Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: patron_anejo_por_favor who wrote (100750)	5/8/2001 11:21:02 PM
From: benwood	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 436258

Like they said, it's more a reflection of more choices now and more medications. Also, note that 10.5% in 5 years is merely 1.6% compounded annually, which I think is lower than the CPI (which surprises me...).

To: patron_anejo_por_favor who wrote (100750)	5/9/2001 4:31:47 AM
From: Oblomov	Respond to of 436258

What is not mentioned in the article is the fact that the marketing paradigm used by the pharma firms has changed markedly in the last 3 years. PFE was very aggressive in its launches of blockbuster drugs such as Viagra and Lipitor. Instead of being satisfied with gradual adoption by MDs, PFE has launched new drugs with contract sales forces to radically shorten the adoption time. This strategy has paid off ... but at a significantly higher risk than the traditional strategy (thus, the expected return is higher). PFE's success has necessitated a new standard by which competing firms must abide. Further, in the past few years, there have been several new major therapeutic classes developed: Cox-2 inhibitors, cholesterol reducers, atypical antipsychotics, erectile dysfunction treatments. The immense popularity of these (expensive) new classes of drugs, combined with the new marketing strategies, has put upward pressure on the average price of all prescriptions.