Why BMS Discounted Sotyktu by 86% and Eliquis by 40%

Bristol Myers Squibb ran two of these at once, in two different categories, at two very different discounts. The gap between 40% and 86% is the most instructive number published in this entire wave, and almost nobody has asked why it exists.

It is not generosity in one case and restraint in the other. It is market position, expressed as arithmetic, and once you can read it you can work out what your own cash price would have to be.

What did BMS actually do?

Announced two direct channels inside ten weeks, for two medicines with nothing in common, and handed you a controlled experiment in the process.

The first went live in September 2025. A joint announcement with Pfizer offered Eliquis to uninsured, underinsured and self pay patients at more than 40% below list, bought through Eliquis 360 Support and shipped to all fifty states and Puerto Rico. Christopher Boerner, board chair and chief executive of Bristol Myers Squibb, said the program "passes more savings directly to patients." The release notes more than 15 million Americans have been prescribed the medicine since launch.

The second was announced on 25 September 2025. BMS Patient Connect launches in January 2026 offering Sotyktu, an oral treatment for moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, at more than 80% below list. Boerner framed it as making medicines "more accessible and affordable for patients living with serious conditions."

Fierce Pharma got the actual figures. List price $6,828 for a thirty day supply. Cash price $950. BMS puts the discount at 86%.

Hold those two numbers next to each other. Eliquis, roughly 40% off a list around $606 a month. Sotyktu, 86% off $6,828. Same company, same quarter, same stated rationale.

Why is one discount 40% and the other 86%?

Because the two channels are doing entirely different jobs, and the discount is set by competitive position rather than by how much the company wants to help.

Eliquis is an incumbent with enormous installed volume and most of its business running through coverage. A deep cash discount there would undercut the covered book for very little gain, because the patients who need it are a thin slice of fifteen million. Forty percent is a retention and goodwill instrument sized not to disturb the main business.

Sotyktu sits in a crowded psoriasis market against several well established biologics. It is the challenger. For a challenger, a cash channel is not a goodwill gesture, it is a share acquisition instrument, and 86% is what it costs to make one viable.

Neither of those is a criticism. Both are the rational move from where each brand actually stands, which is exactly why copying the percentage rather than the logic will produce a number that makes no sense for you.

Here is the rule worth taking away. Your defensible cash discount is a function of how much covered business you would cannibalize set against how much new volume you could win. Work out both sides before anyone in your company picks a percentage.

What does $950 buy that $3,571 does not?

A price a real patient might actually pay, in a disease where a competitor just demonstrated the opposite.

Novartis set a cash price for Cosentyx in the same indication. Managed Healthcare Executive reported the Cosentyx list at $7,936.48 a month and the discount at 55%, which leaves roughly $3,571. Sotyktu arrives at $950.

Same disease. Roughly a quarter of the price. That comparison has not appeared anywhere in the trade press and it is the single most useful fact in this wave.

The difference is not that one company cares more. Cosentyx is Novartis's top selling US product, so an 86% cash price would compete with its own covered revenue. Sotyktu has far less covered revenue to protect. Position sets the floor, and I set out the Cosentyx case in what Novartis is testing.

What it means for a patient is more interesting than what it means for either company. At $950 a month the cash channel becomes a genuine option during a deductible phase or a coverage gap. At $3,571 it mostly is not. The arithmetic decides whether a program is an offer or a gesture, and your patients will work that out faster than your brand team does.

Which path does this solve?

Affordability inside one path, and both releases are notably quiet about everything else.

We model the distance between your science and your patient as three sequential paths. The Path to Prescribe , where a patient is identified, diagnosed, referred and a clinician decides. The Path to Fulfill , where that decision survives coverage, prior authorization, cost and dispensing. The Path to Adhere , where the patient stays on therapy long enough to get the benefit the trial demonstrated.

Read both announcements for what they promise and what they do not. Discounted pricing, direct shipping, transparency into cost, patient support resources. Neither mentions telehealth. Neither mentions benefit verification or prior authorization help for the patients who do have coverage.

That is a price and logistics solution on the Path to Fulfill. It is real and it is bounded.

Now consider Sotyktu specifically. It is a daily oral medicine for a chronic condition, which means the Path to Adhere is not a secondary concern, it is where the value is won or lost over years. A monthly shipment is a useful start and it is not an adherence program.

