Incorporated: 1977
NAIC: 339112 Surgical and Medical Instrument Manufacturing; 339113 Surgical Appliance and Supplies Manufacturing; 339114 Dental Equipment and Supplies Manufacturing
SIC: 3841 Surgical & Medical Instruments; 3842 Surgical Appliances & Supplies; 3843 Dental Equipment & Supplies
Biomet, Inc., is one of the largest U.S. manufacturers of orthopedic medical devices and supplies. Biomet and its subsidiaries design, develop, manufacture, and market products used primarily by orthopedic specialists in surgical and non-surgical therapy, including reconstructive implants and artificial joints, fixation devices, electrical bone growth stimulators, orthopedic support devices, operating room supplies, general surgical instruments, bone cements, and bone substitutes. Acquired by a consortium of private-equity firms in September 2007, Biomet distributes its products in more than 100 countries around the world.
Located in Warsaw, Indiana, Biomet is part of a seemingly average midwestern community with a population of less than 30,000. What makes Warsaw unique, however, is its reputation as a high-tech hotbed of orthopedic equipment industry innovation. Recognized as the birthplace of the business--industry leaders Depuy Inc. and Zimmer Holdings, Inc., started operations there in 1885 and 1926, respectively--the northern Indiana town is home to three of the four largest orthopedic supplies companies in the world. It is from this pool of longstanding talent that Biomet emerged.
Venturing to Create a Better Orthopedic Equipment Company
Dane A. Miller, Jerry L. Ferguson, M. Ray Harroff, and Niles L. Noblitt were all employed in Warsaw's diverse orthopedic equipment industry in the mid-1970s. While working for different companies, they became acquainted with each other through their business dealings. As early as 1975 the four had shared their dissatisfaction with what they viewed as a stifling corporate culture within the industry, but it was not until the late 1970s that they decided to do something about it.
Ranging in age from only 27 to 39, the four entrepreneurs quit their jobs in early 1978 to start Biomet, Inc. (though the entity had been incorporated late in 1977). The company name combined "bio," referring to the body, and "met," referring to metallurgical implants. The group pooled $130,000 of its own money, received a $500,000 loan from the Small Business Administration, and secured a $100,000 line of credit from a local bank. By taking suggestions from surgeons and emphasizing short product development cycles, they believed they could improve upon artificial joint implant designs offered by the companies they abandoned. Their diverse experience in marketing, engineering, and finance could be parlayed into a formidable force in the orthopedic implants industry. Notably, Miller, who would become Biomet's CEO, brought a Ph.D. in biochemical engineering to the table.
With good reason, critics of the new venture wondered about the timing of the start-up. Shortly before the friends left their safe corporate jobs, amendments to the federal Food and Cosmetics Act placed squelching legislation on the artificial implants industry. Indeed, many industry participants believed that new safety regulations and product liability hazards had made the implant business too risky. "People laughed at us for starting up a new company after the new device legislation went into effect," Miller recalled in Indiana Business. "[Getting the company started] was traumatic. In retrospect, it was a lot more traumatic than it seemed at the time."
Despite hardship, Biomet was able to find a role in the marketplace as a developer and marketer of orthopedic products, contracting with independent manufacturing shops to make its implants. In its first year of operation the company developed a breakthrough titanium "total hip replacement" implant, the first of which was implanted in Miller's grandmother. Total hip replacement devices and the use of titanium both became industry standards by the late 1980s. Although Biomet had only $17,000 in sales during its first year of operation and lost a total of $63,000, by 1980 the struggling enterprise was turning a meager profit.
Unfortunately, Miller and his three partners realized that they were essentially training the manufacturing shop operators to build and sell Biomet-inspired products to their competitors. Unable to locate financing for their own manufacturing program to overcome this dilemma, the Biomet founders considered selling the fledgling business. The company was saved, however, by two brothers from Kalamazoo, Michigan--Kenneth and Jerry Miller (no relation to Dane Miller)--who provided $500,000 in venture capital in return for one-third ownership of the business. Thus the Biomet team found itself in the manufacturing business.
