a little interest for a change, page-8

That all makes sense.

Medibank won't let MAY buy ICS, they are the biggest insurer so that's good. So I guess it was more just a moment in time when MAY thought that. Path of least resistance and a quick fix to their dilemma? But not to be.

I'm not surpirsed that MAY would be thinking of building their own transaction engine ... big company, big ideas, but not a good track record for delivering business cases. It would be an interesting business case - they might own "half" the transaction (hospital ownership), but certainly not the funds. They would own all the transaction where they have specialists of course. I'm not sure who calls the shots when they choose vendors - the hospital or the funds. Of course the funds have the $, and the old saying of he who owns the $ dictates the rules.

With No Gap coming into play, this strengthens ICS' business case - they are a third player in settlements (ie: paying the doctors).

According to the CEO and I'm assuming he is telling the truth, MAY are using the claims application - perhaps you can confirm that with your contact? While you are there you might ask the other obvious question - are they building their own engine? ICS claim they know of no other service of its kind in Australia (carefully written - this doesn't cover developements).

Thanks
Phil