M
Net income of $148M
1985
1,000 people worldwide
Headquarters
Cambridge, MA
San Diego, CA
“Bringing our companies together accelerates both companies' strategic plans
and creates a biotechnology leader with the products, pipeline, infrastructure
and financial resources to grow faster and create sustainable shareholder
value
beyond what either company could achieve separately.”
James Mullen, Chairman and CEO of Biogen
Strategy
Operational
Bus. Dev.
R&D


7
However, merger has failed to create much value
Note: Current price from April 2009; Change in equity value is growth from Q4 2003 to April 2009
Source: Bloomberg; Company documents
Biogen -
IDEC
merger closed
Nov. 2003
Strategy
Operational
Bus. Dev.
R&D
Change in
equity value
Q4 2003
equity value
Genentech
Gilead Sciences
Celgene
Biogen
Idec
$101B
$43B
$18B
$15B
0
25
50
75
100
Current equity value ($M)


8
Announced merger synergies never materialized
Note:
2003
operating
expenses
based
on
first
nine
months
of
2003
annualized
(pre-merger);
$75M
target
synergies
based
on
$300M cumulative target for 2004-2007
Source: Company documents
Expenses
exceeded
target by
$276M
Strategy
Operational
Bus. Dev.
R&D
2004
2005
2006
2007
$276M
$402M
$413M
$711M
0
200
400
600
$800M
Biogen Idec operating expenses
in excess of target ($M)
IDEC
Biogen
Biogen
Idec
Biogen
Idec
2003
Target
synergies
2004
Target
2004
Actual
$1,065M
-$75M
$990M
$1,266M
0
500
1,000
$1,500M
Biogen Idec operating
expenses ($M)


9
Management turnover makes consistent strategy and
execution difficult
Note: Bold & shading denotes
turnover since 2003
Source: Company documents
Position / Department
Chairman
CEO
CFO
COO
Research & development
Officer in 2003
William Rastetter
James Mullen
Peter Kellogg
William Rohn
Nabil Hanna (Research)
Burt Adelman (Development)
Officer Today
Bruce Ross
James Mullen
Paul Clancy
Robert Hamm
Cecil Pickett
Lack of management continuity helps
contribute to lack of consistent strategy
Strategy
Operational
Bus. Dev.
R&D


10
We believe leadership has failed on many dimensions
Strategic
Biogen –
IDEC merger has
not created much value
Announced merger
synergies never
materialized
Management turnover
makes consistent strategy
and execution difficult
Operational
Avonex lost US market
leadership
Failed to manage Avonex
product lifecycle
Amevive never lived up to
management hype
TYSABRI goals also
overly aggressive
Five year stock
performance has trailed
peer group
Business Development
Is Biogen Idec defending its
MS franchise?
Is it defending the oncology
franchise?
Management has signed
only a few licensing deals
over last five years
Research & Development
Research and development
productivity worst in peer
group
Lack of R&D focus apparent
when comparing employee
base with peers
Pipeline has failed to show
meaningful progress
Biogen Idec has launched
no new drugs since 2004
Pipeline lacks strategic
focus
PEGYlation is hardly a
breakthrough
Strategy
Operational
Bus. Dev.
R&D


11
AVONEX lost US market leadership to COPAXONE,
others also grew market share
Note: Data for US; Market share based on number of prescriptions
Source: Deutsche Bank
AVONEX lost 14% market share and
ceded US market leadership to
COPAXONE
Strategy
Operational
Bus. Dev.
R&D
AVONEX
BETASERON
COPAXONE
REBIF
0
10
20
30
40
50%
MS Rx market share %
Apr-05
42%
14%
29%
15%
Mar-09
28%
15%
37%
20%
Change %
-14%
1%
8%
5%


12
Biogen Idec has failed to manage Avonex product
lifecycle
Source:  FDA; Company documents
Strategy
Operational
Bus. Dev.
R&D


13
AMEVIVE never lived up to management hype
Source: North Carolina Biotechnology Center, Feb. 2003; Company documents
After failing to achieve April 2003 projections,
management sold AMEVIVE for $60M in March 2006
Strategy
Operational
Bus. Dev.
R&D
2003
2006
$85M
$40M
$500M
$12M
0
100
200
300
400
$500M
AMEVIVE sales ($M)
April 2003
Projections
Actual


14
TYSABRI goals also overly aggressive
Source: Reuters, Feb. 2009; Company documents
In Sep. 2007, management expected 100K patients on TYSABRI by
2010 year-end; In Feb. 2009, management said it would be
“difficult”
to achieve the original 100K projection
Strategy
Operational
Bus. Dev.
R&D
Actual
Sep. 2007 Projections
2009
2010
37K
100K
0
20
40
60
80
100K
TYSABRI patients (K)


15
Five year stock performance has trailed peer group
Note: BTK represents AMEX Biotechnology Index
Source: Bloomberg; Company documents
Biogen Idec has underperformed peers
Strategy
Operational
Bus. Dev.
R&D
Genentech
Gilead
Sciences
Celgene
Biogen
Idec
BTK
Apr-04
Apr-05
Apr-06
Apr-07
Apr-08
Apr-09
0
100
200
300
400
500
Stock performance
Change %
61%
205%
177%
-24%
10%


16
We believe leadership has failed on many dimensions
Strategic
Biogen –
IDEC merger has
not created much value
Announced merger
synergies never
materialized
Management turnover
makes consistent strategy
and execution difficult
Operational
Avonex lost US market
leadership
Failed to manage Avonex
product lifecycle
Amevive never lived up to
management hype
TYSABRI goals also overly
aggressive
Five year stock
performance has trailed
peer group
Business Development
Is Biogen Idec defending
its MS franchise?
Is it defending the
oncology franchise?
Management has signed
only a few licensing deals
over last five years
Research & Development
Research and development
productivity worst in peer
group
Lack of R&D focus apparent
when comparing employee
base with peers
Pipeline has failed to show
meaningful progress
Biogen Idec has launched
no new drugs since 2004
Pipeline lacks strategic
focus
PEGYlation is hardly a
breakthrough
Strategy
Operational
Bus. Dev.
R&D


17
Business development vital to future prospects
•Companies must defend and strengthen franchises within core
therapeutic areas
•It
seems
Biogen
Idec
has
done
very
little
to
defend
or
strengthen its oncology and MS franchises
-
Competitors active in both therapeutic areas
•Lack of business development limits future growth prospects
Strategy
Operational
Bus. Dev.
R&D


18
Is Biogen Idec defending its MS franchise?
Source: InVivo Deals database
•Biogen Idec has not
participated in any of the approximately
dozen multiple sclerosis business development opportunities
over the last year
•Competitor MS deals in 2008 included:
Acquirer
Merck Serono
Novartis
Merck Serono
Teva
Eli Lilly
Counterparty
Apitope Technology
Peptimmune
Bionomics AGM
Antisense Therapeutics
BioMS Medical
Strategy
Operational
Bus. Dev.
R&D


19
Is it defending the oncology franchise?
Source: InVivo Deals database
•Biogen
Idec
has
executed
only
one
of
the
approximately
150
cancer business development opportunities over the last year
•Competitor oncology deals in 2008 included:
Acquirer
Bristol Myers
Roche
Pfizer
Merck
Sanofi Aventis
Counterparty
Exelixis
ThromboGenics
Aureon Laboratories
Celera
Dyax Corp.
Strategy
Operational
Bus. Dev.
R&D


20
Management has completed only five product in-
licensing deals in five years
Source: Company documents
Date
August 2005
October 2006
July 2007
October 2008
March 2009
Partner
Protein Design Labs
UCB
CardioKine
Genentech
Aveo
Product
Fontolizumab
Daclizumab
Volociximab
CDP323
Aviptadil
GA101
ErbB3
Consideration
$40M upfront
$100M investment in
Protein Design Labs
stock
$30M upfront
$50M upfront
$31M upfront
NA
Suboptimal licensing efforts over
last 5 years
Strategy
Operational
Bus. Dev.
R&D


21
We believe leadership has failed on many dimensions
Strategic
Biogen –
IDEC merger has
not created much value
Announced merger
synergies never
materialized
Management turnover
makes consistent strategy
and execution difficult
Operational
Avonex lost US market
leadership
Failed to manage Avonex
product lifecycle
Amevive never lived up to
management hype
TYSABRI goals also overly
aggressive
Five year stock
performance has trailed
peer group
Business Development
Is Biogen Idec defending its
MS franchise?
Is it defending the oncology
franchise?
Management has signed
only a few licensing deals
over last five years
Research & Development
Research and
development productivity
worst in peer group
Lack of R&D focus
apparent when comparing
employee base with peers
Pipeline has failed to
show meaningful
progress
Biogen Idec has launched
no new drugs since 2004
Pipeline lacks strategic
focus
PEGYlation is hardly a
breakthrough
Strategy
Operational
Bus. Dev.
R&D


22
Biogen Idec research and development productivity
worst in peer group
Note: 5 and 10 year charts represent cumulative gross profits and R&D spending
Source: Company documents
Strategy
Operational
Bus. Dev.
R&D
Gilead
Sciences
Genen-
tech
Amgen
Genzyme
Biogen
Idec
5.9X
4.1X
4.0X
3.6X
3.2X
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0X
5 year gross
profit / 5 year R&D
Gilead
Sciences
Genen-
tech
Amgen
Genzyme
Biogen
Idec
5.0X
3.9X
3.9X
3.5X
3.1X
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0X
10 year gross
profit / 10 year R&D


23
Lack of R&D focus apparent when comparing
employee base with peers
Strategy
Operational
Bus. Dev.
R&D
Note: Employees as of December 2008; Genentech estimate based on estimated retention costs
Source: Company documents; Industry estimates


24
Failure to advance pipeline
Note: Bold & shading denotes
no apparent progress since 2006
Source: Company documents
Compound
BG-12
Galiximab
Lumiliximab
Ocrelizumab
Lixivaptan
ADENTRI
BIIB014
Daclizumab
CDP323
Ocrelizumab
Volociximab
HSP90
GA101
Aviptadil
Therapeutic Area
Relapsing MS
Relapsed NHL
Relapsed CLL
RA
Hypnoatremia
CHF
Parkinson’s
MS
MS
MS
NSCLC
Oncology
NHL
PAH
2006
Phase 3
Phase 3
Phase 2/3
Phase 2
Phase 2
Phase 2
Phase 2
Phase 2
Phase 1
Phase 2
Phase 2
Phase 1
Phase 1
Phase 2
Today
Phase 3
Phase 3
Phase 2/3
Phase 3
Phase 3
Phase 3
Phase 2
Phase 2
Phase 2
Phase 2
Phase 2
Phase 2
Phase 2
Phase 2
Pipeline has made little progress
Strategy
Operational
Bus. Dev.
R&D


25
Biogen Idec is the only major biotech company with
no
new drugs since 2004
Source: FDA
Strategy
Operational
Bus. Dev.
R&D
Genzyme
Amgen
Gilead
Genentech
Celgene
Biogen
Idec
3
2
2
1
1
0
0
1
2
3
Drug launches since 2004
Drugs
Mozobil
Renvela
Myozyme
Vectibix
Nplate
Letairis
Atripla
Lucentis
Revlimid


26
During that same period, 23 new oncology drugs 
have been launched
Source: CenterWatch
Strategy
Operational
Bus. Dev.
R&D
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009 YTD
6
2
4
6
4
1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Oncology drug launches
Drug
Alimta
Avastin
Clolar
Erbitux
Sensipar
Tarceva
Arranon
Nexavar
Gardasil
Sprycel
Sutent
Vectibix
Evista
Hycamtin
Ixempra
Tasigna
Torisel
Tykerb
Degarelix
Mozobil
Sancuso
Treanda
Afinitor


27
Pipeline seems to lack strategic focus
Source: Company documents
Autoimmune /
Inflammation
Cardiovascular
Hemophilia
Antiviral
Neurosciences
Oncology
Biogen Idec
Genentech
Gilead Sciences
Celgene
Strategy
Operational
Bus. Dev.
R&D


28
PEGylation is hardly a breakthrough
Note: Enzon launched Adagen in 1990
Source: FDA
PEGylation was a mature, established technology in the 1990’s; Adagen approved in 1990
19 years after launch of first PEGylated protein, Biogen Idec still has not launched PEG-IFNB
Strategy
Operational
Bus. Dev.
R&D


29
CEO Mullen paid well despite poor performance and
failures across many dimensions
Note: Equity compensation = stock + option grants as valued in relevant proxy
Source: Company documents


30
James Mullen sold ~$85M of stock since merger at
average price of ~$59 per share
Source: Company documents


31
Are board and management aligned with you?
•In our opinion, management ran a flawed auction process last
year
-
Board severely limited due diligence opportunities
-
Refused to allow bidders access to Elan until bidders submitted a firm
and binding offer
-
At least one bidder was denied its request to speak with Elan which may
have caused that bidder to walk away from the process
-
Board minutes that Biogen provided to us under court order last year
show what we consider to be a poorly designed process that lacked
active Board oversight
•Same management and Board that ran the 2007 sales process
continue to run the company today.  How would they treat a
bidder in 2009?  Is shareholder value a priority for this Board?


