Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Guardian)   Pfiizer charges British £22 for a vaccine shot that costs 76p to manufacture   (theguardian.com) divider line
    More: Awkward, Vaccine, drugs manufacturer Pfizer, vaccine supply, vaccine doses, Pfizer's global vaccine contracts, drug firms, former senior US health official, Zain Rizvi  
•       •       •

486 clicks; posted to Business » on 05 Dec 2021 at 4:26 PM (5 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



59 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2021-12-05 1:07:52 PM  
Welcome to American pharmaceuticals. They're lucky it wasn't over $100.
 
2021-12-05 1:22:50 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-12-05 1:26:29 PM  
 British are in luck, just opt for the AZ vaccine.
 
2021-12-05 1:29:05 PM  
The estimated manufacturing costs do not include research, distribution and other costs, but Pfizer says its profit margin as a percentage before tax are in the "high-20s".

It cost them a billion USD or more to make it, probably more.  IIRC this is the one that has to be kept at -80C so distribution and logistics will be tough.  If they're saying their profits are in the high 20s (let's say it's 30%) then a £22 shot costs closer to £17 to produce.
 
2021-12-05 2:02:28 PM  
Yay, and obviously free to research, develop, distribute, modify - bloomin' money grabbers
 
2021-12-05 2:45:10 PM  
Last Feb, Pfizer was charging $19.50 for the shot in the US.

The CDC says COVID vaccines are free.

Either prices is a miracle in this country.
 
2021-12-05 3:27:19 PM  

enry: IIRC this is the one that has to be kept at -80C so distribution and logistics will be tough.


When it was first being tested it was not evaluated for storage at higher temperatures, but now standard refrigeration techniques are used.
 
2021-12-05 3:30:47 PM  

4seasons85!: Welcome to American pharmaceuticals. They're lucky it wasn't over $100.


Normally pricing would be determined by: "Without vaccines, you've got a 70% chance of getting sick, and a 1% chance of dying. With the actuarial value of a life of $10 million, the value of vaccination is $70,000, so $35,000 per dose"
 
2021-12-05 3:33:29 PM  

Enigmamf: 4seasons85!: Welcome to American pharmaceuticals. They're lucky it wasn't over $100.

Normally pricing would be determined by: "Without vaccines, you've got a 70% chance of getting sick, and a 1% chance of dying. With the actuarial value of a life of $10 million, the value of vaccination is $70,000, so $35,000 per dose"


Of course, if you do end up needing a booster every year, with an average life span of 78 years, it's only worth $900 per booster.
 
2021-12-05 3:45:24 PM  
The fact that they will not release the patent on a crucial life saving procedure that can save the world will cause many people to funny this post.

Brought to you by Pfizer compilation
Youtube 210bHotqzFM
 
2021-12-05 3:52:39 PM  

enry: The estimated manufacturing costs do not include research, distribution and other costs, but Pfizer says its profit margin as a percentage before tax are in the "high-20s".

It cost them a billion USD or more to make it, probably more.  IIRC this is the one that has to be kept at -80C so distribution and logistics will be tough.  If they're saying their profits are in the high 20s (let's say it's 30%) then a £22 shot costs closer to £17 to produce.


No, it cost American Taxpayers a billion to make it. Their profits are in the 100%s.
 
2021-12-05 4:05:25 PM  

koder: enry: The estimated manufacturing costs do not include research, distribution and other costs, but Pfizer says its profit margin as a percentage before tax are in the "high-20s".

It cost them a billion USD or more to make it, probably more.  IIRC this is the one that has to be kept at -80C so distribution and logistics will be tough.  If they're saying their profits are in the high 20s (let's say it's 30%) then a £22 shot costs closer to £17 to produce.

No, it cost American Taxpayers a billion to make it. Their profits are in the 100%s.


No, we paid them $1.95 billion for 100 million doses, or a cost of just under $20/shot.
 
2021-12-05 4:07:25 PM  

enry: koder: enry: The estimated manufacturing costs do not include research, distribution and other costs, but Pfizer says its profit margin as a percentage before tax are in the "high-20s".

