#costbased

[quantzig]

Pharmaceutical pricing strategies assist customers and manufacturers of active pharmaceutical ingredients 

Role of Pharma Pricing Strategy in the Industry

First, we need to understand the function of pharmaceutical pricing strategies. Advanced analytics for demand forecasting and powerful pricing strategies (used by businesses to appropriately price their products/services, taking into account the costs of manufacturing, packaging, shipping, marketing, adding margins, etc.) methods) can help companies win. The industry can greatly improve its understanding of what drives customer purchasing decisions. Our pharmaceutical clients implement value-based benchmarking of drug prices to maximize profitability using data-driven insights.  

Types of Pharmaceutical Pricing Strategies:

Value-based

Cost-based

Competition-based

Price skimming-based

About the Client

The customer is a well-known German-based European API manufacturer that is well-known for producing pharmaceuticals that are biologically active. It is also a well-known name on the list of API producers worldwide. The client, which was founded shortly after World War II, has over 70 patent APIs under its name.

Despite having large internal teams, the customer wanted to improve the development of their pharmaceutical drugs, so they contacted our specialists to see what they might do.

Business Impact

The customer was able to determine the appropriate price for their product as a consequence of including pharmaceutical pricing strategy solutions, hidden elements driving price, and price bench marking into their decision-making process.

The road to benchmark medicine prices also triggered a quick transformation in corporate culture, moving workers from a value-oriented to a sales-oriented perspective.

Leading pharmaceutical companies have benefited from the expertise of Quantzig to increase sales and acquire a competitive advantage. Contact our specialists right now.

[mateo393]

frigorifico aeg 

[abigailevelynfan]

Reliable & cost effective basement waterproofing services in Toronto offered by Direct Waterproofing. Get a Free Quote today! Call 416-454-7575. For More Details visit at http://directwaterproofing.ca/

[directwaterproofing1-blog]

If you're looking for leaky basement repair in Toronto, contact Direct Waterproofing call us today at: 416-454-7575 to keep your foundation and basement nice and dry.

[aquatechwaterproofing]

For over 25 years basement waterproofing toronto GTA's trusted waterproofing company specialize in residential, commercial and industrial.

[gabrielfulton-blog1]

Factors to consider for basement remodel

Keeping your basement dry should be of utmost importance when you are planning a basement remodel. Testing the moisture content and addressing the water drainage problems with the help of a sump pump is necessary. Sump pump cost and other costs depend on the requirements of your crawling space or basement. Basement leakage can also be taken care of with expert basement solutions that remain well within your remodeling budget.

Wet basement remodel requirements If a dehumidifier doesn’t quite do the job of keeping the space dry then it’s time to take into account waterproofing solutions. Now, it may sound complicated and costly but once you are done with it, you can live and breathe peacefully for quite a long time. If there are cracks in the basement wall, then the ground water can find a way in and cause major structural damage and decay. What needs to be seen is that whether repairs are required in the interior or the exterior. Interior issues can be sorted out during the remodeling. External damages require separate attention.

Costs to take into account This depends on the extent of remodeling and reconstruction required. Internal waterproofing cost may include sump pump cost, along with the cost of interior sealants and constructing proper water drainage system so that the ground water can be effectively drawn away from the building structure. Sump pumps are extremely functional in achieving the same. Choosing an excellent quality sump pump is therefore essential to successful basement waterproofing. Basement egress solutions also take up a good amount of investment but once installed, they ensure safety and security for the inhabitants. Fresh air and light can enter the basement and keep it well ventilated.

Drawing up a remodeling plan This is where you call the professionals. They are certified contractors who have the experience and resources to help you in renovating your basement and ensure that it is completely waterproofed. The problem can arise from concretes, weeping tiles, poor drainage systems and gutters, and they need to evaluated by experts in order to give you a detailed picture about what needs to be done and how. The best technology will be made available to you only after you are convinced of your decision to go with the plan. Both waterproofing and foundation repair services are offered as a part of your remodeling plan, in case there is need for it.

