Consumers who need AIDS drugs don't have to depend on Turing Pharmaceuticals' product if their closest competitors are selling similar medicines at prices more than 750x lower than their own product, and the companies that sell the cheaper drugs stand to make vastly more money from more consumers who can afford their lower prices.
to:
Consumers who need AIDS drugs don\'t have to depend on Turing Pharmaceuticals\' product if their closest competitors are selling similar medicines at prices more than 750x lower than their own product, and the companies that sell the cheaper drugs stand to make vastly more money from more consumers who can afford their lower prices.
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
Simple math: If half the people in the entire world each gave a corporation just $1, that would already amount to over $3.6 billion. Now, in a world much like ''Johnny Mnemonic'', where half the planet is suffering from a deadly, debilitating plague, if a pharmaceutical company would offer plague victims an absurdly low $1-per-day treatment regimen that most ''anybody'' could afford, that company could stand to earn well over $1.3 trillion in a year--undoubtedly an immense profit for any company, even after paying back production costs, taxes, and other expenses.
to:
Simple math: If half the people in the entire world each gave a corporation just $1, that would already amount to over $3.6 billion. Now, in a world much like \'\'Johnny Mnemonic\'\', where half the planet is suffering from a deadly, debilitating plague, if a pharmaceutical company would offer plague victims an absurdly low $1-per-day treatment regimen that most \'\'anybody\'\' could afford, that company could stand to earn well over $1.3 trillion in a year--undoubtedly an immense profit for any company, even after paying back production costs, taxes, and other expenses.
Changed line(s) 5 from:
n
However, when pricing much needed, highly demanded drug treatments at $750-per-pill or $2,000-per-dose, beyond the ease and simplicity of making a corporation appear absurdly greedy and evil in the context of a movie narrative for artistic sake, in more realistic contexts, such prices make a product completely unaffordable to the vast majority of people who would seek to buy it and, therefore, not anywhere near as profitable. To paraphrase a piece of that Goldman-Sachs analysis, [=PharmaKom=] would be demanding billions of plague sufferers to each pay out hundreds of thousands of dollars, possibly even surpassing well over a million dollars, per year for their treatments, even when many more consumers could more plausibly afford to scrape together just tens of thousands of dollars per year.
to:
However, when pricing much needed, highly demanded drug treatments at $750-per-pill or $2,000-per-dose, beyond the ease and simplicity of making a corporation appear absurdly greedy and evil in the context of a movie narrative for artistic sake, such prices in more realistic contexts make a product completely unaffordable to the vast majority of people who would seek to buy it and, therefore, not anywhere near as profitable. To paraphrase a piece of that Goldman-Sachs analysis, [=PharmaKom=] would be demanding billions of plague sufferers to each pay out hundreds of thousands of dollars (possibly even surpassing well over a million dollars) every year for their treatments, even when many more consumers could more plausibly afford to scrape together as much as tens of thousands of dollars per year.
Consumers who need AIDS drugs don't have to depend on Turing Pharmaceuticals' product if their closest competitors are selling similar medicines at prices more than 750x lower than their own product, and the companies that sell the cheaper drugs stand to make vastly more money from more consumers who can afford their lower prices.
to:
Consumers who need AIDS drugs don\'t have to depend on Turing Pharmaceuticals\' product if their closest competitors are selling similar medicines at prices more than 750x lower than their own product, and the companies that sell the cheaper drugs stand to make vastly more money from more consumers who can afford their lower prices.
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
Simple math: If half the people in the entire world each gave a corporation just $1, that would already amount to over $3.6 billion. Now, in a world much like ''Johnny Mnemonic'', where half the planet is suffering from a deadly, debilitating plague, if a pharmaceutical company would offer plague victims an absurdly low $1-per-day treatment regimen that most ''anybody'' could afford, that much alone would net the company well over $1.3 trillion in a year--undoubtedly an immense profit for any company, even after paying back production costs, taxes, and other expenses.
to:
Simple math: If half the people in the entire world each gave a corporation just $1, that would already amount to over $3.6 billion. Now, in a world much like \'\'Johnny Mnemonic\'\', where half the planet is suffering from a deadly, debilitating plague, if a pharmaceutical company would offer plague victims an absurdly low $1-per-day treatment regimen that most \'\'anybody\'\' could afford, that company could stand to earn well over $1.3 trillion in a year--undoubtedly an immense profit for any company, even after paying back production costs, taxes, and other expenses.
Consumers who need AIDS drugs don't have to depend on Turing Pharmaceuticals' product if their closest competitors are selling similar medicines at prices more than 750x lower than their own product, and the companies that sell the cheaper drugs stand to make vastly more money from more consumers who can afford their lower prices.
to:
Consumers who need AIDS drugs don\'t have to depend on Turing Pharmaceuticals\' product if their closest competitors are selling similar medicines at prices more than 750x lower than their own product, and the companies that sell the cheaper drugs stand to make vastly more money from more consumers who can afford their lower prices.
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
Simple math: If half the people in the entire world each gave a corporation just $1, that would already amount to over $3.6 billion. Now, in a world much like ''Johnny Mnemonic'', where half the planet is suffering from a deadly, debilitating plague, if a pharmaceutical company would offer plague victims an absurdly low $1-per-day treatment regimen that most ''anybody'' could afford, that much alone would net the company well over $1.3 trillion in a year--undoubtedly an immense profit for any company, even after paying back production costs, taxes, and other expenses.
to:
Simple math: If half the people in the entire world each gave a corporation just $1, that would already amount to over $3.6 billion. Now, in a world much like \'\'Johnny Mnemonic\'\', where half the planet is suffering from a deadly, debilitating plague, if a pharmaceutical company would offer plague victims an absurdly low $1-per-day treatment regimen that most \'\'anybody\'\' could afford, that much alone would net the company well over $1.3 trillion in a year--undoubtedly an immense profit for any company, even after paying back production costs, taxes, and other expenses.
Changed line(s) 5 from:
n
However, when pricing much needed, highly demanded drug treatments at $750-per-pill or $2,000-per-dose, beyond the ease and simplicity making a corporation appear absurdly greedy and evil in the context of a movie narrative for artistic sake, in more realistic contexts, such prices make a product completely unaffordable to the vast majority of people who would seek to buy it and, therefore, not anywhere near as profitable. To paraphrase a piece of that Goldman-Sachs analysis, [=PharmaKom=] would be demanding billions of plague sufferers to each pay out hundreds of thousands of dollars, possibly even surpassing well over a million dollars, per year for their treatments, even when many more consumers could more plausibly afford to scrape together just tens of thousands of dollars per year.
to:
However, when pricing much needed, highly demanded drug treatments at $750-per-pill or $2,000-per-dose, beyond the ease and simplicity of making a corporation appear absurdly greedy and evil in the context of a movie narrative for artistic sake, in more realistic contexts, such prices make a product completely unaffordable to the vast majority of people who would seek to buy it and, therefore, not anywhere near as profitable. To paraphrase a piece of that Goldman-Sachs analysis, [=PharmaKom=] would be demanding billions of plague sufferers to each pay out hundreds of thousands of dollars, possibly even surpassing well over a million dollars, per year for their treatments, even when many more consumers could more plausibly afford to scrape together just tens of thousands of dollars per year.
Consumers who need AIDS drugs don't have to depend on Turing Pharmaceuticals' product if their closest competitors are selling similar medicines at prices more than 750x lower than their own product, and the companies that sell the cheaper drugs stand to make vastly more money from more consumers who can afford their lower prices.
to:
Consumers who need AIDS drugs don\'t have to depend on Turing Pharmaceuticals\' product if their closest competitors are selling similar medicines at prices more than 750x lower than their own product, and the companies that sell the cheaper drugs stand to make vastly more money from more consumers who can afford their lower prices.
