Everyone seems to think Viagra has its origins in “VI-tality” and “VI-rility” and “VI-gor.” I always thought it had something to do with Niagra, as in powerful, and as in get the juices flowing. Pfizer probably didn’t take into account "VI" also stands for “Virgin Islands,” which of course directly contradicts their branding.

I recently read something that Cialis comes from the root word “Ciel,” which is French and means “sky” and “heaven,” so I guess that’s good marketing in principle. But how many people speak French? In any case, I guess the word “ceiling” makes sense now. In fact, to “ceil” means to “overlay with wood,” according to Dictionary.com. Hmmm.

As for Levitra, that seems pretty straightforward: LEVI-tate, LEV-erage and LEV-er come to mind. And, as a side note, the Lev is a coin and monetary unit of Bulgaria, equal to 100 Stotinki. So don’t say you didn’t learn something today. And don’t tell the Levitra branding director, but LEV also stands for “Low Emission Vehicle,” which isn’t a very appealing concept for men with ED.

But in all seriousness, how do drugs get their names? It is a complicated answer that is simplified by some web articles I tracked down. I found the “Cliff Notes” version of the story, the “More Information Than I Needed” version, and the “Directly From the Source” version, as in the FDA.

The above articles will help you understand what goes into a drug name, and why it costs companies around $3 million to choose a name and get it approved. In simple terms, it’s a lot of marketing and a lot of red tape. However, the red tape is necessary, as the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) received approximately 126,000 reports of medication error from 2000 to 2009, some of which were directly related to the similar sound and appearance of drug name pairs.

Pharmaceutical manufacturers may like to use uncommon “power” letters like “X” and “V,” and they may like to be literal with their drug names (Rogaine was originally contrived as Regaine), but the watchdogs reject as much as 50 percent of the names that are proposed.

If you enjoy the above articles, which are still very pertinent, then you will probably enjoy the following article too. It’s from the U.S. brand leader for Cialis, and it reveals some interesting Cialis marketing and branding strategies. Happy reading…

By Brian Bujdos

Please visit our Current Health News to find a daily posting on what is happening in the health & pharmaceutical industry.

If you are looking to go to AccessRx.com’s Home Page, Please Click Here To Visit AccessRx.com

By Brian Bujdos

Whoever built the economic structure in which big pharma resides forgot one important thing – the ceiling. And so, as the foundations of the American health care system are about to be uprooted , many consumers continue to be outraged at the skyrocketing costs of drugs.

In particular, the prices for many brand-name drugs that are still on patent seem to have soared rather inexplicably – almost a blatant pilfering of the pocket book. And if you think this trend has any chance of reversing itself, or even stabilizing, in the new health-care economy, au contraire mon frere.

If you’d like to build yourself to a slow boil, check out this comprehensive summary of how big pharma really works. Find out how your government turned an $80 billion bonus for Medicare beneficiaries into an unwaking nightmare that gives big pharma free reign to set drug prices indefinitely.

Viagra and Cialis Prices Rise Sharply

In September, an AccessRx.com blog entry reported that the price of Viagra rose more than 100% since it was introduced in 1998. Now we can report that Cialis has accomplished the same feat – but in only six years! What a curious concept that these two powerhouse erectile dysfunction (ED) drugs could mirror each other exactly in their fast-rising initiatives (their accounting ledgers).

Viagra, manufactured by Pfizer, was introduced in March of 1998 at a wholesale base cost of $7 per pill. Over the next eight years/through 2006, the price of Viagra increased a total of seven times to only $9.54 per pill, or 36%. However, since Jan. 1, 2007, the price of Viagra has increased from $10.02 to $16.20 per pill, or 70%. Price increases now take place about three times a year instead of once. Before 2008, no price increase was more than 7%. There have since been three 9% increases (including one on Jan. 1, 2010) and an 11% increase.

