TITLE

Lowe holds onto Xenical on the 2nd time around

AUTHOR(S)
Gleason, Mark; Hodges, Jane
PUB. DATE
December 1996
SOURCE
Advertising Age;12/2/1996, Vol. 67 Issue 49, p8
SOURCE TYPE
Trade Publication
DOC. TYPE
Article
ABSTRACT
This article reports on the selection of Lowe & Partners/SMS of New York by Roche Laboratories to handle the launch of its anti-obesity prescription drug, Xenical, in 1996. This account costs $45 million. However, for Lieber, Levett, Koenig, Farese & Babcock, Roche's decision is a setback. Roche had awarded Xenical to the Lowe units, but when five top executives left Lowe Direct a week later to form Lieber Levett, Roche began to reconsider. Meanwhile, Lieber Levett made a pitch for Xenical, and Lowe filed a suit against the breakaway shop alleging theft of confidential materials and unfair competition. But then the suit was settled out of court.
ACCESSION #
9612058054

 

Related Articles

  • Xenical endures ad silence as FDA forces alterations. Goetzl, David // Advertising Age;11/8/1999, Vol. 70 Issue 46, p40 

    This article reports on the changes made by U.S. drug company Hoffmann-La Roche to the direct-to-consumer advertising campaign for its obesity drug Xenical as of November 1999. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) charged the commercial, valued at $70 million to $75 million, lacked fair...

  • Roche sheds Lowe as Xenical agency. Goetzl, David; Snyder Bulik, Beth // Advertising Age;4/17/2000, Vol. 71 Issue 17, p1 

    This article reports on the decision of Hoffman-La Roche to replace the Lowe Group as the advertising agency for weight loss drug Xenical in April 2000. The account for Xenical includes an estimated $80 million direct-to-consumer business as well as physician-targeted advertising. One hurdle...

  • Xenical ads lack balance.  // Healthy Weight Journal;May/Jun2000, Vol. 14 Issue 3, p35 

    Deals with the letter made by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to Hoffman-LaRoche Inc. on the television advertisement of its Xenical or orlistat drug. FDA complaint on the advertisement's imbalances; Action taken by the company on the complaint.

  • Xenical account moves to Y&R.  // Medical Marketing & Media;Aug2000, Vol. 35 Issue 8, p24 

    Reports that Hoffmann-La Roche has moved its account for Xenical to Y&R Advertising. Previous handling of the account by Lowe Consumer Healthcare; Awarding of the first professional promotion for Xenical to Sudler and Hennessey.

  • Roche Kicks Off Review for Xenical Fat Drug. McMains, Andrew // Adweek Eastern Edition;4/17/2000, Vol. 41 Issue 16, p4 

    Reports on Roche Laboratories has launched a review of the Xenical account at Lowe Consumer Healthcare. Creative and media duties in play; Potential side effects of Xenical.

  • Roche commits $75M to Xenical DTC campaign.  // Drug Store News;11/29/99, Vol. 21 Issue 19, p17 

    Discusses the launching of the television direct-to-consumer (DTC) program for Xenical, one of the largest DTC spends in the industry by Hoffman-La Roche Inc. Overview of the action taken by Hoffman to carry out the program; Role of the Indian Medical Society; Focus of the television campaigns.

  • Roche Kicks Off Review for Xenical. McMains, Andrew // Adweek Midwest Edition;04/17/2000, Vol. 41 Issue 16, p86 

    Reports the launching of a review of Xenical account by Roche Laboratories company. Estimated budget for the account; Reason for the decline in sales of the drug.

  • Xenical ad campaign planned.  // Medical Marketing & Media;Mar2001, Vol. 36 Issue 3, p24 

    Reports on the plans of Roche Laboratories to schedule the follow-up advertising campaign for Xenical. Inclusion of informational advertisements in the introductory campaign; Emphasis of the campaign on the health problem associated with overweight; Presentation on the side effects of the drug.

  • DDMAC: Roche's Tasmar promos mislead.  // Medical Marketing & Media;Oct2001, Vol. 36 Issue 10, p34 

    Reports on the misleading information presented in the promotional materials for the Tasmar tablets of Roche Laboratories. Failure to include risk information; Assessment of boxed warning; Need for patient monitoring.

Share

Read the Article

Courtesy of THE LIBRARY OF VIRGINIA

Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics