Comments on: AstraZeneca And Teva Square Off Over Pulmicort

By: Bingo

Bingo — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 16:05:27 +0000

Nathan,

Do you know anything about the patents in question or is your reaction just based on your pro-innovator bias?

At-risk launches are relatively rare in Paragraph IV cases and tend to indicate a strong case on the generic side.

There are lots of bad patents in place and the only way to get around them is to challenge them.

Do you think companies would continue to innovate if they could extend exclusivity indefinitely through bogus patents? Why would they bother? Generic competition is a spur to innovation, threatening as that might be.

Michael, your assertion is laughable. Teva’s Copaxone is subject to paragraph IV challenge by Sandoz. US sales of Copaxone are over $1 billion a year and are a significant contributor to Teva’s bottom line.

By: malcolm ross

malcolm ross — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 08:00:52 +0000

Like the comment about Teva being in the business of pharmaceutical prospecting rather than manufacturing or selling drugs. Look at their production capacity and sales volumes.
I think it is more like the innovators who are in the business of manufacturing fools gold by extending products life cycle with dubious patent protection.

But maybe I am biased?

By: Random Walk

Random Walk — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 21:46:23 +0000

Can Astrazeneca buy up bank deposits, become a bank holding company, and get in line for TARP money that will bail them out from generic competition?

By: Michael

Michael — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 20:11:46 +0000

Teva is more in the business of pharmaceutical patent prospecting than it is in the business of manufacturing and selling generic drugs. Of course, one could say that the two activities are one in the same . . . somehow, I doubt that the current market effects were contemplated by the drafters of the 1984 act.

By: Nathan

Nathan — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 18:42:58 +0000

I hope that Teva gets slammed one of these days… What they are doing just isn’t right. Wyeth laid off thousands of employees simply because Teva decided to do an “at risk” launch of Protonix. While I don’t think this drug represents quite as big of a percentage of Astra’s income as Protonix did, it continues down a very bad road.

I know it’s beginning to sound trite these days, but the erosion of patent rights truly stifles innovation. We can’t operate a business with the uncertainty that these kind of “at risk” launches bring. This is driving more and more research into biologics — which can’t be infringed upon so easily.