Cialis, manufactured by Lilly, was introduced in November of 2003 at a wholesale base cost of $8.10 – the exact price of Viagra at that time. Since then, Pfizer and Lilly have raised the cost of Viagra and Cialis at about the same rate. Since 2005, however, Cialis has been slightly more expensive than Viagra, with a maximum difference of $1.50 per pill. Currently, the wholesale base cost for Cialis is $16.67, or about 47 cents more per pill than Viagra. Since its introduction, the cost of Cialis has risen 105%.
No End In Sight for ED Drug Price Increases

Because Viagra’s patent expires in March of 2012, and presumably due to the fact that Pfizer is soon losing its patent on Lipitor (which grosses the company $12 billion annually), the company is in a mad scramble to make up the difference, or at least minimize its losses. Company layoffs have been rampant at Pfizer, as noted in the Huffington Post link above, and the company also bought Wyeth for $68 billion in order to diversify its business model.

That being said, what can truly justify the quickly inflating costs of Viagra and Cialis? Can it really cost that much more to produce a drug over time? Unlikely. And with the obvious pattern of Pfizer cutting costs at every corner, it is equally apparent they are raising costs at every chance. In fact the price increases have never been so rampant.

The Pharmaceutical industry news site Coreynahman.com addresses the rising Viagra cost and explains what consumers can do to protect themselves from getting ripped off. It’s a good read and worth consideration if you are looking to find out where to buy Viagra.

The Viagra patent expiration is equally devastating to Lilly because once the generic ED medications hit the market, Cialis also stands to lose significant market share. Currently, Viagra generates $1.9 billion in annual worldwide sales for Pfizer, and Cialis generates $1.5 billion in annual worldwide sales for Lilly. These two competing drugs control about 90 percent of the ED market (Levitra controls the other 10 percent), and Cialis has been gaining market share over the years on the once-king Viagra. Viagra online sales for this website make up about 60 percent of total for ED medications, while Cialis is at 40 percent and Levitra is at 10 percent.

Although the clock is quickly approaching the patent expiry for Viagra, there are still plenty of opportunities left for Pfizer and Lilly to raise their prices even higher on these drugs. And unfortunately for consumers who depend on the three FDA-approved ED medications, they have no alternative other than to stop using them, or to use them less frequently – not very inviting options.

Some men choose to take their chances with “generic” drugs from overseas. But not only are these medications illegal, the FDA has proven in tests that more than half of the counterfeit medications that enter into the U.S. are either ineffective or harmful. So this option is even less inviting.

There are literally tens of thousands of men who utilize Viagra, Cialis and Levitra on a regular basis in the U.S. All of these men stand to gain some big savings on ED pills on March 27, 2012 (the date of Viagra patent expiration). Check the AccessRx.com research section to find more information about what will happen when the Viagra patent expires and the drug goes generic.

You can read more about what the effects of Viagra patent expiration mean to consumers in an exclusive article written for AccessRx.

The increasing price of Viagra has left many men to look for other options, including "generic" Viagra. Oftentimes, however, this is not a wise choice for men – many of whom are unaware that "generic" Viagra does not legally exist in the U.S. and is often manufactured in foreign countries with no oversight and regulation. The FDA reports at least half of these medications are found to be ineffective or harmful. These counterfeit drugs are cheaper, but basically, their contents are a mystery. Not a good trade-off.

Pfizer is trying to get all it can out of Viagra before the patent expires. In 2008, Pfizer reported $1.93 billion in revenues for Viagra. However, they may have gone a little too far with their rampant price increases because, for the first time in memory, Pfizer’s revenues for Viagra actually dropped in Q3 of 2009. Pfizer has raised the price of Viagra 14 times since 1998, more frequently in recent years. Three of the last four price increases were 9 percent or more. 
 
But that won’t stop Pfizer from passing along more bad news to men who depend on Viagra. Come the first of the year, Pfizer will almost certainly increase the price of Viagra again, just like they have every year since 2000. The big pharma companies continue to roll forward in this manner, even in the face of such setbacks as Pfizer’s $2.3 billion fine (the largest in the history of mankind) levied by the FDA against Pfizer many months ago.

