I have no idea where you are quoting that from, but it costs $500M to $1B to develop a drug and bring it to market. $72M is a drop in the bucket when it comes to drug development costs, probably about 10% of the total development cost, and they have discounted remdesivir well over 10% for $3200/treatment. Now, if you're referring to funding a study, that's a different story, as you haven't provided a link to whatever you are quoting that from. But drug development is damn expensive, and remdesivir wasn't developed to treat COVID-19. The italicized quote is from here...https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/remdesivir-coronavirus-gilead-charge-thousands-treatment-u-s-n1232385 Public Citizen's Remdesivir position is published on their website...https://www.citizen.org/news/gileads-remdesivir-price-is-offensive/ This StatNews article offers a range of "expert" opinions on what an appropriate price might possibly be...https://www.statnews.com/2020/05/15/gilead-remdesivir-pricing-coronavirus/ I figured Gilead was named after the totalitarian state in The Handmaid's Tale, but it turns out they actually drew their inspiration from the ancient Balm of Gilead. This passage from Reverend Becca Stevens book Snake Oil: The Art of Healing and Truth-Telling seems somewhat relevant..."I believe it's more of an idea, like Eden, than a geographic location. Gilead represents the place that holds the hope of healing. For everyone who has been wounded, hurt, or abused, Gilead represents the sacred place where borders fade and balms are poured out lavishly." The only thing lavish about Remdesivir seems to be the price point & Gilead is actively working to put up borders (https://www.citizen.org/news/remdesivir-should-be-in-the-public-domain-gileads-licensing-deal-picks-winners-and-losers/) so it appears they have a different interpretation of their namesake than does the Reverend. It actually costs over $2B to develop a drug now. It was over $1B back when I studied it in Econ classes on public policy in 2003. Part of the reason for the $2B+ number is that for each approved drug, you must account for the half dozen failed drugs. I wrote my senators in March to suggest they incentivize research by placing bounties on treatments. The rarer conditions often have little drug research as pharmaceutical companies target drugs where they can make their money back. My plan would be that regardless of rarity of condition, upon approval manufacturers would receive a check for 3-5 times the total development costs on the condition they set a gov’t mandated price. Additionally I would grant manufacturers 30 years of exclusive patent rights rather than 20 currently, as long as the prices continue to be fair. Basically I want private pharmaceutical companies to continue innovating. I want them to be profitable. I’d like to see long term consumer costs to go down once the drug is approved.