32
Who is most aligned with your interests?
Source: Company documents
Icahn Parties
Board & management
Class 3 directors
up for election
16,075,256
778,198
14,700
0
5,000,000
10,000,000
15,000,000
20,000,000
Biogen
Idec shares owned


33
Agenda
Situation Overview
-
Strategic failures
-
Operational failures
-
Business development failures
-
Research & development failures
Our Qualifications & Proposals
-
Biographies of our nominees
-
ImClone Systems case study
-
Proposals for Biogen Idec


34
Our nominees helped deliver results at ImClone
Name
Alex Denner
Thomas Deuel
Richard Mulligan
David Sidransky
Education
M.S., M.Phil., Ph.D. from Yale University
S.B. from Massachusetts Institute of Technology
M.D. from Columbia University
A.B. from Princeton University
Ph.D. from Department of Biochemistry at Stanford
University School of Medicine
B.S. from Massachusetts Institute of Technology
M.D. from Baylor College of Medicine
B.A. from Brandeis University
Relevant experience
Managing Director, Icahn Partners
Director, Adventrx Pharmaceuticals
Former Portfolio Manager, Viking Global Investors
Former Portfolio Manager, Morgan Stanley
Former Director and Chairman of Executive Committee,
ImClone Systems
Professor of Molecular and Experimental Medicine and Cell
Biology, Scripps Research Institute
Professor Emeritus, Harvard Medical School
Former Director, Division of Growth Regulation at Beth
Israel Hospital
Former Professor of Medicine and Biochemistry and Head
of Oncology Services, Washington University School of
Medicine
Former Director, ImClone Systems
Mallinckrodt Professor of Genetics, Harvard Medical School
Director of Harvard Gene Therapy Initiative
Former Professor of Molecular Biology, Massachusetts
Institute of Technology
Founder, Somatix Therapy Corporation
Member of Scientific Advisory Board, Cell Genesys
Former Director and Member of Executive Committee,
ImClone Systems
Director of Head and Neck Cancer Research Division,
Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine
Chairman, Champions Biotechnology
Former Member of Scientific Advisory Board for
MedImmune, Telik, Roche and Amgen
Former Director, ImClone Systems


35
ImClone shares dramatically outperformed during new
executive committee tenure
Note:
Executive
committee
of
Alex
Denner
and
Richard
Mulligan
formed
Oct.
2006;
ImClone
Systems
sold
to
Eli
Lilly
in
Nov.
2008
Source: Bloomberg
Oct-06
Nov-08
$31.00
$70.00
0
20
40
60
$80
ImClone
Systems
share price ($)
Change %
126%
Oct-06
Nov-08
$44.94
$40.64
0
20
40
60
$80
Biogen
Idec
share price ($)
Change %
-10%


36
Long term focus to build ImClone shareholder value
Note: Graph represents month-end stock and index prices
Source: Bloomberg
Jun-06
Sep-06
Dec-06
Mar-07
Jun-07
Sep-07
Dec-07
Mar-08
Jun-08
Sep-08
0
20
40
60
$80
ImClone stock price ($)
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
S&P 500 Index
Alex Denner
becomes
chairman of
executive
committee
ImClone
receives and
rejects takeover
bid
ImClone
acquired by Eli
Lilly for $70 per
share
July 31, 2008
ImClone receives
$60 offer from
Bristol-Myers
Squibb
Bristol-Myers
Squibb & ImClone
expand ERBITUX
development


37
New executive committee enhanced value at ImClone
New executive committee, including Alex Denner and Richard Mulligan, formed
in October 2006
Embarked on a comprehensive review of the company’s operations which led to
the following courses of action:
-
Recharged partner relations
-
Optimized cost structure
-
Rebuilt product pipeline
-
Changed culture
-
Settled litigation


