2. 考研
  3. By wrestling with the question of its corporate structure, Pfizer is having a debate that echoes throughout the industry. Invest

By wrestling with the question of its corporate structure, Pfizer is having a debate that echoes throughout the industry. Invest

admin2018-06-06  99
问题     By wrestling with the question of its corporate structure, Pfizer is having a debate that echoes throughout the industry. Investors have pressed many diversified drug firms this year over whether they should break themselves up into more specialised units. Diversified firms are those that typically have consumer-health divisions offering low-margin products such as plasters and talcum powder. Meanwhile, "pure-play" drug companies focus on innovative medicines—for example, a full cure for Hepatitis C— that command high margins.
    Companies such as Johnson & Johnson (J&J), GSK and Novartis fall into the first camp, and have all recently wrestled with the question of splitting themselves up. Investors and analysts tell them that they may be worth more broken into their parts than as a whole, and ask whether capital is being allocated efficiently across their divisions. These sort of questions inspired Pfizer to sell its consumer-products division to J&J in 2006, and Merck, an American drug firm, to divest its consumer unit to Bayer in 2014.
    Neil Woodford, an influential shareholder in many pharma companies, including the British drug firm GSK, accused it in January of being four FTSE100 companies bolted together. GSK includes its core medicines and vaccines outfit, a consumer-healthcare division, a dermatology unit and a specialist HIV business. Andrew Witty, its boss, explains that some time ago he took a long-term view of his company, anticipating greater pressure on drug prices. The firm wanted to offset lower drug prices with higher sales of low-margin, high-volume products. The aim was to invest in businesses that were less exposed to a "pricing dynamic".
    Other diversified pharma companies make the same case. Consumer divisions smooth out the bumpy revenue that comes with the uncertain business of inventing drugs—which may fail to win approval, and eventually come off patent. In recent months the argument has gone their way. There has been heavy pressure on drug pricing in America after a series of firms, most recently Mylan, were pilloried for stratospheric rises. The NASDAQ biotech index, comprising mostly small firms pursuing innovative drug research, fell by 3.6% on a single day in August when Hillary Clinton sharply criticised the industry’s decisions on pricing. Advocates of diversification were boosted by GSK’s strong performance in the second quarter of this year. It handily beat expectations thanks to those boring, low-margin areas like consumer health and vaccines.
    Even firms that publicly profess a desire to slim down are likely to buy others. Cash is piling up on the balance-sheets of many companies in the industry. Japan’s Takeda is the latest to indicate that it is on the prowl for acquisitions. Firms may be looking for new drugs to sell, or different geographical regions to operate in. In specific areas such as cancer, points out Matthias Evers, a partner at McKinsey, a consultancy, scale and the depth of drug pipelines matter enormously. Pfizer’s purchase of Mediation, for example, allows the bigger firm to bolster its oncology portfolio. However much pharma bosses and investors debate the merits of focus versus diversification, they will keep doing deals.
What can be inferred from the last paragraph?
选项 A、The firms, which are likely to buy others, should be slim and flexible.
B、Japan’s Takeda would be the last one to be on the prowl for acquisitions.
C、Pfizer could hardly strengthen its oncology products without Medivation’s help.
D、Focus and diversification debate would last for a while to be settled.
答案D
解析 推断题。KK三步宝典：K1定位。A选项“有可能购买其他公司的都是精简而灵活的公司”．根据slim定位到末段第一句：Even firms that publicly profess a desire to slim down are likely to buy others．（甚至那些公开声称希望精简的公司都很可能收购其他公司），所以，至少公开声称希望精简的公司不是精简的公司，故排除。B选项“日本武田制药公司是最后一个表示正在积极寻找收购的公司”，通过Japan’s Takeda定位到末段第三句：Japan’s Takeda is the latest to indicate that it is on the prowl for acquisitions．（日本武田制药公司最近表示正在积极寻找收购的项目）。没有相关表达，故排除。（latest和last写法相近，容易产生误判，需要仔细甄别。) C选项“如果没有Medivation的帮助，辉瑞很难加强其肿瘤产品”，这是一个强干扰项，根据Medivation定位到末段第六句：Pfizer’s purchase of Medivation，for example，allows the bigger firm to bolster its oncology portfolio．（例如辉瑞购买Medivation将允许这家更大的公司支持其肿瘤组合），可见购买Medivation会加强其肿瘤组合，但也不排除通过其他途径来加强，故排除C选项。D．Focus and divetsification debate would last for a while to be settled“集中经营和多元化经营的争论需要持续一段时间才能解决”对应最后一句：However much pharma bosses and investors debate the merits of focus versus diversification，they will keep doing deals．（不论制药公司老板及投资者仍在讨论的专业化与多样化的优劣有多频繁，他们仍会继续进行协约。）而且这个题目完全可以使用主题为王！
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/RR6Z777K
0

考研英语一

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)