Gsk And Aids

Jean-Pierre Garnier found himself facing quite a hard task, where many issues brought up by NGO's and governments had to be addressed. Many where the claims of these actors, and many were the possible solutions. However, all of them had their benefits and pitfalls. There are mainly three bundles of ideas which could have addressed the problem. He could have satisfied all the requests of the parties by cutting prices and dropping patents. This solution would have had positive remarks in terms of brand image, and perception of the company in general, due to the upgrade in CSR and the shutting down of protests against GSK. However some negative aspects would have been brought up. The company would have experienced arising problems in terms of parallel imports, in terms of inappropriate prescription and inaccurate handling of the medicines by the subsidiaries, and perception of unfairness by western countries, all matched to a profit loss. The second bundles of solution envisages a price cut without a loosening of the restrictions about the patents. This has a partially positive impact since the NGOs will not be totally satisfied and will bring forward the protest. Negative remarks will be lessened due to GSK's exclusivity in the drug handling. A third possible solution would be that of not doing anything. It would bring a strong brand impoverishment and would potentially harm GSK's business in the world.

If I were in Garnier's shoes I would adopt a solution which fits in the second bundle. I would cut the prices of the drugs in the 63 poorest countries in order to have a price which is about 20% lower than the average of first-world nations. This solution would partially satisfy the African people and the NGOs, but would be a price preventing parallel trading because deriving profits would be fairly low. However, together with this, I would introduce a special support program in these poor countries, totally financed by GSK in a first