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
Simple math: If half the people in the entire world each gave a corporation just $1, that would already amount to over $3.6 billion. Now, in a world much like ''Johnny Mnemonic'', where half the planet is suffering from a deadly, debilitating plague, if a pharmaceutical company would offer plague victims an absurdly low $1-per-day treatment regimen that most ''anybody'' could afford, that much alone would net the company well over $1.3 trillion in a year--undoubtedly an immense profit for any company, even after paying back production costs, taxes, and other expenses.
to:
Simple math: If half the people in the entire world each gave a corporation just $1, that would already amount to over $3.6 billion. Now, in a world much like \'\'Johnny Mnemonic\'\', where half the planet is suffering from a deadly, debilitating plague, if a pharmaceutical company would offer plague victims an absurdly low $1-per-day treatment regimen that most \'\'anybody\'\' could afford, that much alone would net the company well over $1.3 trillion in a year--undoubtedly an immense profit for any company, even after paying back production costs, taxes, and other expenses.
Changed line(s) 5 from:
n
However, when pricing much needed, highly demanded drug treatments at $750-per-pill or $2,000-per-dose, beyond the ease and simplicity making a corporation appear absurdly greedy and evil in the context of a movie narrative for artistic sake, in more realistic contexts, such prices make a product completely unaffordable to the vast majority of people who would seek to buy it and, therefore, not anywhere near as profitable. To paraphrase a piece of that Goldman-Sachs analysis, [=PharmaKom=] would be demanding billions of plague sufferers pay out hundreds of thousands of dollars, possibly even surpassing well over a million dollars, per year for their treatments, even when many more consumers could more plausibly afford to scrape together just tens of thousands of dollars per year.
to:
However, when pricing much needed, highly demanded drug treatments at $750-per-pill or $2,000-per-dose, beyond the ease and simplicity making a corporation appear absurdly greedy and evil in the context of a movie narrative for artistic sake, in more realistic contexts, such prices make a product completely unaffordable to the vast majority of people who would seek to buy it and, therefore, not anywhere near as profitable. To paraphrase a piece of that Goldman-Sachs analysis, [=PharmaKom=] would be demanding billions of plague sufferers to each pay out hundreds of thousands of dollars, possibly even surpassing well over a million dollars, per year for their treatments, even when many more consumers could more plausibly afford to scrape together just tens of thousands of dollars per year.
Consumers who need AIDS drugs don't have to depend on Turing Pharmaceuticals' product if their closest competitors are selling similar medicines at prices more than 750x lower than their own product, and the companies that sell the cheaper drugs stand to make vastly more money from more consumers who can afford their lower prices.
to:
Consumers who need AIDS drugs don\'t have to depend on Turing Pharmaceuticals\' product if their closest competitors are selling similar medicines at prices more than 750x lower than their own product, and the companies that sell the cheaper drugs stand to make vastly more money from more consumers who can afford their lower prices.
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
Simple math: If half the people in the entire world each gave a corporation just $1, that would already amount to over $3.6 billion. Now, in a world much like ''Johnny Mnemonic'', where half the planet is suffering from a deadly, debilitating plague, if a pharmaceutical company would offer plague victims an absurdly low $1-per-day treatment regimen that most ''anybody'' could afford, that much alone would net the company well over $1.3 trillion in a year--undoubtedly an immense profit for any company, even after paying back production costs, taxes, and other expenses.
to:
Simple math: If half the people in the entire world each gave a corporation just $1, that would already amount to over $3.6 billion. Now, in a world much like \'\'Johnny Mnemonic\'\', where half the planet is suffering from a deadly, debilitating plague, if a pharmaceutical company would offer plague victims an absurdly low $1-per-day treatment regimen that most \'\'anybody\'\' could afford, that much alone would net the company well over $1.3 trillion in a year--undoubtedly an immense profit for any company, even after paying back production costs, taxes, and other expenses.
