Sexual chemistry: Pfizer & the search for the new Viagra

8 September 2007

Drug companies spend billions of pounds chasing “the next big thing” – the wonder pill that will change the world and earn millions for its creators. Viagra, discovered by chance by pharmacists seeking a treatment for angina, is just such a drug.

One specialist US pharmaceutical company has also conducted research into a spray version of Viagra, all part of the drive to explore new markets and make Pfizer's trophy drug appeal to as wide a customer base as possible.

The worldwide market for erectile dysfunction will be worth more than $6bn by 2012. Over 150m men are thought to suffer mild to moderate impotence and would be attracted by a drug available in pharmacies without the need for an embarrassing visit to the doctor. It is too important an opportunity to let pass for any major pharmaceutical company worthy of the name.

Yet for Pfizer, grappling with a messy internal restructuring, it is starting to look dangerously like a case of too little, too late.

Viagra has been on sale since 1998; yet it is only now, with the worldwide patent for Viagra due to expire between 2011-2013, that the company is looking at plans for a non-prescription version of its wonder drug. For so successful a company, with 14 of the world's 25 best-selling medicines and $51bn in annual sales, this is inexcusable.

Shareholders and financial analysts should take Pfizer's man-

agement to task for allowing complacency to cloud their judgement.

Instead of presenting investors with a bold, articulate plan for taking Viagra to the next level, Pfizer has shown signs of bunker mentality. Its reaction to our report that it was researching new versions of Viagra spoke volumes.

After, at first, refusing to comment on “speculative reports”, stock market reaction to our story on its ground-breaking initiatives forced Pfizer last Wednesday night to confirm that it has indeed considered a number of options for Viagra, including an over-the-counter version. Our story was subsequently followed-up extensively in the international media.

While no company likes to see commercially-sensitive information about potential new products leaked to the market, Pfizer was wrong to stick its head in the sand.

It should have taken the opportunity to trumpet its advances in research and development, sending a clear signal to investors that it is on the offensive, rather than fighting a rearguard action.

Investors respond well to a bold, assertive strategy. Instead, Pfizer's churlish reaction reflects the malaise that has gripped the company and which threatens to distract it from the real business of maximising value from its drugs line-up. Its management clearly needs to get a grip, fast.