[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Dominant Patents

To: rlande@UBmail.ubalt.edu
Subject: Re: Dominant Patents
From: James Love <love@cptech.org>
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 15:13:36 -0400
Cc: Multiple recipients of list <antitrust@essential.org>
References: <Pine.PMDF.3.95.980412113632.672159B-100000@UBmail.ubalt.edu>

rlande@UBmail.ubalt.edu wrote:

> Why dosn't the drug manufacturer agree to use the method that reduces
> the need for the drug by 50%, but then double the price of the drug?
> Is the problem that it is locked into a payment schedule that would
> prevent it from doubling the price of the drug, or that doubling the
> price would create bad will and give it a bad corporate image?

  One problem with this is that not every patient will be impacted the same way,
but of course, they could increase the price.  However, there is quite a bit of
resistance among payers to price increases.  The company 10K report goes into this
in some detail.  I believe the company has determined that it cannot realistically
double the price.  (Prices are often regulated outside the US, making this even
more difficult).

   Jamie

--
James Love
Consumer Project on Technology
P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036
love@cptech.org | http://www.cptech.org
voice 202.387.8030, fax 202.234.5176

References:
- Re: Dominant Patents
  - From: rlande@UBmail.ubalt.edu

Prev by Date: RE: ARIN Duplicates Other Government Functions
Next by Date: Re: Dominant Patents
Prev by thread: Re: Dominant Patents
Next by thread: Re: Dominant Patents
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread