Question description
Class, please go to DOC
SHARING. There you will find a new Word DOC called “AZT Pricing Strategy Case
Study”. This will help us to reflect on our TCO #4. Although
the case study is over 25 years old, the STORY is very relevant in 2016: 2024 – Do my homework – Help write my assignment online just as
it was then. I’ll share more as the week goes by.
As this is a
class case study, it is important that everyone be involved and offer their
thoughtful perspectives and what it is that you think the manufacturer
(Burroughs-Wellcome) should do and why (or responses to other questions that
pop up throughout the week). Thus, each class member is asked to contribute at least two different times to this case study discussion and throughout
the week, e.g., don’t post twice on Thursday and then
“disappear”. Thanks!Please post early!
Marketers at the
pharmaceutical companies in the past few years have taken some real hits relative
to the pricing of their drugs. When AZT hit the market (1986), this was the
first medication to come about that had a marked effect on the HIV virus —
although it did not cure
those who had AIDS, the drug did help to control the symptoms, thus prolonging
life of the HIV patient.
What did
Burroughs-Wellcome, the manufacturer, charge? The drug ran $8,700 a year in
1987…lowered from $10,000 per year a year or so earlier!
Was the price
fair?
No emotion, please — look at this strictly from a marketing pricing
perspective. Would your pricing strategy have been one that would have priced
it differently and, if so, why?
When you post,
it will be important to me that I learn your critical thinking. Please
project your decision that demonstrates your understanding of our
chapters on pricing and your ability to apply them to
our AZT scenario!
