ResMed Attacks Internet Suppliers

[Roman Hokie]

Okay. How is price-fixing (at the manufacturers' level) for DME-available products any different than, say, Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft setting the prices for their consoles, handhelds, and games?

For example, a Wii right now, at ANY US retail outlet is $199.99. Includes the console, Wii Sports, one Wiimote, one nunchuck controller extension, Wii Motion Plus, and Wii Sports Resort. White or Black.

Doesn't matter who the retailer/reseller is; that's the way it is.

Of course websites CAN offer the incentive of free shipping and non-collection of sales tax, but only in those states/locales in which they do not have nexus (business location).

I don't have a problem with price-fixing at the manufacturer's level. Sure, it limits profits for the DME providers. However, I think it forces them to get in the customer/patient service game even more.

Competition is good. So it's not about competing price points. Competition is still good. And if folks (like me) want to pay the extra green for a brand or model, there's freedom to do so - or not.

Good point, though. Who DOES have the enforcement responsibility for scripts?

[Uncle_Bob]

Resmed Inc sure are shrewd. But i wish I'd known about all this sleep apnea stuff in 1996, I would have loaded up on some of their stock.

cpapauction.com currently has a new S9 + H5i with bidding at $350 and reserve met so they clearly have not complete control.

[goose]

I'm not absolutely, positively sure the others WILL follow along this time.
Den

You may be right Den, and I think the determining factor will be how successful the Resmed "campaign" is in the end.
If it's an overwhelming success, I think the others will get on board post haste. If it's negative or just marginally positive, I think you are probably correct.
As you say, time will tell......

cheers
goose

[roster]

One of the major roots of the problem is our government's requirements for prescriptions for purchase of CPAP machines and same government's requirement that only licensed DMEs can sell machines to patients.

You know what happens once a government regulates something - it takes nearly a revolution to get it deregulated.

If these two regulations would be thrown out, I believe robust markets for new and used machines would develop. Supply chains would become more efficient and prices would fall.

Smart manufacturers would continue to be profitable and some would use the changes in the market to become even more profitable. After all, it is good for the manufacturer when the consumer is happy with the money-value and it is good for the consumer (patient) when the manufacturers of good machines are profitable.

As attractive as some of the latest ResMed machines are, I will vote with my dollars and not buy one of their machines due to their treatment of internet dealers and their failure to provide a patient version of efficacy software. PST's post is correct; I don't know if ResMed has broken a single law. However, I can still boycott them.

If you want to start a Facebook page, the complaints against ResMed need to be very specific. "Capitalist pigs" is not good enough.

Anyone want to tackle writing the complaints out in concise, clear and specific terms?

[timbalionguy]

And I fully agree with Rooster on the prescription thing. Although there is nothing wrong with doctors issuing prescriptions to patients (which is what most people would want, anyway), it shouldn't be a requirement. I should be able to walk into a pharmacy (like you can in Mexico), and buy most any drug I want, no questions asked. However, it is up to me (not the pharmacist, although he should willingly give advice) to see to it the drug is used properly. It's called personal responsibility!

When meaningful competition happens, prices fall and service (if you want it) improves.

I, too will join a boycott of ResMed products.

[who]

Okay. How is price-fixing (at the manufacturers' level) for DME-available products any different than, say, Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft setting the prices for their consoles, handhelds, and games?

Difference: Price-control policies on games leave a level playing field for customers, since all customers pay for their games in basically the same way.

This is a different situation entirely. This is a manufacturer-enforced extra "tax" for online customers that is in place only to appease the non-online insurance-based businesses, to whom the manufacturers sell most of their machines.

Nutshell version: Manufacturer keeps loudly proclaiming to be deeply in love with user. But user is not stupid. User has eyes to see who manufacturer is actually in bed with at this very moment.

[nosenabook]

U.S. law does not forbid a manufacturer from enforcing a minimum advertised price (MAP)

I'm not so sure. There was quite a hoo-ha a couple of years ago in the knitting world when a high-end yarn manufacturer wrote a threatening letter to a discount seller of that yarn, and refused to sell any more yarn to the discounter. At that time, for the manufacturer to enforce the manufacturer's price was illegal, but prohibitively expensive to fight.

That's why I bought a Respironics System One , not that Respironics is white like snow but at least Resmed had one less S9 sold on their statistics. I'm changing changing to another mask brand too.

Dang! I just got my S9! I was reflecting earlier to day how insurance would be different when I got my next machine. I hope for the better.

I should be able to walk into a pharmacy (like you can in Mexico), and buy most any drug I want, no questions asked. However, it is up to me (not the pharmacist, although he should willingly give advice) to see to it the drug is used properly. It's called personal responsibility!

I might call it survival of the fittest. I do not believe that these machines need a prescription. Some DMEs would have me believe that air pressure can be dangerous, but I maintain it isn't rocket science. And who is asking how we treat our machines after we get them home?

[plr66]

As I said in my previous post, they make respectable products. I don't think that anyone would argue that point, but their corporate attitude, marketing strategy and corporate culture of lies and deceit is incredibly abhorrent as well as arrogant!!

