Welcome to Relentless Health Value, the podcast for those working in the belly of the beast to fix our fundamentally broken healthcare system. If you are a self-insured employer, plan sponsor, benefits consultant, clinician, a C-suite executive or anyone in the business of healthcare tired of the "transformational theater" and marketing fluff, you have found your tribe.
The U.S. healthcare system isn't a rational market; it's a game of Pachinko where perverse incentives reign, and as we always say, where there's mystery, there's margin.
Hosted by Stacey Richter, we relentlessly hunt down the administrative "inches" of waste and expose the hidden fees draining the $5.6 trillion healthcare sector. We transform wonky healthcare theory into ruthlessly practical, actionable insights.
Whether it's demanding radical transparency, navigating complex PBM contracts, or buying actual healthcare instead of illusory discounts, our mandate is simple: If it results in a net positive for patients, we do it. Join the Relentless Health Value Tribe to equip yourself with the fiduciary armor needed to outwit the status quo, demand accountability, and drive real change.
Site
RSS
Apple
Data updated on 22/09/2026
Recent rankings
Latest chart positions across Apple Podcasts and Spotify rankings.
Shared links between episodes and podcasts
Links found in episode descriptions and other podcasts that share them.
Discover shows related to Relentless Health Value, based on actual content similarities. Explore podcasts with similar topics, themes, and formats, backed by real data.
How Stark Law, Stipends, and Noncompetes Drive Hospital Consolidation, With Eric Bricker, MD
Episode 529
Wednesday, September 16, 2026 • Duration 39:28
The Chain Reactions Wrecking Healthcare Affordability: Facility Fees, Stark Law, and Noncompetes. Episode 529.
Why do hospital facility fees keep pace with inflation while professional fees fall behind—and how did a law meant to stop kickbacks end up fueling a stipend economy instead? Stacey Richter talks with Eric Bricker, MD, founder of AHealthcareZ and former co-founder and chief medical officer of Compass Professional Health Services, about two action/reaction chains reshaping healthcare affordability: the facility-versus-professional-fee gap, and the Stark Law's unintended stipend economy driving hospital consolidation. Along the way: a $48,126 hospital charge for the same appendectomy that pays a surgeon $609, the AMA's $300 million CPT-code business, and how Tryon Medical Group in Charlotte, North Carolina, won back 90% of its patients by leaving its hospital employer.
WHAT YOU'LL LEARN
✅ How separate physician "professional fee" and hospital "facility fee" billing streams have diverged so far that Medicare pays a surgeon $609 for an appendectomy while the hospital's published charge for it runs $48,126
✅ Why the Stark Law's ban on hospitals paying physicians for referrals gave rise to "stipends"—flat annual payments that can range from $1 million to $50 million depending on hospital size, and how physician consolidation in fields like anesthesiology has pushed those stipends higher
✅ How "site unneutral" payment gaps incentivize hospitals to buy independent physician practices and shift services like echocardiograms into hospital settings to capture higher fees for identical care
✅ Why noncompete clauses trap physicians in incentive structures misaligned with patient care—and how Tryon Medical Group in Charlotte, North Carolina, sued to leave its hospital employer and kept over 90% of its patients
✅ Why self-insured employers (covering roughly 60% of Americans) and physicians organizing beyond fragmented specialty lines are healthcare's "two sleeping giants"
✅ Practical alternatives already in use: employer direct contracting, direct primary care subscriptions, and fixed-fee specialty models like the LA urology group paid on subscription for prostate cancer care
WHY THIS MATTERS
These two chain reactions—the facility-versus-professional-fee gap, and a well-intentioned law that quietly created a stipend economy—aren't abstract policy trivia. Together they drive the hospital consolidation and site unneutral payment schemes squeezing employers, taxpayers, and patients alike. As Stacey frames it, understanding how these action/reaction chains work is what it takes to reverse their direction toward more affordable, higher-quality care. The fix isn't waiting on Washington: it's employers and physicians—healthcare's two sleeping giants—using their leverage, whether through direct contracting, ending noncompetes, or simply voting with their feet.
07:03 How AHA's success in lobbying plays into its ability to outpace inflation.
14:48 The second action/reaction chain.
21:57 How all of this impacts the patient.
28:24 Purchasers as a sleeping giant.
29:36 Physicians as the second sleeping giant.
