Comments on: Merck And Pfizer Plan 900 Job Cuts

By: pharmavet

pharmavet — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 16:17:29 +0000

One way I favor to lower drug costs is to abolish the 180 day ANDA exclusivity period, which allows the first generic to charge almost as much as the brand nsme. Let all the generics come in at the same time. The other thing to do is to make it a felony for a brand name company to conspire with a generic company to delay generic entry into the market. I’m from the branded side, but I like generics. I would actually favor the govwernment to give grants to the generic companies to hire all the laid off reps and have them counter-detail against the branded products as well as sampling just like the brandeds do.

By: Former Pharma Marketing Director

Former Pharma Marketing Director — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 14:14:52 +0000

Hey Condor,

Excellent post as usual….My thoughts, meditations and prayers to all those young reps and their families.

This is one area that makes me quite angry, the ability of certain companies to “build castle’s in the air” and suck in so many people who “buy” the story and organize their life accordingly. What goes on in big pharma is one of the biggest Ponzi schemes ever.

But Condor, you and I both know that it is not so hard to imagine that companies do not have a problem doing these things to people’s lives. The reps have one solace in that they are not actually on the drugs their companies are making. After all, if companies would “bury” clinical trial results and play Russian roulette with their customers lives, firing 900 people is a “walk in the park” and much easier to do when the higher ups who keep their jobs pay themselves big bonuses for having to do this “nasty” work….

I wish all the people being fired would write a letter to government. Maybe they should all go and put tombstones on the front lawns of the companies and make them look like graveyards…Hope they set up websites and blog publicly about this. Hope they use some of their experience to raise awareness.

Keep doing what you are doing Condor…

By: Rashmi Pant

Rashmi Pant — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 12:37:19 +0000

Merger and acquisitiona are definitely beneficial to the buyer for sustaining their inorganic growth.

the M & A by Pharma today only enhances the company’s savings on account of salaries.

This would look as if the recession triggered the layoffs.
Myths would prevail and truths would be “hidden”

Regards
Rashmi Pant

By: M Helm, MD

M Helm, MD — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 04:10:41 +0000

Pharmavet, seriously - lower drug costs? Sarcasm doesn’t translate in text so I’m not sure if you were intending to make a joke. Patient drug costs are not related to SG&A expenses. If they were, there would be no justification for increasing brand prices as a patent expiration looms. There is typcially a point where marketing support falls while prices rise as the manufacturer tries to apply economic pressure to shift use to the follow-on compound (or just maximize the revenue per sale). The economic principle is that pricing is always based on a combination of what the market will bear and scarcity (which in PhRMA is a function of operating with very high barriers to entry and mandatory periods of limited competition).

A large sales force (or excess research capacity) in PhRMA seems to be a cushion against a downturn in EPS/share price. If prospects look grim - it is easy to predict ‘cost cutting’ layoffs. It is the wrong century to be a pharmaceutical sales rep.

By: pharmavet

pharmavet — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 02:32:58 +0000

Many of those newly unemployed reps will find themselves working for 1/2 wages with contract sales forces. In the long run, SG&A expenses will drop sharply, and this should translate into lower drug costs for the patient.

By: M. Black

M. Black — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 21:23:46 +0000

So with all these new people in the labor pool, which ones
will be likely to obtain new jobs in the industry - the ones that follow procedures as written, or the ones in blissful ignorance have helped their superiors sweep company detritus under the proverbial rug?

This could be bad. Very bad.

By: Condor

Condor — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 17:10:44 +0000

The snow falls silently here — meanwhile, over at CafePharma, the posts are rolling in — it is looking like a legacy Schering-Plough bloodbath inside the US salesforce (per Ed’s UPDATE, above).

I’ve taken a moment to collect, and reprint, a few of the more poignant ones. . . .

I think it useful for Ex-CEO Hassan, and CEO Clark to read a little about their handiwork.

When Dick CLark flippantly offers his “off the top of my head” assessment of where he should cut people, I think he ought to read about the real peoples’ lives he is dropping an anvil on.

Ad yes, I do know they (those two CEOs) read the blog.

[If I told you how I know that -- I'd have to kill you. Heh.]

I’ll keep all the affected — and the retained (as their jobs will undoubtedly be tougher than they expect!) — in my morning meditations.

Namaste, to all. . . . a sad day for pharma.

By: LMP

LMP — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 16:11:37 +0000

Sorry for being a spelling bore but the more people see it done wrong, the more they think it’s right! I love your blog, I read it when I should be working…

By: Ed Silverman

Ed Silverman — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 13:32:53 +0000

Hi LMP,

You’re right. Thanks for that. I wrote this before I began drinking all that morning coffee.

Regards
ed

By: LMP

LMP — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 13:26:04 +0000

*ahem* -a-ffected, surely… sorry, my pet peeve.