Biomet's second major product innovation occurred in 1980, when it introduced the metal-backed acetabular cup. It was a device used in total joint replacement that increased the longevity of implant-to-bone stem attachments. "That was one example of how we took an opportunity, responded to it quickly, and then took it to the market," Miller related in Indiana Business. The company broke new ground again in 1983 with its development of a high-tech knee implant system that allowed a surgeon to align ligaments precisely, ensuring that the joint worked properly. The invention was held up for several years, however, because of technical problems and FDA approval. In the meantime, Biomet solidified its financial position via an October 1982 initial public offering (IPO) of stock on the NASDAQ over-the-counter market. The IPO raised $1.43 million through the sale of 110,000 shares at $13 apiece.
Breakthroughs such as the acetabular cup and titanium hip replacements were central to the momentum Biomet was gaining during the early 1980s. Likewise, aggressive marketing and innovative delivery systems placed the company on the forefront of customer service and cost-containment. Contradicting their detractors, the Biomet management team slowly boosted annual company revenues and profits. By 1984 annual sales had grown to $10.6 million and earnings topped a healthy $1.6 million.
Unique Corporate Culture
Aside from innovations in product development, marketing, and operations, Biomet founders attributed much of their success to a unique corporate culture that bred creativity and achievement. The company was founded on a premise of risk-taking and teamwork, and maintained a very loose structure. Biomet developed only one organizational chart during its early history, and that was created only to please a potential lender. "We try to avoid a lot of structure. ... Whoever is there to make a decision makes it," CEO Miller stated in Indiana Business.
In addition to its unorthodox organization, the company prospered by shattering many business school myths that Miller believed were a hindrance to other corporations. While many organizations relied on detailed planning to reach their goals, for example, Biomet spent about 1 percent of its time planning and the rest of the time implementing and monitoring results. "Too much planning sometimes keeps a company from responding to a world that is changing around it," Miller explained in the Elkhart (Indiana) Truth. Another myth, according to Miller, was that a company should set a goal and not let anything interfere with the accomplishment of that mission. "One thing you have to let get in the way from time to time is reality," he said.
Also a part of Biomet's management strategies was intimate worker involvement in, and employee reliance on, the company's performance. All employees were stockholders, either through stock options or by way of a benefit plan. Moreover, half of senior management's compensation was directly dependent on Biomet's financial performance. Miller set the example for his employees by accepting a comparatively conservative compensation package. In fact, Miller was cited in Business Week during 1992 for giving shareholders more for their money than any other CEO surveyed: he received only $712,000 between 1989 and 1991 while shareholders garnered huge returns. In the Indianapolis Business Journal, Miller declared, "I'd have to admit that if my board came to me and said, 'We're cutting your salary to zero,' I'm having enough fun that I'd come into work anyway."
First Acquisitions
Indeed, if Miller's job satisfaction was any reflection of the company's performance during the mid- to late 1980s, he was a very happy man. After posting its $1.6 million profit in 1984, Biomet entered a sustained period of steady, rapid growth that soon earned the company international recognition within the industry. An October 1983 secondary stock offering raised an additional $11.9 million that funded the firm's first acquisition. In May 1984 Biomet acquired Orthopedic Equipment Company, a manufacturer based in nearby Bourbon, Indiana, for $8.4 million, boosting its revenues for 1985 more than 300 percent. Sales continued to swell through 1988, when the company purchased New Jersey-based Electro-Biology, Inc. (EBI), developer and producer of devices that stimulate bone growth, for $25.8 million. As a result of this important acquisition, Biomet's 1989 revenues leapt to $136 million, of which one-third was contributed by EBI.
