Path-Inc Purchase?

Quote
Anonymous said:
You sound very young … and naive. Your response was also comprised of mostly clichés, so I’m not sure if you’re even serious about this topic.

Unfortunately for the patients involved, there has always been some separation from the business aspect of a clinical lab and its quality and commitment to patient care. Mission drift.

Actually, in many mjor markets in big cities there are laboratories in business for monetary reasons only. This is not even mission drift, but a deliberate business plan for labs small enough to be under the OIG radar.
Click to expand...

You exposed yourself as not knowing the what the hell you are talking about. Is that how you operate? Filibustering? A mission statement clearly identifies a company's purpose and provides the framework for its business strategy. All employees and officers identify with it. Where did you come from? You sound like a military vet. Mission drift? Mission drift was when the Military was sent to Afghanistan to capture Bin Laden but ended up hunting down Saddam Hussein after bombing the hell out of Iraq.

Company departments don't have mission statements. Divisions and departments have goals and objectives, benchmarks to objectively measure achievement. Now, who is being spoon fed, you incompetent dumb ass.

Our Path Inc officers have Phd's in Econ and business management. What do you have? Oh, that's right.....your GED.
 






Anonymous said:
You exposed yourself as not knowing the what the hell you are talking about. Is that how you operate? Filibustering? A mission statement clearly identifies a company's purpose and provides the framework for its business strategy. All employees and officers identify with it. Where did you come from? You sound like a military vet. Mission drift? Mission drift was when the Military was sent to Afghanistan to capture Bin Laden but ended up hunting down Saddam Hussein after bombing the hell out of Iraq.

Company departments don't have mission statements. Divisions and departments have goals and objectives, benchmarks to objectively measure achievement. Now, who is being spoon fed, you incompetent dumb ass.

Our Path Inc officers have Phd's in Econ and business management. What do you have? Oh, that's right.....your GED.
Click to expand...


What the hell are you blathering about? Who said anything about departments having mission statements? Have you actually followed the thread?

The term “mission drift” led you to believe I was a military vet? What the F…..? You’ve not heard this in a business context?

And do you even know what the word Filibustering means? Hey Hothead. Try cutting and pasting examples of any filibustering in my previous posts.

Also, why the cowardly move of posting this nonsensical rant two months after my post? ? Show some intellectual integrity and cut and paste my statements you disagree with and refute them.

Be a big boy. Surprise me, instead of repeating your old “GED” adhominem and juvenile “dumb ass” pejoratives. Grow up a little and start to express your point of view coherently. This will make actual discourse possible.
 




































Anonymous said:
Seems interesting for Lab Corp shareholders if the company is going to purchase a profitable entity. Adds a lot of solid revenue to the company.
Click to expand...

Nah. Shareholders know this purchase won't budge the needle, and is only an infinitesimal speck of one of many growth strategies. It’s irrelevant to those except for the uneasy PathInc. toot soldiers and a few that will make money from this transaction.
 






Anonymous said:
Nah. Shareholders know this purchase won't budge the needle, and is only an infinitesimal speck of one of many growth strategies. It’s irrelevant to those except for the uneasy PathInc. toot soldiers and a few that will make money from this transaction.
Click to expand...

Why wouldn't shareholders be excited about revenue increasing? Seems like that is the reason they invest in a company.
 






Anonymous said:
Why wouldn't shareholders be excited about revenue increasing? Seems like that is the reason they invest in a company.
Click to expand...

Shareholders are usually more excited about organic growth, or growth rates in high-margined molecular diagnostics.

This small acquisition of a local path lab will not be a lot of revenue when expenses are backed out and in some cases it takes years to see acquisition strategies come to fruition. New revenue is not necessarily good anyway … profit is what drives a company’s growth. Not all acquisitions are profitable or ultimately good for a company’s strategic plan.

Typically shareholders are more apprehensive about acquisitions. This would be such a small acquisition that excitement/apprehension needle won’t even budge. Again, it’s relevant (primarily) to the Pathinc execs who will profit from this transaction and their foot soldiers who won’t. Divisionally, it will help out a company like Labcorp … so it will have an effect on their sales and service people – if that happens. But in the whole scheme of things, to the average shareholder … nothing.

What are their total revenues? 30-40 million (a wild guess).

Quest was at 62 when the rumors started regarding their recent 600 million dollar purchase of Solstas. It’s now around 52. When this acquisition was finally announced the stock was at 55, now it’s under 54.

You must work for Pathinc if you're making the dubious claim that LCA shareholders are excited about this.
 






Anonymous said:
You must work for Pathinc if you're making the dubious claim that LCA shareholders are excited about this.
Click to expand...

Please, lets not insult each other. :)

I'm just quizzical about the whole things. 2013 earnings for Lab Corp disappointed investors. I would think that any increase in earnings would be a good thing for the company.
 






. I would think that any increase in earnings would be a good thing for the company. [/QUOTE said:
Without sounding insulting, I realize that’s what you think, as you have mentioned it in your last three posts. However, I’ve explained why this neither accurate nor relevant so if you’d like to address those points we can stop repeating ourselves :)
Click to expand...
 






Anonymous said:
Shareholders are usually more excited about organic growth, or growth rates in high-margined molecular diagnostics.

This small acquisition of a local path lab will not be a lot of revenue when expenses are backed out and in some cases it takes years to see acquisition strategies come to fruition. New revenue is not necessarily good anyway … profit is what drives a company’s growth. Not all acquisitions are profitable or ultimately good for a company’s strategic plan.

Typically shareholders are more apprehensive about acquisitions. This would be such a small acquisition that excitement/apprehension needle won’t even budge. Again, it’s relevant (primarily) to the Pathinc execs who will profit from this transaction and their foot soldiers who won’t. Divisionally, it will help out a company like Labcorp … so it will have an effect on their sales and service people – if that happens. But in the whole scheme of things, to the average shareholder … nothing
What are their total revenues? 30-40 million (a wild guess).

Quest was at 62 when the rumors started regarding their recent 600 million dollar purchase of Solstas. It’s now around 52. When this acquisition was finally announced the stock was at 55, now it’s under 54.

You must work for Pathinc if you're making the dubious claim that LCA shareholders are excited about this.
Click to expand...

Not trying to insult you but, are you serious? Your pedantic rant doesn't make you sound intelligent. You continue to expose your ignorance. The prior poster is right. The only thing shareholders care about are dividends and profits and the proof is in the pudding. There is nothing organic about LCA's growth strategy. It expands through acquisition. Chews them up and shits them out. Now try to be more succinct when you respond. The meth might make you think you are Einstein, but you are NOT!!!!
 






Anonymous said:
Not trying to insult you but, are you serious? Your pedantic rant doesn't make you sound intelligent. You continue to expose your ignorance. The prior poster is right. The only thing shareholders care about are dividends and profits and the proof is in the pudding. There is nothing organic about LCA's growth strategy. It expands through acquisition. Chews them up and shits them out. Now try to be more succinct when you respond. The meth might make you think you are Einstein, but you are NOT!!!!
Click to expand...

Oh boy, you again. And once again you try to use a big word you think is big, but is then used in the wrong context exposing your unfamiliarity with it. My prior posts were neither pedantic nor a rant, but anyone with an objective eye could see that.

I see the same pattern of your responses; very angry and impulsive which highjacks your reading comprehension and causes you to misrepresent a point of view. Case in point: I never said organic growth was their growth strategy, although higher margined molecular diagnostics is. Also, the prior poster never said shareholders care about profits and dividends.

Are you actually following this thread? I know I’ve asked you this before, but you never answer. The prior poster mentioned only adding revenues via acquisition.

Yeah, yeah … the meth insult. I believe you’ve used that before … or something just as juvenile.

Everyone knows that big labs have been expanding via acquisition for … LIKE THE PAST 20 YEARS! But thanks for point that out. Our prior comments spoke to the relevance of these small acquisitions to the average share holder.
 


















Anonymous said:
Oh boy, you again. And once again you try to use a big word you think is big, but is then used in the wrong context exposing your unfamiliarity with it. My prior posts were neither pedantic nor a rant, but anyone with an objective eye could see that.

I see the same pattern of your responses; very angry and impulsive which highjacks your reading comprehension and causes you to misrepresent a point of view. Case in point: I never said organic growth was their growth strategy, although higher margined molecular diagnostics is. Also, the prior poster never said shareholders care about profits and dividends.

Are you actually following this thread? I know I’ve asked you this before, but you never answer. The prior poster mentioned only adding revenues via acquisition.

Yeah, yeah … the meth insult. I believe you’ve used that before … or something just as juvenile.

Everyone knows that big labs have been expanding via acquisition for … LIKE THE PAST 20 YEARS! But thanks for point that out. Our prior comments spoke to the relevance of these small acquisitions to the average share holder.
Click to expand...

Adding revenue as apposed to losing revenue? I would think yes. Small labs also expand through merger and acquisition. That's usually how they become big labs. Can you say ROI (return on investment)? A positive ROI is sought by ALL shareholders.
 






Anonymous said:
Why would anyone need to say this?
Click to expand...

Let’s keep it honest and add the context of that statement: What followed was; “The prior poster mentioned only adding revenues via acquisition.” And the reason that was said was to correct the prior poster’s misrepresentation of … yet another point.

The poster who started this thread claims to work for LCA and claims he/she is going to purchase Pathinc. I question its overall relevance to the vast majority of share and stake holders and argued that “revenue is not all the same” and all acquisitions are not good. All my opinion regarding Pathinc, of course.
 






Anonymous said:
Adding revenue as apposed to losing revenue? I would think yes. Small labs also expand through merger and acquisition. That's usually how they become big labs. Can you say ROI (return on investment)? A positive ROI is sought by ALL shareholders.
Click to expand...

Whoa Nelly! Positive ROI? I think we’re getting a little ahead of ourselves. IF LCA buys Pathinc, then money has to come out of a divisional budget. Even though the days of paying 3-4 times multiple are over, LCA will still pay x2 of current revenues for this lab.

Then, if you back out the typical 10-20% client attrition that follows lab acquisitions then ROI becomes a trickier proposition. I personally think it will be a higher %, since Pathinc has been selling against LCA, so their clients will most likely be entertaining proposals from other labs.

Key accounts could be in near to mid-term jeopardy, since they (hypothetically) would have been given IOPs, promised expensive interfaces and collection supplies that fall outside the tight compliance of LCA.

The SpiraBrush could also be an issue to ROI. (Hypothetically) Very large OBGYN accounts that were closed by Pathinc due to fact that LCA thought this collection device was too expensive. Will LCA pick up this additional hit to their ROI, or will these clients be told to purchase them directly from the company?

There are also expenses for assimilation; standardizing IT, testing/technical processes and personnel.

Another risk to ROI would be the lack or complete financial due diligence. Unearthed expenses and potential low-margined books of revenue could be missed. Low margin revenue (especially lots of it) is a lab killer.

So, even while the LCA brain trust is strategizing on getting lost attrition-accounts back, they are planning on paying 2-3 times more for those books of business (more than the actual retained revenue).

ALL that money spent on trying to realize an ROI could potentially be used more effectively. Maybe, like, taking over the CLIA license of the local hospital outreach programs, or other affiliation agreements which will take hospital ownership out of untouchable physician accounts. OR, infrastructure investments in their current hubs.

I’m not saying that none of this has not been considered. Just saying not all acquisitions are neither profitable nor strategic.
 






Anonymous said:
The SpiraBrush could also be an issue to ROI. (Hypothetically) Very large OBGYN accounts that were closed by Pathinc due to fact that LCA thought this collection device was too expensive. Will LCA pick up this additional hit to their ROI, or will these clients be told to purchase them directly from the company?
Click to expand...

Any lab that isn't run by morons who want to get fined into oblivion has stopped giving these away for free by now.
 






Top Bottom
Back
Quote