HealthSherpa (YC S12) has processed more than 3% of healthcare.gov enrollments
blog.healthsherpa.com
blog.healthsherpa.com
If the broker's cut is average just $100 / year (WAG) on 110,000 signups, that's ARR of $11 million. Holy shit, nicely done on $1.1m of funding.
Their agent platform [2] nets just $10 per application and gives the agent the full commission, but even just $1m revenue is impressive for the funding level.
Also, can we now officially stop talking about trying to fix the problem from the inside? If this doesn't show that healthcare.gov (and every single other state-exchange) should never have been built in the first place, I don't know what does. It also makes you wonder, does the Fed get that annual broker's commission when you signup fully on healthcare.gov, or do they just give it away to the insurance company?
[1] - http://www.nytimes.com/news/affordable-care-act/2014/03/06/m...
Our main goal is to making signing up as easy as possible. Our currently flow is getting individuals through in about 5 minutes, and families in around 10. The revenue will allow us to build many more useful features.
I am definitely stepping out on a limb here, but I would imagine HealthSherpa uses the HealthCare.org API and would not have a product offering without Healthcare.org having laid the ground work (i.e. consolidating the insurance plans available and offering the API).
Take MetroPlus for example: their plans looks good on paper, but their network consists of overcrowded municipal hospitals. Take a look at their yelp reviews for a more realistic picture: http://www.yelp.com/biz/metroplus-health-plan-new-york
The 2nd issue, none of these plans on the market place make healthcare affordable to those who were previously uninsured due to cost. Yes, there are subsidies for premiums, but once someone actually has to use the plan, most can not afford the out of pocket co-pay much less the deductible. Due to inability to truly afford their subsidized insurance plan, people avoid using their insurance and so all the mandate really seems to do is line the pockets of the insurers with subsidized premiums on behalf of people who knowingly will not use their plans.
What we also need is payment through these sites because once you are signed up, paying through Aetna / Blue Cross and others is a inception like web ring from the 90s and not consumer ready, they have been company focused for too long and reliant on mail/phone. The plan I had at Aetna a year ago, had no lie, 7 clicks to get to the payment system. It was all POST ing so you could not go direct. A few pages on others took 30-45 seconds to load. I feel like all insurance companies sites feel like they can waste everyone's time because you have to do it.
And now I know in terms I can understand why healthcare is such a pain. :)
The Sherpa are an ethnic group, after all.
HealthNegro? HealthWhitey?
Of course, not really following mass media since the '70s I don't know if the term has degraded since then, but at least it started from a good base. It's like the American usage of Indian tribe names for naming sports teams and Army helicopters, that's not done out of disrespect, although there are of course the inevitable malcontents.
What does it mean to say that "it's not done out of disrespect", when it's done even despite the objections of the ethnic group in question?
In this particular case, I can assure you that many Sherpa people very strongly object to the use of the word "Sherpa" as a synonym for "guide", and they do indeed feel it is very disrespectful.
I thought I addressed that with part you omitted quoting, "although there are of course the inevitable malcontents."
Who speaks for these people? Have they ever submitted these sorts of questions to a vote?
As long as e.g. there's a reasonable number of Apache tribes-members who are proud our biggest, baddest, proven in combat attack helicopter is named after them, I don't give a [expletive deleted] about the malcontents, most especially including the SJW crowd.
And if Sherpa has mutated into simply "guide", that's also addressed, in my "I can't speak for post-70s" qualification. Given your closeness to that situation, are all or even most of the "Sherpas" upset with all the connotations the word had accumulated in English over the decades? If you claim the latter, how do you know?
Check wikipedia:
Sherpa (Tibetan: "eastern people", from shar "east" + pa "people") are an ethnic group from the most mountainous region of Nepal, high in the Himalayas.
> The Sherpa is one race where nothing negative is said about them...
First of all, this isn't true (source: my Nepali family).
> And if you want to do, better look up about their bravery and count the costs :)
This practice has been a major source of criticism in the past. The Sherpa people are often hired by wealthy foreigners as guides for mountaineering, and while there's a perception that they are "locals" and therefore at less risk during these expeditions, this isn't always the case. It's often been described as an exploitative practice, and I can assure you that many Sherpa people do dislike their ethnic identity being used as a synonym for "guide".