38
Recharged ImClone
partner relations and optimized
cost structure
Note: CRO’s = Contract Research Organizations
Recharged partner relations
-
Partnership
with
Bristol-Myers
Squibb
had
deteriorated
due
to
prior
management
neglect
-
Initiated
dialogue
and
led
negotiations,
ultimately
leading
to
new
agreement
with
Bristol-
Myers
Squibb
that
expanded
Erbitux’s
development
with
no
change
to
ImClone
economics
-
From
2005
to
2007,
ERBITUX
sales
grew
by
41%
annually
and
ImClone
royalty
revenue
grew
by
37%
annually
Optimized cost structure
-
ImClone
cost
structure
had
not
been
appropriate
for
company
needs
-
Executive
committee
reallocated
costs,
shifting
SG&A
spending
by
expanding
sales
force
for
tactical
reasons
while
reducing
overhead
costs
-
Margin
expansion
and
capex
reduction
led
to
substantial
free
cash
flow
growth
-
Increased
spending
on
R&D
and
salesforce
was
funded
through
savings
on
corporate
costs
(re-negotiating
with
CROs,
transportation
costs,
smarter
purchasing,
etc.)


39
Rebuilt pipeline, changed culture and settled litigation
Rebuilt product pipeline
-
Industry had poor perception of ImClone pipeline and research and development efforts
-
Executive committee conducted top-down review of pipeline
Significantly increased investments in particularly promising candidates such as
1121B, A12, 11F8 and others
Cancelled programs where the return on investment was poor
-
Pipeline cited as major strategic rationale for whole company acquisition
Changed culture
-
ImClone morale poor due to lack of strategic direction from prior management
-
Took steps to institute a new culture
Emphasis on cash flow
Investment in R&D
Gave responsibility to scientists and clinicians
Settled litigation
-
Settled litigation including Yeda, Abbott and Repligen


40
From 2005 to 2007, ImClone royalty revenue grew by
37% annually
Note: 2005 most recent full year prior to formation of new executive committee; 2007 most recent full year available; Collab.
reimb. represents collaborative agreement reimbursements;  Manuf. represents manufacturing revenues
Source: UBS, January 2008; UBS, April 2008; Company documents
Collab.
reimb.
Manuf.
License
fees &
milestones
Royalties
2005
2007
$383M
$591M
0
200
400
$600M
ImClone
revenue ($M)
05-07
CAGR
37%
3%
39%
5%
24%
EU
USA
2005
2007
$678M
$1,348M
0
500
1,000
$1,500M
WW ERBITUX sales ($M)
05-07
CAGR
29%
57%
41%


41
Tighter cost controls contributed to higher free cash
flow
Note:
2005
most
recent
full
year
prior
to
formation
of
new
executive
committee;
2007
most
recent
full
year
available;
EBIT
excludes
one-time
charges;
FCF
represents
free
cash
flow;
Capex
represents
capital
expenditures;
FCF
=
EBITDA
-
Capex
Source:
Company
documents
EBIT
COGS
Royalties
SG&A
Research &
development
2005
2007
100%
100%
0
20
40
60
80
100%
ImClone
% of revenue
EBIT
margin %
23%
27%
2005
FCF
EBITDA
growth
Capex
reduction
2007
FCF
$16M
$93M
$74M
$183M
0
50
100
150
$200M
ImClone
FCF ($M)


42
Increased R&D investment to improve pipeline and
future competitive position
Note:
2005
most
recent
full
year
prior
to
formation
of
new
executive
committee;
2007
most
recent
full
year
available
Source:
Company
documents
Other
Pancreatic
Non-small
cell lung
Head
& neck
Colorectal
2005
2007
34
44
0
10
20
30
40
50
ImClone
product
candidates
2005
2007
$145M
$194M
0
50
100
150
$200M
ImClone
R&D spend ($M)
R&D %
of sales
38%
33%
05-07
CAGR
16%


43
Increased R&D investment improved pipeline
Phase 1
Phase 2
Phase 3
1121b:
2005 status
2008 status
A12:
2005 status
2008 status
11F8:
2005 status
2008 status
18F1:
Pre-clinical
2008 status
UCB:
2005 status
Exited


