IBJNews

Lilly braces for decline in Europe

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Austerity and upheaval in Europe have not hurt Eli Lilly and Co.’s $4 billion-a-year drug business there, but the company is moving forward with plans to survive a coming swoon anyway.

The Indianapolis-based drugmaker reported July 25 that its European sales rose 3 percent during the three months ended June 30, excluding the loss of sales for Zyprexa, Lilly’s former blockbuster which saw its European patents expire last fall.

Prices for Lilly’s products fell 3 percent in the quarter in Europe, where most drug prices are set by government-run health plans. Governments in Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain all have had to enact spending reductions to deal with massive debt costs even as their economic growth has stagnated or declined. The government pullback has further exacerbated economic growth, and many say Europe has fallen back into recession.

“Historically, we've experienced a 1-percent to 2-percent price decline in Europe, so this 3-percent decline confirms that we've not seen significant new austerity measures that impact our products,” said Ilissa Rassner, Lilly’s director of investor relations, during a July 25 conference call with investors. She added that the private wholesalers Lilly uses to distribute its drugs have not fallen behind in paying their bills.

Even so, officials still see dark clouds over the European market. Consumers there account for 20 percent of Lilly’s global drugs sales, and cash-strapped governments will make it more difficult for the company to get favorable pricing and access to drug formularies, said Chief Financial Officer Derica Rice. A plethora of cheap, generic drugs also will take a toll on Lilly.

“While Europe will continue to be an important market for Lilly, we expect it to decline in value, driven by the difficult macroeconomic environment, faster generic erosion than in the past, and excessive hurdles for reimbursement and access of new products,” Rice told investors during the July 25 conference call.

In response, Lilly intends to reduce its number of locations and costs to operate in Europe.

“Specifically, we're simplifying the organization from 12 to five geographic hubs, giving us critical mass and delivering efficiencies across markets. In addition, we'll organize marketing medical, and other commercial support functions into pan-European therapeutic communities,” Rice said. “These changes will create a more focused organization, one able to respond effectively to customer needs.”

Rice declined to quantify how much Lilly could save with these changes, other than to say they will produce “substantial savings in the coming years.” However, Rice delighted analysts by saying that Lilly would reduce its worldwide selling, general and administrative expenses to no more than 30 percent in the few years after 2014.

Overhead expenses have been running at nearly 34 percent of revenue recently as Lilly deals with declining revenue from Zyprexa at the same time it has ramped up marketing efforts to generate new sales. That strategy has worked better than many Wall Street analysts expected. Lilly’s second quarter earnings per share were six cents higher than analysts predicted, and the company raised its full-year profit forecast by 10 cents to 15 cents per share.

In response, most analysts raised their long-term profit forecasts for Lilly, but some wondered whether the cost cuts will actually materialize—especially if Lilly fails to launch new products before then.

“We believe that cutting costs will be easier than growing revenues, and we remain cautious about revenue growth beyond 2014,” Alex Arfaei, a drug analyst at BMO Capital Markets, wrote in a July 27 research note.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. By Mr. Lee's own admission, he basically ran pro-bono ads on the billboard. Paying advertisers didn't want ads on a controversial, ugly billboard that turned off customers. At least one of Mr. Lee's free advertisers dropped out early because they found that Mr. Lee's advertising was having negative impact. So Mr. Lee is disingenous to say the city now owes him for lost revenue. Mr. Lee quickly realized his monstrosity had a dim future and is trying to get the city to bail him out. And that's why the billboard came down so quickly.

  2. Merchants Square is back. The small strip center to the south of 116th is 100% leased, McAlister’s is doing well in the outlot building. The former O’Charleys is leased but is going through permitting with the State and the town of Carmel. Mac Grill is closing all of their Indy locations (not just Merchants) and this will allow for a new restaurant concept to backfill both of their locations. As for the north side of 116th a new dinner movie theater and brewery is under construction to fill most of the vacancy left by Hobby Lobby and Old Navy.

  3. Yes it does have an ethics commission which enforce the law which prohibits 12 specific items. google it

  4. Thanks for reading and replying. If you want to see the differentiation for research, speaking and consulting, check out the spreadsheet I linked to at the bottom of the post; it is broken out exactly that way. I can only include so much detail in a blog post before it becomes something other than a blog post.

  5. 1. There is no allegation of corruption, Marty, to imply otherwise if false. 2. Is the "State Rule" a law? I suspect not. 3. Is Mr. Woodruff obligated via an employment agreement (contractual obligation) to not work with the engineering firm? 4. In many states a right to earn a living will trump non-competes and other contractual obligations, does Mr. Woodruff's personal right to earn a living trump any contractual obligations that might or might not be out there. 5. Lawyers in state government routinely go work for law firms they were formally working with in their regulatory actions. You can see a steady stream to firms like B&D from state government. It would be interesting for IBJ to do a review of current lawyers and find out how their past decisions affected the law firms clients. Since there is a buffer between regulated company and the regulator working for a law firm technically is not in violation of ethics but you have to wonder if decisions were made in favor of certain firms and quid pro quo jobs resulted. Start with the DOI in this review. Very interesting.

ADVERTISEMENT