Let’s do a little industry analysis; the numbers here a generally reflective of market conditions in recent years, with minor adjustments, but this exercise should still be considered “hypothetical.” Suppose annual industry sales are $188.4 billion. In this industry there are six leading companies, several smaller significant competitors, and a number of even smaller niche firms. The top companies and their revenue data are:

Company	Revenue
Pfizer Inc.	$ 22.2 billion
AbbVie Inc.	$ 21.5 billion
Johnson & Johnson	$ 21.5 billion
Merck & Co. Inc.	$ 19.4 billion
Amgen Inc.	$ 18.3 billion
Bristol-Myers Squibb	$ 13.0 billion
Eli Lilly & Co.	$ 9.2 billion
Sanofi SA	$ 9.2 billion
GlaxoSmithKline PLC	$ 6.4 billion
Other smaller firms combined	$ 47.7 billion
Industry Total	$188.4 billion

Suppose you work for Amgen, and your firm is preparing to buy out both Eli Lilly to compete more effectively with your larger competitors. Top management expects the merger to be investigated if not challenged by the DOJ/FTC, and they’ve asked you to prepare a defense of the merger. What key areas will you want to look into to make the case that your acquisitions will be pro-competitive, not anticompetitive?

There have been a number of mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical industry in recent years, with quite a bit of M&A activity happening even now. 

Are these mostly 

(a) mergers among industry leaders, creating “mega” firms, 

(b) acquisitions by large firms buying out smaller specialty producers, or 

(c) smaller firms merging in order to compete with the industry leaders? 

Give some examples and discuss whether you think this merger activity is making the industry more competitive or less competitive.

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

There are a few key issues that you will want to look into to make the case that your acquisitions will be procompetitive not anticompetitive 1 The market share of the combined ... View the full answer