31:26 Site-neutral payments: who wants them, who doesn't.
33:33 Dr. Bricker's advice.
Private Equity in Primary Care: What the Data Actually Shows, With Yashaswini Singh, PhD. Episode 528.
Episode 528
Wednesday, September 9, 2026 • Duration 38:49
Private Equity in Primary Care: Just Another Inflationary Business Model? What Does the Data Actually Show, With Yashaswini Singh, PhD (EP528)
Private equity has been buying up primary care practices for years, promising the capital that chronically underfunded clinicians badly need. But does the money actually make care better? Yashaswini Singh, PhD, MPA, the Thomas J. and Alice M. Tisch Assistant Professor of Health Services, Policy, and Practice at Brown University, has spent years studying that question — and her newest research, published in Health Affairs and JAMA Health Forum, finds PE-affiliated primary care physicians negotiate prices 8% to 10% higher than independent doctors, while patient outcomes barely budge.
WHAT YOU'LL LEARN
✅ Why negotiated prices for PE-affiliated primary care physicians run 8% to 10% higher than independent doctors — and why hospital-affiliated physicians still command the highest prices of all
✅ How a national study of roughly 200 PE-acquired primary care practices found a 20% increase in preventive services, including the Medicare Annual Wellness Visit, with no evidence of low-value care
✅ Why "cognitive atrophy" — deskilling from rigid, box-checking visits — isn't inevitable under PE ownership, but why the "best case scenario" often isn't what's actually happening
✅ How opaque common ownership — the same investors owning primary care, GI, orthopedic, and oncology practices — can create hidden referral incentives current data can't detect
✅ Why site-of-care payment arbitrage — a hospital-owned MRI can cost double or triple an independent one — drives referral-machine incentives regardless of who owns the practice
✅ Why PE's promise to reduce fragmentation through consolidation has instead produced physician turnover that undermines the patient-doctor relationship
WHY THIS MATTERS
Primary care clinicians are chronically underpaid, and private equity promises the capital to fix that. But Dr. Singh's research shows a real tradeoff: costs rise 8% to 10% while quality barely moves. Whether professional capital builds sustainable, whole-person care or becomes, as Stacey puts it, corporate arbitrage in a different Halloween costume depends on realigning payment incentives around outcomes rather than throughput — something no ownership model, PE included, is yet built to do.
Mark Cuban and Cora Opsahl: The Truth About Pass-Through PBM Contracts and Generic Compliance Ratios
Episode 526
Wednesday, August 26, 2026 • Duration 20:11
How Discount Theater and Generic Compliance Ratios Quietly Overcharge Patients and Employers. Episode 526.
Mark Cuban, co-founder of Mark Cuban Cost Plus Drug Company, and Cora Opsahl, managing director of Peterson Health Analytics and former director of the 32BJ Health Fund, join Stacey Richter for an outtake from their conversation last fall (EP488) on the operational mechanics of the pharmacy supply chain.
They trace how a generic compliance ratio—typically requiring pharmacies to buy at least 92% of their generics from a single primary wholesaler—pushes independent pharmacies into paying a premium that gets passed straight to patients, and how so-called pass-through PBM contracts can pay pharmacies using one pricing formula while billing employers using an entirely different one.
Along the way, they walk through the classic generic imatinib example—a drug Cost Plus Drugs sells for $25 a month that a traditional PBM channel has billed at $9,000—to show why a discount off an inflated reference price is, as Cuban puts it, discount theater.
WHAT YOU'LL LEARN
✅ Why pharmacies get locked into overpaying: wholesalers set a Generic Compliance Ratio requiring pharmacies to buy at least 92% of their generics from them or face chargebacks and fees that wipe out their margin
✅ The classic generic imatinib example: Cost Plus Drugs sells it for $25 a month, while the same drug billed through a traditional PBM channel has run $9,000 a month—a "discount" off a $27,000 branded Gleevec price that Mark Cuban calls discount theater
✅ How specialty tiers compound the problem: because generic imatinib gets classified on a specialty tier, patients can owe 25% coinsurance calculated off the inflated WAC price rather than the drug's real cost
✅ Why a "pass-through" PBM contract isn't simple math: Cora Opsahl explains that PBMs often reimburse pharmacies on an acquisition-cost-plus formula while billing employers a completely different AWP-minus formula for the same claim
✅ Why claims audits keep finding money owed back to the plan—and why employers are often restricted to auditing only a pre-approved sample of 250 claims
PMPM vs FFS—The Perverse Incentives Plan Sponsors Sometimes Miss, With Cristin Dickerson, MD
Episode 525
Wednesday, August 19, 2026 • Duration 16:33
Four Questions Plan Sponsors Should Ask Before Choosing PMPM or Fee-for-Service. Episode 525.