It cost them a billion USD or more to make it, probably more.  IIRC this is the one that has to be kept at -80C so distribution and logistics will be tough.  If they're saying their profits are in the high 20s (let's say it's 30%) then a £22 shot costs closer to £17 to produce.

No, it cost American Taxpayers a billion to make it. Their profits are in the 100%s.

No, we paid them $1.95 billion for 100 million doses, or a cost of just under $20/shot.


We were cutting blank checks for the entire development.
 
2021-12-05 4:28:10 PM  

koder: enry: koder: enry: The estimated manufacturing costs do not include research, distribution and other costs, but Pfizer says its profit margin as a percentage before tax are in the "high-20s".

It cost them a billion USD or more to make it, probably more.  IIRC this is the one that has to be kept at -80C so distribution and logistics will be tough.  If they're saying their profits are in the high 20s (let's say it's 30%) then a £22 shot costs closer to £17 to produce.

No, it cost American Taxpayers a billion to make it. Their profits are in the 100%s.

No, we paid them $1.95 billion for 100 million doses, or a cost of just under $20/shot.

We were cutting blank checks for the entire development.


Not for Pfizer. They did not participate in Operation Warp Speed. Others did but not Pf/BioNTech.
 
2021-12-05 4:28:14 PM  

koder: enry: koder: enry: The estimated manufacturing costs do not include research, distribution and other costs, but Pfizer says its profit margin as a percentage before tax are in the "high-20s".

It cost them a billion USD or more to make it, probably more.  IIRC this is the one that has to be kept at -80C so distribution and logistics will be tough.  If they're saying their profits are in the high 20s (let's say it's 30%) then a £22 shot costs closer to £17 to produce.

No, it cost American Taxpayers a billion to make it. Their profits are in the 100%s.

No, we paid them $1.95 billion for 100 million doses, or a cost of just under $20/shot.

We were cutting blank checks for the entire development.


No, we did not.  We paid them up front for 100 million shots.
 
2021-12-05 4:37:02 PM  
Yeah, maybe it should be illegal to make a profit on medicine.
 
2021-12-05 4:45:31 PM  

austerity101: Yeah, maybe it should be illegal to make a profit on medicine.


I agree in principle, but then what is the incentive to invest all that sunk cost money into R&D for medicine when most of them will not work out and never make it to market?
 
2021-12-05 5:03:38 PM  

koder: enry: The estimated manufacturing costs do not include research, distribution and other costs, but Pfizer says its profit margin as a percentage before tax are in the "high-20s".

It cost them a billion USD or more to make it, probably more.  IIRC this is the one that has to be kept at -80C so distribution and logistics will be tough.  If they're saying their profits are in the high 20s (let's say it's 30%) then a £22 shot costs closer to £17 to produce.

No, it cost American Taxpayers a billion to make it. Their profits are in the 100%s.


As mentioned above, Pfizer didn't take Warp Speed money.  They made literally a multi-billion dollar bet that they could get this to market fast, and it was not a certain thing.  Lots of other groups (see Merck) flamed out completely with other techniques and got nothing for their investments.  That's the nature of the drug industry- immensely expensive bets on products that usually fail.

And if you really want to argue, you should pay the Germans.  The Pfizer vaccine is a BioNTech product, Pfizer did the trials and manufacturing.
 
2021-12-05 5:06:35 PM  
I'm laughing all the way to the bank because I own stock in Pfizer. Long-term growth is better than those meme stonks.
 
2021-12-05 5:15:05 PM  

phygz: The fact that they will not release the patent on a crucial life saving procedure that can save the world will cause many people to funny this post.

[Youtube-video https://www.youtube.com/embed/210bHotq​zFM]


Why should they?

Patents can be licensed. And there's also other vaccines that are better suited for the developing world anyway.
 
2021-12-05 5:40:30 PM  
If we take away the ability to profit from risky bets on uncertain vaccine efforts that succeeded from Pfizer/Moderna/etc, we fully deserve for all biopharma scientists to give us the finger and tell us we're on our own come the next pandemic.
 
2021-12-05 5:52:32 PM  
The list of items that retail for 30 times what they cost to manufacture is long.   Name brand shoes and clothing are prime examples.
 
2021-12-05 6:02:34 PM  

Tinstaafl: The list of items that retail for 30 times what they cost to manufacture is long.   Name brand shoes and clothing are prime examples.


