Business
Still life of Ozempic and Wegovy with weight scale.
(Michael Siluk/Getty Images)

Lawsuit alleges Lilly, Novo locked up telehealth to kill compounded GLP-1s

Novo Nordisk CEO Mike Doustdar estimated that around 1.5 million US patients are using compounded versions of the company’s drugs.

Strive Specialties, one of the largest compounding pharmacies in the country, accused Eli Lilly and Novo Nordisk of locking up telehealth companies they partner with in an effort to cut off businesses like them from the GLP-1 market.

Telehealth is one of the primary ways patients access weight-loss medications. Novo and Lilly have partnerships with companies like Ro, Weight Watchers, and LifeMD to distribute branded versions of their weight-loss drugs.

According to Strive, those partnerships bar those telehealth companies from working with compounders, which make bespoke or “personalized” versions of Lilly and Novo’s patented drugs — often for lower prices than the branded version sold by the drugmakers. The drugmakers have argued compounders simply mass-produce copies of their patented drugs with unnecessary tweaks.

“These agreements limit both prescriber choice and patient access to the medications that would most benefit the individual patient,” Strive said in a lawsuit filed Wednesday.

The lawsuit cites Novo’s short-lived partnership with Hims & Hers. Novo abruptly called off the deal with Hims because it continued to sell compounded versions of its blockbuster weight-loss shot, Wegovy. (Hims contracts with Strive to fulfill some of its prescriptions.)

Strive Pharmacy screenshot
A screenshot from Strive Specialties’ website. Semaglutide is the active ingredient in Novo Nordisk’s Ozempic and Wegovy (Sherwood News)

Novo did not immediately respond to a request for comment. A spokesperson for Lilly called Strive’s lawsuit “an attempt to shift focus away from its own conduct.”

Lilly sued Strive last year, accusing it of false and deceptive online marketing. That lawsuit was dismissed in October after a judge said it did not have jurisdiction to sue in Delaware. Lilly refiled the suit later that month in Arizona, where Strive is based.

Compounders like Strive were supposed to stop mass-producing copies of GLP-1s earlier this year once the FDA no longer classified the drugs as being in a shortage, but some continue to advertise “personalized” or “microdosed” versions that are, in theory or in practice, slightly different than the meds the big drugmakers sell. They are also significantly cheaper than branded drugs, though Novo and Lilly have slashed their cash-pay prices to make the drugs more accessible.

At the JPMorgan Healthcare Conference this week, Novo CEO Mike Doustdar estimated that around 1.5 million US patients are using compounded versions of the company’s drugs.

“It’s not because this 1.5 million patients like to have unsafe, knock-off versions of our products,” he said Monday. “They [compounders] grabbed a part of the consumers that simply were price-sensitive to the whole thing.”

More Business

See all Business
business

The Trump administration is reportedly planning a 50% made-in-America requirement for USMCA tariff relief

Qualifying for USMCA-related lower tariffs may soon require more US-made vehicle components, according to reporting by The Wall Street Journal.

The Trump administration is reportedly planning to introduce a 50% US content requirement for vehicles covered by the trade pact to receive lower tariffs. The content would be measured by cost, according to the WSJ.

There currently isn’t any US-specific requirement for those lower tariff rates, but in order to receive preferential tariffs, vehicles are must contain at least 75% regional content (components made in North America). Per Reuters reporting, the Trump admin is seeking to raise the regional requirement to 82%.

These reported plans are subject to change as the US negotiates USMCA terms with Mexico over the next few months.

Overall, Tesla will likely have the easiest time qualifying for any stricter requirements. The automaker’s vehicles contained the highest amount of US/Canadian content in 2025, according to American University research. Ford, GM, and Stellantis all scored lower.

Notably: the underlying government data that many domestic content measurements rely on intentionally combines US and Canadian components, so it’s difficult to know exactly how much of any given vehicle is specifically US-made.

There currently isn’t any US-specific requirement for those lower tariff rates, but in order to receive preferential tariffs, vehicles are must contain at least 75% regional content (components made in North America). Per Reuters reporting, the Trump admin is seeking to raise the regional requirement to 82%.

These reported plans are subject to change as the US negotiates USMCA terms with Mexico over the next few months.

Overall, Tesla will likely have the easiest time qualifying for any stricter requirements. The automaker’s vehicles contained the highest amount of US/Canadian content in 2025, according to American University research. Ford, GM, and Stellantis all scored lower.

Notably: the underlying government data that many domestic content measurements rely on intentionally combines US and Canadian components, so it’s difficult to know exactly how much of any given vehicle is specifically US-made.

business
Tom Jones

The $640,000 Luce makes the average Ferrari look like a bargain

Put aside the shape; put aside the smoothing out of Ferrari’s iconic sharp edges; put aside, even, the calls from former Chairman and President Luca Cordero di Montezemolo to “take the Prancing Horse off.” On the grounds of price alone, Luce detractors might have a point.

By now, many of us will have read the criticisms of Ferrari’s first fully electric vehicle, as the Luce — which was unveiled to the world earlier this week and promptly saw the company’s shares crash out in New York and Milan — gets subtly shaded by competitors online and not-so-subtly shaded by basically everyone else.

What makes all of this worse for Ferrari is that, even by the luxury car maker’s notoriously high standards, they’ve slapped a pretty hefty price tag on the Luce, and the company’s CEO, Benedetto Vigna, has already been forced to defend the €550,000 ($640,000) price point, saying yesterday that it’s “fair to pay for innovation,” per Reuters.

While Ferrari’s cars have been getting more expensive of late, as recently as 2022, Ferrari’s average revenue per car sold was around $340,000. At nearly twice that price, this new electric model is obviously proving a little much (visually, conceptually, and financially) for many loyal and long-standing fans of the Prancing Horse to stomach.

Ferrari Luce cost chart
Sherwood News

By now, many of us will have read the criticisms of Ferrari’s first fully electric vehicle, as the Luce — which was unveiled to the world earlier this week and promptly saw the company’s shares crash out in New York and Milan — gets subtly shaded by competitors online and not-so-subtly shaded by basically everyone else.

What makes all of this worse for Ferrari is that, even by the luxury car maker’s notoriously high standards, they’ve slapped a pretty hefty price tag on the Luce, and the company’s CEO, Benedetto Vigna, has already been forced to defend the €550,000 ($640,000) price point, saying yesterday that it’s “fair to pay for innovation,” per Reuters.

While Ferrari’s cars have been getting more expensive of late, as recently as 2022, Ferrari’s average revenue per car sold was around $340,000. At nearly twice that price, this new electric model is obviously proving a little much (visually, conceptually, and financially) for many loyal and long-standing fans of the Prancing Horse to stomach.

Ferrari Luce cost chart
Sherwood News

Latest Stories

Sherwood Media, LLC and Chartr Limited produce fresh and unique perspectives on topical financial news and are fully owned subsidiaries of Robinhood Markets, Inc., and any views expressed here do not necessarily reflect the views of any other Robinhood affiliate, including Robinhood Markets, Inc., Robinhood Financial LLC, Robinhood Securities, LLC, Robinhood Crypto, LLC, Robinhood Money, LLC, Robinhood U.K. Ltd, Robinhood Derivatives, LLC, Robinhood Gold, LLC, Robinhood Asset Management, LLC, Robinhood Credit, Inc., Robinhood Ventures DE, LLC and, where applicable, its managed investment vehicles.