The only roadbloack ahead for Pfizer’s Viagra – and it’s a big one – is the March 27, 2012 date for patent expiration.

Brian Bujdos

The damage to Pfizer had already been done when the New York Times and many other news agencies covered a dog-and-pony press conference last week at the White House. There, Kathleen Sebelius, secretary of health and human services, patted the backs of her fellow bureaucrats as they celebrated the $2.3 settlement that Pfizer already agreed to put on its books in the final quarter of 2008.

However, it did serve its purpose to remind the world of what the Times called the largest health care fraud settlement, and the largest criminal fine of any kind – ever. Wow, these Pfizer people must have really done it THIS time.

What, you ask? Pfizer has been in this boat before? Well, actually this was Pfizer’s fourth settlement regarding illegal marketing activities since 2002. Which is a point a couple of Forbes editors accidentally missed, apparently, in this truly entertaining column posted yesterday. Still, their argument has its merits. Pfizer DID NOT really do it this time, the editors say – unless you count the hurt feelings at the FDA worth anything.

The headline in the New York Times last week read just like the headlines did when the settlement came to light many months ago: “Pfizer Pays $2.3 Billion to Settle Marketing Case Wholesalers.” This probably made a few people ask the questions, “Is Pfizer in trouble and how can they absorb such a fine… What does $2.3 billion mean to a Big Pharma company like Pfizer?”

Well, here are your answers, in reverse order, just to spice things up…

1)  For full-year 2008, Pfizer recorded reported revenues of $48.3 billion (not bad considering it includes the $2.3 billion penalty), essentially flat compared with 2007 full-year revenues of $48.4 billion.

So the fine equals less than 5 percent of annual revenues. And we’re not sure if you’ve been tracking price increases recently, but Pfizer began to raise the cost of Viagra twice a year instead of once a year in 2007. Including the last six price increases since Jan. 1, 2007, the price of Viagra has gone up 45.5%.  This means that online pharmacies, such as AccessRx.com, have also raised the price of Viagra online to keep up with Pfizer’s increases. 

Let’s put it this way, Pfizer will continue to find ways to be profitable, including its expected purchase of Wyeth for $68 billion. Makes the fine almost seems like play money, doesn’t it? Makes you wonder if all of these “corporate integrity agreements” that the feds make Pfizer sign are used as place holders or scratch paper.

2) Pfizer does not appear to be in trouble, and the fine can be “absorbed” if not replaced with additional streams of new revenue. The company’s stock bottomed out below $12 per share in late February, about a month after the company’s 2008 revenue reports were released. The shares climbed to above $16 in July, where they remain in early September.

It seems Pfizer’s track record indicates a profound ability to recover from similar and repeated misdoings, fines and even White House press conferences. Some of the facts surrounding the case are still somewhat disconcerting…

To borrow a line from the Times: “John Kopchinski, a former Pfizer sales representative whose complaint helped prompt the government’s Bextra case (which cost Pfizer $1.3 billion of the settlement), said that company managers told him and others to dismiss concerns about (another drug being marketed improperly) while pushing them to undertake similar illegal efforts on behalf of Bextra.

‘The whole culture of Pfizer is driven by sales, and if you didn’t sell drugs illegally, you were not seen as a team player,’ said Mr. Kopchinski, whose personal share of the Pfizer settlement is expected to exceed $50 million (thanks to a Civil-War era law that pays bounties to whistleblowers). Mr. Kopchinski left Pfizer in 2003.”

Of course, Pfizer is not alone among pharmaceutical companies who have settled, or been told, to pay  huge amounts of money. And the other companies are not hard to find. In fact, there are numerous industry blogs that track these and other pharma stories. For a good pharma carnival blog review that provides weekly insight, check out  http://blog.pharmalive.com.

By Brian Bujdos