Search results

The case on Moodcafe captures the journey of the start-up and its entrepreneurs from the beginning till the fund-raising stage. The case brings forth critical decisions that each entrepreneur or the team of co-founders have to address during their start-up journey. This short case gives opportunity to delve into two aspects mainly a) As a founder, which investor should one choose for seeking funds and what should be the terms and conditions of investment? and b) How can one review and assess the business model of a start-up?

This case presents the dilemma faced by Danville Airlines’ management when one of its best pilots is found to have the inherited gene for Huntington’s disease. Although he inevitably will develop the physically and mentally debilitating disease, the pilot, who has yet to experience symptoms, does not want to step down from his position. Danville Airlines explores the complicated issues of employee rights versus public safety, employee rights to privacy, and genetic testing and its effects on employees and management.

Richard Alpert, senior partner at Evergreen Investments, must decide which of his two best employees to promote to the position of managing VP. He had initially preferred Charlie Pace over Daniel Faraday, but that decision had become less clear-cut when Alpert inadvertently overheard an office conversation and learned that Pace was taking Adderall, a stimulant primarily prescribed for people suffering from attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Pace did not have ADHD and apparently obtained the medication by deceiving a physician. Alpert is faced with a number of questions, including whether it was fair to Faraday—or any other high-performing employee—to be passed over for promotion in favor of someone who illicitly boosted his performance with a substance he did not medically need.

Learning outcomes (objectives and outcomes) are as follows: to understand the brand positioning, brand building and category extension decisions of a pharmaceutical brand (operative in one of the most competitive and regulated industries in a developing country); to analyze the outcomes of decisions pertaining strategic sales, branding, marketing and strategic restructuring to overcome the challenges of growth; and to design strategic solutions for developing brand equity.

This case explores the strategy of launching and establishing a pharmaceutical brand in an industry that tends to be a highly technical and the most regulated industry. It depicts market research data, industry analysis, stiff competition and regulatory affairs, and elaborates various strategic decisions taken by the company. The primary data for the case is accumulated through in-depth interviews from six industry experts on pharma marketing who were well acquainted with Maple Pharma and secondary data is gleaned from substantive literature. Maple Pharmaceuticals launched Starpram, a high-growth, high-potential generic antidepressant brand (in the central nervous system category) containing Escitalopram molecule/chemical. It had expertise cum competitive advantage in cardiovascular and anti-diabetic streams, but such initiative appeared category extension, with the intention to diversify risk and expand the company to achieve greater economies of scale. The first year sales revenue for Starpram appeared too bleak to spur further product inaugurations. Consequently, strategic overhaul transpired to establish the brand in the highly fragmented pharmaceutical industry. The firm lacked experience in anti-depressants category, coupled with poor sales, marketing mix and overall marketing strategy. Eventually, the management exercised strategic restructuring to establish brand equity and observed growth.

Study levels/Applicability graduate (MBA), MS, PhD (management sciences).

Teaching Notes are available for educators only. Please contact your library to gain login details or e-mail support@emeraldinsight.com to request teaching notes.

CSS 8: Marketing.

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.