Vertex Case Study Vertex Has Succeeded in

Vertex Case Study Vertex has succeeded in the past. However, rising costs, negative attention and generics and negative attention has lead large pharmaceutical companies to attempt to survive via partnerships and mergers. In order to stay independent and in-control, the Vertex corporation must avoid these big pharmaceutical company solutions.

Until now, the company has been able to protect its independence and shield itself from the hostile mergers by its policy of "rational drug design" which hopefully will save the company some millions of R&D money in the act of focusing the testing according to a central plan rather than in randomly searching for a viable drug (Pisano, Fleming & Strick, 2006, 11). Analysis There is no right answer, but only the one that holds closest to the company marketing plan.

John Randle who was the program director in charge of Vertex's ICE inhibitors expressed his opinion that the VX-765 was the best candidate due to the fact that it used existing Vertex proprietary chemistry. For that reason, the company would be in a strong patent position and would likely infringe on any existing patents or intellectual property. The potential for the product being a blockbuster was good.

On the other hand, the company Vertex could be losing valuable ground and time in the attempt to develop the compounds on a wholly internal basis (ibid., 11-12). While partnering with large pharmaceutical company may not be the answer, as the larger entity would likely reap more of the rewards due to its name recognition. Rather, Vertex should instead probably partner with smaller bio-tech companies, or even independent university laboratories.

This flexibility would allow permit Vertex to control more of the basic testing and thus retain the power for the marketing and distribution. By controlling the branding, Vertex would then have far more name recognition over the smaller bio-tech start-ups as well as a high prestige the from altruistic partnering with university labs. This would provide fertile fields for young scientific minds. With the company funding the graduate research projects, the company could then recruit and have the pick of the best minds from multiple disciplines.

Also, by allowing graduate students to do research, it would cut down on the initial costs. With development times taking some 10 to 15 years (costing over $800 million), the company needs to continue to specializing in the cutting edge, best and newest technology available (ibid., 16). Of course, by occupying the cutting edge of technology, there is a definitive risk. However, by possessing the ability to market the product to the general public the patients always be on the lookout for the best prescription solution at the time of their release.

Alternatively, ties with big pharmaceutical companies could be severed for the initial funding to keep control. However, partnering with a generics company could cost a critical year or two of brand-name pricing where Vertex can recoup the product startup costs. In any case, there is not a completely ideal solution self-evident at the outset. This is why a.