Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

China fines Medtronic $17 million on anti-monopoly charges
Associated Press ^ | December 7, 2106 | By AP

Posted on 12/07/2016 11:35:19 PM PST by granada

BEIJING (AP) — Medical device maker Medtronic has been fined $17 million by Chinese anti-monopoly regulators in the latest effort by Beijing to force down what it sees as unreasonably high prices.

Regulators concluded Medtronic, which supplies cardiovascular, restorative, and diabetes-related medical devices, suppressed competition by enforcing minimum prices its distributors were required to charge, the government said Wednesday.

Foreign automakers, milk suppliers and other companies have faced similar penalties. Setting minimum prices is a common tactic in other markets but lawyers say Beijing appears to see them as a barrier to competition.

"Competition in China's high-value consumables and implantable medical equipment market is inadequate," said a statement by the Cabinet's planning agency. It said preventing market forces from setting prices "increases the burden on patients and damages the interests of consumers."

Business groups welcomed the passage of China's first anti-monopoly law in 2008 as a step toward clarifying operating conditions. Since then, they have said it is enforced more actively against foreign companies than against their Chinese rivals.

There have been few court rulings to clarify the application of the 2008 law. That has fed uncertainty about how it will apply to global companies that are eager to expand in the world's second-largest economy.

(Excerpt) Read more at finance.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: china; medtronic

1 posted on 12/07/2016 11:35:19 PM PST by granada
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: granada

i.e. their stuff couldn’t be copied locally.


2 posted on 12/08/2016 12:00:30 AM PST by glorgau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: granada

Communists worried about Monopolies?! That’s like Hillary Clinton worrying about vote fraud!


3 posted on 12/08/2016 1:24:23 AM PST by Slings and Arrows (My music: http://hopalongginsberg.com/ | Facebook: Hopalong Ginsberg)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: glorgau
i.e. their stuff couldn’t be copied locally.

I've got a Medtronic device they'd love to copy.

It's a pacemaker nicknamed "The Bullet". It is the same size and shape as a .22 short cartridge. And it is embedded within my heart...having been placed there without invasive surgery.

I was the first to receive it in my part of the country, probably one of the first half-dozen-or-so nationally. It is a simply incredible piece of technology.

You might say that I took a bullet in the heart...in order to stay alive.

And a committed Medtronics supporter...

4 posted on 12/08/2016 2:21:09 AM PST by okie01 ( The MainStream Media: IGNORANCE ON PARADE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: glorgau

If they can get their hands on it, they can copy it.

They can get their hands on anything in country, so it probably has already been copied.

The med device market in asia is stiffly regulated to x number of implants per year, regardless of how many people actually need or would benefit from them. The number of implants allowed varies by country, but it is tightly controlled.

I do work for a competitor of Medtronic.


5 posted on 12/08/2016 4:13:32 AM PST by jurroppi1 (The only thing you "pass to see what's in it" is a stool sample. h/t MrB)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: granada

Design copy must be complete. I am sure the free traitors are proud.


6 posted on 12/08/2016 4:22:19 AM PST by cp124 (America Survives)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jurroppi1
I do work for a competitor of Medtronic.

I worked in the same field, albeit with the export of US made Class I devices, and both minimum and maximum pricing policies were fairly common. Hard to monitor and enforce, but common. In the U.S. at least they're also generally recognized as legal. It's one of the few ways a company can try to protect its brand value and its authorized dealers from grey market sharks. The Chinese just don't play by the same set of rules. And you're right, if they can get their hands on a product they'll copy it down to the flaws in the housing mold.

7 posted on 12/08/2016 5:35:10 AM PST by katana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: granada

Their crap is CRAPPY, do not buy into their products. Badly functional products that can cause harm.


8 posted on 12/08/2016 7:43:18 AM PST by GailA (Ret. SCPO wife: Merry CHRISTmas, Happy Birthday JESUS CHRIST, suck it up buttercup you lost)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: granada

China copies everything then stiffs the original manufacturers. BMW brought a suit and was told the copy was different enaough so they lost in ‘court’.


9 posted on 12/08/2016 1:18:10 PM PST by minnesota_bound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: granada

There goes my bonus.


10 posted on 12/08/2016 1:24:47 PM PST by toast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson