影音下載電影電視劇使用幫助

Follow-On

Biologics:Economic,

Innovation

and

PolicyReflectionsThe

Fuqua

School

of

BusinessDuke

UniversityNovember

6-7,

2008av72電影Charles

DiLibertiV.P.

Global

Pharmacokineticsand

Bioequivalence,Barr

Laboratories,

Inc.“Commercial

Opportunities

andChallenges

for

Follow-onBiologics”Presentation

OverviewGeneric

BiologicsCommercial

Opportunities

&

SavingsScience

&

Technology

ChallengesRegulatory

&

Intellectual

PropertyIssuesSummaryCommercial

Opportunities

&SavingsBenefitsofGeneric

CompetitionSignificant

Cost

Saving

OpportunitiesSavings

for

consumers

and

taxpayers

Generic

CompetitionInnovationBrand

companies

will

have

the

incentiveneeded

to

vigorously

pursue

newbiologicsIncreasing

Significance

of

BiologicProducts

US

Biologic

Revenues–

1997:

$17.4

Billion–

2007:

$

65.2

Billion*

400

Biologics

&

Vaccines

Currently

inClinical

Trials

Targeting

>200

Diseases**

Between

2003

and

2006,

biologicsrepresented

24%

of

all

new

chemical

entitiesapproved

by

the

US***

Sales

of

biotech

products

in

the

US

showedan

annual

growth

rate

of

20%

between

2001and

2006

compared

with

6%

to

8%

in

thepharmaceutical

market****

Ernst

&

Young**

Biotechnology

Industry

Organization***

Journal

of

American

Medical

Association,

October

22,

2008High

Cost

of

Brand

BiologicsEnbrel

(Arthritis)

$20,000*Cerezyme

(Gaucher

Disease)

$200,000**Remicade

(Arthritis)

$35,000-$66,000***ion

Wiese

C*Baltimore

Sun

January

28,

2007**Bloomberg

January

11,

2007***Philadelphia

Inquirer

September

19,

2006Significant

Cost

SavingsOpportunityGeneric

Biologics

Represent

Significant

Cost

SavingsOpportunities

and

Stimulate

InnovationEpogenMarket

Before

Generic

Launch:

$2.5Billion*Brand/Year

Today:$9,000**GenericSavings/Yearassuming

50%

savings:$4,500EnbrelMarket

Before

Generic

Launch:

$2.7Billion*Brand/Year

Today:$20,000***GenericSavings/Yearassuming

50%

savings:$10,000*ABN

AMRO

February

2008**National

Journal

February

10,

2007***Baltimore

Sun

January

28,

2007Generic

CompetitionPrice

Drops

as

Number

of

Manufacturers

IncreasesMarket

Size

for

Select

BiologicProductsProduct2006

Sales($

Millions)Patent

ExpirationAranesp

(Darbapotein

alfa)$2,7902016Enbrel

(Etanercept)$2,7362012Epogen

(Epotein

alfa)$2,5112004Remicade

(Infliximab)$2,3552013Rituxan

(Rituximab)$2,0712013Eprex

(Ortho

Biotech)$2,0642004Avastin

(Bevacizumab)$1,7462019Rebetron

(Ribavirin

&

Interferonalfa-2B)$1,3612001Lantus

(Insulin

glargine)$1,2602015Source:

ABN

AMRO

February

2008Market

Size

for

Select

BiologicProductsProduct2006

Sales($

Millions)PatentExpirationHumira

(Adalimumab)$1,1762013Avonex

(Interferon

beta-1a)$1,0222003Cerezyme

(Imiglucerase)$1,0072010Neupogen

(Filgrastim)$8302013Humalog

(Insulin

lispro)$8112013Ceredase

(alglucerase)$5372001Rebif

(Interferon

beta-1a)$4932005Neulasta

(Pegfilgrastim)$4932015Source:

ABN

AMRO

February

2008Perspective:Historical

Growth

in

SubstitutionLL

stimatesGeneric

BiologicsOpportunityGeneric

Pharmaceuticals

-

A

Vital

Part

in

HealthCare

System

Approximately

67%

of

the

Prescriptions

Dispensed

in

theUS

Are

Generics*BiologicsWorldwide

Market

Estimated

around

$75

Billion*Per

Patient

Cost

for

Biologic

Products

Can

Exceed$100,000

Per

YearGeneric

Biologics

US

Consumers

Could

Save

$43

Billion

Between

2011

and2020**

Estimated

Value

of

Biologics

that

have

already

lost

PatentProtection:

$10

Billion***

Estimated

Value

of

Biologics

to

lose

Patent

Protection

inthe

Next

Ten

Years:

$20

Billion****

IMS

Health**Citizens

Against

Government

Waste

(CAGW)

Release,

May

2,

2007***ABN

AMRO

February

2008Science

&

Technology

ChallengesScientific

Challenges

forGeneric

BiologicsCharacterizationSafety

AssessmentTherapeutic

EquivalenceManufacturing

ControlsGeneric

BiologicsGeneric

biologics,

sometimes

called

follow-on

biologics(FOBs),

are

protein

products

that

are

pharmaceuticallyand

therapeutically

equivalentGeneric

biologics

do

not

utilize

the

reference

product’sproprietary

process,

specifications

or

clinical

dataFor

established

products,

therapeutic

equivalence

can

bedemonstrated

usingIn

vitro

studies

and/orPharmacokinetics

and/orSurrogate

markers

and/orClinical

outcomesdepending

on

the

characteristics

of

the

proteinInter2804MonoclonalAntibody21112

atomsrDNA

Technology

Drugs:BiologicsSize

Does

Matter...124

atomsChemical

Drug:Misinformation

CampaignAbout

Generic

BiologicsMyth:

Raw

materials

of

biologic

origin

are

hardto

source

and

only

brand

biotechs

knowwhere

to

find

them.Reality:

Raw

materials

are

available

today

formany

generic

biologics

including

insulin,G-CSF,

erythropoietin,

interferons,

etc.Misinformation

CampaignAbout

Generic

BiologicsMyth:Biologics

are

too

complicated

to

becharacterized.Reality:Numerous

highly

sophisticated

analyticalmethods

have

been

developed,

permittingcomplete

characterization.

More

advances

willbe

achieved

each

year.Misinformation

CampaignAbout

Generic

BiologicsMyth:Generic

companies

lack

the

medical,

scientific,and

technical

ability

to

produce

safe

andeffective

biotech

products.Reality:Generic

companies

can

and

do

make

safe

andeffective

biologics.

Many

safe

and

effectivebiologics

currently

are

made

in

controlledenvironments

and

marketed

by

genericcompanies

outside

the

U.S.Generic

Biologics

(Biosimilars)in

the

EUThe

ability

to

make

generic

biologics

is

far

froma

theoretical

possibility.In

2004

EU

issued

EMEA

Draft

Guidelines

forfour

classes

of

generic

biologics,

referred

to

asbiosimiliars

in

the

EU.Since

2004,

the

EU

has

approved

severalbiosimilar

products.EU

Biosimilar

ApprovalsDRUGSandoz’s

Omnitrope?(somatropin)

EU

MARKET

AUTHORIZATION

DATEApril

12,

2006BioPartners’

Valtropin?(somatropin)April

24,

2006Sandoz’s

Binocrit?Medice’s

Abseamed?Hexal

Biotech’s

Epoetin

alfa

Hexal?(recombinant

human

erythropoietin

alfa)August

28,

2007Stada

Arzneimittel’s

Silapo?Hospira’s

Retacrit?(epoetin

zeta)December

18,

2007Teva’s

Tevagrastim?Ratiopharm’s

Ratiograstim?Ratiopharm’s

Filgrastim

ratiopharm?CT

Arzneimittel’s

Biograstim?(human

G-CSF)September

15,

2008current

through

September

25,

2008FDA

Approves

Sandoz’sOmnitrope

There

has

been

some

movement

in

the

USto

approve

generic

biologics.FDA

approved

Omnitrope

in

May

2006.

FDA

stated,

however,

that

this

approvaldoes

not

create

a

pathway

for

all

genericbiologics.

Omnitrope

referenced

a

brandproduct

(Genotropin)

approved

under

theFDCA.Misinformation

CampaignAbout

Generic

BiologicsMyth:“The

Product

is

the

Process.”Reality:“Old

models

and

mantras

are

inhibitingprogress

–

the

product

is

no

longer

theprocess.”

(Statement

of

Mathias

Hukkelhoven,Ph.D.,

Senior

V.P.,

Global

Head,

DrugRegulatory

Affairs,

Novartis,

Sept.

14-15,

2004).Misinformation

CampaignAbout

Generic

BiologicsReality

(continued):Biotech

products

can

be

fully

characterized

andcompared

analytically.Biotech

Firms

routinely

justify

their

own

processchanges

via

FDA

approved

comparabilityprotocols.Development

ofGeneric

BiologicsStrictly

Controlled

Process

(Validated)Extensive

Analytical

Comparability(Characterization)Comparable

Biological

Activity(In

Vitro/In

Vivo)Non-Clinical

Comparability

(Safety,Immunogenicity...)Comparable

pharmacokinetics

(bloodconcentration

profile)Comparable

Clinical

Efficacy

and

SafetyDevelopment

ConsiderationsProduct

ComplexityFrom

Development

To

ClinicalCharacterizationBiosynthesis,

In-Process

and

Finished

ProductNomenclatureLack

of

Strict

Definition,

INN

IssueHigh

Cost

of

DevelopmentMarketing

Requirements

and

CostPost-Marketing

Safety

SurveillanceIP

StrengthRegulatory

&

Intellectual

ProperIssuesChallenges

for

GenericBiologicsRegulatoryCongress

needs

to

create

an

abbreviatedapproval

pathwayIntellectual

PropertyBrand

exclusivityGeneric

exclusivityResolution

of

patent

litigation

prior

to

generilaunchRegulatory

Issues

Regulatory

Framework

Complicated

ByExistence

of

Two

Laws

For

BiologicsFDCA

for

NDA

ProductsPHSA

for

BLA

ProductsNDA

ProductsGeneric

Pathway

Exits,

But

FDA

ImplementationIs

UnclearBLA

ProductsThree

Issues

Need

To

Be

ResolvedMechanics

of

Approval

Pathway

Need

To

Be

DefinedBrand/Generic

ExclusivityAn

Efficient

Patent

Dispute

Resolution

MechanismAbbreviatedGeneric

PathwayUnder

PHSAA

Generic

Pathway

Should:Give

FDA

Authority

To

Decide

ApprovalRequirements

For

Generic

ProductsAdopt

Exclusivity

Provisions

No

GreaterThan

Those

Found

In

Hatch-WaxmanPermit

Pre-Launch

Adjudication

of

CertainPatent

DisputesAbbreviatedGeneric

PathwayUnder

PHSA

FDA

should

be

permitted

to

decide

whattests/data

are

necessary

for

approval

as

acomparable

or

interchangeable

generic.

Congress

should

not

impose

unnecessarybarriers

to

generic

approvals,

e.g.,mandatory

guidance

or

rule-makingrequirements;

mandatory

clinical

trials;requirement

that

generics

seek

approval

forall

approved

brand

uses.AbbreviatedGeneric

PathwayUnder

PHSA

Congress

should

carefully

consider

anynew,

additional

exclusivities

awardedto

brand

biologics.

Considerable

incentives

already

existfor

brand

biotech

companies.Existing

Incentives

for

BrandBiotech

CompaniesINCENTIVEPatent

Term

RestorationDrug

manufacturers

get

back

up

to

5

years

of

time

lostto

product

testing

and

approval

delays.PTO

Patent

RestorationIf

the

patent

approval

is

delayed

by

PTO’s

fault,patentee

gets

back

each

day

in

excess

of

3

years.Orphan

Drug

Exclusivity7

years

of

exclusivity

for

drugs

treating

rare

diseases.General

Business

R&DTax

CreditAllows

manufacturers

to

claim

20%

of

qualifiedspending

in

the

U.S.

above

the

base

amount.Puerto

Rico

Tax

CreditAllows

U.S.

corporations

to

exempt

40%

of

incomefrom

business

operations

owned

in

P.R.,

U.S.V.I.,

etc.Foreign

Tax

CreditAllows

U.S.

corporations

to

claim

limited

tax

credit

fortaxes

paid

to

foreign

governments.URAAPatent

Term

RestorationThe

Uruguay

Rounds

Agreement

Act

(“URAA”)gives

drug

companies

a

20

year

patent

from

the

date

itwas

filed

(rather

than

17

years

from

issue).AbbreviatedGeneric

PathwayUnder

PHSA

If

Congress

decides

to

give

additionalexclusivities

to

brand

companies,Hatch-Waxman

establishes

themaximum

length

and

number

ofexclusivities

that

can

be

justified:5

years

for

truly

new,

innovative

products3

years

for

certain

improvements

to

already-approved

brand

productsAbbreviatedGeneric

PathwayUnder

PHSA

Unlike

the

incentives

that

already

existo

develop

new

brand

biologics,

noincentives

exist

to

develop

genericbiologics.

Generic

biologics

legislation

shouldinclude

an

incentive,

just

as

Hatch-Waxman

does

for

small

moleculedrugs,

for

the

development

of

genericbiologics.AbbreviatedGeneric

PathwayUnder

PHSA

Effective

generic

biologics

legislatiowill

include

a

mechanism

forexpeditious

resolution

of

patentdisputes.

Hatch-Waxman

has

shown

that

patentmechanisms

can

be

abused

to

delaygeneric

market

entry.AbbreviatedGeneric

PathwayUnder

PHSA

Only

those

patent

disputes

that

wouldcause

the

generic

company

to

delaylaunch

should

be

litigatedsimultaneously

with

the

FDA

approvalprocess.

Disputes

over

any

other

patent

that

thebrand

owns

should

wait

until

thegeneric

company

actually

launches.AbbreviatedGeneric

PathwayUnder

PHSA

Such

a

process

ensures

that

brandcompanies

cannot

use

weak

orsuspect

patents

to

delay

genericmarket

entry.

At

the

same

time,

the

process

protectsall

legitimate

patent

rights

–

it

allowlitigation

over

all

patents,

but

controlwhen

that

litigation

can

start

so

thatgeneric

marketing

isn’t

undulydelayed.Negotiations

Are

OngoingMuch

Momentum

Gained

in

DebateOptimistic

for

Ultimate

ResolutionRegulatory

IssuesU.S.

Proposed

LegislationSummaryGeneric

Biologics

in

USSignificant

Momentum

in

US

Congress

Failed

to

Pass

in

2007-08

Session;Likely

to

Be

On

Legislative

Agenda

in2009

Strong

Consensus

for

Generic

BiologicsAmong

Payers,

Consumer

GroupsDebate

Centers

On

Three

IssuesMechanics

of

PathwayHow

to

Resolve

IP

IssuesExclusivity

IssueBroad,

Bipartisan

Support

for

aWorkable

Pathway

for

Generic

BiologicsGroups

in

SupportConsumer

GroupsAARPAFL-CIOAFSCMECalifornia

Public

Employees’

RetirementSystem

(CalPERS)Consumer

Federationof

AmericaConsumers

UnionFamilies

USANational

Consumers

LeagueNational

Multiple

Sclerosis

Society(MS)National

Research

Centerfor

Women&

FamiliesNational

Organizationfor

Rare

Disorders(NORD)National

Women"s

Health

NetworkPharmaceutical

Care

ManagementPublic

CitizenService

Employees

International

Union(SEIU)Spastic

Paraplegia

FoundationUSPublic

Interest

Research

GroupUnited

Auto

Workers(UAW)Groups

in

OppositionBIOPhRMABusiness

GroupsCaterpillar,

Inc.DaimlerChrysler

CorporationEastman

Kodak

CompanyFord

Motor

CompanyGeneral

Motors

CorporationHealth

PlansAetna

Inc.America’s

Health

Insurance

PlansBlue

Cross

Blue

Shield

AssociationHumanaKaiser

PermanenteUnited

Health

GroupWellpointPharmaceutical

StakeholdersApotexBen

VenueBarr

LaboratoriesCaremarkExpress

ScriptsGeneric

Pharmaceutical

Association(GPHA)HospiraMedcoS?tMaomteentGaovernorsNational

Associationof

Chain

Drug

StoresNational

Associationof

Health

UnderwritersPharmaceutical

Care

Management

Association(PCMA)Ranbaxy

PharmaceuticalsSandozTeva

Pharmaceuticals

USAWatson

PharmaceuticalsWalgreens

CompanyStateGovernorsVermontWisconsinMinnesotaKansasMontanaVirginiaWest

VirginiaMississippiWashington如何在媒介購(gòu)買中完美的實(shí)現(xiàn)媒介計(jì)劃？沒有愚蠢的問題！愚蠢的是有問題而不問！Lorem

ipsum

dolor

sit

amet如何在媒介購(gòu)買中完美的實(shí)現(xiàn)媒介計(jì)劃？(一)什么是媒介購(gòu)買(二)怎樣定義“完美的媒介計(jì)劃”、媒介計(jì)劃是什么、怎樣評(píng)估它的目標(biāo)？(三)怎樣完美地實(shí)現(xiàn)媒介計(jì)劃？(