The burden on the path these platforms do not touch is heavy and documented. In the American Medical Association's latest survey, 93% of physicians said prior authorization delays care and 82% said it at least sometimes leads patients to abandon treatment.

Why does one company have two front doors?

Because each brand built its own, which is the most transferable finding here and the least comfortable.

Eliquis runs through Eliquis 360 Support. Sotyktu will run through BMS Patient Connect. The BMS release does not say the Eliquis program moves onto the new platform, and it describes Patient Connect as somewhere other medicines may be added later.

So a company with two direct programs has two addresses, two sets of eligibility rules and two support experiences. Each one is sensible on its own terms, and nobody set out to build a maze.

That is what brand level ownership produces. When each brand funds its own access solution, the patient inherits the organization chart, and no function is accountable for the whole distance. I have argued the structural fix in who should own customer experience in a pharma company.

Check your own portfolio against this before you feel superior to anyone. Count your patient support addresses, your copay programs, your hubs and your portals. Then ask who in your company could tell a newly diagnosed patient which one is hers.

Independent observers expect the next move here to be routing rather than pricing. In Pharmaceutical Commerce, Chip Parkinson of Gifthealth expects platforms to stop defaulting to cash pay and instead send each patient down whichever path, cash or insurance, is cheapest and fastest. If that is where this lands, the durable asset is the routing logic rather than the discount.

What is actually driving this wave?

Policy pressure on net price, not a conversion to customer thinking.

This matters to how you read every one of these announcements, including the ones still to come. Fierce Pharma notes that the Sotyktu move followed letters sent in July 2025 from President Trump to seventeen pharmaceutical chief executives urging more direct to consumer sales.

Programs like these have now arrived at six large manufacturers inside two years. Every one is a pricing and channel decision made by commercial leadership. Not one began inside an experience function.

That is not cynicism and it is not a complaint. Your own planning should account for it, because a wave driven by price transparency will not, by itself, fix anything on the two paths where your earned value actually leaks.

What should you take from it?

Two rules and one number.

The first rule is that your cash discount is set by position. Cannibalization against acquisition, worked out brand by brand, before anyone picks a percentage. BMS has shown you both ends of that calculation inside one company.

The second rule is that a direct channel solves a seam, not a system. Price and shipping sit on the Path to Fulfill. Your Path to Prescribe and your Path to Adhere are where most of the remaining money is, and no portal reaches them.

The number is what arrives. A 2026 JAMA study summarized by Johns Hopkins found insurer rejections reached 40.7% of initial brand name attempts in 2024. Of those rejected scripts, 48.4% were never followed by a fill of that drug or anything in its class within 90 days.

So find your gate, name the seams, give each one an owner, and measure what arrives against what you earned. The money in that interval is value leakage. The share of earned decisions that becomes therapy is your Realization Rate. The bar your patients already apply is Consumer-Grade, the discipline that recovers the value is Customer Excellence, and the whole argument sits in the future of the pharma commercial model.

BMS has handed the industry a free lesson in pricing logic. The question it leaves on your desk is which job your channel would be doing, and whether anyone has done the subtraction.

Key takeaways

  • BMS announced two direct channels ten weeks apart at radically different discounts, 40% off Eliquis and 86% off Sotyktu, and the gap is explained by competitive position rather than intent.
  • Sotyktu arrives at $950 a month against a $6,828 list, roughly a quarter of the cash price Novartis set for Cosentyx in the same indication.
  • Your defensible cash discount is cannibalization of covered business set against new volume won, calculated brand by brand before anyone picks a number.
  • Both programs solve price and shipping on the Path to Fulfill. Neither mentions telehealth, benefit verification or prior authorization help, and neither touches the Path to Adhere.
  • One company now has two front doors, because each brand built its own, which is what happens when no function owns the whole distance to the patient.

Questions to ask your leadership team

  1. For your lead brand, what would a cash price have to be before a real patient used it, and what would that cost you in covered revenue?
  2. Is your brand the incumbent protecting a covered book or the challenger buying share, and does your access strategy match that answer?
  3. How many separate patient support addresses does your portfolio have, and who could name them all?
  4. Of the barriers between your prescription and your patient, how many are price and how many are paperwork, coordination and persistence?
  5. If a competitor priced direct at a quarter of your cash price tomorrow, what would you do, and who would decide?

