Intro


Hi and welcome! My name is Jennie Dickerson, and I will be using this site to incorporate the curriculum of MGMT 7160 into the business practices of Medtronic. Join me in this final semester on the journey towards the culmination of the Masters of Business Administration program at the University of Memphis.


Wednesday, October 22, 2014

Tacit Collusion and Accusation on Medtronic

Collusion is a tempting strategy. It is like a game of corporate keep away, where companies band together to improve their own conditions in the market, while keeping others out of their potential successes. Over the years, Medtronic has been accused of engaging in this illegal behavior for the sake of profits.

In the last few years, Medtronic has been accused of colluding with several competitors to reduce the competition in the market. In 2012, “Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) and senior member Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa)” accused Medtronic of collusion by falsifying product reviews. They suggested that Medtronic had influence over the physicians that were performing reviews of products and that the physicians were exaggerating side effects of competing products to enhance the attractiveness of Medtronic products. Evidence found that Medtronic paid $210 million in kickbacks to physicians and that several email chains confirming the relationship between Medtronic and the physicians. In 2014, “Stryker Corp. [asserted] anti-trust claims against Medtronic over its sale of some 500 patents for its Kyphon vertebroplasty technology to alleged patent troll Orthophoenix.” This example is of explicit collusion, where one company is in direct communication with another company to corner the market on a product. Also in 2014, Lenox MacLaren Surgical Corporation blamed Medtronic for collusion through recalling Lenox’s product and then charging super competitive prices for the same product, after taking Lenox out of the market. In this case, Medtronic was not held responsible for the accusation, but if it were, they would have been guilty of reducing the competition in the market in order to keep prices high.



No comments:

Post a Comment