I'm not sure they would care about a Facebook campaign, but why not?? If someone wants to set one up I'll sign on - I just don't have the time to create and monitor. Any "public forum" where Resmed is provided with bad press can't be all bad, but it has to be on the up-n-up....no unsubstantiated emotional outbursts and name calling that cannot be backed by facts because those kinds of arguments can be used against the effort,-- If you set up a Facebook page, let us all know. I'm in....
cheers
goose

I agree with you completely, Goose. It has been a year now since the charade that ResMed "customer services" performed with me in response to my publicly (here) confronting their obvious move to producing inferior quality Swift LT pillows (and probably all the rest of their silicone cushions and nasal pillows, since they likely use the same manufacturers for all of them).
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=41729&st=0&sk=t&sd=a

There has been absolutely no evidence whatever of their making any effort to rectify that quality issue since that time, despite their statements that quality would be corrected. Heck, they even had the audacity to send me 8-10 sleazy & flimsy replacement pillows for the ones I sent them for their supposed "under the microscope study"--rather than to try to rectify the losses I incurred with all those purchases!! What a complete outrage. I would certainly join in any effort to empower all of us in responding publicly to this company having such potentially great products and such a horrible, disgusting, and frankly despicable response to their actual user-consumers.

[Roman Hokie]

I remember when I was working for a "large wholesale club's" online presence. Let's call my customer, "Pam's". Said wholesale club is a wholly-owned subsidiary of a small retailer HQed in NW Arkansas who, at least for a time, was focused on value-priced American-made merchandise.

Anyway, we were getting merchandise in during the rampup. We carried several high-end handbags at bargain prices. The handbags were made by a company, let's call them, um, "Roach." Yeah. That's it.

Well, the way that many companies undercut official distributors is to use something called "diverters". A diverter will offload their product (for a smaller profit) to an unauthorized reselling channel. So, while my customer, "Pam's", was making a small profit per bag, they were not an authorized reseller. And no, when "Roach"'s rep contacted us, we did not tell them from whom we purchased their fine leather handbags. Free market trade did not make such disclosure a requirement. They were not making the same profit as, say, the Roach authorized reseller would have.

Now, online resellers, including the fine organization that hosts and offers this forum may be using diverters or they may be purchasing directly through manufacturers. I don't know. I have no ethical issue with using diverters. The goods are not stolen. They are traded legally for dollars or whatever between two willing parties. If the selling party is not supposed to be selling the merchandise to the unauthorized party, that's their own problem.

I also have no issue with price controls. The pricing, from what I see, is the same between the DME and the online resellers. The issue is what INSURANCE will cover as in-network and out-of-network. Those are the real hardline troublemakers.

If insurance wasn't a player in the game, I do not thing the price-fixing would be an issue.

[plr66]

If insurance wasn't a player in the game, I do not thing the price-fixing would be an issue.

I'm going to sincerely apologize if I missed your point, RH, but many of us here have had to make a decision to pay out of pocket to online companies--and cpap.com is my preference--rather than to pay the ridiculously inflated price of what is charged to insurance and then a much higher rate for the copay or deductable than is reasonable or affordable.

[Roman Hokie]

I'm just saying that, if I had to pay out of pocket for CPAP, I'd be all over it at CPAP.com. The only reasons I didn't is that I wanted 1) someplace local so I could get quicker turnaround on supplies, etc (and visit the place if need be) and 2) as CPAP.com is out of network I'd be paying 3x what my cost was to my in-network DME.

There's still some stuff I might be dot-comming for later. Still learning.

I've also found that some places, if they don't have to go through insurance take cash at a discount. There's less overhead and "billing options" to insurance companies run 4-15% of the bill as a service fee.

[dog_tired1]

Things like this make my blood boil! It seems everybody is going after internet sellers and internet businesses lately.

I am embarrassed to admit it, but I am a (light) smoker. In New York, cigarettes are between $7.95-$9.00 a pack. I don't smoke much, but once in a while I like to go outside, prop my feet up in my lawn chair and relax with a cig. NY, is now raising the price of cigarettes to $10 a pack. For years me and a few of my friends and family have purchased them online for half the price.

Now, Obama had passed the PACT ACT (June 30, 2010) and buying tobacco products online will be illegal. Lots of tobacco sellers will be out of business then. Smokers will be forced to pay the $7.95-$10 a pack (New York) and some other states if they want to keep on smoking. Anti smokers will cheer, but remember this.... For every right somebody loses, you might lose your rights too in regards to something else.

The government is using health as an excuse to tax us to death. Smoking is not good for anyone's health, but to the government it is all about money. A lot of states also complained that people were buying online and from the Indian Reservations and they were not getting cigarette tax revenue. Brick & mortar stores were howling too, because of a lack of sales. Just recently I started to roll my own cigarettes and it now costs me $1-$2 a pack. A lot of people will not think of this option and will pay the $10.

Now here is where my post makes sense. It is similar to the greediness of major pharmaceutical companies and makers of medical equipment. They really don't truly care about our health. They only care about their profits. My insurance doesn't cover Cpap, so I pay for it out of my pocket. I am not rich, but thank god I can afford it. If these big medical companies jack up the price and make it hard for them and us to get discounts buying online, lots of people who can't afford it will go without treatment. It is just plain greed!

Please don't bash me about the smoking (I have thin skin, lol). I hope I didn't stir up any controversy, but it sure feels good to vent once in a while.

~Dee

[roster]

"Trying to get everything you want at dirt-cheap prices is greed."

Woof. Woof.

[goose]

$10 a pack???? Obviously not enough yet!!!!
Gotta wanna commit slow suicide awfully bad to pay that!!!

cheers
goose

[dog_tired1]

"Trying to get everything you want at dirt-cheap prices is greed."

Woof. Woof.

Roster was that intended for me? If it was, just remember one thing. I am just a basic middle class person in America who is not a multi-million dollar corporation. I pay all my bills and do not live beyond my means. Once in a while I enjoy a simple pleasure whether it is a cup of coffee, a puff on a cigarette or a little treat. I am not greedy if I am trying to save a little money.

Hi Goose,
Yes, $10 bucks a pack. I will grow my own tobacco if we go into cigarette prohibition, lol! I can think of much more expensive, slower suicide methods than cigs.