Pharma Will Spend How Much Advertising Online?

Online advertising and promotional spending by drugmakers and other healthcare marketers may hit a hefty $1.58 billion this year, but actual online spending growth will gradually decline over the next few years as the pharmaceutical industry adjusts its product portfolio and adapts to regulatory challenges governing promotions, according to a market research report from eMarketer.

The $1.58 billion forecast to be spent online this year to reach consumers and healthcare providers represents a 23.3 percent increase from last year. But over the next four years, annual online spending will grow at an average of 14 percent. Next year, for instance, spending is projected to hit $1.86 billion, a 17.7 percent rise. By 2016, spending is expected to reach $2.48 billion, but that will amount to a 7.8 percent gain from the prior year.

There are a couple of reasons, according to eMarketer. "Drugmakers have been slow to shift to online tactics. Without definitive online marketing guidelines from the FDA for direct-to-consumer advertising, many marketers prioritize spending in print and broadcast media, for which there is a clearer road map. The shift to digital is under way, but has not progressed as quickly as it has in less-regulated industries," the firm writes.

Another reason: both traditional and online ad spending have been largely geared toward blockbuster medicines, but the recent wave of patent expirations coupled with a growing emphasis on newer drugs that target more specific patient populations will soon translate into lower online spending to reach both patients and healthcare providers, according to eMarketer.

Meanwhile, the spending mix is starting to change between DTC advertising and promotions aimed at healthcare providers. The firm reminds us of a recent Cegedim Strategic Data report showing several large drugmakers reduced DTC ad spending last year but boosted electronic detailing. This underscores that spending aimed at physicians, which has traditionally been larger, is growing even faster as more doctors use the Internet and mobile devices for information and education.

18 Comments

Jun 21, 2012 - 12:00pm
Keep shedding manufacturing jobs and bench scientists and the *savings* there can go to legal, marketing and advertising.
Jun 21, 2012 - 1:36pm
Dz everybody in this biz has to sing for their supper. You are either a cost center or a profit center. You guys used to be the latter but you are now the former. Everyone in this biz expendable. You get paid for performance, so if you can reduce a 55 step organic synthesis to five steps and produce a billion dollar blockbuster you may keep your job and Marketing can hire an army of gelheads to sell your creation.
Jun 21, 2012 - 1:56pm
Marketing, shmarketing. Sales shmales. Invent a drug that cures and stop messing around. Oh, cure? Don't be silly.
Jun 21, 2012 - 3:00pm
I love how pharma blames their high drug costs on "R&D" but they spend significantly more on marketing than R&D.
Jun 21, 2012 - 3:50pm
R&D became a cost center when it started to spend all that money on computer technology and stupid software. So go ahead and get the cheap Chinese stats guys now to predict the odds of 70% fewer engineers doing pilot batches to come up with your 5 step process.

At this point in time, maybe we all should just go find out what medical problem one of the 400 billionaires is having and ask him/her to cover the slum lord rental in Detroit and give us classic lab set up - HPLC, microscope, fridge, beakers, spinners, etc etc. Whole set up would cost less than 6 months of CEO salary and if after one year we don't clear up the boil on their ass (marketing schtick - we'll call it pre-cancerous to give it the elan they like, and trace it to a genetic deficiency with enzymatic digestion passed down to them from Cesar's uncle's pancreas) with a NME, we'll fire ourselves. Does that work for you?

Jun 21, 2012 - 7:28pm
Any entrepreneur CEO who has started a biotech company or specialty pharma has put some of their own skin in the game. It's their way of showing the VC guys that you're serious. Many more have lost their initial investment than recouped it. Most came from Big pharma. That's how they got the money to ante up in the first place.

R&D always ignored calls for doing things faster, better and cheaper because they thought the well would never run dry. It has run dry and so has the faith that management has in you bench scientists.

Come over to the dark side, pal. Do some Marketing studies. Research is a transferable skill. The studies are shorter, more lucrative and you get to meet some pretty hot looking babes on the Marketing side.

Jun 21, 2012 - 9:19pm
There is one person at the bench left for show and 1000 idiots pushing paper, so to speak, and saying that the one scientist left with USELESS million dollar technology and software is not producing.

There is only one explanation for this and I'm positive I'm correct.

The billions have been made from Viagra and blood brain barrier breakers (greedy bastards want them hooked at age 2 so put in a Mommy authority to threaten another Mommy with throwing the kid out of school if they don't get medicated)

and a business model is in place to shuffle the billions in all sorts of directions other than R and D.

You politically embedded nimrods, who only learned of what people did in pharma after the Patriot Act allowed you to SPY on us and then steal our identities with BUZZWORDOLOGY,

spew volumes of puke, masquerading as words, at people instead of even pursuing new antibiotics. That's the one talent you all have that is about to run dry - the ability to NEVER run out of stupid rationalizations and cynical, carping-critic perspectives that all lead to one big "No".

But people STILL know that its all a big bj cover for not having what it takes to deal with the exacting precision of science.

I could never work with people who have faith that they can do brain surgery to fix the head they just cracked open in order to get their hands on the billions.

Market this - and you know what I'm saluting you with.

