Ironically, there are two newer formulations and the older soon to be authorised generic. My PBM in their infinite wisdom doesn’t want to cover the cheaper one. My doc has yet to get a PA approved for anyone for the newest version, so I’m stuck with the version they foisted upon us as soon as original exclusivity expired “because sodium raises BP,” and the newer one is salts with other metals.
Funny how they didn’t figure that out years ago……
Unfortunately not an option for specialty and niche drugs. Wish it was, I’d rather him get a cut than a certain PBM
I’m mildly curious to see what happens in the next month or two, as I’m about to hit my OOP max. Never ran into that combo of scenarios before.
The one I’m thinking of has a couple months “bridge” program for uninsured/just started new job/etc, but very time limited and an even bigger hassle as they’ll only send out two weeks instead of a month supply with each shipment.
IIRC, if I had insurance and it explicitly excluded the drug, the card would cover it, but it’s been a couple years since I left that job so memory isn’t clear.
None of is trustworthy. Mine is $$$$, and they know damn well insurance won’t pay it all. Of course, if the FDA didn’t require a single source pharmacy to ship it with all the infrastructure that entails, it would help, but only marginally.
Nightmare of a system even for relatively healthy folks. The older I get, the angrier I get because the people who most need the help are the ones either in enough pain they can’t nav the system, or old enough they don’t know where to start
Nobody is buying the med I have in mind out of pocket, in any world. Orphan drug, rare condition, and six figures a year.
Not to suggest your scenario doesn’t happen - it absolutely does. But I’m more curious about why I have to deal with a tiny company when they’re already eating a couple of grand a month on it.
It’s not a physical card always, it behaves like a secondary insurance payor, and if a $5k drug is covered for $2.5k by insurance, the card writes down the difference to $5 (as far as the patient is concerned).
Not unlike goodrx in principle, but specific to a drug.
As long as the reports that the C-suite gets look pretty, that’s all that matters. Have seen that one from both sides.
“I need five developer hours to implement a UI for this manual process that is time sensitive and exposes us to significant risk if we screw it up. Oh, and I’m the only one who knows how to do it in prod, so we have a bus problem.”
“Nah, I want reports…. Wait, why did we write an HO4 policy in Corpus Christie, AFTER the hurricane warning was issued?”
“See above, and prioritise things that matter.”
I don’t disagree, just not sure why there’s always a cost associated with it. No one benefits from the $5 net I pay, and it’s just one more (costly) admin step.
Visible is wholly owned by VZW, and runs a whole $30/mo inclusive of tax and such.
Best compromise I’ve found between network and not getting screwed or being surprised with outages.
To wit, WorkDay is universally regarded as trash. But companies keep writing checks, so employees on both sides of the time clock have to keep tolerating it
I support accounting professionals using one of perhaps four or five highly complex pieces of software that handles individual, corp, trust, and other misc tax forms
The churn rate is very low YoY, because it’s what they know. They have the freedom to move their data, and we will help them to the extent possible, but at most they’ll get a subset of client data and lose the ability to query agai t prior year datasets, etc.
They’re not locked in, but between 10/15 and, say, 2/15 is a damn short time to implement and learn a new piece of software with that level of complexity.
Interestingly, I’ve never seen a long-standing calculation bug in the program. The overwhelming majority of support is d/t user error or data entry error. From that standpoint, there is of course a financial incentive for it to work well - arithmetic errors would be unacceptable - but in terms of UI/UX, no one cares and if anything were improved folks would just whine about the change anyway - even if it made their life easier
Not a CPA/not your CPA, just a software guy who got lucky enough to be in the right time/place when I decided I didn’t have the energy for the startup world anymore.
Lord, we can only hope.
Getting both generic and specific models shoved down my throat by $multiNationalCorp on a daily basis is exhausting.
If I write an email that annoys someone and costs the company money, I’m thrilled to bits to own it and admit I fucked it up. But I dont have the time or energy to make sure that AI isn’t turning a reasonable email into something rage-inducing just by missing an obvious nuance. I’m certainly not hanging the quality of my code on the strength of an AI “helper.”
Agree - I’m mid 40s with both deep and broad experience, US based so no picture or irrelevant biographical bits, and I still absolutely cringe at the idea of sending out 2-3 page resume/CV.
Could I reasonably fill that space with relevant and compelling information? Sure.
Do I think anyone would read it? Not a chance.
I went into a smidge more detail over on my Mastodon last night, but my response is summed up as “WTAF? No! Freeware is an explicit license, as anyone from the BBS days will recall.”