Doesn't this exist in almost every country? There is always market for rich to get better health care.
For example. To see a dentist in Slovenia there is a 6 month waiting list. But if you pay 20eur, you go to their private practice and see them in 2 weeks.
Optometrists are a several month as well. But you can go private, see them in 1 week, and they waive the fee if you buy glasses from them.
Bigger procedures get a little more expensive and there are things that don't exist in private (surgery can never be private because the country only has N surgery rooms and they are booked up with public stuff), but in general it's the same doctors and the same service in private and public health care. Private lessens your waiting times and the doctor is a bit nicer to you.
Now that I'm in the US I'm essentially terrified of needing a doctor even with insurance because of the crazy copay and deductible and in-network out-network system. Been here 3 years, never needed a doctor thank god.
If you only have one pool of doctors to draw from then those who are seem faster by paying are slowing down the remainder. If its a small enough difference that a significant portion pay the slow down could be substantial.
More recently, they started allowing private practice but there are rules for how much time a doctor can work vs in the public system. Tbh I'm not sure I how stand on it, it's a complex problem with many variables. The only thing I'm sure of is your wealth shouldn't affect your chance of living or dying, and for that we're better off with a public system. Should a private system also exist in parallel? Time will tell I guess.
These countries help underwrite the thriving medical tourism markets in places like Thailand and India.
In fact, if somebody would just freed me from any worries about hospital bills, negotiations, late fees, appointments etc, I would consider paying $40000 flat yearly rate to get everything covered (if for the whole family). Unfortunately, it looks impossible in Switzerland. There are concierge services, but they just add their own bill on top of hospital bills.
From the article: "The annual fee covers the cost of visits, all tests and procedures in the office, house calls and just about anything else other than hospitalization"
I.e. I am OK with the terms. I would prefer to pay a little less, $40k is outside of my affordable range ($24k is more like it). However, if absolutely unnegotiable, I might put it on wishlist for the next 3-4 years.
If it is $40k _on top_ of existing medical expenses (which I doubt), it is just another toy for the wealthy, and will not gain significant traction. "Regular" concierge service is usually much less expensive.
Edit: To all the down-voters. The article isn't about private healthcare which in the US is more the rule than the exception. It's about a layer on top of private healthcare.
Of course private healthcare exist in other countries. But this concierge layer for "normal" rich people you will be hard pressed to find many other places I ma pretty sure off (but could be wrong of course). Unless you are a politician or royal or something.
My own data point: back when I had a job that provided private insurance in Spain, making an appointment for my daughter with a specialist required waiting for weeks. The shortcut? A paid, private appointment, outside this private insurance. The specialist saw her in a matter of days.
All your private insurance allowed you to do is do what the US system allow you to do through a better healthcare insurance.
The article as far as I understand it is another extra layer on top.