Online marketing is increasing every year anyways. I think it's very important for big pharmaceutical companies to focus on content marketing. Creating more viral things, this way they can really get the word. TV ads are dead.
Jun 22, 2012 - 7:05am
That's the whole idea. With computer assisted design we don't need whole teams of bench scientists mixing shelf chemicals and mucking through soil samples to come up with the next Tagamet. After we spent those billions in Viagra profits to buy you guys supercomputers and assay systems to do your high throughput screening as well as all of the other techology you requested AND received, would it be too much to ask you folks to come up with a few new drugs once and a while?

Remember, Sales and Marketing didn't all of a sudden forget how to sell overnight. It's the failure to replenish the pipeline, i.e. YOUR shop that has kept my girlfriend in Marketing from buying herself a new pair of Christian Louboutins this year.

Jun 22, 2012 - 10:27am
@oii, "With computer assisted design we don’t need whole teams of bench scientists mixing shelf chemicals and mucking through soil samples to come up with the next Tagamet."

Like I said, the POLITICAL FRAUD CORPORATISTS never run out of spin - can't PATENT nature designed molecules and they're too complex to be manufactured by trained bears in Siberia. So all you do is take all those benzene rings left over from making gasoline and attach other chemicals to them and then find someone who will serve as a guinea pig. Not quite the way Mother Nature does it. Your programs and computers couldn't design a lemon, let along a molecule to cure "cancer" (AKA as toxic damange).

And that's all past woo-woo now, isn't it? It's all GENE THERAPY. Congratulations on convincing a billion people in the East that they can do it. Proof from the 1970s that it can't be done is hidden in some "Warehouse 13" in USA.

Find one bench scientist who signed off on the million dollar computer purchases. We HATED the technology, protested against it, and wasted eons of time being stalked by programmers getting us to work in front of them so that they could design software to TAKE OUT THE HUMAN INTELLIGENCE in the job!

Another billion dollar biz - organ transplants - computer designed lung? Where's the KNOWLEDGE that comes with shutting off the immune system, oh, like, turning it back on?

I can't sit here and listen to you FRAUDS lay that retard IQ rule of marketing on me - "we don't care what is inside, it's the package that sells it"....

Putin summed up USA pharma this way, "If you don't take this, you will die."

Nothing I worked on was yanked off the market after it's marketing shelf life of 2 years until the body counts add up and some whistleblower actually files a report.

All you banksters and fraudsters are doing is taking the BILLIONS SCIENTISTS contributed to piling up and re-distributing it to "privatize" the country.

Go blow it out your ear...

Jun 22, 2012 - 12:42pm
I don't know about warehouse 13 but if you were a lab rat working at Abbott back in the day and you were no longer considered productive, or even worse, no longer a team player as dx has so eloquently described himself, managers like me would have these folks transferred to Building AP99. The inside joke was that AP99 didn't actually exist. It was HR's way of informing management that these people were unfireable for one reason or another, and needed to be collectivized in a location where they could do no harm, which was easy since the only budget for that building was to run the utilities and pay the janitorial staff.
Jun 22, 2012 - 2:48pm
@oii - if you and your ilk are such geniuses, then why all the hand wringing about big pharma not being PRODUCTIVE?

Somebody pulled a compound out of their nose and before any activity began in developing a First In Man protocol, the manager told me in the bathroom, in passing conversation, that it was going to be a big success. The whole pre-clinical (tox and bench) team sent out their CVs rather than team-play with that manager.

You belong somewhere else, also, OII than in medical research. A building with barbed wire and guards that is NOT your own house.

Jun 22, 2012 - 3:30pm
Actually I am planning to retire someday to a house that is not my own. Yet. Have my sites set on this little gem of a property on the Puget sound. Won't need the barbed wire. I've got water on all sides, as you can see below:

I got it on a hot tip from a VP friend in the Executive Washroom.

http://www.gigharborhomeforsale.com/detailpage.asp?ID=3046&Category=Land

Jun 22, 2012 - 11:15pm
@oii - no one cares about you and your retirement - you'll die like everyone else.

As I opined before - all you politically embedded FRAUDS are doing is sucking out the advances in HEALTH and the production wealth created by generations upon generations of people before you because you can, thanks to the RANK criminality of the banksters who taught you how.

There's blood on all your hands - check your stats for the acceptable "risk of death". Welfare Queens - every one of you.

Jun 24, 2012 - 7:51am
Yep, and here's a picture of me shopping later today.

http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=welfare+queen+pictures&view=detail&id=27B7BE2AD39D42607DCB466B9D36B3C0E9D930B5

Jun 25, 2012 - 11:00am
If anyone knows the name of the Cegedim report that is mentioned in the last paragraph of this article (i.e. "...a recent Cegedim Strategic Data report showing several large drugmakers reduced DTC ad spending last year but boosted electronic detailing.), please let me know. I am interested in reading it.

Thank you.

Jun 25, 2012 - 11:03am
If you believe you are TBTF, you are a Welfare Queen.

The top and the bottom ALWAYS feasted on the Middle. Killing off the Middle proves that criminals are, indeed, as dumb as rocks.