Mylan Pharmaceutical Case Summary

1000 Words2 Pages

i) For Mylan Inc., the owner of medical device EpiPen, the primary challenge of the product is balancing its profit-driven pricing strategy with ethical consideration towards customers. This can be attributed to two key factors: the near-monopoly it has historically held over the epinephrine autoinjector market, and its need-based demand, as a life-saving necessity for anaphylaxis. Exploiting limited competition, from acquiring EpiPen in 2007 to 2016, Mylan incrementally increased the EpiPen’s price from US$100 to over US$600 despite manufacturing and dosage costs under US$1 each. As noted by the Antitrust Committee, “This outrageous increase in the price of EpiPens is occurring at the same time that Mylan Pharmaceutical is exploiting a monopoly …show more content…

Product necessity limited their influence, but increasing buyer power due to competition will allow demand to potentially alter pricing. Distributors such as pharmacies and wholesalers are the intermediary between Mylan and customers, selling EpiPen packs at an average margin of US$334 (Mylan, 2017). Their price gouging has been attributed to Mylan paying them rebates to win business (McLaughlin, D and Hopkins, J 2017). Mylan’s owners (shareholders) are somewhat responsible for EpiPen’s strategic direction through electing a board of directors. Whilst they rejected executive pay increases, they recently re-elected the board despite disagreements. (Reuters, 2017) Governments regulate health, safety and IP law. Notably, the USA’s Federal Drug Administration had previously only given patents to EpiPen for epinephrine autoinjectors, creating an institutionalised basis for monopoly. In late 2016, the FDA confirmed it had approved 3 other devices (Woodcock, J 2016), arguably the major catalyst in EpiPen’s newfound …show more content…

Notably, CVS offers the generic Impax autoinjectors two-pack for US$109, leveraging fair and ethical pricing in competitive differentiation (Georgescu, P 2017). As some countries cannot access alternatives, EpiPen faces geographically-segmented time pressure to position themselves as an ethical, accessible product. Ultimately, the fall of EpiPen’s monopoly encourages more ethical pricing, but EpiPen can still position itself in competitive markets as a ‘premium product’ rather than absolute competitive parity, leveraging its brand familiarity over the past 25 years to create value through trust, a major factor in the decision-making process for

Open Document