This is a continuation of a long topic, addressed by post number rather than by page. Start at post 1.
List price versus negotiated price was covered in the wiki last year and the page has a review date on it, which is a better starting point than my memory of a thread.
Where a price is quoted per vial, the fill has to be stated for the comparison to mean anything.
It cost nothing to check and would have cost something not to.
Coming back to post #91, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.
What I would check first on list price versus negotiated price is whether the thing being measured moved or whether the way of measuring it moved. Those look identical in a graph.
Post #91 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.
A definition problem is doing most of the work in this list price versus negotiated price discussion. Once the term is pinned down I suspect the disagreement mostly goes away and what is left is small.
Where somebody posts a comparison, the useful version states the date, the region and what was included.
Not a strong opinion, just a consistent one.
That is clearer than the version I had in my head. Thank you.
Post #95 answers the question as asked. The question underneath it is different.
The number people quote for list price versus negotiated price is a central estimate presented without its interval, and the interval is wide enough that the estimate is nearly uninformative on its own.
Post #95 put the caveat in the right place and I want to underline it.
A cheaper option that arrives slowly has a cost in the form of running out, and people rarely price that.
An observation about list price versus negotiated price that I cannot explain and am posting anyway, on the principle that unexplained observations are more useful public than private.
Where I part company with post #99, and it is a narrow parting.
Speaking only to list price versus negotiated price as I have actually seen it, rather than as it is usually described: the effect is real, it is smaller than the thread suggests, and the variance between people is larger than the effect.
Post #99 is the version of this I will quote in future. One addition.
Nothing here is financial advice and none of it is a route to a transaction.
Good question, well framed, and I would like to see it answered properly.
Cost per milligram is the only comparison that survives format differences, but even then it needs care. A pen and a vial are not the same product and cannot be compared on price per milligram alone because dead volume, wastage, and number of doses actually obtainable differ.
It is the sort of thing that seems obvious in retrospect and was not at the time.
Confirming post #104 from a second method, which matters more than confirming it from a second person.
The most useful pricing posts here are the ones that show the arithmetic rather than the conclusion.
I have changed my mind on this once already, so take it as current rather than settled.
On post #104 — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.
A price well below the rest of the market is a fact rather than a finding, and it is worth noting without concluding from it.
List price versus negotiated price is one of those subjects where the general answer and the answer for a specific case diverge, and the thread will go in circles until someone says which one is being asked for.
Larger orders shift risk as well as price, because more of your material then comes from one lot.
Same conclusion as the reply above, reached differently, which is mildly reassuring.
Picking up post #110: that is the part I would want checked first.
The failure mode on list price versus negotiated price is boring rather than dramatic. It is almost always the step everyone assumes was done correctly because it is too simple to get wrong.
On post #108 — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.
The cost of an independent submission is worth stating in these threads, because it is the main reason people do not do it.
On reflection I would soften that slightly.
Comparing a licensed product's price to a research-use-only preparation's price is comparing two different things, and the difference is most of the explanation.
A modest claim, modestly supported.
Adding the measurement that post #114 says would settle it.
Where somebody posts a comparison, the useful version states the date, the region and what was included.
Worth one more sentence than it usually gets.
Agreed, and I will stop repeating the version of this I had been repeating.
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Cost per milligram, computed honestly across formats — the long version
Cost per milligram, computed honestly across formats — the long version Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Documenting an access outcome, dated, because…
|
+111 | 124 | 24k | 14mo |
|
Cost per milligram, computed honestly across formats
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Cost per milligram, computed honestly across formats Everything below is what sits behind that. Documenting an access outcome, dated, because everything in this…
|
2 | 47k | 18mo | |
|
Revisiting: List price versus negotiated price versus what you pay
Revisiting: List price versus negotiated price versus what you pay — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Working notes on List price versus negotiated price rather than a…
|
+24 | 28 | 50k | 12mo |
|
Pen wastage and its effect on real cost — the long version
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Pen wastage and its effect on real cost — the long version Everything below is what sits behind that. A narrow question about Pen wastage, deliberately narrow,…
|
2 | 34k | 13mo | |
|
Manufacturer assistance programmes and their eligibility rules
On the subject in the title: Manufacturer assistance programmes and their eligibility rules Working notes rather than a conclusion. I have spent a fortnight trying to pin manufacturer assistance programmes…
|
+37 | 42 | 32k | 11d |
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Oxidation pathways for methionine and tryptophan
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Oxidation pathways for methionine and tryptophan Everything below is what sits behind that. Working notes on oxidation pathways for methionine rather than a…
|
+58 | 63 | 1k | 19mo |
|
What a reversed-phase purity number actually is
The question in the title: What a reversed-phase purity number actually is I will give what I have already checked below so nobody repeats it. I would like to understand what this number means before I repeat…
|
+87 | 101 | 27k | 4h |
|
How shortages have affected compounding permissions
How shortages have affected compounding permissions I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. I would like to know what people here actually do about shortages,…
|
+61 | 71 | 3.6k | 2d |
|
Ultrasound and skinfolds: operator dependence in practice — what changed since
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Ultrasound and skinfolds: operator dependence in practice — what changed since Everything below is what sits behind that. What changes if the standard account of…
|
+32 | 37 | 7.4k | 3mo |
|
Aggregated purity results across four services, with caveats
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Aggregated purity results across four services, with caveats Everything below is what sits behind that. Aggregated purity results across four, from the point of…
|
3 | 24k | 9mo |