And with most items, the mark-up only barely exceeds the costs of inventory, warehousing, shipping, marketing, and sales.

(And it's not BS to include marketing in the cost, because it does add to the item's value - buyers wouldn't value the item as much as they do without marketing to convince their subconscious that it's special. Otherwise we'd all buy plain t-shirts for $3 each.)
 
2021-12-05 6:38:14 PM  

Ketchuponsteak: phygz: The fact that they will not release the patent on a crucial life saving procedure that can save the world will cause many people to funny this post.

[Youtube-video https://www.youtube.com/embed/210bHotq​zFM]

Why should they?

Patents can be licensed. And there's also other vaccines that are better suited for the developing world anyway.


I was under the impression that we are in the middle of a deadly worldwide pandemic that will only be fixed if everyone on the planet is vaccinated.

Was I mistaken?
 
2021-12-05 6:39:31 PM  

Ketchuponsteak: phygz: The fact that they will not release the patent on a crucial life saving procedure that can save the world will cause many people to funny this post.

[Youtube-video https://www.youtube.com/embed/210bHotq​zFM]

Why should they?

Patents can be licensed. And there's also other vaccines that are better suited for the developing world anyway.


Also

I hate Big Pharma EXCEPT for Pfizer
Youtube o_s5y9Ls83Q
 
2021-12-05 6:47:53 PM  

phygz: I was under the impression that we are in the middle of a deadly worldwide pandemic that will only be fixed if everyone on the planet is vaccinated. Was I mistaken?


"Ask your doctor if being a smarmy, disingenuous c*nt is right for you."
 
2021-12-05 6:51:32 PM  
Now add in all the other costs besides manufacturing
 
2021-12-05 6:57:15 PM  

phygz: Ketchuponsteak: phygz: The fact that they will not release the patent on a crucial life saving procedure that can save the world will cause many people to funny this post.

[Youtube-video https://www.youtube.com/embed/210bHotq​zFM]

Why should they?

Patents can be licensed. And there's also other vaccines that are better suited for the developing world anyway.

I was under the impression that we are in the middle of a deadly worldwide pandemic that will only be fixed if everyone on the planet is vaccinated.

Was I mistaken?


You were right about the first, not about the second.

What does that have to do with anything?
 
2021-12-05 7:01:29 PM  

phygz: Ketchuponsteak: phygz: The fact that they will not release the patent on a crucial life saving procedure that can save the world will cause many people to funny this post.

[Youtube-video https://www.youtube.com/embed/210bHotq​zFM]

Why should they?

Patents can be licensed. And there's also other vaccines that are better suited for the developing world anyway.

Also

[iFrame https://www.youtube.com/embed/o_s5y9Ls​83Q?autoplay=1&widget_referrer=https%3​A%2F%2Fwww.fark.com&start=0&enablejsap​i=1&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.fark.com&​widgetid=1]


I have no strong opinions about Pfizer in any directions.

I know of ethical pharmacy companies, such as Novo Nordisk, that realizes is has a lock, more or less, on insulin. And thusly price their products accordingly to those nations who can afford it.

It sucks for USA of course, since Novo Nordisk considers USA as rich.

https://www.novonordisk.com/sustainab​l​e-business/access-and-affordability/pr​icing-position.html

I believe Novo Nordisk have made special arrangements for the poor in USA, which is well, it shouldn't be needed.
 
2021-12-05 7:07:05 PM  

4seasons85!: Welcome to American pharmaceuticals. They're lucky it wasn't over $100.


Logistics and distribution, how do they work?
 
2021-12-05 7:07:45 PM  

koder: enry: The estimated manufacturing costs do not include research, distribution and other costs, but Pfizer says its profit margin as a percentage before tax are in the "high-20s".

It cost them a billion USD or more to make it, probably more.  IIRC this is the one that has to be kept at -80C so distribution and logistics will be tough.  If they're saying their profits are in the high 20s (let's say it's 30%) then a £22 shot costs closer to £17 to produce.

No, it cost American Taxpayers a billion to make it. Their profits are in the 100%s.


