The entire industry agrees on where AI belongs first in a launch. Pfizer already built it, and named it after the man who founded the company. The short version: • Pfizer's Charlie is the clearest real-world proof of the MLR consensus, and it works because it routes risk to humans faster rather than deciding anything itself. • It's the lowest-regret AI win in launch, and worth building. • But the pitch assumes the review was the bottleneck, and the real delay usually sits ups

That gap, between knowing what good looks like and being able to act while the market is still moving, is what I wanted to put to someone who has lived it. Lou has spent three decades in commercialization and has since sat on the other side of the table, advising the teams making these calls. Not a vendor with a platform to sell. An operator who has watched launches drift in real time and can tell you where and why. My thanks to him for a genuinely candid hour, and for being

Every big firm is now selling the same pharma launch. Agentic. Sense-and-respond. "Launch as a learning system." They are all describing the same thing, and none of them is in the room when it fails. The short version: The big-firm launch point of view has converged, and the platforms behind it are real. Launches still drift anyway, because the gap was never structure. It was control. The question isn't which agentic platform to buy. It's who holds the loop closed when the ma

We're probably at the peak of the AI hype cycle. Your teams have moved beyond experimenting with ChatGPT—they're now integrating AI into...

The AI-powered drug discovery platform market is set to reach $1.29 billion in 2025, and surge to $8.27 billion by 2035—a rapid ~20%...