Slashdot Mirror
Mylan's Epic EpiPen Price Hike Wasn't About Greed -- It's Worse, Lawsuit Claims (arstechnica.com)
Mylan engaged in a campaign to squash a rival to its EpiPen allergy treatment and artificially inflate the price of the drug to maintain a market monopoly, French drugmaker Sanofi said in a lawsuit. From a report: With the lofty prices and near-monopoly over the market, Mylan could dangle deep discounts to drug suppliers -- with the condition that they turn their backs on Sanofi's Auvi-Q -- the lawsuit alleges. Suppliers wouldn't dare ditch EpiPens, the most popular auto-injector. And with the high prices, the rebates wouldn't put a dent in Mylan's hefty profits, Sanofi speculates. Coupled with a smear campaign and other underhanded practices, Mylan effectively pushed Sanofi out of the US epinephrine auto-injector market, Sanofi alleges. The lawsuit, filed Monday in a federal court in New Jersey, seeks damages under US Antitrust laws.
Steal a loaf of bread to feed starving kids, THE SLAMMER!
FWIW, and I speak as a Democrat here, Heather Bresch, CEO of Mylan, is the daughter of Sen. Joe Manchin, Democratic Senator from West Virginia.
the thing that bothers me with this story is that you have a disconnect between government funded healthcare, and profit seeking private corporations.
if you have a government entity such as medicare (or really any socialized institution), that essentially guarantees payment to a drug company for a treatment; coupled with a corporation which has a responsibility to shareholders to maximize profit.. The situation that arises absolutely incentivizes the company to charge as much as they can get away with, since after all the US gov't has essentially infinitely deep pockets. And a very similar situation arises with the military and higher education.
And the shitty thing is, any attempt by the government to reign in profit margins and/or maximum price on a drug company would be met with the usual right winger response of "less regulation, free market!" (And this is coming from a republican.. I just don't get mental gymnastics on this level.)
I had actually just finished reading this on Ars before coming here to see it at the top of the page. The summary leaves out a very important detail.
Sanofi is suing Mylan claiming that their underhanded attempts cost them business. While that may be true, I think that this may have a more severe impact on their sales:
"In 2015, Sanofi pulled Auvi-Q following quality control issues. The device has since been put back on the market by another pharmaceutical company, Kaléo. The list price of the newly released Auvi-Q is set at $4,500."
If you post as Anonymous Coward, don't expect a reply.
Don't forget that the CEO of Mylan is the daughter of a Democratic Senator.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/24/...
"-1 Troll" is the apparently the same as "-1 I disagree with you."
Should be? How about is be?
No. According to the FTC: "Exclusive dealing or requirements contracts between manufacturers and retailers are common and are generally lawful." The FTC also says: "Most exclusive dealing contracts are beneficial because they encourage marketing support for the manufacturer's brand.", which is, of course, total bullcrap.
Under current law, exclusivity agreements are only illegal in very narrow circumstances, and it falls on their competitor (Sanofi in this case) to sue for relief at their own expense.