Even by the mid-1980s, Biomet's success had earned the company a lofty position in the hierarchy of Warsaw's orthopedic supplies business. Biomet was still dwarfed by Zimmer and Depuy, but its rapid growth and unique products garnered the company third place in the local industry, making Biomet a competitive force that could not be ignored. All three major producers credited the local community with supplying a high-quality, hardworking supply of labor that helped to ensure their success. The region also provided an excellent location for distribution and offered fantastic land prices, cost-of-living advantages, and a high quality of life.
International Expansion Efforts
While grateful to the community, by the late 1980s Biomet had begun to branch out from its native turf. Not only was the company seeking domestic growth, but Biomet management was fully committed to an international expansion effort that was expected to carry the corporation into the 21st century. In fact, Biomet had been chasing international business since its early years. By the early 1990s, international sales represented about 25 percent of the company's revenues and comprised more than 30 percent of its annual growth.
The success of Biomet's important international business reflected the drive and initiative of Chuck Niemier, senior vice-president of international operations. Niemier was a 24-year-old accountant at an outside audit firm when he was introduced to Miller and the small Biomet team. "I think because of my hairline, he thought I was older," recalled Niemier in Indiana Business. Miller liked Niemier, and was able to lure him to Biomet with an offer of $26,000 per year and a chance to own some Biomet shares.
Niemier played an early role in developing Biomet's international expansion, which entailed delivering cutting-edge implant products to overseas buyers. During the 1980s and early 1990s, the company expanded into Europe, South America, Japan, the Middle East, the Soviet Union, and other regions. In those countries where Biomet maintained manufacturing facilities, including Germany and England, a direct sales force was established; in other countries it worked through dealer organizations. Niemier benefited from Biomet's flat organizational structure and decentralized decision-making process. The Berlin Wall had barely fallen, for example, before Biomet acquired a successful German orthopedics firm, Berlin-based Effner GmbH, purchased in March 1991. The acquisition of Effner, coupled with the August 1990 purchase of Arrow Surgical Technologies Inc., formed the nucleus for Arthrotek, Inc., Biomet's arthroscopy subsidiary.
Not all of Biomet's international deals played out so nicely, however. When the company received a multimillion-dollar order for trauma products from Iraq in the early 1990s, for instance, Biomet managers were excited. Several months later, though, Iraq invaded Kuwait, providing insight into Iraq's giant order and ending Biomet's dealings with the aggressor nation. Likewise, Biomet invested in several ventures in the Soviet Union during the early 1990s, only to have that market dry up as a result of inner political turmoil. Regardless of minor setbacks, international growth remained a priority for the company going into the mid-1990s. Biomet was operating in about 100 countries by 1992.
Augmenting rising international sales in the late 1980s and early 1990s were continued product and manufacturing innovations that kept Biomet on the leading edge of the industry. In 1989, for example, Biomet technicians began using computer-aided-design (CAD) systems to create three-dimensional images of diseased and damaged joints. When integrated into the production process, the CAD systems allowed Biomet to customize artificial joints for individual patients. The company also became involved in advanced research projects related to bone-growth protein, flexible carbon-fiber implants, and the use of naturally occurring soft tissue to lubricate artificial joints.
Reputation As a Solid Growth Stock
By the early 1990s, Biomet's stellar rise had earned the company a reputation on Wall Street as a solid growth stock. In 1992, for example, USA Today listed Biomet as one of "the hot stocks to watch in the 1990s." Although the 30 percent growth rate in the company's stock price enjoyed by shareholders during the late 1980s and early 1990s had subsided by 1993, it continued to outperform many of its competitors and was considered a good, long-term purchase by a number of analysts. Biomet's ascension was aided by its string of acquisitions, including the July 1992 purchase of Jacksonville, Florida-based Walter Lorenz Surgical, Inc., a leading producer of craniomaxillofacial products for oral surgeons.