44
We believe ImClone and Biogen Idec situations
analogous
Partner relations
Cost structure
Product pipeline
Strategic direction
Litigation
ImClone Systems
Relationships with Bristol Myers Squibb were
strained
Renegotiated agreement with BMS, leading to
increased support and sales
Cost structure was not appropriate for
company needs
Reallocated costs, led to margin expansion
and free cash flow growth
Pipeline poorly regarded by industry
Conducted review and increased investments
in certain candidates
Pipeline key rationale for acquisition
Strategic direction lacking and morale poor as
a result
Installed new leadership and established clear
strategic priorities
Settled litigation including Yeda, Abbott, and
Repligen
Biogen Idec
Relationships with Genentech, Roche and
Elan are strained
Excluding Rituxan, operating margins below
peers
Pipeline has not advanced significantly over
last five years
Poor product lifecycle management
Strategic direction unclear as focus diffused
over too many therapeutic areas
Adverse Genentech arbitration settlement is
valuation overhang
Electing our directors with directly relevant
experience could help Biogen Idec


45
We have several proposals
Board should study potential splitting of Biogen IDEC into
neurology-focused and cancer-focused companies
Examine cost structure
Prioritize, improve focus, and re-invigorate R&D efforts
Improve partner relationships


46
Board should evaluate whether separating assets will
enhance value
NF Co. had $2,926M of 2008 sales
NF Co. assets include the following:
-
Key products include AVONEX and
TYSABRI
-
Related pipeline such as BG-12,
Lixivaptan, ADENTRI and other neurology
and cardiovascular product candidates
-
Biologics manufacturing plants in North
Carolina, Massachusetts and Denmark
-
Majority of existing research &
development infrastructure and sales force
-
Collaboration with Elan on TYSABRI
NF Co. will benefit from improved focus
on core neurology competency
Neurology-Focused Company
CF Co. had $1,172M of 2008 sales
CF Co. assets include the following:
-
Key products include RITUXAN and
FUMADERM
-
Related pipeline such as galixibam,
lumiliximab, ocrelizumab and other
oncology and autoimmune product
candidates
-
Collaboration with Genentech in the US,
Zenyaku and Chugai in Japan and Roche
in the rest of the world
CF Co. will benefits from improved
focus on core oncology competency
Cancer-Focused Company
Separating Biogen assets will enhance shareholder value as
management focus should improve and disparate assets appeal to
different buyers


47
Separated assets have different growth profiles
Source: Goldman Sachs, March 2009; Company documents
CF Co.
NF Co.
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009E
2010E
$2,212M
$2,423M
$2,683M
$3,172M
$4,098M
$4,402M
$4,451M
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
$5,000M
Biogen
Idec revenue ($M)


48
Separated assets viable as standalone companies
Amgen
Genentech
Gilead
Sciences
Genzyme
NF Co.
Celgene
CF Co.
$15.0B
$13.4B
$5.3B
$4.6B
$2.9B
$2.3B
$1.2B
0
5
10
$15B
2008 revenue ($B)
Equity
value ($B)
$51B
$101B
$43B
$16B
?
$18B
?


49
Overhead spending can be reduced
Note: Peer group includes Genentech, Amgen, Gilead Sciences and Celgene
Source: Company documents
Biogen
Idec
Median
Best in
class
23%
21%
15%
0
5
10
15
20
25
30%
2008 SG&A %
of sales (%)
In 2008, Biogen Idec spent 23% of
sales on selling, general and
administrative expenses
-
Median biotech company = 21%
-
Best in class company = 15%
Reducing overhead spending will
improve cash flows
-
Applying median SG&A % of sales
generates $46M of cost savings
-
Applying best in class SG&A % of sales
generates $309M of cost savings
Overhead assumptions


50
We would push hard to reinvigorate R&D and improve
productivity
Identify most promising products
Focus investment in key therapeutic areas
Rationalize pipeline products not part of overall strategy


51
Electing our directors could help maximize
shareholder value
Board and management have failed to achieve the full potential
of Biogen Idec
Quality of board and management especially crucial today
Electing our directors could help maximize shareholder value
Better management of Biogen Idec assets
will enhance value for all shareholders


52
We have shown that
management has failed
shareholders
strategically and
operationally, resulting
in a company not well
positioned for future
challenges!
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*