一

) 什么是媒介購(gòu)買？與媒介就價(jià)格、服務(wù)及其他合作事宜進(jìn)行談判與媒介溝通、聯(lián)系購(gòu)買及執(zhí)行一切有關(guān)行政工作(如訂單、付錢等)與媒介計(jì)劃、客戶部及客戶溝通，反饋訊息及提供媒介機(jī)會(huì)制作媒介排期媒介購(gòu)買的演變及發(fā)展與媒介談判與媒介溝通、聯(lián)系購(gòu)買以前媒介購(gòu)買的演變及發(fā)展向客戶溝通提供訊息及機(jī)會(huì)制作排期與媒介談判與媒介溝通、聯(lián)系購(gòu)買現(xiàn)在以前媒介購(gòu)買的演變及發(fā)展獨(dú)立媒介公司：-與客戶直接聯(lián)系-提供專業(yè)咨詢及顧客服務(wù)-獨(dú)立的營(yíng)運(yùn)體系自負(fù)盈虧現(xiàn)在/將來向客戶溝通提供訊息及機(jī)會(huì)制作排期與媒介談判與媒介溝通、聯(lián)系購(gòu)買現(xiàn)在以前被動(dòng)只與媒介及內(nèi)部溝通主動(dòng)、直接

多方面接觸、競(jìng)爭(zhēng)從被動(dòng)變成主動(dòng)媒介購(gòu)買負(fù)責(zé)制作排期的好處？對(duì)客戶媒介購(gòu)買獲得最多，最直接及最快的市場(chǎng)訊息可作出最靈活的應(yīng)變對(duì)廣告公司減少溝通時(shí)間及內(nèi)部流程加強(qiáng)客戶與媒介購(gòu)買的聯(lián)系，提高效益及競(jìng)爭(zhēng)能力(

二

) 實(shí)現(xiàn)媒介計(jì)劃的目標(biāo)目標(biāo)必須是：客觀的

(

Objective)可量度的

(Measurable), 可比較的

(Comparable)媒介計(jì)劃的目標(biāo)-

(1)-

(2)-

(3)效果(Effectiveness)成本效益(Efficiency)準(zhǔn)確(Accuracy)(

1

) 效果

(

Effectiveness

)一個(gè)媒介計(jì)劃是否有效果可以用以下客觀的量度標(biāo)準(zhǔn)去評(píng)估：有效到達(dá)率及頻率(Effective

Reach

&

Frequency)品牌知名度(

BrandAwareness)媒體比重占有率(

Share

ofVoice

)市場(chǎng)占有率(

Shareof

Market)普及率其他調(diào)研方法(

Penetration

)(

Other

research

measures

)(

2

) 具成本效益

(

Efficiency

)一個(gè)媒介計(jì)劃是否具成本效益，可以用以下客觀的量度標(biāo)準(zhǔn)去評(píng)估：千人成本(CPM)總接觸人次(GrossImpression)覆蓋率(Coverage)(

3

) 準(zhǔn)確

(

Accuracy

)在執(zhí)行時(shí)，是否準(zhǔn)確達(dá)到原本要求，可透過以下方法去評(píng)估：監(jiān)察報(bào)告

(

Monitoring

)l

漏刊、播l

錯(cuò)刊、播事后評(píng)估

(

Post

Analysis

)以實(shí)際廣告效果與計(jì)劃比較：收視率、收聽率有效到達(dá)率及頻率發(fā)行量平均暴露頻次從事后評(píng)估

(

Post

Analysis

) 累積經(jīng)驗(yàn)及教訓(xùn)例子

(

一

)

：還珠格格第一輯收視率在各地相當(dāng)高，但當(dāng)中的廣告段的收視率則很低：對(duì)于購(gòu)買第二輯的策略：盡量避免片中廣告購(gòu)買電視劇前廣告，如預(yù)算許可，考慮節(jié)目前較好的位置從事后評(píng)估

(

Post

Analysis

) 累積經(jīng)驗(yàn)及教訓(xùn)例子

(

二

)

：當(dāng)北京的“個(gè)人收視儀” 收視報(bào)告

(

People

Meter) 誕生, 中央臺(tái)的黃金時(shí)段收視率并沒有象以往“日記” 式收視報(bào)告的那樣高對(duì)于以后的策略：可能考慮增強(qiáng)各地區(qū)的投放量減少在中央臺(tái)黃金時(shí)段投放，考慮其他時(shí)段(

三

) 怎樣完美地實(shí)現(xiàn)媒介計(jì)劃？(1)效果l

具創(chuàng)意的、嶄新的媒介點(diǎn)子(Creative)l

對(duì)市場(chǎng)、品牌及媒介了解(Informative

andKnowledgeable)具創(chuàng)意的媒介點(diǎn)子-

創(chuàng)新的媒介點(diǎn)子：利用新媒體：如

： 飛艇在空中巡走在網(wǎng)上以一元拍賣汽車在公車

/ 地鐵把手作廣告利用舊媒體：如： 同一時(shí)間在不同電視頻道播放相同的廣告(

Horizontal

Block

Buy

)具創(chuàng)意的媒介點(diǎn)子震撼的媒介點(diǎn)子通過增加播放量增加沖擊力(Impact):在雜志上的連續(xù)廣告(Consecutive