Furthermore, Biomet's profit growth continued unabated in the early 1990s and was even accelerating going into the mid-1990s. Sales jumped 22 percent in 1993 to $335 million, and net income ballooned to $64 million. These figures represented five-year compound annual revenue growth of 28 percent in the reconstructive device segment (56 percent of Biomet sales) and 17 percent in the EBI division (25 percent of sales); the remaining revenue was generated from the operations of Arthrotek and Walter Lorenz Surgical as well as the sale of fixation and trauma devices, orthopedic support devices, and operating room supplies.
Aside from sales and stock statistics, Miller and the Biomet managed team looked to another, less tangible measure of their company's success: its victories in helping people to lead better lives. "I believe as we look back 10 years, the evolution of orthopedics has led to the rehabilitation of America," Miller explained in Indiana Business. "Ten years ago, if you were incapacitated with a bad knee or hip, you were in bed for the rest of your life. ... In the last ten years, the tools and products have been developed to allow ... patients to live a normal life."
By the beginning of 1993, Miller and Noblitt were the only Biomet founders left at the company, although Ferguson returned late that year after leaving in the mid-1980s to open a classic car dealership (Harroff departed in the early 1980s and bought a golf course). They and other company leaders had ambitious plans for the future, including development of new high-tech products, aggressive global growth, and diversification into new technologies and markets. In the meantime Biomet's entrepreneurial atmosphere and quick-response management structure were retained, owing to the success of such technological breakthroughs as the Maxim, a cutting-edge knee implant introduced in 1993 that significantly boosted profits from the fast-growing knee replacement market. The Maxim in fact became Biomet's biggest new product introduction to that time. Products such as the Maxim cemented Biomet's reputation as a customer-oriented supplier of leading edge, low-cost, high-performance orthopedic devices.
Rounding Out the Century with Further Growth Initiatives
In the mid-1990s, while contending with pricing pressures stemming from the trend toward managed health insurance plans, most notably HMOs, Biomet continued to pursue growth. In November 1994 the company acquired Kirschner Medical Corporation for $38.9 million. Kirschner, a firm with annual sales of $70 million based in Timonium, Maryland, specialized in joint replacements for hips, knees, and shoulders plus spinal implants and fracture fixation products. Kirschner also had a soft-goods division offering products used for musculoskeletal orthopedic support or in postoperative treatments, such as braces, supports, splints, and cast materials. In 1996 Biomet strengthened its position in Europe through the establishment of Biomet Europe. This unit coordinated sales, development, and manufacturing operations in Germany, Spain, and the United Kingdom and sales centers in France and Italy. That year, when sales and profits both increased for the 18th consecutive year, Biomet paid a dividend to its shareholders for the first time, signaling a shift to a more mature phase in the company's development. By 1997, its 20th anniversary year, Biomet had seen its sales reach $580.3 million, while net income that year grew another 13 percent, to $106.5 million.
At the beginning of 1998 Biomet and German pharmaceutical giant Merck KGaA formed a joint venture that combined Biomet's European operations with Merck's biomaterials division, which encompassed orthopedic products and biological agents and also ranked as Europe's leading seller of bone cement. The joint venture, which was headquartered in the Netherlands and had its research base in Darmstadt, Germany, started off with annual sales of roughly $200 million, which translated into a European market share of around 10 percent.
While keeping alert for acquisition and joint venture opportunities, Biomet continued to introduce innovative new products. During fiscal 1998 the company became the first in its field to introduce a minimally invasive partial knee implant. The Repicci II Unicondylar Knee System was designed specifically for people whose osteoarthritis was confined to one compartment of the knee. The system typically required a smaller surgical incision, which reduced blood loss and resulted in a shorter recovery time with less pain in comparison with total knee replacement surgery. In many cases, the Repicci system enabled the surgery to be performed on an outpatient basis. The system had been developed in conjunction with a surgeon, Dr. John Repicci.
