Recitation1
The “Bio Hemi” practice case
9/11/2014
Bio Hemi company sells blood treatment products for hemophiliacs, the old version medicine of the company was unemulsified that can spread HIV. Sales of the unemulsified product was slip and increasingly unmarketable in the United States and Europe. Bio Hemi company developed emulsification products that can prevented the problem of HIV contamination, but the company still had excess inventory of the old-version that cost more than 37.5 million dollars. Besides, there were several large fixed-price contracts which no re-negotiation required products either old or new version. If Bio Hemi company continued to sell old-version medicine and provide to fixed-price contracts, they would earned more money and get normal segment profit margins, but it’s not legal, Bio Hemi company clear knew the old-version medicine spread HIV then still sell them, not only hurt consumers but also ruin the future of company. Bio Hemi had a duty to be responsible for consumers’ health. If Bio Hemi company destroyed all old-version medicine and provided emulsification products, they would lost a lot of money, but they still have market and then can earn money back in the future. Therefore, my recommendation is destroy the old-version products and provide emulsification products to market. Bio Hemi company do not continue to be sold in Central and South America even if they still have market, life is more value than money. As for fixed-price contracts, I think Bio Hemi company can provide old-version products since those are old-version products contracts if Bio Hemi company do this is legal. But we should tell them all the true situation, if they didn’t agree, then re-negotiation.
9/11/2014
Bio Hemi company sells blood treatment products for hemophiliacs, the old version medicine of the company was unemulsified that can spread HIV. Sales of the unemulsified product was slip and increasingly unmarketable in the United States and Europe. Bio Hemi company developed emulsification products that can prevented the problem of HIV contamination, but the company still had excess inventory of the old-version that cost more than 37.5 million dollars. Besides, there were several large fixed-price contracts which no re-negotiation required products either old or new version. If Bio Hemi company continued to sell old-version medicine and provide to fixed-price contracts, they would earned more money and get normal segment profit margins, but it’s not legal, Bio Hemi company clear knew the old-version medicine spread HIV then still sell them, not only hurt consumers but also ruin the future of company. Bio Hemi had a duty to be responsible for consumers’ health. If Bio Hemi company destroyed all old-version medicine and provided emulsification products, they would lost a lot of money, but they still have market and then can earn money back in the future. Therefore, my recommendation is destroy the old-version products and provide emulsification products to market. Bio Hemi company do not continue to be sold in Central and South America even if they still have market, life is more value than money. As for fixed-price contracts, I think Bio Hemi company can provide old-version products since those are old-version products contracts if Bio Hemi company do this is legal. But we should tell them all the true situation, if they didn’t agree, then re-negotiation.