Changed line(s) 5 from:
n
However, when pricing much needed, highly demanded drug treatments at $750-per-pill or $2,000-per-dose, beyond the ease and simplicity making a corporation appear absurdly greedy and evil in the context of a movie narrative for artistic sake, in more realistic contexts, such prices make a product completely unaffordable to the vast majority of people who would seek to buy it and, therefore, not anywhere near as profitable. To paraphrase a piece of that Goldman-Sachs analysis, [=PharmaKom=] would be demanding billions of plague sufferers pay out hundreds of thousands of dollars, possibly even surpassing well over a million dollars, per year for their treatments, even when more consumers could more plausibly afford to scrape together tens of thousands of dollars per year.
to:
However, when pricing much needed, highly demanded drug treatments at $750-per-pill or $2,000-per-dose, beyond the ease and simplicity making a corporation appear absurdly greedy and evil in the context of a movie narrative for artistic sake, in more realistic contexts, such prices make a product completely unaffordable to the vast majority of people who would seek to buy it and, therefore, not anywhere near as profitable. To paraphrase a piece of that Goldman-Sachs analysis, [=PharmaKom=] would be demanding billions of plague sufferers pay out hundreds of thousands of dollars, possibly even surpassing well over a million dollars, per year for their treatments, even when many more consumers could more plausibly afford to scrape together just tens of thousands of dollars per year.
Consumers who need AIDS drugs don't have to depend on Turing Pharmaceuticals' product if their closest competitors are selling similar medicines at prices more than 750x lower than their own product, and the companies that sell the cheaper drugs stand to make vastly more money from more consumers who can afford their lower prices.
to:
Consumers who need AIDS drugs don\'t have to depend on Turing Pharmaceuticals\' product if their closest competitors are selling similar medicines at prices more than 750x lower than their own product, and the companies that sell the cheaper drugs stand to make vastly more money from more consumers who can afford their lower prices.
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
Simple math: If half the people in the entire world each gave a corporation just $1, that would already amount to over $3.6 billion. Now, in a world much like ''Johnny Mnemonic'', where half the planet is suffering from a deadly, debilitating plague, if a pharmaceutical company would offer plague victims an absurdly low $1-per-day treatment regimen that most ''anybody'' could afford, that much alone would net the company well over $1.3 trillion in a year--undoubtedly an immense profit for any company, even after paying back production costs, taxes, and other expenses.
to:
Simple math: If half the people in the entire world each gave a corporation just $1, that would already amount to over $3.6 billion. Now, in a world much like \'\'Johnny Mnemonic\'\', where half the planet is suffering from a deadly, debilitating plague, if a pharmaceutical company would offer plague victims an absurdly low $1-per-day treatment regimen that most \'\'anybody\'\' could afford, that much alone would net the company well over $1.3 trillion in a year--undoubtedly an immense profit for any company, even after paying back production costs, taxes, and other expenses.
Changed line(s) 5 from:
n
However, when pricing much needed, highly demanded drug treatments at $750-per-pill or $2,000-per-dose, beyond the ease and simplicity making a corporation appear absurdly greedy and evil in the context of a movie narrative for artistic sake, in more realistic contexts, such prices make a product completely unaffordable to the vast majority of people who would seek to buy it and, therefore, not anywhere near as profitable. To paraphrase a piece of that Goldman-Sachs analysis, [=PharmaKom=] would be demanding billions of plague sufferers pay out hundreds of thousands of dollars, possibly even surpassing well over a million dollars, per year for their treatments, even when more consumers would be able to more plausibly scrape together tens of thousands of dollars per year.
to:
However, when pricing much needed, highly demanded drug treatments at $750-per-pill or $2,000-per-dose, beyond the ease and simplicity making a corporation appear absurdly greedy and evil in the context of a movie narrative for artistic sake, in more realistic contexts, such prices make a product completely unaffordable to the vast majority of people who would seek to buy it and, therefore, not anywhere near as profitable. To paraphrase a piece of that Goldman-Sachs analysis, [=PharmaKom=] would be demanding billions of plague sufferers pay out hundreds of thousands of dollars, possibly even surpassing well over a million dollars, per year for their treatments, even when more consumers could more plausibly afford to scrape together tens of thousands of dollars per year.