Fiscal 1999 saw Biomet's string of consecutive years of net profit growth end at 20 due to a special charge of $55 million the company recorded after losing a breach-of-contract lawsuit brought by Orthofix SRL. A jury had ruled in Orthofix's favor regarding its contention that a Biomet subsidiary had breached an agreement to distribute Orthofix's external fixation devices. Damages of nearly $50 million had been awarded. The special charge reduced Biomet's net income for 1999 to $125 million, which was down slightly from the $127.9 million of the previous year. Sales for 1999 jumped more than 17 percent, hitting $827.9 million.
The most significant event of 1999, however, occurred in December when Biomet acquired Implant Innovations International Corporation, known as 3i, in a stock swap valued at approximately $175 million, Biomet's largest acquisition to that date. Based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, 3i was a world leader in dental reconstructive implants, which were an alternative to crowns and bridges for dental patients. Its revenues of around $70 million made 3i the second largest player in the U.S. dental implant sector and the third largest in the world.
Continuing Expansion in the Early 21st Century
Biomet followed up the 3i deal with another acquisition completed in September 2000. That month the company acquired, through its EBI subsidiary, Biolectron, Inc., based in Allendale, New Jersey. Biolectron produced external electrical devices for the stimulation of bone growth for spinal fusion and for long bone fractures, as well as a bone tunneling product used to reattach soft tissue to bone in arthroscopy procedures. The acquired company had generated sales of $26 million in 1999. The continuing rollout of new products coupled with the acquisitions of 3i and Biolectron propelled Biomet's sales past the $1 billion mark for 2001. Sales for the year increased 12 percent, to $1.03 billion, while net income increased 14 percent to a record $197.5 million.
Strategic alliances were another important avenue for Biomet growth. In August 2001 the company entered into an agreement with Organogenesis, Inc., of Canton, Massachusetts, that granted Biomet the right to globally develop and market orthopedic and periodontal products stemming from Organogenesis' FortaFlex bioengineered matrix technology. The first fruit from this alliance was the launch in 2002 of the CuffPatch rotator cuff product used for repairing tendons and ligaments of the shoulder. In February 2002 Biomet entered into an alliance with Hollywood, Florida-based Z-KAT, Inc., for the codevelopment and distribution of image-guided surgical applications in all of Biomet's business sectors.
In March 2004 Biomet bought out Merck's interest in the companies' European joint venture in a $300 million cash deal. By this time the venture was generating annual revenues of around $370 million. Although the deal provided Biomet with increased flexibility to pursue acquisitions in Europe, the company's next purchase occurred back home. In June 2004 Biomet enhanced its position in the spinal market by acquiring Interpore International, Inc., of Irvine, California, for $266 million in cash. Interpore, which had net sales of $67.5 million in 2003, specialized in spinal implant products, orthobiologic products, and minimally invasive surgery products. Interpore's product line included stainless-steel screws, rods, and plates for spinal implants as well as a kit to inject bone cement for the treatment of compression fractures. By 2005 Biomet's expansion efforts had added up to revenues of $1.88 billion, the 27th straight year of record sales. Net income for the year amounted to $351.6 million, an increase of 8 percent over 2004.
2006 Forward: New Leadership, New Ownership
In March 2006 Miller resigned suddenly and unexpectedly after apparently clashing with the board of directors over the company's rather lackluster performance over the preceding year. Biomet had fallen short of Wall Street expectations several times during that period. While cofounder Noblitt remained chairman of the board, Daniel P. Hann was named interim president and CEO as a search for a permanent successor was launched. Hann had joined Biomet in 1989 and had most recently served as senior vice-president, general counsel, and secretary. Miller was given much credit for spearheading Biomet's remarkable development into one of the leaders of the orthopedic device industry during his nearly 30 years at the helm.
Shortly after Miller's resignation, Biomet hired Morgan Stanley to evaluate possible "strategic alternatives" at a time when rumors were spreading about a sale of the company. In November 2006 Biomet entered into preliminary talks with U.K. rival Smith & Nephew plc about a possible merger, but the negotiations failed to lead to a deal. Private-equity firms then came to the fore as the most likely buyers, and in December 2006 Biomet agreed to be acquired by a consortium that included affiliates of the Blackstone Group, Goldman Sachs Capital Partners, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co., and Texas Pacific Group. Miller was also an additional investor in the consortium. At the time the deal was announced, the consortium and Biomet had settled on a price of $44 per share, or a total of $10.9 billion.
