Closed a deal last week for 60 syringe pumps: vendor cut unit price 11% with a 24‑month disposables commitment and a 3‑year PM cap. Has anyone had this backfire on formulary flexibility or utilization, and did compatibility clauses protect you when new SKUs rolled out?
I put the no-recording line plus “Rename to FirstName–Role” in the Zoom waiting-room description and paste it again on admit, then lock the meeting — compliance jumped way up. For crisp signing, 720p at 30 fps is steadier than chasing 1080p; if you must go higher, Zoom’s Group HD explains the caps: Enabling HD video for Zoom Meetings. Want my one-liner consent script?
Seen it backfire when a tubing SKU change killed compatibility; we now write in ‘SKU refresh = guaranteed compatibility or vendor provides adapters at no charge within 60 days, or we can exit the 24‑month disposables’ and carry over net price to successor SKUs. Did you get a formulary escape if P&T shifts mid‑term? Also tie the ‘3‑year PM cap’ to parts+labor and a 24‑hr response SLA, otherwise it’s soft.
Lock a ‘24‑month’ inventory buyback: vendor buys unused/expired disposables at SKU refresh — sound fair?
We tied our disposable commitment to a rolling usage baseline and added a ‘mix-and-match’ clause: if we clinically adopt an ISO-compatible set from another vendor, the pump maker must certify compatibility or let us shift up to 20% of volume without penalties, and any IFU change or recall pauses minimums — a little belt-and-suspenders. We also layered in price parity to our GPO so we’re not stuck above market mid-term. Does your deal have a clean exit if the formulary committee pivots, @jdoe_57?