No, I actually agreed with the gist of the article. And I do think the group has brought a greedy company to task. I was speaking to financial illiteracy, and

No, I actually agreed with the gist of the article. And I do think the group has brought a greedy company to task. I was speaking to financial illiteracy, and perhaps I didn't communicate it too well. I know costing well, and I even had a truly innovative, potential Medicaid device to aid blind people in walking unassisted by canes, or canines way back in 1995. I am not sure how cheap an Epipen can be made at a sufficient profit for a company to either take it on as their only product, or as a horizontal or vertical market offshoot of their existing business without looking at the numbers. I strongly suspect it is far from $30 if it is to be made and sold at sufficient profit and not charity work, or a device of the Theranos/Elizabeth Holmes kind. I was pointing at the over-simplified, short title as possibly another misleading example of what things truly cost to make to have a final price at $60 or $150 when there is more involved than cost of materials whether bought in quantity for a prototype or discounted in bulk. Did any of the lines at the bottom of my post ring with you? I only ask, since I am an experienced senior manager with a very eclectic skill set, and I have heard them from the young to the old and experienced, and I am still amazed when I hear them.