This episode is a tangent that never made it into the final cut of Stacey Richter's original conversation with Cristin Dickerson, MD, founding partner of Green Imaging, a physician-led radiology network built on direct contracting for imaging. In episode 485, they discussed how imaging can run 6% to 11% of total plan sponsor spend and how direct contracting brings that down while improving access; this outtake is where they got into the harder question underneath it — whether PMPM (per member per month) capitated payments create their own new perverse incentives, potentially just as strange as the old-fashioned fee-for-service kind, depending on who's holding the risk and why. It's a natural follow-on to last week's conversation with John Quinn (EP524) on buying healthcare like a supply chain of defined "pods of care."
WHAT YOU'LL LEARN
✅ Why Dr. Dickerson says fee-for-service can reduce perverse incentives compared with a PMPM subscription — Green Imaging charges no PEPM or admin fees and takes on the risk that its services simply won't be used
✅ How radiologist protocols and appropriateness guidelines let Green Imaging cut unnecessary imaging — switching a CT to an MRI, or skipping unneeded contrast — while showing 60% to 90% documented savings for employers
✅ Why not being the referring physician removes Green Imaging's financial incentive to drive up volume, which Stacey Richter identifies as the real test of whether a fee-for-service model has mitigated its own perverse incentive
✅ The four factors Stacey Richter says plan sponsors should weigh before choosing fee-for-service over PMPM: price beats the base network, the vendor (not the plan) drives its own volume and is auditable, the contract allows termination at will, and the plan's ASO contract actually permits carving out or steering to a high-value provider
✅ Why Stacey Richter argues there isn't just one "fee-for-service" — pricing you can see and verify against what you're billed is a fundamentally different model than a discount-based fee-for-service that hides the real price and can add 20% or more in revenue-cycle "hot potato" costs
Beating Provider Network Pricing Games by Thinking About Buying Healthcare Like a Manufacturer Supply Chain, With John Quinn
Episode 524
Wednesday, August 12, 2026 • Duration 17:02
John Quinn, founder and CEO of Wellnecity, joins Stacey Richter in episode 524 for an outtake from their conversation last fall on rethinking how self-insured employers build their provider networks. Rather than treating the network as one big, undifferentiated system, Quinn argues employers should think like a manufacturing supply chain: break healthcare into defined "subassemblies," or pods of care — pediatric care, a cancer journey, a kidney stone episode — and direct-contract for those pods whenever the price beats the fee-for-service average. If the boundaries of the pod are clear and the price comes in lower, Quinn says, the plan and the member both win, quality being equal.
WHAT YOU'LL LEARN
✅ Why Stacey Richter says the provider-network debate could fill "a 20-hour show," and why networks still have real upsides — administrative infrastructure, claims coordination, guaranteed provider payment, and broad access — even as critics like Mark Cuban ask on LinkedIn, "Why do we need networks? It is just a way for insurers to play pricing games."
✅ A real example of network rigidity: a self-insured employer identified 40 physicians who cost the plan upwards of $15 million in a single plan year while patient harm was occurring, and their ASO couldn't figure out how to remove those doctors from network under the existing contract structure
✅ How John Quinn defines a "subassembly" or "pod of care" — a bounded, definable episode like pediatric care or a cancer journey — and why purchasing that pod for less than the fee-for-service average is a win for the plan and member, assuming quality stays neutral
✅ Quinn's kidney stone example: a physician who says he can now treat a kidney stone in a 48-hour to five-day episode for roughly $2,000 to $3,000, versus the typical six weeks of pain, overuse of pain medication, and a price north of $10,000
✅ Why Quinn frames network optimization as a manufacturing supply-chain problem — the same way an automobile gets built from subassemblies sourced from specialized providers around the globe — because it's a mental model CFOs and senior leadership at self-insured employers already trust
The Sleeping Giants of Healthcare—Why Self-insured Employers and Clinicians Keep Missing Each Other, With Suhas Gondi, MD, MBA. EP523
Episode 523
Wednesday, August 5, 2026 • Duration 35:16
Why Self-Insured Employers and Clinicians Keep Missing Each Other, With Suhas Gondi, MD. The Sleeping Giants of Healthcare: Why Employers and Clinicians Keep Missing Each Other. Episode 523.