BioNTech is a German company
 
2021-12-05 7:16:08 PM  

enry: The estimated manufacturing costs do not include research, distribution and other costs, but Pfizer says its profit margin as a percentage before tax are in the "high-20s".

It cost them a billion USD or more to make it, probably more.  IIRC this is the one that has to be kept at -80C so distribution and logistics will be tough.  If they're saying their profits are in the high 20s (let's say it's 30%) then a £22 shot costs closer to £17 to produce.


The refrigeration requirements were overblown. Deep freeze is required for long term storage however you can keep the vaccine at normal fridge temps for 10 weeks. See the latest handling guidelines for the 5 to 12 dosages. Due to lack of knowledge/testing they were overly conservative with temperature requirements with the initial adult vaccine. This has been rectified with when the vaccine has been approved for newer age groups.
 
2021-12-05 7:27:40 PM  
$20 does not seem that outrageous.  The costs associated with developing the medication and the risk of failure should allow a company a reasonable profit.
 
2021-12-05 7:47:51 PM  
I don't think the cost is the main point of TFA, it's this:

Rizvi said the UK needed to explain why it had agreed to secret arbitration proceedings. He said: "It's the only high-income country we have seen that has agreed to this provision. It allows pharmaceutical companies to bypass domestic legal processes.

I've also found the news about the UK government cancelling orders for Valneva's vaccine interesting. Valneva's vaccine contains the whole virus so may confer better immunity against developing variants. My first impression was that the cancellation was down to it being developed by a French lab and produced in Scotland, two groups that Tories are renowned for despising. But given TFA and the general corruption/incompetence/criminality of this government, I wouldn't be surprised if they did it to enrich Pfizer.
 
2021-12-05 8:45:22 PM  

enry: The estimated manufacturing costs do not include research, distribution and other costs, but Pfizer says its profit margin as a percentage before tax are in the "high-20s".

It cost them a billion USD or more to make it, probably more.  IIRC this is the one that has to be kept at -80C so distribution and logistics will be tough.  If they're saying their profits are in the high 20s (let's say it's 30%) then a £22 shot costs closer to £17 to produce.


Yeah, this isn't even, "The second shot cost $1, the first cost $1 billion."  The logistics are crazy elaborate.
 
2021-12-05 8:47:35 PM  

enry: koder: enry: koder: enry: The estimated manufacturing costs do not include research, distribution and other costs, but Pfizer says its profit margin as a percentage before tax are in the "high-20s".

It cost them a billion USD or more to make it, probably more.  IIRC this is the one that has to be kept at -80C so distribution and logistics will be tough.  If they're saying their profits are in the high 20s (let's say it's 30%) then a £22 shot costs closer to £17 to produce.

No, it cost American Taxpayers a billion to make it. Their profits are in the 100%s.

No, we paid them $1.95 billion for 100 million doses, or a cost of just under $20/shot.

We were cutting blank checks for the entire development.

No, we did not.  We paid them up front for 100 million shots.


Technically, we gave them $1.95 billion and told them "If you do get a working vaccine you owe us the first 100 million doses"

There was no guarantee that we'd get anything.
 
2021-12-05 8:52:55 PM  

Ketchuponsteak: phygz: Ketchuponsteak: phygz: The fact that they will not release the patent on a crucial life saving procedure that can save the world will cause many people to funny this post.

[Youtube-video https://www.youtube.com/embed/210bHotq​zFM]

Why should they?

Patents can be licensed. And there's also other vaccines that are better suited for the developing world anyway.

I was under the impression that we are in the middle of a deadly worldwide pandemic that will only be fixed if everyone on the planet is vaccinated.

Was I mistaken?

You were right about the first, not about the second.

What does that have to do with anything?


So vaccinations aren't the fix to the pandemic?

Tell me more about mandates...
 
2021-12-05 9:23:15 PM  

phygz: Ketchuponsteak: phygz: Ketchuponsteak: phygz: The fact that they will not release the patent on a crucial life saving procedure that can save the world will cause many people to funny this post.

[Youtube-video https://www.youtube.com/embed/210bHotq​zFM]

Why should they?

Patents can be licensed. And there's also other vaccines that are better suited for the developing world anyway.

I was under the impression that we are in the middle of a deadly worldwide pandemic that will only be fixed if everyone on the planet is vaccinated.

