Only time for a quick response now but I don't think the Corcell guarantee is sinister or greedy at all. But I do think the approach is naive. It is a delicate balance working with patients desperately fighting for their lives. Any hospital administrator works routinely with Risk Management dept to answer some of these type of questions. Let me tell you it ain't easy. As you may or may not know, in health care it's a lawyers world. If you open the door to pay part of a claim you open yourself up to a lawyer then expanding the claim to say that yes the transplant failed and cord blood company acknowledged it. In fact the patient stayed in the hospital for 10 months, was on dialysis for 6 months and died...all because of a failed stem cell transplant. You get the picture. It's a sad situation for clinicians trying to do the right thing with patients and having to consider medmal lawyer ramifications. But such is the health care system today in America.
I have to disagree. On paper your right on and there may be some reimbursements but the focus is confidence and assurance.
When a company makes a statement like this it’s based on their confidence that they can avoid ever paying a dime. (Core Cell believes they can get it right) That confidence is translated to the consumer and assures the public they can trust the product, this will translate into sales. Ultimately it’s like ALL STATES – claiming - YOU’RE IN GOOD HANDS
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
