I have searched some more and I have found that I am mistaken. My apologies.
This ruling modified the original one and that one did indeed specify that Natco was restricted from either outsourcing or exporting the product. It also instructed “Natco to supply the medicine free of cost to at least 600 needy and deserving patients every year”
So my conclusion that China was the target market was mistaken. You are correct; I was wrong.
Absolutely no reason to apologise. Good respectful argument is surprisingly difficult to find, even on this board. It was a pleasure!
ETA: I’m also impressed by your Google Fu. I was unable to turn up this specific cite in searching, and I thought I was being pretty comprehensive. What’s your overall view on this matter now?
I double back to my post#6, specifically
The ruling actually seems pretty fair and Bayer could have avoided it by thinking of the poor of the world as a “compassionate use” and either offering for slightly more than marginal cost of production or under similar terms imposed by the courts voluntarily. They would still be making more than the otherwise would without losing any of their prime market and earning good PR cred to boot. The point of the original quote in context was that India generic sales were not going to hurt them financially because India was never the market for the drug … so why not just let them have it for a small royalty or at slightly above margin without opening up the specter of compulsory licenses?
Also, there is this in the cite that you provided
I’m assuming that’s annual revenue. So monthly revenue is approximately INR 2 crores(20 million). Which means each month Bayer’s selling to about 70 patients since they charge approximately 300,000 INR a month. I think we should consider that figure 0.5% of HCC incidence in India. Only the top 0.5% would be capable of affording what Bayer was charging in my view. Probably fewer.
ETA: It is possible that the amount mentioned is potential, not actual revenue. There isn’t enough detail to be able to tell.
Not directly related to this thread but still of some peripheral interest …
A point a friend made to me today …
Medicines like this, extremely expensive in the West and the year’s supply available for about $65K less in India, drive some degree of medical tourism. Fly first class there, get a year’s supply, fly back. My friend posits that that possibility is likely what concerns Bayer most.