Dr. Suhas Gondi, MD, MBA, chief medical officer at Health Strategy and an attending physician at Massachusetts General Hospital, co-wrote a New England Journal of Medicine article — "A Sleeping Giant of Health Care Affordability—Self-Insured Employers" — because most clinicians, he found, have little idea a self-insured employer, not an insurance carrier, is the one actually paying for their patients' care. Talking with Stacey Richter, Dr. Gondi argues that self-insured employers and clinicians are both "sleeping giants," each holding real power over cost and access, who rarely communicate directly — leaving patients caught in the gap.
WHAT YOU'LL LEARN
✅ Why Dr. Suhas Gondi and his NEJM co-author, Zirui Song, MD, PhD, wrote for clinicians who, they found, have little sense that a self-insured employer — not the carrier name on the card — actually pays for a patient's care
✅ How a GLP-1 prescription can get denied at the pharmacy counter even after a clinician verifies coverage, because the employer has quietly moved GLP-1 coverage exclusively through a single third-party prescribing and coaching vendor
✅ Why GLP-1 spending alone can push a self-insured employer's pharmacy costs up 9% to 20% in a year, and why the roughly eight-year payback period employers are counting on assumes patients stay adherent far longer than most actually do
✅ How oncology site-of-care steering — an employer declining to pay a roughly 40% premium for infusion at a hospital-owned center instead of a physician's office — can look to the patient and oncologist like a denied cancer drug
✅ Why Dr. Gondi says EHRs like Epic are built to optimize revenue for hospital-system customers, not to surface a lower-cost site of care for patients or plan sponsors
✅ Dr. Gondi's advice for closing the gap: clinicians and employers should communicate directly, especially before a coverage change lands on patients, rather than assuming direct contracting is the only fix
How GoodRx Actually Makes Money: PBMs, Cash Prices, and Pharmacy Contracts, With Ge Bai, PhD, CPA (EP522)
Episode 522
Wednesday, July 29, 2026 • Duration 13:45
Ask Me Anything: How Does GoodRx Actually Make Money, and Who Really Pays for the Discount? Episode 522.
A listener asked Stacey Richter a deceptively simple question: how exactly does GoodRx make money? To answer it, this AMA episode revisits a 2021 conversation with Ge Bai, PhD, CPA, professor of accounting at the Johns Hopkins Carey Business School and of health policy and management at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, recently nominated to serve as Assistant Secretary at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Ge Bai lays out exactly how GoodRx turns pharmacy-PBM contract dysfunction into a business, and Stacey updates listeners on what's changed—and what hasn't—in the years since.
WHAT YOU'LL LEARN
✅ Why GoodRx is purely a pricing platform with no pharmacy of its own—unlike Amazon, which operates its own pharmacy
✅ How PBM contracts requiring pharmacies to offer insurers their "best price" force cash list prices artificially high, the exact dysfunction GoodRx monetizes
✅ How GoodRx's network of contracted PBMs—including Express Scripts and OptumRx—collects a per-dispense fee every time a patient uses a GoodRx card
✅ Why pharmacies lose out twice: they never collect their high list price, and they still owe a fee to the PBM that "referred" the cash-pay patient to them
✅ What's changed since 2021: a wave of new cash-pay competitors like Mark Cuban Cost Plus Drugs, GLP-1-driven cash-pay behavior, and proposed legislation targeting "Most Favored Nation" (lesser-of) clauses in PBM contracts
✅ Ge Bai's recent nomination to Assistant Secretary at HHS, building on research she has used to testify before Congress and shape healthcare policy
WHY THIS MATTERS
GoodRx's entire business model runs on a single structural quirk: PBM contracts require pharmacies to keep their list price higher than any insurer's negotiated rate, which pushes cash prices artificially high for anyone without a coupon. As Stacey Richter puts it, this dysfunction "is sadly pretty much the same" today as when Ge Bai first explained it in 2021, even as new cash-pay entrants and proposed "Most Favored Nation" contract restrictions start to reshape the landscape.
