Measuring Real ROI From Your MAVRIX Strategy Call
A strategy call with MAVRIX Profit System produces a clear, executable plan when you arrive with specific numbers, genuine decision-making authority, and a practice that already has enough volume to absorb a pricing transition. Without those three things, the call still has value, but the outcome shifts from “here’s your first move” to “here’s what you need to build before your first move.”
Key Takeaways
- The call functions as a focused review of your practice’s specific revenue constraints, not a general introduction to cash-pay medicine.
- Physicians who arrive with real numbers, average reimbursement per procedure, and weekly visit volume consistently leave with a concrete first action.
- Delay after the call is the single most reliable predictor of a slow result. Implementation speed determines timeline, not strategy quality.
- MAVRIX works well with physicians starting a new practice, those already running a fully cash-pay practice, and those looking to move away from insurance.
- This approach is not the right fit for every practice. Read the “who this is not for” section before you book.
Why Do Some Physicians Leave With a Plan While Others Leave With a Conversation?
The difference isn’t the quality of the advice. It’s the quality of what you bring in.
Think of it the way you’d think about a diagnostic consult in your own clinic. A patient who walks in with labs, imaging, a clear symptom timeline, and a list of what they’ve already tried gives you something to work with. You can prescribe with precision. A patient who arrives with vague complaints and no history forces you to spend half the appointment reconstructing the baseline. The strategy call works the same way.
Physicians who arrive with their actual numbers give the call a specific problem to solve. What is insurance currently paying per procedure? What does your overhead look like per patient visit? Where does your schedule have slack to accommodate a new patient segment? Those inputs let MAVRIX identify the one or two changes that move revenue fastest, the specific fee restructuring or pricing communication shift that can be deployed without dismantling what’s already working.
Physicians who arrive wondering whether cash-pay is “right for their specialty” are asking the wrong question. That question gets you a framework. Specific numbers get you a plan.
What Does the Call Actually Do?
A focused review of your practice means exactly that: a structured look at your current revenue model, where the constraints are, and which part of the MAVRIX system applies to your situation first.
The call is not a presentation. It’s not an orientation to cash-based medicine. It’s a decision session, designed to answer one question: given your specific numbers, what is the first lever you can move, and what does moving it actually look like in your practice?
The one or two changes that move revenue the fastest are usually not the most dramatic. They’re typically fee restructuring for services already in your schedule and a shift in how cash pricing is communicated to patients who are already motivated to pay out of pocket. Those changes don’t require exiting insurance contracts, rebuilding your schedule from scratch, or retraining your entire staff. They require a clear decision and a two-week implementation window.
What to bring to your call:
- Your current payer mix as a percentage breakdown
- Your average reimbursement per procedure for your top three billed codes
- Your weekly patient visit volume
- The cash-pay or out-of-network percentage you’re currently running, even if it’s close to zero
- One specific service or patient segment you’ve already considered pricing outside your insurance agreements
What’s a Realistic Timeline for Seeing Revenue Movement?
The 90-day figure MAVRIX references is real, and it comes with conditions.
Ninety days is achievable for practices that implement the first identified change within two weeks of the call. The system isn’t designed around a full practice overhaul before anything moves. It’s built to find the change that can generate revenue without requiring every other piece to be in place first.
What consistently slows results is a specific pattern: a physician leaves the call with a clear first action, then spends the first month reviewing the plan with their billing team, discussing it with a partner, or waiting until the next quarter to “start fresh.” The strategy doesn’t degrade. The timeline keeps extending, and the cost of staying with the current model continues to accumulate while the review is underway.
What slows results in practice:
- Waiting for internal alignment before taking any action
- Treating the call outcome as one input among many rather than a decision
- Implementing partially while keeping every insurance relationship intact and unchanged
- Delaying fee restructuring until after a staff transition or system upgrade is complete
None of those delays is inevitable. They’re choices. The calendar doesn’t pause because the decision feels complicated.
The Comparison That Actually Matters
The question worth asking isn’t what the strategy call costs. It’s what another quarter in the current model costs.
Insurance reimbursement rates compress over time, not occasionally, but predictably. Overhead holds steady or increases. The math on staying in a volume-based, insurance-dependent model doesn’t improve with time. Every month of delay is a month of revenue generated at below-market rates, with overhead absorbing a larger share of what remains.
| Situation | What Typically Happens | Revenue Direction | Timeline to Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Books call, brings specific numbers, implements within two weeks | First lever identified, fee restructuring starts immediately | Measurable movement within 30 to 60 days | 90 days or less |
| Books call, treat it as research, delay action | General understanding gained, no specific move made | Minimal to none | Results pushed 90 to 180 days further out |
| Books call, implement partially, preserves all insurance contracts | Incremental improvement, no structural shift | Modest, often plateaus quickly | Limited upside without a bigger change |
| Takes no action, stays in the current model | Insurance dependency continues, overhead stays fixed, reimbursements compress | Negative in real terms over time | Cost compounds indefinitely |
The expensive option isn’t the call. The expensive option is to run another quarter on a model that pays you less each year while the overhead stays exactly where it is.
