Search results

The case discusses the legal journey of the Bajaj — TVS patent dispute from the Madras High Court to the Supreme Court and back to the Madras High Court. Almost four years have passed, yet the final verdict is nowhere in sight. The Supreme Court has recommended a period of four months for such cases to be finally decided. In such instances, the warring parties either settle it out of court or adopt other means to do business. The value of patent is undermined if the patentee has to fight so much for its protection.

Tom McKillop, CEO of AstraZeneca, faced the classic quandary of large pharmaceutical firms. The firm's patent for Prilosec (active ingredient omeprazole) was expiring. Severe cost-based competition from generic drug manufacturers was inevitable. Patent expirations were nothing new for the US$15.8 billion in revenues drug firm, but Prilosec was the firm's most successful drug franchise, with global sales of US$6.2 billion. How could the company innovate its way around the generic cost-based competition and avoid the drop in revenues associated with generic drug market entry? AstraZeneca had other follow-on drugs in the pipeline—namely Nexium, an improvement on the original Prilosec molecule. Additionally, the company had the opportunity to introduce its own version of generic omeprazole, hence becoming the first mover in the generic segment, and/or introduce an OTC version of omeprazole that might tap into other markets. Ideally, AstraZeneca would like to move brand-loyal Prilosec customers to Nexium. In this market, direct-to-consumer advertising has remarkable efficacy. Classical marketing challenges of pricing and promotion need to be resolved for the Nexium launch as well as possible product and place challenges for the generic or OTC opportunity. Which combination of marketing options will allow the firm to best sustain the value of the original omeprazole innovation?

The central objective of the case is to teach students how marketing variables can be used by first movers with diverse product portfolios to fend off severe price competition. These variables include pricing, promotion, product, and place (distribution) options as considered in the context of branded, generic, and OTC pharmaceutical market segments.

The objectives of the case study are to provide an overview of intellectual property rights and intellectual property rights in Indian context; understand the intellectual property rights implementation and challenges for implementing it in emerging economies; understand what would be the best approach that companies can adopt when the companies face backlash in such circumstances; and explore the scope for redefining the intellectual property rights in the changing global environment.

In December 2021, the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Authority (PPV&FRA) in India revoked the plant variety protection (PVP) certificate granted to PepsiCo India Holding (PHI) for its Lays variety potato (FL-2027, known as FC-5). The FC-5 variety possessed low moisture content which made it suitable for making potato chips. The controversy started with Pepsi suing the small and marginal farmers of Gujarat for alleged patent infringement and cultivating the patented variety. Pepsi’s legal suit against nine marginal potato farmers in Gujarat initiated the dispute over how intellectual property (IP) rights are used to intimidate small, marginal farmers and its infringement of farmers’ rights. But, on the other side, the interesting aspect was how IP infringement could be a setback for the companies that made the capital investment to develop the variety. The case study discusses the backlash Pepsi faced due to this IP rights legal suit and the punitive aspects of IP rights (IPR) law. Moreover, in the context of the global pandemic, the case study helped discuss the need to redefine the intellectual property rights regime keeping in mind global welfare.

The case is intended for use in postgraduate-level management courses in agricultural marketing, agribusiness, international business and economics. This study can help management students understand how IPR is defined, the apparent complexities associated with it and the adverse effect of it on small and marginal farmers in emerging economies.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 5: International business.

The spread of bird flu outside of Asia, particularly in Africa and Europe, topped headlines in 2006. The migration of wild birds brought the virus to Europe, where for the first time it spread to productive livestock, bringing it closer to the Western world. Due to today's globalized and highly interconnected world, the consequences of a potential bird flu pandemic are expected to be much more severe than those of the Spanish flu, which killed 50-100 million people between 1918 and 1921. A vaccine for the bird virus is currently not available. As of July 2006, 232 cases of human infection had been documented, mostly through direct contact with poultry. Of those, 134 people died. The best medication available to treat bird flu was Roche's antiviral drug Tamiflu. However, Tamiflu was not widely available; current orders of government bodies would not be fulfilled until the end of 2008. Well aware that today's avian flu might become a global pandemic comparable to the Spanish flu, Roche CEO Franz Humer had to decide how Roche should respond. While the pharmaceutical industry continued its research efforts on vaccines and medications, Tamiflu could play an important role by protecting healthcare workers and helping to contain the virus---or at least slow down its spread. Due to patent protection and a complicated production process with scarce raw ingredients, Roche had been the only producer of the drug. Partly in response to U.S. political pressure, in November 2005 Roche allowed Gilead to produce Tamiflu as well. Even so, it would take at least until late 2007 for Roche and Gilead to meet the orders of governments worldwide. The issue was a difficult one for Roche: What were the risks; what were the opportunities? If a pandemic occurred before sufficient stockpiles of Tamiflu had been built up, would Roche be held responsible? What steps, if any, should Roche take with respect to patent protection and production licensing in the shadow of a potential pandemic?

