IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jecomi/v10y2022i11p277-d966415.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Impact of Pharmaceutical R&D Activity on Financial Flexibility and Bargaining Power

Author

Listed:
  • Gergő Tömöri

    (Institute of Accounting and Finance, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Debrecen, H-4032 Debrecen, Hungary)

  • Zoltán Bács

    (Institute of Accounting and Finance, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Debrecen, H-4032 Debrecen, Hungary)

  • János Felföldi

    (Institute of Applied Informatics and Logistics, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Debrecen, H-4032 Debrecen, Hungary)

  • Ildikó Orbán

    (Institute of Accounting and Finance, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Debrecen, H-4032 Debrecen, Hungary)

Abstract

The specificities of pharmaceutical companies’ activities also have an impact on their ability to improve profitability compared to other sectors. Examples of such specificities include patent rights on the medicines produced, which for a longer period of time prevent the entry of competing players, allowing sunk costs to be offset to some extent by advantages from using higher margins. The primary purpose of this study is to examine whether the bargaining power of R&D-engaged companies significantly affects the financial margin of their operations to a different extent than other pharmaceutical companies. This study examined panel data focused on companies with the highest turnover, while we filtered out differences in the effect due to different macroeconomic and development environments. Our findings are that while the gross profit was significantly influenced by the type of activity within the industry, this statement for the cash cycle is no longer justified. Our conclusion was that the difference between the engaged and non-engaged in R&D companies expressed mostly in the profitability ratios, besides that, countries which had different development policies and accounting systems also took impact on financial margins, although the relative GDP advantages disappeared when looking at intra-industry, cross-country movements.

Suggested Citation

  • Gergő Tömöri & Zoltán Bács & János Felföldi & Ildikó Orbán, 2022. "Impact of Pharmaceutical R&D Activity on Financial Flexibility and Bargaining Power," Economies, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-19, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jecomi:v:10:y:2022:i:11:p:277-:d:966415
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7099/10/11/277/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7099/10/11/277/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael Kremer, 2002. "Pharmaceuticals and the Developing World," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(4), pages 67-90, Fall.
    2. Thomas A. Abbott & John A. Vernon, 2007. "The cost of US pharmaceutical price regulation: a financial simulation model of R&D decisions," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(4-5), pages 293-306.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Stephan Eger & Jörg Mahlich, 2014. "Pharmaceutical regulation in Europe and its impact on corporate R&D," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 1-9, December.
    2. Chakraborty, Shankha & Papageorgiou, Chris & Pérez Sebastián, Fidel, 2010. "Diseases, infection dynamics, and development," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(7), pages 859-872, October.
    3. John Vernon & Robert Goldberg & Joseph Golec, 2009. "Economic Evaluation and Cost-Effectiveness Thresholds," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 27(10), pages 797-806, October.
    4. Javad Moradpour & Aidan Hollis, 2021. "The economic theory of cost‐effectiveness thresholds in health: Domestic and international implications," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(5), pages 1139-1151, May.
    5. Moreno Gigi & van Eijndhoven Emma & Benner Jennifer & Sullivan Jeffrey, 2017. "The Long-Term Impact of Price Controls in Medicare Part D," Forum for Health Economics & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 20(2), pages 1-56, December.
    6. Harsha Thirumurthy & Joshua Graff Zivin & Markus Goldstein, 2008. "The Economic Impact of AIDS Treatment: Labor Supply in Western Kenya," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 43(3), pages 511-552.
    7. Eric W. Bond & Kamal Saggi, 2023. "Compulsory licensing, price controls, and access to patented foreign products," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Kamal Saggi (ed.), Technology Transfer, Foreign Direct Investment, and the Protection of Intellectual Property in the Global Economy, chapter 19, pages 437-448, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    8. Gamba, Simona & Magazzini, Laura & Pertile, Paolo, 2021. "R&D and market size: Who benefits from orphan drug legislation?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    9. Lucy Xiaolu Wang, 2023. "A cost-benefit analysis of the medicines patent pool," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 43(3), pages 1298-1319.
    10. Teteryatnikova, Mariya, 2018. "R&D in trade networks: The role of asymmetry," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 307-350.
    11. Gino A.Gancia, 2003. "Globalization, Divergence and Stagnation," Development Working Papers 174, Centro Studi Luca d'Agliano, University of Milano.
    12. Barrero, Jose Maria & Bloom, Nick & Davis, Steven J., 2020. "Why Working From Home Will Stick," SocArXiv wfdbe, Center for Open Science.
    13. David Rietzke & Yu Chen, 2020. "Push or pull? Performance‐pay, incentives, and information," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 51(1), pages 301-317, March.
    14. Patricia M. Danzon & Eric L. Keuffel, 2014. "Regulation of the Pharmaceutical-Biotechnology Industry," NBER Chapters, in: Economic Regulation and Its Reform: What Have We Learned?, pages 407-484, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Iain M. Cockburn & Jean O. Lanjouw & Mark Schankerman, 2016. "Patents and the Global Diffusion of New Drugs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(1), pages 136-164, January.
    16. Alexander Cuntz & Frank Mueller-Langer & Alessio Muscarnera & Prince C. Oguguo & Marc Scheufen, 2024. "Access to science and innovation in the developing world," WIPO Economic Research Working Papers 78, World Intellectual Property Organization - Economics and Statistics Division.
    17. Kessing, Sebastian G. & Nuscheler, Robert, 2006. "Monopoly pricing with negative network effects: The case of vaccines," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 50(4), pages 1061-1069, May.
    18. Xavier Vives, 2008. "Innovation And Competitive Pressure," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(3), pages 419-469, December.
    19. Daron Acemoglu & Joshua Linn, 2004. "Market Size in Innovation: Theory and Evidence from the Pharmaceutical Industry," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(3), pages 1049-1090.
    20. Dosi, Giovanni & Palagi, Elisa & Roventini, Andrea & Russo, Emanuele, 2023. "Do patents really foster innovation in the pharmaceutical sector? Results from an evolutionary, agent-based model," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 564-589.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jecomi:v:10:y:2022:i:11:p:277-:d:966415. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.