Pfizer Animal Health Products Case Study Analysis

Main Issue/Problem

There were a few problems in this case study. The NAFTA with Canada and Mexico really messed the local ranchers up financially. When this agreement took place, it allowed cows and cattle from other countries come in and produce/ sell their animals in the United States for cheaper. With the new ranchers coming in, it made the local ranchers work even hard to sell their products because they were already struggling to make ends meet. The second issue was the fact “prices of beef had declined precipitously from the prior year. The prices being offered for the calves by the feedlot operators costs less than raising the calves. ” (Dwyer and Tanner 2008) Due to the prices dropping the ranchers were forced to cut end so they could save money they weren’t able to keep flowing in.

This is when Pfizer comes into play. Their company sells the health products that the ranchers need to keep their animals up to par so they can be sold, but since they needed to save money they skipped on the animal’s or they just chose a way cheaper alternative to get the job done. The main problem they were having was the decline in the market for US beef products, which in turn made the decline of Pfizer sales. It happened because the consumer were starting to demand more convenient meals such as “ready-to-eat products and branded products” (Dwyer and Tanner 2008) These meals mainly consisted of chicken and fish, not the beef that Pfizer company’s made most of their profits on. Also, another contributing factor was the” health and nutritional issues such as foodborne disease, fat content and cholesterol. ” (Dwyer and Tanner 2008)

Case background

Pfizer was founded in 1849 by cousins Charles Pfizer and Charles Erhart in New York. “Pfizer Animal Health is committed to providing high-quality, research based health products for livestock and companion animals. ” (Dwyer and Tanner 2008) “At Pfizer, we apply science and our global resources to bring therapies to people that extend and significantly improve their lives. We strive to set the standard for quality, safety and value in the discovery, development and manufacture of health care products. ”(Pfizer 2002) They are made up of the major parts Pfizer animal health, Consumer health group, and us pharmaceuticals They have research and development facilities both abroad and in the U. S. (Dwyer and Tanner 2008)

According to their website they do the best that they can to provide great and healthy products. The book talks about they do a great deal of research and development for all of their products. Pfizer products are sold to veterinarians and animal health distributors in more than 140 countries around the world for use by livestock producers and horse and pet owners according to the text. This is huge! Knowing this, you can tell this company is well known and respected. The only reason their sales had dropped was the fact that their customers began cutting costs because of the NAFTA. The fact that the industry was including ready to eat products and branded products, this meant the ranchers actually had to buy the correct products in order to meet the standard. So, the Pfizer company started doing promotions. For example, “When a vet consults and recommends a Pfizer product to a rancher, the vet gives the rancher a coded coupon that may be redeemed at either a vet clinic or supply house. When that coupon is sent back to Pfizer for reimbursement the vet is credited for servicing that products. They also did trade promotions to vets. ” (Dwyer and Tanner 2008)

Possible alternative

The two options that Pfizer has are 1) Focus on other markets that are doing well other than just beef. In other words, they can try to expand in the poultry division. What they would have to do is decide to do more research and development so that they can sell more products and increase their profits. Or 2) They can just not give up on the beef industry just yet. Work with them and help then grow stronger. Sometimes you have to stick through the hard times and plan for better ones. The only thing that comes with that is the fact it could go either in a positive direction or a negative one. Focusing on other markets leaves them up for vulnerability. We currently know they are in a great spot where there are, in the beef industry. They have built great relationships with their currently customers and they are happy with it.

If Pfizer decides to open up to more options like the poultry division, they might not get the same results. It is possible they won’t make as much money doing it this way. They also don’t know how tough the competition is in that market. Going this route puts them up for anything and they might be better off not doing so. Another thing is consider is not giving up on the beef industry. Well by doing this, they could also have lose out on money. There could potentially be more money out there and by staying in the comfortable zone hinders them from finding out. Both options here could go either way. My reccomendationMy recommendation is open up with other markets. They could generate profits from both the beef and the poultry customers. It can be a great idea to expand the options for future opportunities. By being able to sell to both the beef and poultry industry could lead to great sales. There is a huge market out there for people who prefer chicken and or fish. If it turns out that this doesn’t work out for the Pfizer company, they can always choose to go back to how they were before and discuss a new alternative for themselves.