Basement remodel plans need to take into account waterproofing requirements so that the space is free of moisture. Ensuring proper water drainage is an important step in remodeling. As a part of it, sump pumps are installed. Sump pump cost will depend on various factors, of which you will be informed by your service provider. Using the right material is very important for having a dry and well-ventilated basement. Your basement can be your private space, a family room or a workshop. Before everything, the structure needs to be secured so that you can enjoy your time there sans bulging walls or moist floor. With a little time and investment your basement can be remodeled to suit your needs.

Plan basement remodel considering all costs including sump pump cost.

[clarenceomoore]

5 questions for… Roger Davies, Value Management Guru

Roger Davies is a business consultant and author. His specialist topic is Value Management — that is, ensuring that business transformation delivers on the goals it sets out to achieve. He’s also an old colleague and friend — we worked for the same consulting firm, back in the Nineties.

I caught up with Roger to get an update on the latest thinking on how we define the value of our business change programmes.

1. What the heck is ‘value’ anyway, and how does it relate to money? You once told me value equated to “benefits minus costs” — is it still this simple?

Yes it is that simple. The challenge is how to frame value so that this ‘Value Equation’ works in any context and when the units of benefits and costs are not the same. Value is most effectively framed as energy transformation. Money is effectively a surrogate for energy, and money transactions the mechanism for energy transformations – an invention up there with the wheel in terms of energy transmission. That is why it is called currency, because it is all about the flow.

Therefore, it is more appropriate to frame money as a measure of value for the purposes of transaction – i.e. the informational means by which energy can be transformed through value chains. Money helps us define the value of a relationship, a transaction or a situation. The concept of money works very well under near perfect competition where choice can (but not inevitably) create equitable balance, reflected in cost and price – i.e. costbase and revenue, the 2 sides of the P&L.

2. Where does use of money to define value fall down?

Whilst money is an efficient tool for transaction, research shows us that it is an unreliable indicator of value. Symptoms of this include excessive C-level salaries at one end and at the other, the ‘gig’ economy and aged care, where substantial value is often delivered by people on subsistence income. So when money is used as a direct synonym for value, we come unstuck.Whilst money is an efficient tool for transactions, research shows us that it is an unreliable indicator of value. Symptoms of this include excessive C-level salaries at one end and, at the other, the ‘gig’ economy and aged care, where substantial value is often delivered by people on subsistence income. So, when money is used as a direct synonym for value, we come unstuck.

3. So, shouldn’t we look for other ways of measuring value?

The brutal reality is that money drives the physical world which we have created, so we either change the model (tricky) or define and frame value using money in a way which drives the right stakeholder outcomes, taking into account its limitations. My stance is not to declare dogmatically that everything can be measured directly in financial terms, but that through precise tracing of cause and effect, it is possible to determine how intended outcomes can be delivered with equitable return to all stakeholders. In other words, quantify the benefits to the decision makers in the units they need to deliver win-win outcomes to all stakeholders , This requires a very different approach, not right or left wing dogma but precise causal thinking.

4. Ok, but Wwhat does this mean for organisations looking to ‘deliver’ value?

The answer is two-fold. First you should use money where appropriate, and other measures where not. And second, you can see money as the cart, not the horse — which is vision and strategy. For example, in the case of aged care, you can start with the highest purpose – ‘people living comfortably and in dignity in their later life’. You can then work backwards through the value chain to determine how all the players, including tax payers, investors, society as a whole, can gain from the attainment of this purpose through the performance they deliver.

5. This sounds quite complicated — can’t I just say, “Here’s a problem, what’s the solution, how much does it cost?”

This quantification cannot be achieved using conventional linear thinking and static models. Indeed, it’s precisely this kind of thinking that leads so many projects and programmes to under-deliver. If we really want to deliver benefits to our organisations, we are directed to master the world of complexity and systems thinking, where causality exists in patterns and probabilities, with many soft drivers, such as trust, security, relationships etc – which boil down to values.