EXHIBIT II

PARTICIPANTS

The participants in the solicitation of proxies (the “Participants”) from stockholders of Biogen Idec Inc. (“Biogen” or the “Corporation”) include the following: Mr. Carl C. Icahn, Icahn Partners LP, a Delaware limited partnership (“Icahn Partners”), Icahn Partners Master Fund LP, a Cayman Islands limited partnership (“Icahn Master”), Icahn Partners Master Fund II LP, a Cayman Islands limited partnership (“Icahn Master II”), Icahn Partners Master Fund III LP, a Cayman Islands limited partnership (“Icahn Master III”), High River Limited Partnership, a Delaware limited partnership (“High River”), Barberry Corp., a Delaware corporation (“Barberry”), Hopper Investments LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (“Hopper”), Beckton Corp., a Delaware corporation (“Beckton”), Icahn Enterprises G.P. Inc., a Delaware corporation (“Icahn Enterprises GP”), Icahn Enterprises Holdings L.P., a Delaware limited partnership (“Icahn Enterprises Holdings”), IPH GP LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (“IPH”), Icahn Capital LP, a Delaware limited partnership (“Icahn Capital”), Icahn Onshore LP, a Delaware limited partnership (“Icahn Onshore”), Icahn Offshore LP, a Delaware limited partnership (“Icahn Offshore”), Dr. Alexander J. Denner, Dr. Richard C. Mulligan, Dr. Thomas Deuel, Dr. David Sidransky, Mr. Mayu Sris, Dr. Eric Ende and Mr. Jeffrey Meckler.

The address of Icahn Partners, High River, Barberry, Hopper, Icahn Enterprises GP, Icahn Enterprises Holdings, Beckton, IPH, Icahn Capital, Icahn Onshore and Icahn Offshore is White Plains Plaza, 445 Hamilton Avenue - Suite 1210, White Plains, NY 10601. The address of Icahn Master, Icahn Master II and Icahn Master III is c/o Walkers SPV Limited, P.O. Box 908GT, 87 Mary Street, George Town, Grand Cayman, Cayman Islands. Mr. Icahn’s, Dr. Denner’s, Mr. Sris’, Dr. Ende’s and Mr. Meckler’s business address is c/o Icahn Associates Corp., 767 Fifth Avenue, 47th Floor, New York, NY 10153. Dr. Mulligan’s business address is Harvard Gene Therapy Initiative, Harvard Institutes of Medicine, Suite 407, 4 Blackfan Circle, Boston, MA 02115. Dr. Deuel’s business address is The Scripps Research Institute, MEM 268, 10550 North Torrey Pines Road, La Jolla, CA 92037. Dr. Sidransky’s business address is Johns Hopkins University - Cancer Research Building II, 1550 Orleans Street, Suite 503, Baltimore, MD 21231.

Icahn Partners, Icahn Master, Icahn Master II, Icahn Master III and High River (collectively, the “Icahn Parties”) are entities controlled by Mr. Icahn. Dr. Denner and Mr. Sris. are employees and/or officers and directors of the Icahn Parties and various other entities controlled by Mr. Icahn who may also participate in soliciting proxies from Biogen Stockholders. Dr. Ende and Mr. Meckler are consultants hired by the Icahn Parties. Dr. Denner, Mr. Sris, Dr. Ende and Mr. Meckler do not own beneficially any interest in securities of Biogen. Neither Dr. Denner nor Mr. Sris will receive any special compensation in connection with the solicitation of proxies. In connection with his employment by Mr. Icahn and his affiliated companies, Dr. Denner, among other employees, has a participatory interest in the profits and fees derived by Mr. Icahn and/or his affiliated entities from Icahn Partners, Icahn Master, Icahn Master II and Icahn Master III (collectively, the “Funds”). Because only a portion of such profit interests are distributed and because of their other investments in the Funds, Dr. Denner also has capital accounts in the Funds. Generally, in the aggregate, Dr. Denner’s profit interests and capital accounts in the Funds entitle him to less than 2% of the profits generated by the Funds. Dr. Ende and Mr. Meckler are independent consultants retained by the Icahn Parties to solicit proxies and provide consulting services relating to this solicitation, and another solicitation of proxies by the Icahn Parties, as well as general consulting services relating to other investments by the Icahn Parties. Assuming the Annual Meeting of Biogen and the annual meeting relating to the other solicitation are each held in May and further assuming each contest is successful, the consulting agreements referenced herein may provide for payments to Dr. Ende and Mr. Meckler of up to approximately $325,000 in the aggregate.


