9 ms·
Turing CEO Defends $750 Pill in Reddit AMA
- tincholio 11y agoWhy not just link to the AMA itself, instead of TC? https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/3q38qg/iama_martin_shkreli_ceo_of_turing_pharmaceuticals/ https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/3q38qg/iama_martin_sh...
- alextgordon 11y agoBetter on /r/tabled since all his responses are downvoted https://www.reddit.com/r/tabled/comments/3q3mwn/table_iama_martin_shkreli_ceo_of_turing/ https://www.reddit.com/r/tabled/comments/3q3mwn/table_iama_m...
- FireBeyond 11y agoWhat a slimy piece of crap: "People hate because they think I'm charging people $750 per pill even though it costs patients less than $10 out of their pocket" No. People hate because you ARE charging $750 per pill. They may only have to pay $10 out of pocket immediately, but one way or another, through co-pays, deductibles, premiums, opportunity cost when employers pay premiums, patients ARE paying $750 per pill. I highly doubt Shkreli is stupid enough to think that there's a magic pill-paying fairy conjuring $740/pill out of thin air for his benefit, and patients aren't inconvenienced. But... he DOES think WE are stupid enough to fall for this.
- cma 11y agoMaybe we need a charity that builds a research war chest to threaten companies like this with redevelopment. It costs a lot to replicate a pill and go through the FDA hoops, and once a private company does, the price just gets competed down to the point where it doesn't cover the redevelopment costs. Instead, a charity doesn't have to take profit into consideration and can just threaten: drop your price or we'll persue independent redevelopment. With only the credible threat of spending on independent redevelopment, they could devalue a lot of these orphan drugs, and then buy up the rights/trade secrets to them for open release. Competing businesses can't do this, because they can't pose a credible threat, because following through wouldn't make business sense. A charity can have non-business aims.
- redblacktree 11y agoI like this idea. Where do I donate?
- n0us 11y agoWhat he thinks is that people are going to be outraged over this and new regulations will drive down the stock price of other pharmaceuticals which he has shorted, and if that fails he will still make some money off the pills. It's an excellent bet even if it is extremely immoral.
- eitally 11y agoAnd so far it's working. Look at Valeant for a timely example. And they aren't the only ones facing federal inquiries. http://fortune.com/2015/10/22/valeant-debt/ http://fortune.com/2015/10/22/valeant-debt/ http://www.streetinsider.com/FDA/House+Oversight+Committee+Democrats+Request+Subpoena+of+Valeant+Pharma+(VRX)/10924647.html http://www.streetinsider.com/FDA/House+Oversight+Committee+D... https://aishealth.com/archive/ndbn100915-04 https://aishealth.com/archive/ndbn100915-04
- meric 11y agoHe's taking advantage of government imposed barrier to entry costs. Perhaps by going all out in extracting benefits from the government protection it will point out to the public how much they're being taken advantaged of by the pharmaceutical companies in general and prompt them to demand changes from the authorities. And by tearing down these walls it would benefit his company, because his company is very small startup in the pharmaceutical world. As a startup he doesn't have much incentive to keep the status quo as it is and it is advantageous for him to rock the boat as much as possible. Would he have gotten so much coverage of the inefficient part of the pharmaceutical industry by preaching to the converted, or as he's done and go all out and squeezing it for all he can?
- intopieces 11y agoShkreli says if he could do things differently, he'd have explained things better instead of being a flippant jackass. But I'm not sure that would have worked: very few people know or care about how the pharmaceutical industry / drug research works. "Pharma bro screws over AIDS patients" just rings too many of the right bells, zeitgeist wise. I have a hard time believing this isn't all part of some plan. Stock shorting?
- david-given 11y agoI'm not quite sure which depresses me most --- the assholish questions, or the sociopathic answers. This is, truly, a great day for humankind.
- n0us 11y agoAt least he was pretty honest.
- AdmiralAsshat 11y agoSeems completely unapologetic. I'm trying to be shocked, but then, he's apparently still CEO, so clearly the company that employs him can't be that outraged by his behavior.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- just_curioussss 11y agoA couple of greatest hits: [–]LouisDeFeo 2 points 16 hours ago* Since a new drug came out that's almost the same as your company's for such a cheap price, how do expect to turn a profit now? [–]martinshkreli[S] 0 points 16 hours ago no new drug is FDA approved for toxoplasmosis. [–]LouisDeFeo 1 point 16 hours ago You're right, excuse me. I meant when it gets approved, how do you expect to turn a profit? [–]martinshkreli[S] 0 points 16 hours ago they're not going to do that. they don't have the resources. and: [–]strik3three 2 points 16 hours ago You've said the rise in the cost of Daraprim won't effect most patients because the insurance companies will absorb the cost. Does it not stand to reason though that the insurance companies will pass those cost back along to the policy holders who pay the premiums. How does that argument not perpetuate the problem of out of control medical cost? [–]martinshkreli[S] -1 points 16 hours ago It definitely stands to reason. But the other thing to consider is that as more companies generate revenue and profits new companies sprout to compete with them for that profit pool. This keeps costs down. and: [–]HomerPepsi 1 point 12 hours ago Money aside, how do you feel about being hated by the world? [–]martinshkreli[S] 0 points 5 hours ago It doesn't bother me. My priority is patients and I have a ton of support from them. I don't answer to the media or random internet crazies. And the winner (appeal to common practice fallacy): https://twitter.com/MartinShkreli/status/656180089747611651 https://twitter.com/MartinShkreli/status/656180089747611651
- afarrell 11y agoHe should get his head of R&D (Dr. Eliseo Salinas ) to do a kickstarter to raise money for research into a better toxoplasmosis drug. Either it would be successful and he could do what he says he wants to do, or he would make the point he's trying to make about the fact that fundraising to get a drug all the way through clinical trials to market is expensive and it falls on the backs of sick patients in basically every other case. Or he would be forced to reveal that he actually is just in this as a common rent-seeker.