In February 2007, while the takeover was still pending, Jeffrey R. Binder was appointed president and CEO. Binder was an orthopedic industry veteran who most recently had served in a senior management position at Abbott Laboratories. Around this same time, several company subsidiaries began operating under new monikers as additional emphasis was placed on the Biomet brand: Arthrotek was renamed Biomet Sports Medicine, Inc.; Implant Innovations, Inc., became Biomet 3i, Inc.; and Walter Lorenz Surgical adopted the name Biomet Microfixation, Inc. Revenues for the fiscal year ending in May 2007, the firm's final year as a public company, totaled $2.11 billion. Although sales had increased just 4 percent over fiscal 2006, this still marked the 29th consecutive year of record revenues.
After several large shareholders expressed their opposition to the $44 per share takeover price, the private-equity consortium in June 2007 increased its offer by 4.5 percent to $46 a share, or $11.4 billion. Shareholders accepted this sweetened offer, and the deal was consummated in September 2007. A new board of directors was seated that included representatives of the private-equity firms that composed the consortium, along with Binder, who was named chairman while remaining president and CEO, and cofounder Miller.
Just days after being taken private, Biomet was one of five orthopedic device makers to enter into a $311 million settlement with the U.S. government relating to a probe of allegations that the firms had paid kickbacks to surgeons to use their products. Biomet's portion of the settlement amounted to $26.9 million, and all the companies agreed to abide by new standards for consulting agreements with surgeons and to be monitored for 18 months to ensure that they were following the new standards. In October 2007 it was revealed that the Securities and Exchange Commission was investigating Biomet and several of its competitors for possible violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act in connection with their sales practices in foreign countries.
Despite these clouds that hung over the orthopedic device industry, demographics boded well for the future success of Biomet and its competitors. The enormous baby boom generation was just entering the age range at which degenerative joint disease becomes increasingly common, setting the stage for increased demand for Biomet's replacement knees and hips and other orthopedic devices. In addition, younger patients were beginning to seek treatment earlier in the disease process in part because the devices were constantly being improved to last longer. Every year, Biomet introduced dozens of new products to maintain its position as one of a handful of major manufacturers of orthopedic devices.
Principal Subsidiaries
Biomet Biologics, Inc.; Biomet Manufacturing Corp.; Biomet Microfixation, Inc.; Biomet Orthopedics, Inc.; Biomet Sports Medicine, Inc.; Biomet 3i, Inc.; EBI, L.P.; Biomet Europe B.V. (Netherlands).
Principal Competitors
Zimmer Holdings, Inc.; DePuy Inc.; Stryker Corporation; Smith & Nephew plc; Synthes, Inc.
Further Reading
"Biomet: Wall Street Likes What It Sees," Indiana Business Magazine, April 1985, p. 55.
Bray, Chad, and Jon Kamp, "Orthopedic Firms Settle Kickback Probe," Wall Street Journal, September 28, 2007, p. B4.
Carey, Susan, and Jonathan Vuocolo, "Biomet Agrees to Be Acquired for $10.9 Billion," Wall Street Journal, December 19, 2006, p. C4.
Cassak, David, "Biomet Goes Solo in Europe," In Vivo, February 2004.
------, "Biomet's Contrarian Conservatism," In Vivo, May 1999, pp. 48-50.
------, "Biomet's Rebirth?" In Vivo, September 2007.
Ellis, James E., "Biomet Should Boom As Baby Boomers Get Older," Business Week, July 27, 1987, p. 77.
Green, Lisa, "Biomet Acquiring N.J. Firm," Fort Wayne (Ind.) Journal Gazette, September 26, 2000, p. 5B.