Was I mistaken?

You were right about the first, not about the second.

What does that have to do with anything?

So vaccinations aren't the fix to the pandemic?

Tell me more about mandates...


Oh, you made up a strawman, and decided to argue against that, how cute.

Nah, I ain't telling you shiat. Ask your schoolteacher.
 
2021-12-05 9:29:25 PM  

koder: enry: koder: enry: The estimated manufacturing costs do not include research, distribution and other costs, but Pfizer says its profit margin as a percentage before tax are in the "high-20s".

It cost them a billion USD or more to make it, probably more.  IIRC this is the one that has to be kept at -80C so distribution and logistics will be tough.  If they're saying their profits are in the high 20s (let's say it's 30%) then a £22 shot costs closer to £17 to produce.

No, it cost American Taxpayers a billion to make it. Their profits are in the 100%s.

No, we paid them $1.95 billion for 100 million doses, or a cost of just under $20/shot.

We were cutting blank checks for the entire development.


We were guaranteeing R&D costs so they would move as quickly as they could (once we had evidence there were on a viable path). Otherwise they would have had to sit there and weigh costs, if it was worth even pursuing, and it would have taken a lot longer.

Basically we paid for them to drop everything to get it out quicker.
 
2021-12-05 9:35:09 PM  

LineNoise: We were guaranteeing R&D costs so they would move as quickly as they could (once we had evidence there were on a viable path). Otherwise they would have had to sit there and weigh costs, if it was worth even pursuing, and it would have taken a lot longer.

Basically we paid for them to drop everything to get it out quicker.


Additionally, and this was very important, we were paying them to manufacture all those doses while testing was still going on so that as soon as soon as the FDA said "Go", we could start getting them in arms.
 
2021-12-05 10:12:53 PM  

Ketchuponsteak: phygz: Ketchuponsteak: phygz: Ketchuponsteak: phygz: The fact that they will not release the patent on a crucial life saving procedure that can save the world will cause many people to funny this post.

[Youtube-video https://www.youtube.com/embed/210bHotq​zFM]

Why should they?

Patents can be licensed. And there's also other vaccines that are better suited for the developing world anyway.

I was under the impression that we are in the middle of a deadly worldwide pandemic that will only be fixed if everyone on the planet is vaccinated.

Was I mistaken?

You were right about the first, not about the second.

What does that have to do with anything?

So vaccinations aren't the fix to the pandemic?

Tell me more about mandates...

Oh, you made up a strawman, and decided to argue against that, how cute.

Nah, I ain't telling you shiat. Ask your schoolteacher.


Thanks for deflecting.
 
2021-12-06 12:53:40 AM  

phygz: So vaccinations aren't the fix to the pandemic?

Tell me more about mandates...


They would if the numbers worldwide were 100%, but due to idiots here, and in other 'Western' nations, as well as tens of poor countries that couldn't afford the price (or get the shot last) that will never happen.

As a note, vaccinations might not prevent catching COVID, but they universally reduce the symptoms when you do get it. Like prevention of death and keeping you out of the ER.
 
2021-12-06 1:11:28 AM  

phimuskapsi: phygz: So vaccinations aren't the fix to the pandemic?

Tell me more about mandates...

They would if the numbers worldwide were 100%, but due to idiots here, and in other 'Western' nations, as well as tens of poor countries that couldn't afford the price (or get the shot last) that will never happen.

As a note, vaccinations might not prevent catching COVID, but they universally reduce the symptoms when you do get it. Like prevention of death and keeping you out of the ER.


If everyone gets the vaccine then mandates make sense. When higher branches of government aren't exempt, mandates makes sense.

Until then, it's turned in to a gravy train that will see no end.
 
2021-12-06 1:16:54 AM  

phygz: Until then, it's turned in to a gravy train that will see no end.


What gravy train? For mask makers?

Generally speaking the pandemic is causing everyone and everything to lose money and everything to be more expensive as a result. 

COVID has literally killed 800k Americans. What's that worth?
 
2021-12-06 2:20:55 AM  

iron de havilland: I don't think the cost is the main point of TFA, it's this:

Rizvi said the UK needed to explain why it had agreed to secret arbitration proceedings. He said: "It's the only high-income country we have seen that has agreed to this provision. It allows pharmaceutical companies to bypass domestic legal processes.