Who Gets the Most From This, and Who Doesn’t
This approach works best for physicians running practices between $1 million and $3 million annually, with meaningful weekly visit volume and at least some existing willingness among their patient base to pay outside insurance. It works especially well for physicians who have already started asking the right questions about their revenue model and just need a clear first action, not more general information.
It’s not the right starting point for every situation.
This approach is not a fit for practices with annual revenue under $800,000 or for physicians with zero existing cash-pay patients and no near-term path to building that segment. It’s also not a fit for physicians who are still deciding whether a cash-pay model is appropriate for their specialty. The call is a decision tool, not an orientation. If you’re still at the “should I even consider this” stage, the call will be more useful after you’ve worked through the foundational case.
Physicians locked into multi-year insurance contracts with significant exit penalties need a different sequencing. The MAVRIX system can work around existing contracts, but the 90-day timeline depends on what your contract terms actually allow. The transition is still structured and executable, but the starting point shifts.
The call also won’t resolve operational dysfunction. Broken scheduling systems, high staff turnover, and persistent billing errors don’t disappear when your pricing strategy improves. They surface faster. If those problems are active, addressing them before or alongside the revenue strategy matters.
FAQ
How do I know if I’m ready to get real value from a strategy call?
You’re ready when you can answer three questions without looking anything up: what percentage of your revenue is insurance-dependent, what your average reimbursement per procedure is compared to what you’d charge a cash-pay patient for the same service, and how many patient visits you run per week. If those numbers are fuzzy, spend 30 minutes pulling them first. The call produces a plan when it has real data to work with.
What actually happens during the call?
It’s a focused review of your specific practice, not a general overview of cash-pay medicine. You’ll identify the primary revenue constraint in your current model, the first change you can deploy without disrupting your existing patient base, and a realistic timeline for increased revenue. It’s structured as a decision session.
Is 90 days realistic or just a marketing claim?
Ninety days is realistic for practices that implement the first identified change within two weeks of the call. It’s not realistic for practices that spend the first month in internal review. The timeline is a function of how quickly you act, not the quality of the strategy. Delay is the only variable that consistently pushes results past 90 days.
What if I’m still under insurance contracts? Can’t I exit immediately?
The MAVRIX system can sequence around existing contracts. The typical approach starts with identifying services you can price outside your current insurance agreements, building cash-pay volume in parallel, and timing contract renegotiation to coincide with the establishment of that volume. The 90-day window may shift depending on your specific contract terms.
What kind of revenue increase is typical?
It depends on your starting point, your specialty, and how quickly you implement. Practices entering with high insurance dependency and meaningful weekly volume have the most room to move. Practices already running significant cash-pay percentages are optimizing rather than transforming, and the gains are real but smaller in scale. The range is wide enough that a single average number wouldn’t be honest.
What if I’ve tried a cash-pay transition before and it didn’t work?
Failed transitions almost always trace back to one of two causes: pricing that wasn’t positioned at a level that attracted the right patient, or patient communication that didn’t clearly connect the cash-pay model to the value being delivered. Both are fixable. A strategy call is particularly useful in this situation because it can identify which of those two problems applied to your previous attempt.
Do I need to fully exit insurance to benefit from working with MAVRIX?
No. Many physicians run hybrid models, keeping certain insurance relationships while building a cash-pay tier for specific services or patient segments. Full exit is one option, not the only one. The right structure depends on your specialty, your patient demographics, and where your revenue targets actually sit.
If you’re running a practice in the $1 million to $3 million range and you’re watching reimbursement rates compress while your overhead holds steady, the call is where the math changes. Bring your numbers. Schedule your strategy session with MAVRIX Profit System.
About the Author
Matthew Gillogly is the Founder and CEO of MAVRIX Profit System, a business growth company that helps physicians build and scale cash-based medical practices. Before founding MAVRIX, he built medical practices that generated $6.5 million in annual revenue, approaching the business of medicine as an operator rather than a clinician. MAVRIX and its team have helped physicians generate more than $100 million in new revenue through their proprietary profit optimization system.