This quantification cannot be achieved using conventional linear thanking and static models. Indeed, it’s precisely this kind of thinking that leads so many projects and programmes to under-deliver. If we really want to deliver benefits to our organisations, we are directed to master the world of complexity and systems thinking where causality exists in patterns and probabilities, with may soft drivers, such as trust, security, relationships etc – which boil down to values.

This may sound like it’s over-complicating things but the fact is, too many projects today work on the basis of throwing money at the problem, rather than thinking about how to ensure the solution delivers value. Accordingly, Value Management places great emphasis on non-linear causal modelling of Complex Adaptive Systems, such as markets, to quantify the linkage between programme deliverables (interventions) and stakeholder outcomes.

  My take

In an industry driven by cycles of telling the world that the latest raft of technology can achieve less with more, it’s important for all enterprise decision makers to resist any urge to accept these mantras. At the same time, thinking about value as opposed to money is a challenge: while the latter is tangible, the former is amorphous and, not ironically, a harder sell.

As a result our business cases tend to be linear, talking in terms of TCO or ROI over a fixed period. And meanwhile, we struggle with concepts such as ‘digital transformation’ — business leaders know they have merit, but can’t put their finger on what it is.

The answer, like it or lump it, is to tease apart the link between value and financial measures: as Roger suggests, use money when appropriate, but not when it isn’t. It is incumbent on any strategist to know the difference between value and money, and be able to drive better business decisions as a result.

[babbleuk]

5 questions for… Roger Davies, Value Management Guru

Roger Davies is a business consultant and author. His specialist topic is Value Management — that is, ensuring that business transformation delivers on the goals it sets out to achieve. He’s also an old colleague and friend — we worked for the same consulting firm, back in the Nineties.

I caught up with Roger to get an update on the latest thinking on how we define the value of our business change programmes.

1. What the heck is ‘value’ anyway, and how does it relate to money? You once told me value equated to “benefits minus costs” — is it still this simple?

Yes it is that simple. The challenge is how to frame value so that this ‘Value Equation’ works in any context and when the units of benefits and costs are not the same. Value is most effectively framed as energy transformation. Money is effectively a surrogate for energy, and money transactions the mechanism for energy transformations – an invention up there with the wheel in terms of energy transmission. That is why it is called currency, because it is all about the flow.

Therefore, it is more appropriate to frame money as a measure of value for the purposes of transaction – i.e. the informational means by which energy can be transformed through value chains. Money helps us define the value of a relationship, a transaction or a situation. The concept of money works very well under near perfect competition where choice can (but not inevitably) create equitable balance, reflected in cost and price – i.e. costbase and revenue, the 2 sides of the P&L.

2. Where does use of money to define value fall down?

Whilst money is an efficient tool for transaction, research shows us that it is an unreliable indicator of value. Symptoms of this include excessive C-level salaries at one end and at the other, the ‘gig’ economy and aged care, where substantial value is often delivered by people on subsistence income. So when money is used as a direct synonym for value, we come unstuck.Whilst money is an efficient tool for transactions, research shows us that it is an unreliable indicator of value. Symptoms of this include excessive C-level salaries at one end and, at the other, the ‘gig’ economy and aged care, where substantial value is often delivered by people on subsistence income. So, when money is used as a direct synonym for value, we come unstuck.

3. So, shouldn’t we look for other ways of measuring value?

The brutal reality is that money drives the physical world which we have created, so we either change the model (tricky) or define and frame value using money in a way which drives the right stakeholder outcomes, taking into account its limitations. My stance is not to declare dogmatically that everything can be measured directly in financial terms, but that through precise tracing of cause and effect, it is possible to determine how intended outcomes can be delivered with equitable return to all stakeholders. In other words, quantify the benefits to the decision makers in the units they need to deliver win-win outcomes to all stakeholders , This requires a very different approach, not right or left wing dogma but precise causal thinking.

4. Ok, but Wwhat does this mean for organisations looking to ‘deliver’ value?

The answer is two-fold. First you should use money where appropriate, and other measures where not. And second, you can see money as the cart, not the horse — which is vision and strategy. For example, in the case of aged care, you can start with the highest purpose – ‘people living comfortably and in dignity in their later life’. You can then work backwards through the value chain to determine how all the players, including tax payers, investors, society as a whole, can gain from the attainment of this purpose through the performance they deliver.