I've also found the news about the UK government cancelling orders for Valneva's vaccine interesting. Valneva's vaccine contains the whole virus so may confer better immunity against developing variants. My first impression was that the cancellation was down to it being developed by a French lab and produced in Scotland, two groups that Tories are renowned for despising. But given TFA and the general corruption/incompetence/criminality of this government, I wouldn't be surprised if they did it to enrich Pfizer.


The British Conservative government you so despise had the most successful vaccine procurement program in the world, to the point the EU was threatening to sue us, and threated to close the Irish border, unless we handed over our vaccine supplies to them because we were so far ahead of them. The Astra Zenica vaccines only exists because this government brokered a deal with Oxford.

Even Guy Verhofstadt, hardly a Brexit supporter, confirmed the UK had just negotiated a better deal than the EU.

And if they hated Scotland and France so much why did they place that order in the first place?
 
2021-12-06 4:18:21 AM  
Pfizer didn't charge £22, the tories offered them that amount.
Bozo and co like nothing more then pissing our money away on rich folks
 
2021-12-06 6:50:34 AM  

Zenith: Pfizer didn't charge £22, the tories offered them that amount.
Bozo and co like nothing more then pissing our money away on rich folks


$22 a dose is cheap. Do you realize how much dry-ice shipments across the pond cost? How much -80 storage costs? How much overhead there is in planning all that shiat?
 
2021-12-06 7:05:48 AM  

phygz: The fact that they will not release the patent on a crucial life saving procedure that can save the world will cause many people to funny this post.

[YouTube video: Brought to you by Pfizer compilation]


It's more complicated than that.  China and Russia are distributing their vaccines in their region as part of a soft power grab. So it's not like the Pfizer vaccine is the only one in the world.
The UK developed their own much flaunted vaccine with Oxford University and AZ, and Moderna has a competing vaccine.
The hilarious thing is that after Brexit they could have received the Pfizer vaccine cheaper because it is actually an EU vaccine from German firm BioNTech.
So Boris opting to interface with the US pharma system is another bad decision of many, likely to save face in front of Brexit fans rather than cost as the main consideration.
Oh, and Pfizer transferred the vaccine and ramped up manufacturing independent of Donald Trump, they were not part of Operation Warp Speed.  Pfizer did and does benefit by Biden's efforts to build out supporting industries like single use sterile parts and EO/steam/gamma sterilization services.  So now we have a lot more capacity to manufacture than we did in 2020.  Pfizer is run by ivy league types wbo came from finance, they don't GAF about public health or affordability, the would sell their own mothers for $0.05 if it were allowed.  That's the culture in big pharma.  Pfizer hasn't developed a drug in-house in decades.  They are in reality a private equity firm.  We applaud this in the USA because stonks but they don't add any value to the public really.  We should be supporting the actual drug creators.   But that is another conversation.
IMHO you should be upset at Boris & Co, who could have negotiated a better price, likely with BioNTech not Pfizer.
/But blue passports amirite?
 
2021-12-06 8:07:30 AM  

Northern: So Boris opting to interface with the US pharma system is another bad decision of many, likely to save face in front of Brexit fans rather than cost as the main consideration.


Saving lives was the main consideration.

That's why Boris and his government did a far better job than the EU in procuring vaccines and why the EU was so pissed off at how much better we were doing they threatened to sue us, raided AstraZenica factories looking for evidence of cheating, threated to close the Irish border, blocked a shipment to Australia etc.

It took many months for the EU to catch up to the UK, and that's why before Omicron the EU was imposing new lockdowns while the UK was returning to normal.
 
2021-12-06 8:31:33 AM  
Ahh, the good old fallacy of completely ignoring fixed costs. Ok, I'll bite.

If they price it equal to the variable manufacturing cost, who pays for the salaries of all the scientists and engineers they employ, the rent at their headquarters, and so on? Who pays for the huge scale research studies used to verify that the vaccine works? Who pays for all the lawyers needed to file all the paperwork with the FDA and 100 other country equivalents?
 
Displayed 50 of 59 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.