# Bind (new "insurance")



## BuffySummers (Jan 22, 2020)

Target sent an email out awhile ago about a new "insurance" called Bind, that they are doing a trial of, i think in 3 states (FL, MN, TX) maybe. So far, it sounds like a crap shoot. Premiums will double,  no deductible, high out of pocket max, and heafty co-pays. Amd they don't even cover everything - you have to buy add-on plans to get additional coverages
Anyone hear anything about this?


----------



## Hardlinesmaster (Jan 23, 2020)

I did not  get the email. I am not in those states. 





						Bind | On-Demand Health Insurance
					






					www.yourbind.com


----------



## starfishncoffee (Jan 23, 2020)

I don't live in those states, nor do I need insurance from Target, but their website underwhelmed me. Increased premiums/worse coverage on top of decreased hours? Just how much do they think $15 an hour (when we get there) can buy?


----------



## Captain Orca (Jan 23, 2020)

Sounds like a terrific plan.


----------



## BoxCutter (Jan 23, 2020)

To me, it sounds like a terrific plan. For the employer.


----------



## redeye58 (Jan 23, 2020)

I"m in one of those states & they haven't said ANYTHING yet which, considering how sucky it sounds, is probably why


----------



## Captain Orca (Jan 23, 2020)

Excellent retention strategy for loyal hard working employees.  Very thoughtful indeed.


----------



## Cinnamon2005 (Jan 23, 2020)

I am in Texas and haven't seen or heard anything about this.


----------



## commiecorvus (Jan 23, 2020)

"Plans are designed with basic co-pays and no deductibles for core medical coverage. In addition to free preventive care required under the Affordable Care Act, Bind’s plans cut out deductibles for primary care and specialist visits, maternity coverage, hospital care, medications and even cancer treatment. Co-pays are priced on a sliding scale — from $15 for a visit to retail clinic to $100 at an urgent care facility.

The big-ticket out-of-pocket costs kick in for elective procedures, such as knee replacement or back surgery. The extra co-pay for those procedures is based on the total cost, with consumers being given the full price of the procedure up front and no surprise bills on the back end. The co-pay can be structured so the worker can pay it off through payroll deductions, like a premium.

On-demand health insurance seems like an oxymoron, but digital health insurance firm Bind is betting that by structuring health plans so that people can add coverage and pay for it when they need it, companies and employees can save money in the long run.

“It’s not intuitive for people, but I think when we started this we thought, ‘how do people really use the health-care system?’ And we used it in an on-demand way,” explained Tony Miller, co-founder and CEO of Bind."

There isn't enough information on this good or bad because it hasn't been running long enough.
But keep these things in mind, 1) they are using an algorithm to figure out how to keep everything balanced and we all know how well that works. 2) When the company is deciding what is an elective process (back surgery?) and then you get the cost taken out of your paycheck, that doesn't bode well and 3) this so smacks of the insurance version of Uber it makes my head hurt.


----------



## johnnydepp (Jan 24, 2020)

I’m in one of those states, never heard about this. But i did get sent a check about a month ago from the bank that handles our HSA accounts..?


----------



## SigningLady (Jan 24, 2020)

When looking this over, my premiums for family coverage would drop saving me about $400/year from what we currently pay with the HRA. And the co-pays for office visits would actually save us money too because that's what most of our medical needs are throughout the year (I have young kids and they seem to need office visits a few times a year which adds up before we meet the deductible). The highest co-pay for an office visit is lower than what it typically costs to go. Seriously considering this option, seems like a good fit for my family.


----------



## bikebryan (Jan 24, 2020)

BuffySummers said:


> Target sent an email out awhile ago about a new "insurance" called Bind, that they are doing a trial of, i think in 3 states (FL, MN, TX) maybe. So far, it sounds like a crap shoot. Premiums will double,  no deductible, high out of pocket max, and heafty co-pays. Amd they don't even cover everything - you have to buy add-on plans to get additional coverages
> Anyone hear anything about this?


See what happens when you have no deductibles?  Give and get.


----------



## lifeblows10 (Jan 26, 2020)

Hi guys. TX TL here... currently on the HRA with self+spouse. Our plus one comes in May... That being said, I looked over Bind’s offering and must say at the end of the day it looks like a win-win for just about everyone.

Since my wife is pregnant, I did a comparison between UHC’s HRA and Bind and at least in the case of pregnancy, Bind beats the crap out of the HRA. Her doctor alone (for Labor and Delivery, and excluding the hospital fees) is slated to cost $2,500. On Bind, the copay for the hospital visit (which covers the doctor*) is $660 at the hospital we will be delivering at. Need I say more?

The whole premise of this plan is two-fold. Part one is making it more cost effective for the employer. Since we are self funded, Target pays for everything - not UHC. And because of how UHC’s plan is structured, Target has to account for everything that could be covered - and has to account for the wide variation in cost between different providers for the same procedure. Part 2 is making it more cost effective for the employee (surprisingly.) With Bind, the network is the same as UHC (a plus) - but because those cost wildly vary from doctor to doctor, facility to facility, they just have the info (read cost - you copay) handy and allow you to decide where you want to go. Again, going back to my baby - our hospital was one of the cheapest on the list, but had we had our baby in the city the cost was about double.

The add-in coverage is an interesting concept. But IMHO it’s sort of a win-win again. Because the list of add-ins is only 45 procedures, they have them listed on the website and what the cost is. Again, you get to choose your provider and because if that you effectively get to choose your price. They ask that you call and add the coverage in (at any time - just have to give 3 days notice) and you’re good to go. Those “cost” are also spread out over 24 months. So, really it’s just another co-pay.

I can post more about it if people are interested. Make no mistake, it does benefit the company. But for once it looks to be a huge benefit for the TM as well. My example of this is my doctor - on Bind he has a $40 copay. Currently on the HRA every time I see him it’s $80. Target gives us $1000 for our healthy actions (note - you do not get money for healthy actions if you are in Bind), so technically I’m not paying for it. But day one of Bind I would have to pay $40, and the company would pay the other $40. The way I see it - I’m only paying $40 for a $80 service where before I had to pay all $80.

As for the premiums - they are cheaper than the HRA. Per check TM is $48, TM+Kids is $109, TM+Spouse is $177, and Family is $199.

This time around, I’ll be giving Bind a try.


----------



## Ashfromoldsite (Jan 26, 2020)

Bond is insurance of the 90s. I miss the $25 copay I used to pay to see the doc.


----------



## SigningLady (Jan 27, 2020)

Ashfromoldsite said:


> Bond is insurance of the 90s. I miss the $25 copay I used to pay to see the doc.



This exactly! I just did an evisit yesterday because the maximum cost is $45 and not the $300 I would pay to actually see the doctor.


----------