5. This sounds quite complicated — can’t I just say, “Here’s a problem, what’s the solution, how much does it cost?”

This quantification cannot be achieved using conventional linear thinking and static models. Indeed, it’s precisely this kind of thinking that leads so many projects and programmes to under-deliver. If we really want to deliver benefits to our organisations, we are directed to master the world of complexity and systems thinking, where causality exists in patterns and probabilities, with many soft drivers, such as trust, security, relationships etc – which boil down to values.

This quantification cannot be achieved using conventional linear thanking and static models. Indeed, it’s precisely this kind of thinking that leads so many projects and programmes to under-deliver. If we really want to deliver benefits to our organisations, we are directed to master the world of complexity and systems thinking where causality exists in patterns and probabilities, with may soft drivers, such as trust, security, relationships etc – which boil down to values.

This may sound like it’s over-complicating things but the fact is, too many projects today work on the basis of throwing money at the problem, rather than thinking about how to ensure the solution delivers value. Accordingly, Value Management places great emphasis on non-linear causal modelling of Complex Adaptive Systems, such as markets, to quantify the linkage between programme deliverables (interventions) and stakeholder outcomes.

  My take

In an industry driven by cycles of telling the world that the latest raft of technology can achieve less with more, it’s important for all enterprise decision makers to resist any urge to accept these mantras. At the same time, thinking about value as opposed to money is a challenge: while the latter is tangible, the former is amorphous and, not ironically, a harder sell.

As a result our business cases tend to be linear, talking in terms of TCO or ROI over a fixed period. And meanwhile, we struggle with concepts such as ‘digital transformation’ — business leaders know they have merit, but can’t put their finger on what it is.

The answer, like it or lump it, is to tease apart the link between value and financial measures: as Roger suggests, use money when appropriate, but not when it isn’t. It is incumbent on any strategist to know the difference between value and money, and be able to drive better business decisions as a result.

from Gigaom https://gigaom.com/2018/03/14/5-questions-for-roger-davies-value-management-guru/

[makeacocktail]

New Post has been published on Auto Insurance

New Post has been published on http://autoinsurance.media/virginia-reminds-insurers-rates-rating-rules-must-be-cost-based-2/amp/

Virginia Reminds Insurers: Rates, Rating Rules Must Be Cost-Based

Virginia Insurance Commissioner Jacqueline Cunningham has issued an administrative letter this month reminding insurers to review the rate standards outlined in Virginia Code § 38.2-1904 to ensure compliance.

The administrative letter also indicates that so-called “price optimization” techniques that raise premiums for policyholders who are considered unlikely to search for a better deal have not been permitted in Virginia.

The administrative letter (Re: Compliance with Statutory Rate Standards in File-and-Use Lines of Insurance) was issued on April 15 and was addressed to all insurers and rate service organizations licensed to write property/casualty insurance in Virginia.

“The primary focus of the letter is to remind insurers of the rate standards in Virginia and that rates and rating rules must be cost-based,” said Katha Treanor, a spokesperson for the Virginia State Corporation Commission and the Bureau of Insurance.

In Virginia, insurers’ filings are reviewed to determine that they comply with the statutory requirements before the Bureau of Insurance acknowledges them, Treanor said. The compliance review includes identifying provisions within the filing that may be in conflict with the rate standards or other statutory requirements in Virginia. If any are noted, the items are addressed and remedied during the review process.

Cunningham said in the administrative letter that in recent years, Virginia has received rates and supplementary rating information in filings that utilize increasingly complex pricing mechanisms, such as predictive models.

Cunningham said some filings have included pricing mechanisms that are inconsistent with the rate standards outlined in § 38.2-1904, particularly subsection A 3. (The subsection A 3 states “No rate shall be unfairly discriminatory if a different rate is charged for the same coverage and the rate differential (i) is based on sound actuarial principles or (ii) is related to actual or reasonably anticipated experience.”)