About the author

Wayne Simmons is the founder of The Customer Excellence AGENCY and the author of The Customer Excellence Enterprise (Wiley, 2024). He is founding faculty of the MS in Customer Experience Management at Michigan State University's Broad College of Business. He led global customer excellence in Pfizer's first Chief Marketing Organization and in Bayer's Customer Powerhouse. Related reading: What Novartis is testing with Cosentyx direct, What is Realization Rate? and The future of the pharma commercial model

March 15, 2026
Why healthcare professionals now judge pharmaceutical engagement against the best experiences in their lives, and what that means for the future of commercial leadership. When commercial performance falters, the reflex inside many pharmaceutical organizations is to adjust the machinery of field execution. Leaders revisit call plans, recalibrate targeting models, and increase the volume of activity in the hope that more precision or more frequency will restore momentum. For decades this system has been treated as the central instrument of commercial performance, determining which physicians are prioritized, how frequently representatives engage, and how resources are deployed across territories. Yet the growing gap between commercial effort and commercial impact suggests a deeper issue. T he problem is rarely the design of the call plan itself. It is the context in which healthcare professionals now operate. Physicians are navigating increasingly complex clinical, administrative, and informational environments, and that evolving reality now shapes prescribing behavior far more than the cadence of promotional interactions. What many organizations are experiencing is a widening Customer Context Gap. Commercial systems were designed for a time when prescribing decisions could be influenced primarily through promotional interaction and product information. Today physicians operate inside a far more complex reality shaped by administrative burden, reimbursement constraints, digital information overload, and growing expectations for seamless support across the entire care journey. In this environment the physician’s decision is influenced not only by clinical evidence but also by how easily a therapy fits into the practical realities of care delivery. When commercial models remain anchored in promotional activity while the customer’s context has fundamentally changed, even the most disciplined call plan struggles to deliver the outcomes it was designed to produce. Closing this gap requires a different way of thinking about commercial performance. The question is no longer how to optimize promotional activity but how to align the organization around the real journeys through which physicians help patients receive therapy. Prescribing decisions unfold within complex sequences of clinical evaluation, reimbursement navigation, patient readiness, and ongoing support. When commercial strategy is designed around these journeys rather than isolated interactions, the role of the field force begins to evolve. Representatives are no longer positioned primarily as messengers of information but as partners in removing barriers that slow care. Organizations that recognize this shift begin redesigning their commercial systems accordingly, aligning field engagement, digital support, access programs, and patient services around the same goal: helping healthcare professionals help patients move from clinical intent to successful treatment. From Promotional Activity to Customer Journeys The pharmaceutical industry has historically organized commercial activity around the moment of promotion. Call plans, targeting models, and message sequencing were designed to influence prescribing behavior primarily through informational engagement with healthcare professionals. While this model brought structure and scale to commercial operations, it reflects an earlier era in which the path from clinical awareness to prescribing action was comparatively linear. Today the journey is far more complex. Physicians must navigate an intricate landscape of clinical evidence, treatment guidelines, payer requirements, prior authorization processes, patient affordability concerns, and adherence challenges. Prescribing a therapy is no longer a single decision point. It is the beginning of a chain of events that determines whether a patient ultimately receives and remains on treatment. This is why the commercial conversation must expand beyond the traditional moment of prescription to encompass three interconnected journeys. The first is the Path-to-Prescribe , where scientific evidence, clinical education, and confidence in the therapy shape the physician’s willingness to recommend treatment. The second is the Path-to-Fulfill, where access, affordability, patient readiness, and operational support determine whether that recommendation ultimately becomes therapy in the patient’s hands. The third is the Path-to-Adhere , where ongoing patient support, monitoring, and engagement determine whether patients remain on therapy long enough to realize the intended clinical benefit. Science drives the Path to Prescribe, where evidence, clinical education, and confidence in the therapy shape the physician’s willingness to recommend treatment. Experience shapes the Path to Fulfill, where access, affordability, and patient readiness determine whether that recommendation becomes therapy in the patient’s hands. Sustained outcomes depend on the Path to Adhere, where ongoing support, monitoring, and engagement ensure patients remain on therapy long