How Revenue Cycle Management (RCM) Became an Over $200 Billion Healthcare Hot Potato, With Andrew Tsang. EP521
Episode 521
Wednesday, July 22, 2026 • Duration 36:13
RCM: Why Revenue Cycle Management Is Healthcare's $200B Hot Potato, With Andrew Tsang (EP521)
How Revenue Cycle Management (RCM) Became an Over $200 Billion Healthcare Hot Potato. Episode 521.
Revenue cycle management (RCM) sounds like the least sexy phrase in healthcare — a back-office spreadsheet problem. It isn't. Andrew Tsang, an independent healthcare analyst and writer of the Substack Health Is Other People, with 15+ years across providers, payers, consulting, and policy, joins Stacey Richter to unpack how RCM has grown into a $200-plus-billion industry that eats roughly a third of every healthcare dollar spent — not on care, but on the fight over who pays for it. Together they trace RCM's front end, middle, and back end, and the "hot potato" that lands on whoever has the least leverage to fight back.
WHAT YOU'LL LEARN
✅ How revenue cycle management (RCM) grew into a $200-plus-billion industry — Andrew Tsang puts RCM-related market cap at roughly $217 billion, and estimates roughly a third of every healthcare dollar goes to the fight over payment, not to care
✅ The three phases of RCM (front-end eligibility and prior authorization, middle clinical coding, and back-end claims adjudication and appeals) and why the "hot potato" of financial responsibility lands on whoever has the least administrative leverage — patients, independent practices, or self-funded employers
✅ Why a routine screening colonoscopy can flip to a diagnostic procedure — and an unexpected bill — the moment a polyp is found, even though the ACA mandates the screening itself be free
✅ How the prior authorization burden (physicians average roughly 39 prior auths a week) forces independent practices to compete on administrative capacity rather than clinical outcomes, accelerating consolidation into larger health systems
✅ Why self-funded employers face their own version of the hot potato through stop-loss "lasering," where a stop-loss carrier can exclude a specific high-cost employee from coverage after a catastrophic claim
Cash-Pay Generic Drugs Are a Functioning Market in Healthcare—Policymakers Beware and Be Careful. EP520
Episode 520
Wednesday, July 15, 2026 • Duration 32:18
Cash-Pay Generic Drugs and the PBM Spread Pricing Problem (EP520)
Cash-pay generic drugs are one of the few corners of US healthcare where a real, functioning market already exists — which is why Stacey Richter argues policymakers need to tread carefully when trying to "fix" drug affordability. In this solo episode, Stacey explains why cash generic prices can run as low as $1 a prescription, then plays clips from four past guests — Ge Bai, PhD, CPA; Bryce Platt, PharmD; Benjamin Jolley, PharmD; and Luke Slindee, PharmD — showing how inserting a PBM extracts $41 out of every $100 spent, leaving patients paying more for the "privilege" of using their insurance.
WHAT YOU'LL LEARN
✅ Why cash-pay generic drugs are one of the few genuinely functioning markets left in US healthcare, with multisource manufacturer competition keeping prices as low as $1 to $18 per prescription
✅ Why using insurance/PBM coverage makes the 20 most prescribed generics more expensive 43% of the time overall, and up to 79% of the time in the deductible phase, per Ge Bai, PhD, CPA's research in Annals of Internal Medicine
✅ How PBMs extract $41 out of every $100 spent on generic drugs that cost roughly 47 cents to manufacture, largely through the administrative overhead of risk pooling
✅ How Most Favored Nation "lesser of" clauses in PBM-pharmacy contracts punish pharmacies for lowering their cash prices, and why Luke Slindee, PharmD, argues removing that single clause could unlock a more robust cash-pay market without pulling generics from insurance entirely
✅ Why generic drug adoption has slowed from about one month to six months to reach peak uptake, which Bryce Platt, PharmD, ties to PBM formulary control rather than reduced competition or prescriber resistance
✅ Four policy ideas Stacey floats for keeping generics affordable without wrecking the underlying market: eliminating MFN clauses, funded wallets or prepaid cards, pre-funded cash-pay pharmacy relationships, and removing generics from PBM adjudication entirely
Cognitive Atrophy and Referral Incentives Breaking Primary Care, With Lisa Rosenbaum, MD (EP519)
Episode 519
Wednesday, July 8, 2026 • Duration 40:00
Cognitive Atrophy and Referral Incentives Breaking Primary Care, With Lisa Rosenbaum, MD (EP519)
Primary care physicians are leaving traditional practice for concierge medicine in visible numbers—and the question is whether that exodus is an unavoidable consequence of how the system is built, or something we've simply chosen not to fix. Stacey Richter talks with Dr. Lisa Rosenbaum, a cardiologist at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC) and national correspondent for the New England Journal of Medicine , who recently devoted an entire season of her NEJM podcast, Not Otherwise Specified , to the state of primary care. Together they test three forces reshaping the field—cognitive atrophy, referral incentives, and care fragmentation—against a single question: inevitable, or fixable?
