An excellent article from the Financial Times. Michael Steen puts his finger on the position of Philips in the post GE/Intel deal.
“However, in contrast to GE and its research pact with Intel, Mr Kleisterlee (Philips’s Chief Executive) believes the challenge lies not in technology, which he says is “fundamentally available”. Instead he points to the “tedious grassroots work” of getting patients, doctors, insurers and governments to co-operate in setting up services such as the remote monitoring of cardiac patients in countries with vastly differing healthcare systems. That is why Philips’ remote patient monitoring services are at present focused on the US, where the Dutch group generates 70 per cent of its home healthcare revenues. “It’s really still a cottage industry,” Mr Kleisterlee says. The picture is especially complex in Europe with its patchwork of healthcare systems.”
Spot on! Read the whole article: Philips plans new health regime.
Philips: Excellent point…
Mr. Kleisterlee’s vision of home health is very forward thinking, and differs vastly from his competition’s. He sees it as a voluntary, co-operative process of various groups towards a worthy goal. And to him this is easier (and more profitable) in the US with a semi-free market in healthcare than in the socialized, highly controlled states of Europe or Canada.
I wonder what he thinks of the very big bet that his chief competitor is placing on (and trying to engineer) a top-down, socialized/corporatist system in the US. Not much, I would bet.