2. 考研
  3. By wrestling with the question of its corporate structure, Pfizer is having a debate that echoes throughout the industry. Invest

By wrestling with the question of its corporate structure, Pfizer is having a debate that echoes throughout the industry. Invest

admin2018-06-06  52
问题     By wrestling with the question of its corporate structure, Pfizer is having a debate that echoes throughout the industry. Investors have pressed many diversified drug firms this year over whether they should break themselves up into more specialised units. Diversified firms are those that typically have consumer-health divisions offering low-margin products such as plasters and talcum powder. Meanwhile, "pure-play" drug companies focus on innovative medicines—for example, a full cure for Hepatitis C— that command high margins.
    Companies such as Johnson & Johnson (J&J), GSK and Novartis fall into the first camp, and have all recently wrestled with the question of splitting themselves up. Investors and analysts tell them that they may be worth more broken into their parts than as a whole, and ask whether capital is being allocated efficiently across their divisions. These sort of questions inspired Pfizer to sell its consumer-products division to J&J in 2006, and Merck, an American drug firm, to divest its consumer unit to Bayer in 2014.
    Neil Woodford, an influential shareholder in many pharma companies, including the British drug firm GSK, accused it in January of being four FTSE100 companies bolted together. GSK includes its core medicines and vaccines outfit, a consumer-healthcare division, a dermatology unit and a specialist HIV business. Andrew Witty, its boss, explains that some time ago he took a long-term view of his company, anticipating greater pressure on drug prices. The firm wanted to offset lower drug prices with higher sales of low-margin, high-volume products. The aim was to invest in businesses that were less exposed to a "pricing dynamic".
    Other diversified pharma companies make the same case. Consumer divisions smooth out the bumpy revenue that comes with the uncertain business of inventing drugs—which may fail to win approval, and eventually come off patent. In recent months the argument has gone their way. There has been heavy pressure on drug pricing in America after a series of firms, most recently Mylan, were pilloried for stratospheric rises. The NASDAQ biotech index, comprising mostly small firms pursuing innovative drug research, fell by 3.6% on a single day in August when Hillary Clinton sharply criticised the industry’s decisions on pricing. Advocates of diversification were boosted by GSK’s strong performance in the second quarter of this year. It handily beat expectations thanks to those boring, low-margin areas like consumer health and vaccines.
    Even firms that publicly profess a desire to slim down are likely to buy others. Cash is piling up on the balance-sheets of many companies in the industry. Japan’s Takeda is the latest to indicate that it is on the prowl for acquisitions. Firms may be looking for new drugs to sell, or different geographical regions to operate in. In specific areas such as cancer, points out Matthias Evers, a partner at McKinsey, a consultancy, scale and the depth of drug pipelines matter enormously. Pfizer’s purchase of Mediation, for example, allows the bigger firm to bolster its oncology portfolio. However much pharma bosses and investors debate the merits of focus versus diversification, they will keep doing deals.
Why did Merck get rid of the consumer part?
选项 A、It did not fall in the first camp as Johnson & Johnson (J&J), GSK.
B、It has been talked into this action by investors and analysts.
C、It has been controlled by the investors of the Bayer.
D、It has been influenced by the Pfizer and J&J.
答案B
解析 细节题。KK三步宝典：K1定位。由题干Merck定位到第二段末句：These sort of questions inspired Pfizer to sell its consumer-products division to J&J, in 2006，and Merck，an American drug firm，to divest its consumer unit to Bayer in 2014．（这类问题启发辉瑞公司在2006年向强生出售了其消费产品部门，也启发美国药品公司默克公司在2014年将其消费者部门出让给拜耳。）KK三步宝典：K2替换。A选项“默克公司将其消费者部门剥离，因为该公司无法像强生、葛兰素史克跻身第一阵营”，对比原文，这类问题启发辉瑞公司在2006年向强生出售了其消费产品部门，也启发美国药品公司默克公司在2014年将其消费者部门出让给拜耳。文中并没有相关第一阵营的说法，故排除。B选项“默克公司将其消费者部门放弃，因为投资者和分析师说服其这样做”，而原文没有这样的信息，该选项是强干扰项，第二段第二句：Investors and analysts tell them that they may be worth more broken into their parts than as a whole, and ask whether capital is being allocated efficiently across their divisions．(投资者和分析师告诉他们，分开多个部分或能比作为一个整体更值钱，并问及资本是否在多个部分有效配置。) investors and analysts问了问题，Merck自己做了行动，所以B选项正确。C选项“默克公司将其消费者部门放弃，因为拜耳的投资人控制了他们。”比对原文，没有相关描述，故排除。D选项“默克公司将其消费者部门出让，因为该公司受到辉瑞和强生的影响”，对比原文，前后没有关联性。故排除！
转载请注明原文地址:https://jikaoti.com/ti/zf57FFFM
0

考研英语一

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)