The commissioner noted that in order to comply with the rate standards, “any rate differentials for the same coverage” must be based on differences between expected losses and/or expenses.

She said examples of practices that have been determined to be inconsistent with the provisions of § 38.2-1904 A 3 include, but are not limited to, the use of:

• Characteristics specific to a particular policyholder to predict and assign pricing components unrelated to losses or expenses incurred during the policy period;

• Pricing components related to an insured’s predicted long-term profitability over time, based on an insured’s likelihood to renew; and

• Price optimization techniques intended to maximize overall retention, profitability, written premium or market share based on how much of a premium increase an individual policyholder is likely to tolerate before seeking coverage with other carriers.

Powered By WizardRSS.com | Full Text RSS Feed News – Insurance Journal

[directwaterproofing1-blog]

Reliable & cost effective basement waterproofing services in Toronto offered by Direct Waterproofing. Get a Free Quote today! Call 416-454-7575

[directwaterproofing1-blog]

Reliable & cost effective basement waterproofing services in Toronto offered by Direct Waterproofing. Get a Free Quote today! Call 416-454-7575

[directwaterproofing1-blog]

Reliable & cost effective basement waterproofing services in Toronto offered by Direct Waterproofing. Get a Free Quote today! Call 416-454-7575

[aquatechwaterproofing]

Wondering about basement waterproofing Toronto cost? Aquatech Waterproofing has variables that are unique to your home and offers free estimates on every job. Call 416-300-2191 today!

[makeacocktail]

New Post has been published on Auto Insurance

New Post has been published on http://autoinsurance.media/virginia-reminds-insurers-rates-rating-rules-must-be-cost-based/amp/

Virginia Reminds Insurers: Rates, Rating Rules Must Be Cost-Based

Virginia Insurance Commissioner Jacqueline Cunningham has issued an administrative letter this month reminding insurers to review the rate standards outlined in Virginia Code § 38.2-1904 to ensure compliance.

The administrative letter also indicates that so-called “price optimization” techniques that raise premiums for policyholders who are considered unlikely to search for a better deal have not been permitted in Virginia.

The administrative letter (Re: Compliance with Statutory Rate Standards in File-and-Use Lines of Insurance) was issued on April 15 and was addressed to all insurers and rate service organizations licensed to write property/casualty insurance in Virginia.

“The primary focus of the letter is to remind insurers of the rate standards in Virginia and that rates and rating rules must be cost-based,” said Katha Treanor, a spokesperson for the Virginia State Corporation Commission and the Bureau of Insurance.

In Virginia, insurers’ filings are reviewed to determine that they comply with the statutory requirements before the Bureau of Insurance acknowledges them, Treanor said. The compliance review includes identifying provisions within the filing that may be in conflict with the rate standards or other statutory requirements in Virginia. If any are noted, the items are addressed and remedied during the review process.

Cunningham said in the administrative letter that in recent years, Virginia has received rates and supplementary rating information in filings that utilize increasingly complex pricing mechanisms, such as predictive models.

Cunningham said some filings have included pricing mechanisms that are inconsistent with the rate standards outlined in § 38.2-1904, particularly subsection A 3. (The subsection A 3 states “No rate shall be unfairly discriminatory if a different rate is charged for the same coverage and the rate differential (i) is based on sound actuarial principles or (ii) is related to actual or reasonably anticipated experience.”)

The commissioner noted that in order to comply with the rate standards, “any rate differentials for the same coverage” must be based on differences between expected losses and/or expenses.

She said examples of practices that have been determined to be inconsistent with the provisions of § 38.2-1904 A 3 include, but are not limited to, the use of:

• Characteristics specific to a particular policyholder to predict and assign pricing components unrelated to losses or expenses incurred during the policy period;

• Pricing components related to an insured’s predicted long-term profitability over time, based on an insured’s likelihood to renew; and

• Price optimization techniques intended to maximize overall retention, profitability, written premium or market share based on how much of a premium increase an individual policyholder is likely to tolerate before seeking coverage with other carriers.

Powered By WizardRSS.com | Full Text RSS Feed News – Insurance Journal