WHAT YOU'LL LEARN
✅ Why Dr. Lisa Rosenbaum calls the risk of "cognitive atrophy" among primary care physicians a generational threat rather than an individual one—and why she believes it is not inevitable
✅ How financial incentives that pay far more for a specialist visit than a primary care visit (roughly 5% of healthcare dollars for close to 35% of outpatient visits) structurally push referrals earlier and more often than necessary
✅ Why "relational expertise"—the judgment a doctor builds by knowing a patient over time—is, in Dr. Rosenbaum's view, primary care's real and undervalued skill set
✅ How care fragmentation, illustrated by Miriam Paramore's LinkedIn essay about her father's end-of-life care, leaves patients bouncing among specialists with no one taking ownership of the whole picture
✅ Why Dr. Rosenbaum argues that blaming everything on structural constraints "strip[s] ourselves of our own agency," and what she thinks physicians and healthcare buyers should each do about it
WHY THIS MATTERS
Roughly 70% of physicians are employed today, and about 5% of every healthcare dollar goes to primary care despite it covering close to 35% of all outpatient visits—numbers that, per Dr. Rosenbaum, reflect choices the system has made, not laws of nature. When primary care doctors lose the time and incentive to build relationships with patients, the system loses its quarterback, and patients end up fragmented across specialists with no one accountable for the whole picture. Dr. Rosenbaum's core argument is that none of this is inevitable, but fixing it requires both structural change and individual physicians and healthcare buyers reclaiming their own agency.
04:16 The three categories covered in today's episode.
05:36 The conversation with Dr. Singh.
07:02 Findings these private equity studies have found about primary care.
12:00 Does private equity make cognitive atrophy inevitable?
14:49 In PE-backed, single-specialty primary care, is it easier for PCPs to have full-spectrum clinical scope?
17:14 Why perverse financial incentives cause problems but aren't necessarily an inevitability.
22:17 Fragmentation and private equity in primary care.
25:46 Indie primary care versus PE-backed primary care versus hospital system–backed primary care.
32:22 What Dr. Singh is thinking about and looking to solve for next.
34:30 Inspiring physician-led work and a reason for hope.
✅ Mark Cuban's advice for the next RFP: simply requiring that Cost Plus Drugs be included in the network is often enough on its own to get PBMs to offer better rebates and terms
WHY THIS MATTERS
As Stacey Richter puts it, where there's mystery, there's margin—and pharmacy pricing is thick with both. Generic compliance ratios, WAC-based specialty tiers, and pass-through contracts that pay pharmacies one number while billing employers another all point to the same underlying reality: so much of what gets called an expense in medicine is simply pricing failure. For plan sponsors and brokers heading into their next RFP, understanding these mechanics—rather than accepting a discount off an inflated reference price—is what it takes to move from passive price taker to informed decision maker.
05:59 Today's conversation with Mark Cuban and Cora Opsahl.
07:25 Why discounts are meaningless without knowing the absolute price.
09:29 What a generic compliance ratio does.
12:28 Thinking about the demand side for employers.
15:00 The complication of a pass-through contract.
17:48 Why too much of healthcare comes down to a negotiation.
✅ How this conversation builds on John Quinn's supply-chain framing from EP524: treating a bounded, clearly defined "pod of care" as something to procure competitively, regardless of which payment model is attached to it
WHY THIS MATTERS
Value-based care is often framed as the fix for fee-for-service's volume-driving perverse incentives, but a PMPM subscription simply moves the risk instead of eliminating it — the purchaser now pays whether or not the service is used, and different accountability failures can follow. Dr. Dickerson's model works not just because it's fee-for-service, but because it's fee-for-service structured so the vendor can't drive volume, the pricing is transparent, and the contract can be ended at any time. For self-insured employers and plan sponsors choosing how to pay for a defined pod of care, the payment model matters less than these underlying safeguards.