enough to realize its intended clinical benefit. When commercial organizations focus almost exclusively on the first while leaving the latter journeys fragmented and burdened, a significant portion of therapeutic value is lost between intention and impact. In many therapeutic areas, the result appears in the persistent gap between prescriptions written, prescriptions filled, and therapies sustained—gaps that reflect not a failure of science but a failure of system design. Recognizing these three journeys shifts the unit of focus from promotional activity to the real-world pathways through which care is delivered. It reframes the role of the field force, the purpose of digital engagement, and the design of patient support programs around a single objective: reducing the friction that stands between clinical intent, treatment initiation, and sustained patient outcomes. Customer Context Is the New Commercial Variable For much of the pharmaceutical industry’s history, commercial performance was largely explained by a familiar set of variables. Product efficacy, clinical differentiation, promotional reach, and sales force execution determined the trajectory of most brands. When performance lagged, leaders adjusted those levers by refining segmentation, optimizing targeting, and recalibrating call plans. Today those traditional levers still matter, but they no longer explain commercial outcomes on their own. A far more powerful variable has entered the equation: customer context. HCPs now operate within an environment defined not only by clinical complexity and administrative burden but also by rising expectations shaped by their experiences outside healthcare. Physicians are also consumers. In their personal lives they interact daily with companies such as Apple, Amazon, Tesla, and Netflix that anticipate their needs, remove friction, and simplify complex processes through thoughtful design. These experiences quietly reset the benchmark for competence, responsiveness, and respect for their time. When those same physicians step into their clinical roles, they do not shed those expectations. They carry them with them. The contrast between the seamless orchestration of their consumer experiences and the fragmented systems surrounding many healthcare interactions becomes difficult to ignore. What once felt acceptable now feels unnecessarily burdensome. This dynamic represents the Consumer-Grade Imperative. Healthcare professionals increasingly evaluate pharmaceutical engagement not against other pharmaceutical companies but against the best experiences they encounter anywhere in their lives. In this environment even a clinically superior therapy can struggle if the surrounding system makes it difficult to initiate treatment, navigate reimbursement, or support patient adherence. Customer context therefore becomes the new commercial variable. It determines whether scientific differentiation translates into practical adoption. It shapes whether prescribing intent becomes therapy initiation and whether therapy initiation becomes sustained patient outcomes. Call plans were designed to manage activity. Customer context requires organizations to manage journeys. The Field Force in the Era of Customer Context Recognizing customer context as the defining commercial variable inevitably reshapes how the role of the field force is understood. For decades the pharmaceutical sales representative has been positioned primarily as the carrier of scientific information. Call plans optimized the frequency and sequencing of these interactions to ensure that physicians received consistent messaging. That role does not disappear, but the environment surrounding it has changed profoundly. Physicians today are navigating administrative burden, payer complexity, digital information overload, and increasing time pressure. In this environment they are not simply seeking more information. They are seeking clarity, simplicity, and support that helps them navigate the complexity surrounding treatment decisions. This shift transforms the representative from a messenger of information into something far more valuable: a partner in removing friction from the care journey. Conversations move beyond repeating clinical claims toward understanding the practical barriers that physicians and their teams face as they attempt to initiate and sustain therapy for patients. The most effective field forces are therefore supported by commercial systems designed around journeys rather than activities. Representatives are equipped not only with scientific messaging but with the insight and coordination required to address obstacles across prescribing, reimbursement, and patient support. Field engagement becomes a catalyst for problem solving rather than simply a vehicle for promotion. From Call Plans to Customer-Aligned Commercial Systems If customer context has become the defining commercial variable, then the systems designed to support the field must evolve accordingly. The traditional call plan was built to manage activity. It provided structure for how frequently physicians were engaged, how territories were covered, and how resources were deployed. Yet activity alone does not determine whether therapies ultimately reach patients. What determines impact is whether the commercial system surrounding the physician reduces or increases the burden of delivering care. A customer-aligned commercial system begins with the journeys through which physicians help patients move from diagnosis to treatment and beyond. Marketing clarifies the scientific story. Sales provides