Howey, Brian, "Biomet: Bringing R&D to Market," Indiana Business Magazine, May 1988, pp. 72+.
Hubbard, Richard F., and Jeffrey L. Rodengen, Biomet Inc.: From Warsaw to the World, Fort Lauderdale, Fla.: Write Stuff Enterprises, 2002, 144 p.
Kaelble, Steve, "International Business Person of the Year," Indiana Business Magazine, October 1992, pp. 17+.
Kamp, Jon, "Biomet Co-founder, CEO Retires," Wall Street Journal, March 28, 2006, p. B11.
------, "New Buyout Offer for Biomet Is Now Sweeter and Tender," Wall Street Journal, June 8, 2007, p. C3.
------, "SEC Targets Sales of Devices for Orthopedics," Wall Street Journal, October 15, 2007, p. B9.
Karkaria, Urvaksh, "Biomet Pays $300 Million for Venture in Europe," Fort Wayne (Ind.) Journal Gazette, December 19, 2003, p. 8B.
------, "Biomet to Buy Spinal Implant Maker," Fort Wayne (Ind.) Journal Gazette, March 9, 2004, p. 7B.
Ketzenberger, Jolene, "Future Looks Rosy for Maker of Joint Replacements," Indianapolis Business Journal, May 26, 2003, pp. 16B-17B.
Kurowski, Jeff, "Biomet Blossoms from Warsaw Roots," South Bend (Ind.) Tribune Business Weekly, September 30, 1996, p. 10.
------, "Indiana Business's Industrialist of the Year: Dane Miller, CEO, Biomet," Indiana Business Magazine, December 1989, pp. 8+.
Lee, Daniel, "Private Equity Group Will Acquire Biomet," Indianapolis Star, December 19, 2006, p. C1.
Lee, Daniel, and Jeff Swiatek, "U.S. Probe Targeting Three Orthopedics Firms in State," Indianapolis Star, June 27, 2006.
Margolis, Jay, "Biomet Signs Merger Deal with Kirschner," Fort Wayne (Ind.) Journal Gazette, July 19, 1994, p. C1.
Miller, Jim, "Biomet Founder Recalls Years Filled with 'Sheer Excitement,'" Elkhart (Ind.) Truth, October 29, 1992.
Panzica, Lisa, "Getting a Knee Up on the Competition," South Bend (Ind.) Tribune Business Weekly, September 22, 1993, p. 14.
Peterson, Kimberly, "Chief Tapped for Transition," Fort Wayne (Ind.) Journal Gazette, March 5, 2007, p. 1C.
Ronco, Ed, "Biomet Chief Steps Down," South Bend (Ind.) Tribune, March 28, 2006.
------, "Biomet Names New Chief," South Bend (Ind.) Tribune, February 27, 2007.
------, "Biomet Will Go Private," South Bend (Ind.) Tribune, July 13, 2007.
------, "Shake-up Ends Biomet Probe," South Bend (Ind.) Tribune, April 3, 2007.
Russell, John, "Foreign Sales of Orthopedics Investigated," Indianapolis Star, October 13, 2007, p. C1.
Schroeder, Michael, "Private Group Acquires Biomet," Fort Wayne (Ind.) Journal Gazette, December 19, 2006, p. 1A.
------, "Shareholders OK Biomet Sale," Fort Wayne (Ind.) Journal Gazette, July 13, 2007, p. 1A.
Shankle, Greta, "FDA Proposes Stiffening Regulation of the Medical Device Industry," Indianapolis Business Journal, January 10, 1994, p. 11A.
Slater, Sherry, "Warsaw Firms Fined by Feds," Fort Wayne (Ind.) Journal Gazette, September 28, 2007, p. 1A.
Theobald, Bill, "CEO's Personality Pushes Biomet to Forefront," Indianapolis Star, July 11, 2004.
— Dave Mote; Updated by David E. Salamie