- petilon 11y agoThe problem with healthcare in America is insurance. When you are insured and insurance is paying for everything patients don't care how much anything costs. (See Tragedy of the Commons). And the drug companies charge $250 to $750 a pill or $14,000 for a years worth of drugs (recent cholesterol drugs Repatha and Praluent) to $250,000 (cancer drugs) and the drug companies justify it by saying insurance pays for it anyway. Drug companies are charging Americans 26,000% higher than in other countries (eg: Cuprimine, for which Valeant charges $260 per pill is available for $1 in other countries.) The net result is that insurance rates are rising rapidly, and even if you have insurance you may not be able to make the copay. As much as I hate socialism, the only solution appears to be Single Payer.
- suneilp 11y agoWhat does this have to do with socialism? How does drug companies charging for an arm and a leg or insurance companies paying for it and raising premiums relate to socialism?
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- petilon 11y agoSingle-payer is socialized medicine.
- CamperBob2 11y agoIt's all socialized medicine. We all have the same bodies. The only question is whether we get what we pay for. In the US, we don't. The idea that "insurance" is somehow applicable to a scenario where essentially every participant will need to file multiple expensive claims is extremely silly.
- necessity 11y agoHe wants the tax payer to pay for it instead of insurance owners.
- 11y ago
- phlandis 11y agowhat a loser, how exactly do people like this end up as CEOs
- Kiro 11y agoSo what's his defense exactly? He makes it sound like this is just one big misunderstanding.
- msie 11y agoThis is relevant ("Four Reasons Drugs Are Expensive, Of Which Two Are False"): http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewherper/2015/10/13/four-reasons-drugs-are-expensive-of-which-two-are-false/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewherper/2015/10/13/four-re...
- kolbe 11y agoI love this as an example of how broken the USA is. Democracies, for better or worse, mean that the government represents the will of the people. Determine 'will' however you want (majority vote, enlightened representatives, reddit poll, &c), and you would find overwhelming support for at least stopping Shkreli from doing this, and probably worse. What do we get instead? Shkreli will gain a few hundred million dollars from this scheme, and Millennials will complain about him on message boards. And don't think that the system is broken because corrupt system is unyielding and impenetrable. It's broken because our generation lacks the constitution (and possibly aptitude) to push for the changes necessary. There has never been an easier place and time to than 2015 USA to enact the changes you want to see. But we're content eating fast food and watching Netflix instead.
- jnbiche 11y ago> It's broken because our generation lacks the constitution (and possibly aptitude) to push for the changes necessary. If you mean Gen X or Y, that's just wrong. Those two generations basically got Obama elected in 2008 (who got out and canvassed, and ran his Internet campaign and much of his meatspace campaign, and voted), and look what happened: vontinued never-ending war, police brutality on the rise, drug war on the rise, continued mass incarceration and surveillance state, ridiculous Dem/Repub back and forth showmanship, and so forth. And please don't say we should have picked better in 2008. Who? Clinton? Biden? McCain/Palin? Anyone outside of the two parties has no chance, witness the party Sanders ran under this cycle. Could it be that we simply see the game is fixed, and simply no longer wish to participate in or implicitly support this system? > There has never been an easier place and time to than 2015 USA to enact the changes you want to see. Oh really? Well, such a pliable system sure has proved remarkably impervious to change.
- kolbe 11y agoChanges happen in the streets, not the ballot box. The fact that you think real change only takes place by choosing the "right" one of two (largely indistinguishable) major party candidates every four years is part of the problem. Change is hard. It takes dedication and sacrifice. It takes wit and cunning and luck. But we live in a country where if you go out and try to make those changes, you will not be arrested (for very long) or killed. Your family will not be tortured. In fact, when people do attempt to make changes, our country encourages them. There are very few places in the world where this can be said. And groups dedicated to making changes this way have altered the course of this country. The LGBT community is doing it right now. Racial minorities have done it in the past. Anti-war activists have done it. But they didn't do it from a place of comfort. It's very hard to make positive changes to society while climbing a corporate ladder. If you are too scared to disturb the comfort of your current life, and you think the ballot box is all you have control of, then you are the exact type of person I described in my original post. And it's not an insult to you. It's an insult to an entire generation.
- cabinpark 11y agoDespite me not liking what he has done, I can't really find any faults with what he has done. If he purchased the drug legally then why can't he charge as much as he want? Can anyone point me to the law that says he can't do that? I'd be curious to know if he has done anything illegal. Additionally, I wonder if he is doing this on person to make a point about drug pricing in the USA.