Buy)壟斷媒體作地鐵車身廣告創(chuàng)意效果?PART?01對(duì)市場(chǎng)、品牌及媒介的了解市場(chǎng)、品牌

：-

有效利用市場(chǎng)及品牌數(shù)據(jù)：

地區(qū)銷售分布：( 品牌發(fā)展指數(shù)BDI

)

地區(qū)預(yù)算是否合理？

地區(qū)是否應(yīng)在具潛力的市場(chǎng)多投預(yù)算？

地區(qū)是否應(yīng)在媒介成本較低的市場(chǎng)多投預(yù)算？對(duì)市場(chǎng)、品牌及媒介的了解媒介

：不同電視臺(tái)的互相覆蓋

：

省臺(tái)和市臺(tái)的運(yùn)用及分配不同報(bào)紙對(duì)於不同層次或地區(qū)互相覆蓋

：

例子

： 北京晚報(bào)、北京日?qǐng)?bào)與北京青年報(bào)

預(yù)算

：

50萬左右

目標(biāo)

： 有效頻率

/ 到達(dá)率

：

3+/

40%

目標(biāo)受眾

： 男性25歲以上各大市場(chǎng)電視

(

30”) 千人成本比較(RMB)1城市 千人成本北京1782海口1653合肥1364西安1005福州916石家莊897沈陽71省臺(tái)與市臺(tái)收視點(diǎn)之比較浙江省目標(biāo)受眾群：女性20-45歲收視率來源：央視-索福瑞媒介收視報(bào)告(99年4月30日至7月31日)報(bào)紙不同配合目標(biāo)收眾：女性18-35歲資料來源：TGI(目標(biāo)群眾指數(shù))日期：98年12月-99年11月(

三

) 怎樣完美地實(shí)現(xiàn)媒介計(jì)劃(

2

)

成本效益制作媒介排期的技術(shù)及能力談判能力制作媒介排期的技術(shù)及能力同等預(yù)算，但由于制作媒介排期的技術(shù)不一樣，可以有很大的差別例子一： 北京的電視投放目標(biāo)受眾： 女性 20-45

歲比較方式： 比較當(dāng)頻率為3+時(shí)的有效到達(dá)率購(gòu)買策略： 選擇一： 北京及北京有線的電視劇、綜藝節(jié)目?jī)蓚€(gè)電視的投放量較平均選擇二： 北京有線臺(tái)與選擇一類似但投放量略為倚重選擇三： 除黃金時(shí)段外，還利用北京有線臺(tái)的白天廣告套餐預(yù)算： 所有排期均控制在60萬以內(nèi)表現(xiàn)比較---北京收視報(bào)告來源：尼爾森北京收視報(bào)告(99年5月10日至7月31日)例子二： 天津的電視投放目標(biāo)受眾： 女性 20-45歲比較方式： 女性 20-45歲購(gòu)買策略： 選擇一： 天津一套及二套晚間電視劇，投放策略重天津一套選擇二：天津一套及二套晚間電視劇，投放策略重天津二套選擇三： 除黃金時(shí)段外，利用天津一套中午電視劇預(yù)算： 43萬左右表現(xiàn)比較---天津收視報(bào)告來源：尼爾森北京收視報(bào)告(99年5月10日至7月31日)談判能力及技巧在大學(xué)里，漂亮女生替男生在飯?zhí)门抨?duì)打飯的例子談判能力總體的媒介表現(xiàn)及效果談判行為模式彼此關(guān)系高中低低高容忍建立友好關(guān)系合作有創(chuàng)意的解決問題以使雙方都贏后退能拿多少拿多少戰(zhàn)勝不惜一切取得勝利妥協(xié)縮小差異，折中中關(guān)注談判結(jié)果與媒介談判的特性媒介位置具極強(qiáng)的時(shí)間性媒介需要在特定的時(shí)間內(nèi)，盡量把位置賣掉，否則位置會(huì)浪費(fèi)月餅銷售的例子與媒介談判的特性媒介位置具極強(qiáng)的時(shí)間性媒介需要在特定的時(shí)間內(nèi)，盡量把位置賣掉，