Johansson, said in a statement sent to the FTC that such deals limit the availability of generic treatments and drive up consumer prices. The alliance’s then-chairperson, Jennifer S. The agency has known about the dubious use of exclusivity deals in the pet medication market since at least 2012 industry stakeholders complained about it during a public workshop the FTC hosted that year “to examine competition and consumer protection issues in the pet medications industry.”Ī representative of the Generic Animal Drug Alliance told the agency she knew of at least two large drug companies whose agreements banned national distributors from carrying the generic versions, or any similar versions, of their brand-name products. When big companies use them to choke rivals out of the market, however, the deals become unlawful and the FTC can intervene. The practice can encourage distributors and retailers to specialize in specific products and offer consumers related services and amenities. It’s ‘price-fixing in its purest form’Įxclusive dealing is a common and legal practice in many industries, according to the Federal Trade Commission, which enforces consumer protection laws. Tied to those deals are often lucrative financial incentives such as discounts and rebates that vendors can ill afford to turn down, especially if their rivals are taking advantage of them. ![]() Such agreements block vendors – including pet stores, online pharmacies and wholesale distributors that supply retailers and veterinarians – from selling products that directly compete with their brand-name goods. And industry insiders have long decried their outsize leverage through exclusivity agreements. That allows pioneer drug companies – those that own the brand-name or patented versions – to dominate much of the pet medication market. Pet insurance is nowhere near as widespread or influential. Food and Drug Administration.Īmong the many reasons for the difference is that human health insurance requires generic drug substitution whenever possible, which has spurred the development and availability of low-cost alternatives. Meanwhile, generics in human health care last year accounted for 9 out of 10 filled prescriptions, according to the U.S. Just 14% of federally approved animal drugs have a generic version, according to the Generic Animal Drug Alliance. Unlike the human pharmaceutical industry which abounds in cheap alternatives once brand-name patent protection expires, the pet med market offers relatively few choices. The brand-name equivalent, Advantage II for cats, cost more than twice as much – $64 – on. Its ActiSpot II six-dose treatment for large cats cost $30 on, as of May 15. Its line includes TevraPet Activate II for dogs and ActiSpot II for cats, as well as Vetality Avantect II for dogs and Advotect II for cats. Tevra sells its generic topical treatments for cats and dogs on its website, on Amazon and elsewhere, but the company argues that Bayer prevented it from reaching pet owners where they’re most likely to shop and depriving them of a better deal. Tevra’s suit claims it lost tens of millions of dollars because Bayer Animal Health, a former subsidiary of the German pharmaceutical giant, conspired to maintain its monopoly over the treatment it created. ![]() District Court in Northern California, the lawsuit by Tevra Brands offers a rare behind-the-scenes glimpse of the multibillion-dollar pet medication market, where a few major companies have a stranglehold on pricing. Their elusiveness is not by accident, according to a federal lawsuit by one of the generic’s makers, but a scheme by the brand-name products’ company to block competition.įiled in the U.S. And they’re absent from popular online pet pharmacies like or PetMed Express. Even today, they’re nowhere to be found at many of the biggest pet specialty stores, like PetSmart or Petco. ![]() ![]() Pet owners paying for Advantage II and K9 Advantix II topical flea-and-tick treatments could have saved hundreds of dollars by now had they switched to the generic versions that first hit the market six years ago.īut first, they would have had to find them.Ĭheaper equivalents for the blockbuster brands, which both kill and repel pests, have quietly eluded consumers for years.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |