I'm sure you are right, but when has cost to produce been an indicator of selling price?
There is a cost, then there is a perceived value which hopefully the market will accept. With all new products there is something called the 'S' curve. It plots sales qty and associated price with the small take on by 'early adopters', and as the word gets around, the demand/quantity increases and prices fall, until a point of maturity where increase in quantity levels off and price dips a little.
You might be right
@barrym.
There is of course a third possibility.
That when the NHS was negotiating the price it would pay for the Libre 3 sensors, it failed to take account of what was happening with Libre 3 pricing in other markets and simply made a bad deal with Abbott.
Because someone would need to explain why, precisely, if you live in Germany, Italy or the US, the price of the Libre 3 sensor is the same price that users in each of those countries paid for the Libre 2 (or the Libre 1) sensors previously.
Dexcom and Abbott are suing each other at present for patent infringement in Germany, the UK and USA concerning the technology in their respective glucose monitoring products. Because of that litigation, and as a precaution in case Abbott lose the litigation in Germany, I understand that German users of Libre 2 were moved over and given the Libre 3 instead. For the same price as the Libre 2. I also understand that's why the Libre 3 was launched widely and quickly in Italy.
I wonder what will happen when the UK patent dispute is concluded between the parties?