Students will weigh the benefits of short-term profit maximization against the risks that a highly uncertain event could pose to a business and consider nonstandard approaches to mitigate these risks. Students will discuss the challenges of addressing low-probability, high-impact events; potential conflicts with the short-term view of the stock market and analyst community; and challenges of the patent protection model for drugs for life-threatening diseases.

The case tells the story of Synthroid from its development in 1958 as the first synthetic thyroxine molecule to its competition against generic equivalents in 2004. The case introduces students to the pharmaceutical industry, its practices, and some of the complexities of pricing and drug choice, with drug manufacturers, insurance companies, physicians, pharmacists, and patients all playing a role. It also provides a primer on hypothyroidism, its symptoms, and its treatment.

Because Synthroid was developed and introduced before FDA regulations and drug standards of identity were fully established, it was difficult for competitors to get their drugs certified as identical to Synthroid. Through a series of efforts with physicians, especially endocrinologists, Synthroid's owners were able to maintain the perception for forty-six years that Synthroid was uniquely effective. In 2004, however, the FDA declared several competitive products to be bioequivalent to Synthroid, which posed a significant challenge to its owner, Abbott Laboratories. Students are challenged to consider options to maintain the drug's unit volume, revenue, and/or profit in these difficult circumstances.

The case is written in two parts. The (A) case provides background on the history of the drug, the pharmaceutical industry and its marketing practices, and hypothyroidism and its treatment, and it concludes in 2004 as Abbott's marketers face the impending challenge of defending the Synthroid business against generic competition. The (B) case describes what Abbott actually did to maintain its share in the United States and outlines its strategy in India, a market without patent protection for pharmaceuticals.

After analyzing the case students should be able to:

• Describe strategies that branded competitors can use to defend their business from lower-priced competition

• Understand the basics of pharmaceutical marketing and pricing, including the global challenge of defending branded drugs against generic equivalents

• Discuss ethical issues in the marketing of high-margin branded products that have lower-priced alternatives, especially in the healthcare industry

Describe strategies that branded competitors can use to defend their business from lower-priced competition

Understand the basics of pharmaceutical marketing and pricing, including the global challenge of defending branded drugs against generic equivalents

Discuss ethical issues in the marketing of high-margin branded products that have lower-priced alternatives, especially in the healthcare industry

This case asks the student to take a stance on whether an portfolio manager should take a long or short position in the equity of Universal Display Corporation (PANL). The stock is polarizing, in that reasonable arguments could be made for both long and short positions. The case suggests a number of steps that an analyst might follow when valuing a company

Discounted cash flow valuation, comparables valuation, short selling. After students have analyzed the case they will be able to value the equity of a publicly traded company and take a position on whether a portfolio manager should buy or sell the stock.

Describes Myriad Genetics and its struggle to develop a genetic testing service while facing challenges from competitors and activist organizations. After Myriad's discovery of the BRCA gene, capable of genetic testing for breast cancer in women, Myriad needed to choose a strategy to provide this service to the public. With several major competitors offering similar services, intense media scrutiny, and a charged activist and political climate, a poor Myriad decision could have major repercussions.

The case offers a study of change management in the pharmaceutical industry in India.

The case is designed for undergraduate and postgraduate students to examine strategic decisionmaking in the context of mergers and acquisitions (M&As), firm capabilities and management practices. In particular, it has important pedagogical lessons for businesses eager to start operations in emerging countries. Students learn to recognize the unique nature of the pharmaceutical market and the factors affecting the demand and supply of drugs, including the economics of generics. The case can be discussed in one class session of approximately one-and-a-half to two hours duration.

