|
Resale
price maintenance
Post-RPM prices vary 20 per cent (7 February
2002)
There is wide variation in prices
for non-prescription medicines following the abolition of resale price
maintenance.
Which? says that prices at Tesco
are the cheapest overall, with Boots being the most expensive, for a basket
of top-selling health, medicine and personal care items purchased in October
and November. Prices from 12 independent pharmacies came out just above
average.
"Generally, the supermarkets
were cheaper than the chemists," Which? says in its February
issue, adding: "It's
worth remembering, of course, that chemist stores with pharmacists on
site can offer help and advice that probably won't be available in
stores without a pharmacy counter."
Independents were found to be cheaper
than Boots for all products sampled by Which? except baby care.
2001
(13 July 2001)
Too early to say if loss of RPM has affected sales of pharmacies (PJ,
7 July) [more]
RPM defence was destined to failure [more]
Life after RPM [more]
Similar challenges face pharmacy around the world [more]
In brief
Resale price maintenance at an end [more]
Society's guidance on promotion of medicines (PDF file) here
Does the end of resale price maintenance mark the end of community pharmacy
as we know it? [more]
Statement on resale price maintenance, made during the annual general
meeting discussion forum by Mrs Sue Sharpe, Director of Professional Standards
for the Society and secretary of the Community Pharmacy Action Group [more]
NPA calls for ban on promotions and a review
of the GSL classification criteria The National Pharmaceutical
Association has called for a legal ban on three-for-two promotions for
medicines and for a review of the law and guidelines that govern the reclassification
of pharmacy medicines as safe for general sale...[more]
NPA plans post-RPM campaign to support pharmacy
The National Pharmaceutical Association is to launch a three-stranded
campaign to try to bolster the position of community pharmacy after the
abolition of resale price maintenance...[more]
Society issues advice on the price-promotion of medicines
The Royal Pharmaceutical Society has issued guidance to pharmacists on
the promotion of medicines in the light of the abolition of resale price
maintenance.
The guidance says that price promotions, special offers and three-for-two
offers are acceptable for general sale list medicines so that pharmacies
can compete on equal terms with non-pharmacy outlets which cannot be constrained
by professional ethics.
The position is more complicated where pharmacy medicines are concerned.
The Society says that pharmacists must consider the case for individual
products on their merits. Simple price promotions are acceptable, as are
three-for-two type offers where pack sizes are small and people would
legitimately be taking the medicine for an extended period of time, such
as antihistamines.
“The challenge for pharmacists is going to be deciding where to draw
the line,” The Society says. “Pharmacist owners and superintendents
must be satisfied that promotions for P medicines are acceptable and
that
they do not seek to persuade customers to obtain medicines which are
not wanted or in quantities which are substantially in excess of those
wanted.”
The full guidance is available from the Society's website
as a PDF file. To download it, click here.
OFT to seek costs from CPAG
The Office of Fair Trading is to try to recover from the Community Pharmacy
Action Group some of its legal costs in bringing resale price maintenance
to an end.
This is despite a heavy hint from the judge in the case that an application
for costs would be unlikely to succeed.
The Restrictive Practices Court, which heard the case, is bound by statute
not to award costs against any party appearing before it unless their
behaviour in the case has been unreasonable. When the CPAG withdrew its
opposition to the OFT's application for discharge of the 1970 order which
allowed RPM on medicines, the judge warned the OFT that this was a high
hurdle to overcome. He added that he would not consider the director-general
of fair trading to be in dereliction of his public duty if he decided
not to seek costs. |