None of Dr. Richard C. Mulligan, Dr. Thomas Deuel or Dr. David Sidransky own beneficially any interest in the securities of Biogen. Each of Dr. Richard C. Mulligan, Dr. Thomas Deuel and Dr. David Sidransky have an interest in the election of directors at the Biogen 2009 Annual Meeting of Stockholders pursuant to a Nominee Agreement among each of Dr. Richard C. Mulligan, Dr. Thomas Deuel and Dr. David Sidransky and the Icahn Parties, pursuant to which the Icahn Parties have agreed to pay each of Dr. Richard C. Mulligan, Dr. Thomas Deuel and Dr. David Sidransky a fee of $25,000.

Barberry is the sole member of Hopper, which is the general partner of High River. Beckton is the sole stockholder of Icahn Enterprises GP, which is the general partner of Icahn Holdings. Icahn Holdings is the sole member of IPH, which is the general partner of Icahn Capital. Icahn Capital is the general partner of each of Icahn Onshore LP and Icahn Offshore. Icahn Onshore is the general partner of Icahn Partners. Icahn Offshore is the general partner of each of Icahn Master, Icahn Master II and Icahn Master III. Each of Barberry and Beckton is 100 percent owned by Carl C. Icahn. As such, Mr. Icahn is in a position indirectly to determine the investment and voting decisions made by each of the Icahn Parties.

As of 5:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time on May 11, 2009, the Icahn Parties may be deemed to beneficially own, in the aggregate, 16,075,256 shares of common stock, par value $.0005 per share, issued by Biogen (the “Shares”), representing approximately 5.57% of the Corporation’s outstanding Shares (based upon the 288,541,467 Shares stated to be outstanding as of April 6, 2009 by the Corporation in the Corporation’s Proxy Statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 27, 2009).

High River has sole voting power and sole dispositive power with regard to 3,215,051 Shares. Each of Hopper, Barberry and Mr. Icahn has shared voting power and shared dispositive power with regard to such Shares. Icahn Partners has sole voting power and sole dispositive power with regard to 4,532,847 Shares. Each of Icahn Onshore, Icahn Capital, IPH, Icahn Enterprises Holdings, Icahn Enterprises GP, Beckton and Mr. Icahn has shared voting power and shared dispositive power with regard to such Shares. Icahn Master has sole voting power and sole dispositive power with regard to 5,888,807 Shares. Each of Icahn Offshore, Icahn Capital, IPH, Icahn Enterprises Holdings, Icahn Enterprises GP, Beckton and Mr. Icahn has shared voting power and shared dispositive power with regard to such Shares. Icahn Master II has sole voting power and sole dispositive power with regard to 1,761,077 Shares. Each of Icahn Offshore, Icahn Capital, IPH, Icahn Enterprises Holdings, Icahn Enterprises GP, Beckton and Mr. Icahn has shared voting power and shared dispositive power with regard to such Shares. Icahn Master III has sole voting power and sole dispositive power with regard to 677,474 Shares. Each of Icahn Offshore, Icahn Capital, IPH, Icahn Enterprises Holdings, Icahn Enterprises GP, Beckton and Mr. Icahn has shared voting power and shared dispositive power with regard to such Shares.

Each of Hopper, Barberry and Mr. Icahn, by virtue of their relationships to High River, are deemed to beneficially own the Shares which High River directly beneficially owns. Each of Icahn Onshore, Icahn Capital, IPH, Icahn Enterprises Holdings, Icahn Enterprises GP, Beckton and Mr. Icahn, by virtue of their relationships to Icahn Partners, are deemed to beneficially own the Shares which Icahn Partners directly beneficially owns. Each of Icahn Offshore, Icahn Capital, IPH, Icahn Enterprises Holdings, Icahn Enterprises GP, Beckton and Mr. Icahn, by virtue of their relationships to Icahn Master, Icahn Master II and Icahn Master III, are deemed to beneficially own the Shares which Icahn Master, Icahn Master II and Icahn Master III directly beneficially own.