© 2000 John Petroff 

6)- Research and development

For many companies, especially in growth industries, this item is crucial for future earnings potential. Companies in such sectors will highlight this expense because companies appreciate its importance to investors. The validity of this number must be substantiated by indirect evidence. For instance, the written parts of the annual report should reveal the number of employees engaged in research and development, and the number of patents or projects these employees are involved in. These numbers can be compared with other companies in the industry.

To look at research and development, we look at four American pharmaceutical companies. Table T-13.9 below presents research and development expenses compared to revenue data.

Table T-13.9

Comparison of research and development of four US firms in 1998
. Merck Upjohn AHP Mylan
Revenues total (in $ millions) 29,452 6,758 13,463 721
Non-pharmaceutical revenues (in $ millions) 16,612 631 4,561 0
Pharmaceutical revenues (in $ millions) 12,840 6,127 8,902 721
Research and development expense (in $ millions) 1,821 1,199 1,655 62
R&D/pharmaceutical revenue 0.142 0.196 0.186 0.086
R&D/total revenue 0.062 0.177 0.123 0.086
Source: Annual Reports

Previous analysis of Merck's performance indicated that this was a very successful and profitable company. Its annual report repeatedly emphasizes leadership as the key to its marketing, personnel hiring and technological research strategies (for instance, Merck points to R&D annual growth of 11% over past ten years, on page 35 of its annual report). An investigation of Merck's research and development expense challenges Merck's assertion. Merck used to be the largest American pharmaceutical company (it is not since several mergers in the industry pushed it to third position). In fact, Merck lost its leadership position as pharmaceutical product developer because it merged with Medco in 1993, a managed health care provider which managed only a 3% net profit margin in 1998 compared to 45% on Merck's pharmaceutical products.

In 1998, Merck's R&D expense is still respectable at 14% relative to its pharmaceutical revenue, but lower than Upjohn's 19.6% and AHP's 18.6%. However, as a proportion of total revenue Merck's R&D expense has fallen to 6.2%, compared to 17.7% for Upjohn and 12.3% for AHP. This is the lowest Merck's R&D expense relative to total revenue has been in the past ten years (it decrease each year). This is less than Mylan's R&D expense relative to revenues of 8.6% which is a small generic drug manufacturer that takes over production of drugs on which patents expire. Merck has entered in a number of joint ventures, and one of these was terminated by Merck acquiring rights to all products for $ 1,039 millions which is shown in the income statement as a one time charge for acquired research instead of being capitalized. This is also a strategy more fit for a second rate company than an industry R&D leader

Merck is likely to have difficulties in regaining its former dominant position because Merck is held back by its Medco division in any opportunity of acquiring a competitor or being acquired.

See review questions Q-13C6.1 through Q-13C6.3.

 Previous: 5-General/administrative

Last modified: Jun/01/01
 Next: 7-Interest