A recent article in the Wall Street Times rocked the pharmaceutical world by claiming that one of the world’s biggest drug companies, Pfizer, will be leaving its longtime Manhattan headquarters. Headline Only Readers grabbed up this tidbit without reading the rest of the article and claimed the company was leaving the city entirely. Chicken Littles, for the win.
In fact, the article simply stated Pfizer would be moving to a new office building. They’re not even leaving the borough, much less the Big Apple. But there is an interesting tidbit buried in the Official Story. While Pfizer has not found new digs yet - and won’t complete the move until at least 2019 in any case - the company has said it plans to lease rather than buy the real estate in .
Is that move a harbinger of the company’s expectation that things in the U.S. medical market are about to change?
That’s not the reason they’re giving for the move. According to various media reports, Pfizer is moving to “bring our building up to modern standards…” which will “…take a significant investment … but in terms of capital investment, that’s not where we want to focus.”
So the company wants to invest in making its working areas more modern rather than pushing money into brick and mortar infrastructure and real property. Fair enough, but is that all? Not exactly. In an internal memo, Pfizer let the other shoe drop, saying a “substantial majority” of the current employees will stay in Manhattan, while others would be relocated to “locations in the tri-state area.”
Does that mean there could be some changes in the works for Pfizer, as well as some difficult management decisions and rough headlines? It’s possible, and that brings us back to the question about the medical industry. American consumers are becoming more cognizant of what drug makers are making, doing, selling and, most importantly, how they’re profiting. If the ACA has done anything, it has made more people aware of what the drugs they use actually cost.
These costs have created a groundswell of negative PR for pharmaceutical companies like Pfizer. From time to time, this negative feeling boils over or, in some cases, explodes in a volcanic firestorm of rage. This is a dynamic the folks at Pfizer, and other drug makers, cannot afford to ignore any longer. They need to prepare for the change that is coming, and the company that guesses best what that change will look like can set itself up to win in the new status quo that is coming sooner rather than later.
A recent article in the Wall Street Times rocked the pharmaceutical world by claiming that one of the world’s biggest drug companies, Pfizer, will be leaving its longtime Manhattan headquarters. Headline Only Readers grabbed up this tidbit without reading the rest of the article and claimed the company was leaving the city entirely. Chicken Littles, for the win.
In fact, the article simply stated Pfizer would be moving to a new office building. They’re not even leaving the borough, much less the Big Apple. But there is an interesting tidbit buried in the Official Story. While Pfizer has not found new digs yet - and won’t complete the move until at least 2019 in any case - the company has said it plans to lease rather than buy the real estate in .
Is that move a harbinger of the company’s expectation that things in the U.S. medical market are about to change?
That’s not the reason they’re giving for the move. According to various media reports, Pfizer is moving to “bring our building up to modern standards…” which will “…take a significant investment … but in terms of capital investment, that’s not where we want to focus.”
So the company wants to invest in making its working areas more modern rather than pushing money into brick and mortar infrastructure and real property. Fair enough, but is that all? Not exactly. In an internal memo, Pfizer let the other shoe drop, saying a “substantial majority” of the current employees will stay in Manhattan, while others would be relocated to “locations in the tri-state area.”
Does that mean there could be some changes in the works for Pfizer, as well as some difficult management decisions and rough headlines? It’s possible, and that brings us back to the question about the medical industry. American consumers are becoming more cognizant of what drug makers are making, doing, selling and, most importantly, how they’re profiting. If the ACA has done anything, it has made more people aware of what the drugs they use actually cost.
These costs have created a groundswell of negative PR for pharmaceutical companies like Pfizer. From time to time, this negative feeling boils over or, in some cases, explodes in a volcanic firestorm of rage. This is a dynamic the folks at Pfizer, and other drug makers, cannot afford to ignore any longer. They need to prepare for the change that is coming, and the company that guesses best what that change will look like can set itself up to win in the new status quo that is coming sooner rather than later.TagsEditorialPR Insights & Public Relations StrategyPR NewsPR Perspectives & Public Relations Commentary
Written by
EPR Editorial Team
EPR Editorial Team - Author at Everything Public Relations
Other news
See all
EPR Editorial Team · 05/09/2026
25 U.S. Wellness Campaigns That Defined Digital Marketing—and the Agencies Quietly Powering Them
Wellness in the United States isn’t just a category anymore. It’s a culture.From mental health apps to fitness ecosystems, from supplements to sleep platforms, wellness brands have mastered digital marketing in ways traditional healthcare never did. They move fast, speak clearly,…
Editorial Team · 05/09/2026
25 Health Brand Campaigns That Redefined Digital Marketing
Health has always been emotional. Healthcare digital marketing, historically, has not.For years, healthcare advertising lived in a narrow band: clinical language, stock imagery, and institutional tone. It informed, but rarely connected. It explained, but rarely engaged.Then somet…
Editorial Team · 05/09/2026
Financial Services 2026: The GENIUS Act, AI-Driven Workforce Restructuring, and the Institutionalization of Digital Assets
EPR Financial Services Intelligence tracks the regulatory shifts and market dynamics defining banking, asset management, and digital assets. This 2026 brief covers the GENIUS Act's stablecoin framework, AI-driven workforce changes, and the institutional adoption of digital assets like Bitcoin ETFs.
Never Miss a Headline
Daily PR headlines, weekly long-form analysis, and our proprietary research drops — straight to your inbox.