In 2012, the pharmaceutical industry in India was undergoing dynamic changes. There was keen interest among MNC pharmaceutical giants to buy up Indian generic manufacturing companies since their revenues were drying up with the impending patent expirations of many blockbuster brand name drugs. Japan's Daiichi Sankyo's had taken over the largest Indian pharmaceutical company, Ranbaxy Laboratories, known for its heritage of process innovations and market leadership. However, after the acquisition, Ranbaxy slipped to third position in the domestic market and was facing multiple problems including net losses and falling share prices, cultural differences in management practices, recall of drugs from foreign markets and a US FDA ban on its manufacturing plants. Further, Ranbaxy had always been viewed as a national champion and a customer-friendly company but drug prices had increased after the merger causing problems of affordability. The new CEO of Ranbaxy was facing a dilemma: how to regain the company's position as the market leader. Students are asked to advise the CEO of Ranbaxy how to tackle the challenges arising from the integration of an Indian company with a Japanese company. More specifically, the case focuses on M&A as a strategy for growth and also touches on issues related to competition, regulation, innovation and corporate governance.

The case discusses the different motives behind the deal for Daiichi Sankyo and Ranbaxy and why it was a strategic move by both the alliance partners. The case also raises issues of corporate governance for the management of Ranbaxy and the need for a proactive corporate social responsibility (CSR) strategy. The case provides students with the opportunity to develop their analytical skills in a real-life setting and apply theoretical concepts to the consideration of the various issues raised by the acquisition deal.

Teaching notes are available; please consult your librarian for access.

The Performance Management at IRD Corporation case series is designed to be an in-depth study of performance appraisal in the R&D context. The case series can be used as a platform for discussing the rationale of performance appraisal system, system design and implementation, the differences between R&D and other work contexts (manufacturing, services, etc.), and the challenges involved in R&D management. This case revolves around the Chairman of IRD Corp and his dilemmas, providing an insight to the participants into the challenges of performance management and also R&D management. The series highlights the complex dilemmas associated with managing performance and the necessity of having a new performance evaluation system.

The case tells the story of Synthroid from its development in 1958 as the first synthetic thyroxine molecule to its competition against generic equivalents in 2004. The case introduces students to the pharmaceutical industry, its practices, and some of the complexities of pricing and drug choice, with drug manufacturers, insurance companies, physicians, pharmacists, and patients all playing a role. It also provides a primer on hypothyroidism, its symptoms, and its treatment.

Because Synthroid was developed and introduced before FDA regulations and drug standards of identity were fully established, it was difficult for competitors to get their drugs certified as identical to Synthroid. Through a series of efforts with physicians, especially endocrinologists, Synthroid's owners were able to maintain the perception for forty-six years that Synthroid was uniquely effective. In 2004, however, the FDA declared several competitive products to be bioequivalent to Synthroid, which posed a significant challenge to its owner, Abbott Laboratories. Students are challenged to consider options to maintain the drug's unit volume, revenue, and/or profit in these difficult circumstances.

The case is written in two parts. The (A) case provides background on the history of the drug, the pharmaceutical industry and its marketing practices, and hypothyroidism and its treatment, and it concludes in 2004 as Abbott's marketers face the impending challenge of defending the Synthroid business against generic competition. The (B) case describes what Abbott actually did to maintain its share in the United States and outlines its strategy in India, a market without patent protection for pharmaceuticals.

After analyzing the case students should be able to:

• Describe strategies that branded competitors can use to defend their business from lower-priced competition

• Understand the basics of pharmaceutical marketing and pricing, including the global challenge of defending branded drugs against generic equivalents

• Discuss ethical issues in the marketing of high-margin branded products that have lower-priced alternatives, especially in the healthcare industry

Describe strategies that branded competitors can use to defend their business from lower-priced competition

Understand the basics of pharmaceutical marketing and pricing, including the global challenge of defending branded drugs against generic equivalents

Discuss ethical issues in the marketing of high-margin branded products that have lower-priced alternatives, especially in the healthcare industry