trusted relationships and real-time understanding of physician needs. Access teams simplify reimbursement pathways. Patient support programs reduce administrative burden. Digital engagement reinforces and extends human interaction. The result is a commercial system that operates less like disconnected functions and more like an integrated network designed to help physicians help patients. This is the essence of Customer Excellence. It aligns the entire commercial enterprise around the real-world context in which care is delivered. The problem was never the call plan. The problem was the context. Key Takeaways Commercial performance in pharma organizations has traditionally been managed through field execution mechanics, yet the effectiveness of those mechanics increasingly depends on how well they reflect the real-world context in which physicians operate. Customer context has become the most pivotal commercial variable as administrative burden, payer complexity, and consumer-grade expectations reshape how prescribing decisions are made. HCPs now evaluate pharmaceutical engagement against the best experiences they encounter anywhere in their lives, raising the standard for clarity, responsiveness, and ease. Optimizing promotional activity alone is no longer sufficient. Commercial success depends on reducing friction across the journeys physicians navigate as they move patients from diagnosis to treatment. Customer Excellence represents the structural response, aligning marketing, sales, access, digital engagement, and patient support around the real journeys of care delivery . Diagnostic Questions to Consider Are we optimizing the activity of our field force, or designing commercial systems that support the real journeys physicians navigate to help patients receive therapy? How well do we understand the administrative, reimbursement, and operational barriers physicians encounter after they decide to prescribe a therapy? Do our commercial systems reduce the burden placed on physicians and their staff , or unintentionally add to the complexity of care delivery? Are we benchmarking our engagement against other pharma companies , or against the best experiences physicians encounter in their lives as consumers? Have our investments in digital platforms simplified the physician’s experience, or multiplied the number of disconnected interactions they must manage? Are we still managing performance through activity metrics alone , or beginning to understand the context that ultimately determines whether therapies reach patients? Closing Reflection The pharma and life sciences industry has spent decades refining the mechanics of field execution. Call plans, segmentation models, and targeting systems brought structure and discipline to commercial organizations. Yet the environment surrounding physicians has evolved far more rapidly than the systems built to support them. Healthcare professionals now operate in a world defined by consumer-grade expectations for clarity, responsiveness, and ease. When the experience of engaging with a pharmaceutical company fails to reflect those expectations, the contrast becomes impossible to ignore. Organizations that recognize this shift will redesign their commercial systems around the realities of modern care delivery. They will move beyond managing activity and toward understanding the context in which physicians help patients receive treatment. In doing so they will close the gap between scientific innovation and real-world impact. Your breakthrough science deserves experiences worthy of it. Together, we turn customer excellence into real-world impact. About the Author Wayne Simmons is a hands-on commercial excellence architect and founder of The Customer Excellence Agency, where he partners with pharmaceutical and life sciences leaders to turn customer-centric ambition into durable commercial advantage. He previously served as Global Customer Excellence Lead within Pfizer’s Chief Marketing Organization and has held leadership roles with Bayer Pharmaceuticals and The Ritz-Carlton Leadership Center. Wayne writes The Customer-Centric Marketer newsletter and is the author of The Customer Excellence Enterprise: A Playbook for Creating Customers for Life. The Customer Excellence Agency: Advancing the Pursuit of Excellence in Service of Science.
Tan building with a hanging sign against a clear blue sky
By Wayne Simmons • June 12, 2025
Part five of the Starbucks Customer Excellence Series. Reconstructing the brand pyramid so that experience, not just product, carries the promise.
Coffee shop barista serving drinks behind the counter with menu boards and espresso machines.
By Wayne Simmons • June 12, 2025
Part four of the Starbucks Customer Excellence Series. Why corporate culture stays abstract until it is defined as a platform for delivering the experience.
Industrial-style café with large windows, people seated at tables, and a bright wooden counter
By Wayne Simmons • June 12, 2025
Part three of the Starbucks Customer Excellence Series. What the brand lost when it scaled, and what recapturing its mystique would require.
A starbucks logo is on the screen of a cell phone
By Wayne Simmons • June 12, 2025
Part two of the Starbucks Customer Excellence Series. How a highly successful digital innovation can erode the experience it was built to serve.
Starbucks sign on a beige building against a clear blue sky
By Wayne Simmons • June 12, 2025
The final part of the Starbucks Customer Excellence Series. How an experience delivery system is redesigned so excellence is repeatable rather than heroic.