Saturday, April 23, 2016

The generic pharmaceutical market – what’s the competition landscape for a middle-sized player?




In this article, I will analyze the Porter’s Five Forces affecting smaller generic pharmaceutical companies, using the example of Lannett (NYSE: LCI), which have annual revenues of $400mm ~ $1,000mm.



(Photo Source: Internet)

Key Takeaways:
- Small/middle- sized generic pharmaceuticals face strong bargaining power from buyers, potentially squeezing their margins
- Current regulation regime keeps generic pharmaceutical players in an upward trends; it’s safe to project 5-year cash flows
- Sustainable and decent margin, as least in the short-run

OK, let's begin.
First, get some big picture from IBIS world:
“The $61.0 billion Generic Pharmaceutical Manufacturing industry is expanding rapidly, with annualized revenue growth of 4.5% expected in the five years to 2015. An aging population with more chronic illnesses is driving demand for industry products, while regulatory provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act expand consumer access to prescription insurance and provide increased opportunities for product development. Industry revenue is expected to grow 3.7% in 2015.”
Sounds good.  From this 10,000 feet view, we can place LCI as a middle-size player that has grown from $106.8 million revenue in 2011, to $800+ million revenue in 2016 after the Kremers Urban acquisition.
What’re the forces driving LCI’s growth? Let’s start with Porter’s Five Forces.

#1) Threat of new entrants
Although generic companies manufactures lack patent protections like brand-name drug companies, they still enjoy decent ~10% Net Margins. Logically, there should be some barriers, such as followed:
- Regulation: The production of generics is strictly regulated and companies must adhere to stringent goods manufacturing practices and quality-control standards from FDA.
- Cost of production facilities: in US, there’s an interesting “frame of tenders”. It obliges pharmacists to dispense a discounted generic product if one is available. Under this scheme, health insurers are able to pressure prices and request a high quality. This requires companies to be able to quickly produce high volumes and at a low manufacturing cost, and high quality. So small players are difficult to get foot in the door.

#2) Bargaining power of buyers
Let’s first look at a simplified supply chain of pharmaceutical industry:



- Strong counterparties: As a manufacture, LCI’s clients are strong and consolidated wholesalers. Today, the top three wholesalers own 90% of the market share. Their revenue model has evolved into a low margin business that makes money by maximizing economies of scale, creating physical distribution efficiencies and financial efficiencies (Kaiser Family Foundation, 2005).
That’s bad, if you have strong counter-parties. That being said, in an environment that retail price is increasing, will wholesalers keep a fixed markup, or ask for a high margin? I will write about this in another article.
- Brand recognition: for generic products, brand seems useless. The pharmacist can provide any generic drug, as long as it has the effective content.

#3) Bargaining power of suppliers
- Low bargaining power from suppliers – the upstream is commoditized, reflected by low COGS (~20% of revenues)

However, we should keep in mind generic pharmaceutical companies can be manufactures, as well as distributors.
For instance, LCI's over 50% revenue comes from one single supplier, JSP. It is because that LCI is acting as a distributor, not a manufacture in this case. 

#4) Threat of substitute of products or services
That’s a tricky question, and Game Theory is in play
- There’s a certain cost to produce a generic drug, such as FDA and facility cost
- However, the revenue side is uncertain, depending on numbers of players in the market



  

 For instance, assuming a drug demand is $100 million, and the brand drug is priced at $100; fixed cost to launch this drug is $10million and COGS is 20%. We can play following scenarios:
(In $ Millions)









We can find that the third player will not enter the market, leaving existing two players enjoying higher drug price and margins.  In another words, after a certain threshold, new competitors don’t have an incentive to launch a drug and existing players can enjoy less rivalry.

#5) Rivalry among existing competitors
It’s also a product by product question. Similar dynamics as described in the Threat of substitute of products or services are also in play.

#6) Landscape migration
It’s a big question, which needs another 10,000+ words to explain. From the bird view, we should bear in mind that prospers of the generic pharmaceutical market has come from one act: Hatch-Waxman Act in 1984.
Since this Act, the industry has seen an increase in the percent of branded drugs that have a generic competitor on the market. In 1999, nearly 100% of the top-selling drugs with expired patents had generic versions available, versus only 36% in 1983.

Is there a possibility that a new act will be in place and completely destroy the generic pharmaceutical market? The short answer is definitely YES.
Pulling data from Congress.gov, we found it takes average 267.57 days to pass a bill into law. But how long it takes to introducing a bill? The timeframe varies from 2 weeks to forever.

For now, we can safely say (99% confident interval:)) that generic pharmaceutical companies will keep flat/slight upward pricing in 5 years.

No comments:

Post a Comment