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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (891002)	10/1/2015 6:25:00 PM
From: J_F_Shepard	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575175

If any company could produce esomeprazole, as soon as they could ramp up production then there would be more likely to be competition which would erode the pricing power that AstraZeneca currently enjoys. It was duplicated years ago....that's what the generics are.... The FDA just approved the generic in Jan 2015... ] AstraZeneca and Ranbaxy have been in patent litigation since 2005 over Ranbaxy's intention to market a generic version of Nexium. The Indian generics-maker received tentative approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in February for generic Nexium, which could have guaranteed it 180 days of marketing exclusivity in the United States upon patent expiry. Generics companies will often challenge patents early to obtain this coveted marketing exclusivity.

To: TimF who wrote (891002)	10/1/2015 9:37:02 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1575175

Its not a matter of what AstraZeneca does but what the other companies do. If any company could produce esomeprazole, as soon as they could ramp up production then there would be more likely to be competition which would erode the pricing power that AstraZeneca currently enjoys. Not necessarily, Tim. Because of lack of regulation, which you hate, it is perfectly possible, even common, for the original company to offer to share some of the profits with a company who is developing a generic if they stop and don't go through with it. Given the choice of going through the cost of development and the clinicals to show that it is just as effective, vs. taking a smaller, but less costly payment to not do something, which would you choose? Where does your self-interest lie? Yeah, eventually they wind up having to bribe too many companies to make it worthwhile. But that can take decades and they certainly will have something better by then. The consumer pays monopoly prices for years longer than they should. But, that's the cost of freedom, right?