FierceBiotechFierceBioResearcherFierceVaccinesFiercePharma   FierceHealthcare

Free Newsletter

Get the pharma industry's daily monitor, with a special focus on pharmaceutical company news and the market development of FDA approved products. Sign up for free today!

About | Sample | Privacy

Pharma cuts 2008 ad budgets

Tools

Last week, we showed you what happened with pharma's ad spending in 2007. Now, we're here to tell you what ad budgets look like in 2008: not good. According to Jim Edwards at BrandWeek, the money pharma is spending on ads is in decline this year for the first time ever. Health education campaigns--which aim to raise awareness of a disease or disorder without mentioning brand names--are among the hardest hit. Spending on these sorts of ads dropped 3 percent during the first half of the year, to $2.4 billion.

Looking at the past two years, that number looks pretty small. In 2006, drugmakers spent $660 million on image and education ads. In 2007, that fell to $341 million. So far this year, the same budgets now total $138 million, a 22 percent drop from the same period last year.

Times are tough all over, it's true. But unbranded advertising--while popular with some because there's no need for a litany of side effects--is a struggle to justify at cost-conscious companies. Because they aren't directly linked with sales, they're easier to cut than branded ads can be.

Pfizer is the lone exception to this new rule. It's actually increasing educational-ad spending this year with a big stop-smoking push designed to support Chantix.

- read the BrandWeek story

Related Articles:
Big Pharma's Top 13 Advertising Budgets
House, Senate hook up on DTC ads
This year's drug ads? Forget about 'em
Facebook, Twitter, ect., new marketing tools
Drugmakers to delay new-drug ads

More stories about Drug advertising   Drug Marketing   DTC advertising   advertising spending  

Comments

It's interesting that they pay tax exempt political action committees, or charities, whichever name you prefer to call them, to pay lobbyists to badger lawmakers for draconian smoking bans. The little businesses and local charities suffer because of their methods.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.

More information about formatting options

What is 51 + 1?
To combat spam, please solve the math question above.