Great post Gustavo! I think you hit on a few really key points that have been mentioned in the above posts as well. Medicaid, while an important opportunity, is something that physicians and mental health providers do not like to “accept” often because of low reimbursement rates. As you can tell, this is a major issue as the individuals who have Medicaid are among the most marginalized members in our society. For example, only 55% of psychiatrists accept insurance, and 46% of psychiatrists accept Medicaid . This makes me wonder if rather than targeting Medicaid, they should partner with larger insurance providers or organizations that have the incentive to keep their population healthy at a low cost. Some names that come to mind are Kaiser and any organization in a value-sharing model (many in MA such as Partners Health). The ACA provides a lot of incentive for organizations to partner with potential startups such as Talkspace, but with the president elect threatening to repeal the ACA the future of these partnerships may be more uncertain.
Great post Robby.
What I found particularly interesting is your suggestion of implementing a safety checklist for the technicians. This reminded me of Atul Gawande’s book The Checklist Manifesto where he discusses implementing a mandatory, written/verbal checklist in the operating room in order to improve safety. He draws on references from the aviation industry explaining how they have managed to achieve an unparalleled level of safety by implementing a systemic safety checklist no matter the skill level of the team or pilot. This has had notable success in the OR and I believe can benefit Terminix as well.
Thanks for the great post Taylor!
I find Kaiser fascinating for the reason you point out: they are both the insurer and provider. This allows them to align their incentives in a manner that many other networks can’t in order to generate the maximum value for their patients. I think telemedicine has a ton of potential and is largely underutilized because insurers are unsure of the potential results and in many scenarios unwilling to reimburse for it. Since Kaiser is the insurer, they have a lot more experimental flexibility and are taking a leading role in providing this service to patients. As you mentioned it can greatly reduced waiting time, improve space efficiency, and offers a great deal of convinience to patients. However, it certainly has limitations especially given the inability to perform a comprehensive physical examination. I am anticipating to see Kaiser have success in using this platform for a few specialties and expect them to encounter difficult with some of the more physical-exam dependent specialties. I’m also curious to see how they begin to use telemedicine on the inpatient setting to harness specialty expertise for difficult patients.
18.6 quintillion planets sure is a lot! This article was very interesting as I had not thought of the potential ramifications of internet access in gaming as it seems to have become such an intertwined part of gaming. Although the bugs seen in earlier releases may be due to developer complacency due to an ability to fix games with patches, I wonder if what happened with No Man’s Sky extends deeper than that. Not including some advertised features has me wondering what the regulation over some of these games are in terms of protecting customers. I am curious to see the results of the United Kingdom Advertising Standards Authority investigation.
Thanks for the interesting article! The ACA provides many incentives to generate value for all parties involved in the care delivery chain and Athenahealth is an example of that.
If Trump indeed chooses to repeal the ACA, the impact on innovation in value healthcare might take a hit as the ACA has created multiple incentives to develop value sharing. Although this may impact Athenahealth’s future incentive to further innovate, their current system may benefit as with the repeal of ACA there may be more small and medium sized physician’s offices remaining in practice rather than merging with larger care conglomerates. It will be interesting to see how this plays out!
Thanks for the informative post Jessie! Your plan for JBS going forward is very well thought out. What I appreciate about many of the points is the lack of heavy capital investment they would take to implement. As you said, vertical integration is expensive and risky, a step that would be difficult to take first. My concern with JBS is with what they decide to do next. If these capital-inexpensive strategies do not have the desired impact, I wonder how far JBS or similar companies would go on their own without regulatory intervention or incentives.
Thanks for the very interesting read Shray. I agree that a large focus of McDonalds and similar fast food companys needs to be sustainability. However, given the business they are in, generating value at all cost might lead to corner cutting for short-term gains. Although I admire the public-relation focused moves McDonalds has instituted so far, I wonder how far they will go on their own accord without intervention from governing agencies. My personal opinion is that some regulation may be needed to influence them to package and perform in an environmentally sustainable manner.
Thanks for the informative post! I think this issue is something that numerous seasonal industries are grappling with. One, as you mentioned, is an issue of profitability. Shorter seasons and less snow hurts the bottom line and as a result impacts the economic sustainability of these companies. In addition to taking an environmentally friendly approach by reducing GHG emissions and reducing waste, I think the Aspen Skiing Company and similar companies have to take a central role in leading dialogue around climate change. Not only are they strongly impacted by the results of climate change, they are also in a unique position to effect change given the high-impact factor of their client base. Educating families and clients should be a central part of their sustainability efforts.
I also agree with the author that a more proactive stance is needed to fight climate change. In order to maximize it’s own future sustainability, Vail should work to create a year-round business catering to a broader range of people. Moreover, Vail has the opportunity to interact multiple high impact members of the community who may hold significant power to continue the conversation about climate change. Thus, Vail should take a proactive stance in leveraging its unique position in society to start a conversation regarding climate change with current customers and family.
I completely agree with the need to maximize the empty inventory. Perhaps this can extend to other seasons, making a larger impact in the fall with more “leaf-peeping” opportunities in otherwise off-peak seasons. Another consideration may be to partner with winter sports enthusiasts and other famous individuals who visit their resort to educate the public on sustainability efforts that they themselves can participate in.