06:36 The conversation with Dr. Cristin Dickerson.
07:13 In a PMPM scenario, who is taking the risk?
10:44 What mitigates the perverse incentive to drive up volume.
12:18 The other difference between PMPM and fee for service.
✅ Quinn's bottom line: "We have the tech and we've got the tools to do this at this point. We just have to get ourselves out of" the fee-for-service hangover
WHY THIS MATTERS
Provider networks have real tradeoffs: broad access and guaranteed payment on one side, opaque pricing and rigid contracts on the other. John Quinn's pitch to self-insured employers isn't to blow up the network model, but to layer bounded, directly contracted "pods of care" on top of it wherever a clear price beats the fee-for-service average. Framing that as supply-chain sourcing, rather than a wholesale network overhaul, gives risk-averse finance and HR leaders a model they already understand — and, Quinn argues, the technology to act on it already exists.
04:22 A breakdown of what's to come in today's conversation.
06:11 EP503 with Ryan Wells; Leo Spector, MD, MBA; and Adam Stavisky.
06:34 EP485 with Cristin Dickerson, MD.
06:49 EP486 with Stan Schwartz, MD.
07:07 EP493 with John Quinn.
07:57 The conversation with John Quinn.
10:06 Is calculating value realistic?
11:38 Looking at value calculation through an assembly lens.
14:54 The takeaway.
15:17 EP495 with Mick Connors, MD.
15:20 EP505 with Ahilan Sivaganesan, MD.
WHY THIS MATTERS
Roughly half to 60% of the US population has commercial insurance, and nearly three-quarters of large employers self-insure that coverage — yet most clinicians have no visibility into the plan-level decisions those employers make, and most employers have no channel to explain those decisions to the doctors whose patients are affected. Both sides, Dr. Gondi says, usually believe they're doing the right thing — covering the GLP-1, covering the cancer drug — and the patient still gets lost in between. Closing that gap doesn't require full direct contracting, he argues, just employers and local provider groups actually talking to each other before a coverage change lands on a patient, not after.
MENTIONED IN THIS EPISODE
Study: New England Journal of Medicine article, "A Sleeping Giant of Health Care Affordability—Self-Insured Employers," by Suhas Gondi, MD, MBA, and Zirui Song, MD, PhD
06:28 The difference between GoodRx and Amazon Pharmacy?
06:53 The one thing GoodRx makes money from.
07:55 How is GoodRx getting paid?
08:18 Are there middlemen in GoodRx's financial model?
09:25 How PBMs play into the GoodRx model.
10:29 Where the pharmacy fits into the deals created by GoodRx.
11:59 What's changed since this conversation with Ge Bai.
✅ Why direct contracting — agreeing on price upfront — is Andrew Tsang's proposed way to opt out of the RCM hot potato game entirely
WHY THIS MATTERS
Revenue cycle management isn't a niche back-office function — it's a $200-plus-billion economy built on claim-by-claim fights over who pays. As Stacey Richter puts it, this isn't a story about villains; it's a story about an industry built around claim-by-claim fistfights. Whoever has the least administrative leverage in any given moment — patient, independent practice, or self-funded employer — is the one who winds up eating the cost.
12:13 Why patients may spend more time doing revenue cycle tasks than with their doctor.
17:12 Who pays and why?
19:56 An example of RCM working within something like a colonoscopy.
22:55 The worst part about this whole revenue cycle.
24:49 How RCM affects independent doctors.
29:51 How RCM affects self-funded employers and stop-loss carriers.
WHY THIS MATTERS
Generic drugs are one of the only truly functioning markets left in US healthcare, and cash prices are already low because of it. But policymakers trying to make medications more affordable often reach for the same lever — routing everything through insurance/PBM adjudication — which the data shows frequently raises what patients pay while handing PBMs a 41-cent cut of every dollar spent. As Stacey puts it, "you have to be really careful what levers you push because you can't see what they're attached to," and the wrong fix could break the one part of healthcare that's actually working.
