Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
BTW, what has this bit of info got to do with the PFHO scam: It's much easier when a nanoscam medical company fails for 11 years straight to calculate the fair value.
Let's try to stay on topic.
And around PFHO it's all about when BK will take place.
Given how complicated apparently figuring out what a basic PE ratio even is some (lol), how are we to figure out what a properly valued PE is as it pertains to PFHO?
lol
It's much easier when a nanoscam medical company fails for 11 years straight to calculate the fair value.
OMG -- ROFL!!!! That's 22 cents for a single quarter not a year.
I understand that not everybody has experience dealing with companies that actual earn money that are related to the medical field but wow lol. The E in a PE ratio is for a year. Annualized of last Q PFHO has $0.88 in earnings.
Giving a PE of 10 provides a very generous share price of $2.20.
Very generous!
With the dim future that lies ahead I see nothing above $1.25 for this joke of a company run by a geriatric CEO who reminds me of a lobotomized chimp with BK tendencies.
During the three month period ended September 30, 2016, total revenues decreased 30% to $1,443,596 compared to $2,069,581 for the three-month period ended September 30, 2015. For the three month period ended September 30, 2016 UR, MBR, MPN and Other revenues decreased by 78%, 7%, 34%, and 12%, respectively, compared to the same period in 2015 while HCO and NCM revenues were higher by 1% and 131%, respectively. The loss of Amtrust North America ("Amtrust"), Companion Property and Casualty Insurance Co. ("Companion") and a major MPN customer during 2015 has and will continue to have significant negative impact on our revenue during 2016 and until we are able to replace the revenue generated from these customers. Unless we are able to attract additional new customers during 2016, we anticipate revenues will be considerably lower throughout 2016 compared to 2015.
As of September 30, 2016, we had approximately 302,000 total enrollees in our HCO and MPN programs. Enrollment consisted of approximately 170,000 HCO enrollees and 132,000 MPN enrollees. By comparison as of September 30, 2015, we had approximately 453,000 total enrollees, including approximately 142,000 HCO enrollees and 311,000 MPN enrollees. The growth in HCO enrollment of approximately 28,000 was primarily the result of several existing HCO customers increasing their enrollment and the addition of one new HCO customer. MPN enrollment decreased by approximately 179,000 resulting primarily from the loss of a major MPN customer. Many of our HCO and MPN clients also use the other services we offer, but we also have customers that don't use our HCO or MPN services.
Our business generally has a long sales cycle, typically in excess of one year. Once we have established a customer relationship, our revenue, particularly our HCO and MPN revenues adjusts with the growth or retraction of our customers' managed headcount volume. New customers are added throughout the year and other customers terminate from the program for a variety of reasons.
In the current economic environment, we anticipate businesses will continue to seek ways to reduce their workers' compensation program costs. Even though the HCO and MPN programs have been shown to create a favorable return on investment for employers, (as our services are a significant component of the employers' loss prevention programs), it is always a challenge to justify our fees to our customers. In order to convince employers that the fees they pay us are well-spent, we must continue to provide a framework for expeditiously returning employees back to work at the lowest cost. As a result, we may experience some client turnover in the form of existing employer clients seeking to terminate or renegotiate the scope and terms of existing services. We also anticipate our market may shrink as some employers seek to reduce their costs by managing their workers' compensation care services in-house.
On October 5, 2016, Thomas Iwanski tendered his resignation from the board of directors of Pacific Health Care Organization, Inc. (the "Company"). To the knowledge of the Company's executive officers, Mr. Iwanski's resignation was not the result of any disagreement regarding the Company's operations, polices or practices.
SHAREHOLDER ALERT: Pomerantz Law Firm Announces the Filing of a Class Action against Medbox, Inc. and Certain Officers - MDBX
Jan 29, 2015, 20:05 ET from Pomerantz LLP
NEW YORK, Jan. 29, 2015 /PRNewswire/ -- Pomerantz LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed against Medbox, Inc. ("Medbox" or the "Company")(OTC: MDBX) and certain of its officers. The class action, filed in United States District Court, Central District of California, and docketed under 15-cv-00683, is on behalf of a class consisting of all persons or entities who purchased Medbox securities between November 20, 2013 and December 29, 2014, inclusive (the "Class Period"). This class action seeks to recover damages against Defendants for alleged violations of the federal securities laws under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act").
If you are a shareholder who purchased Medbox securities during the Class Period, you have until March 22, 2015 to ask the Court to appoint you as Lead Plaintiff for the class. A copy of the Complaint can be obtained at www.pomerantzlaw.com. To discuss this action, contact Robert S. Willoughby at rswilloughby@pomlaw.com or 888.476.6529 (or 888.4-POMLAW), toll free, x237. Those who inquire by e-mail are encouraged to include their mailing address, telephone number, and number of shares purchased.
Medbox, Inc., through its subsidiaries, provides patented biometrically controlled medicine storage and dispensing systems to the medical and retail industries.
The Complaint alleges that during the Class Period, Defendants issued materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company's financial results for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013 and each of the interim financial periods ended September 30, 2013, December 31, 2013, March 30, 2014, June 30, 2014 and September 30, 2014. Specifically, Defendants overstated Medbox's revenues by recognizing revenue on customer contracts before it had been earned. As a result of these false statements, Medbox's stock traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period, reaching an intraday Class Period high of $93.50 on January 8, 2014.
On or about April 10, 2014, Defendant P. Vincent Mehdizadeh resigned as COO and as a director of Medbox, but was appointed as "Senior Strategist and Founder" of Medbox. Thereafter, the price of Medbox stock declined, dropping from a closing price of $17.52 per share on May 16, 2014 to close down at $16.11 per share on May 19, 2014, following the Friday, May 16, 2014 issuance of a report by the SEC warning of "possible scams involving marijuana-related investments" and quoting Elisha Frank, co-chair of the SEC Enforcement Division's Microcap Fraud Task Force as stating "[w]henever we see incomplete or misleading disclosures, we act quickly to protect investors."
On or about October 17, 2014, the Company disclosed that Defendant Mehdizadeh had resigned as an officer of Medbox but that he would continue to serve the Company as a consultant with the title of Founder and Senior Advisor.
Then, on or about October 21, 2014, the Company disclosed that Medbox's Chief Financial Officer ("CFO") Thomas Iwanski ("Iwanski") – who was just hired in that capacity by the Company in February 2014 - was being replaced by Defendant Douglas Mitchell ("Mitchell"), though Iwanski too would stay on as a consultant. Thereafter, on October 31, 2014, the Company disclosed that it had appointed a special board committee to investigate a letter from a former Company employee to the SEC "alleging wrongdoing by a former officer of the Company who [was] a consultant to the Company" and that "a federal grand jury document subpoena [had been] served in August 2014 on the Company's accountants by the U.S. Department of Justice…."
On November 3, 2014, a press release was issued stating it was released by Medbox entitled "Medbox Comments on Recent 8-K Filing" which claimed that the former employee who sent the letter to the SEC had done so in retribution for Medbox's refusal to pay him a cash settlement, quoting Defendant Mehdizadeh, and further stating that "[c]urrent management commented that the Company ha[d] not found any indications that the subject matter contained in the [former employee's] letter [was] true concerning the conduct of prior officers of the company."
Meanwhile, shares of Medbox fell $1.50 per share from their October 31, 2014 closing price of $13.95 per share, or 10.8%, to close at $12.45 on November 3, 2014. Shares fell another $2.75 per share on November 5, 2014 as the financial media reported on the ensuing SEC investigation and the market absorbed the full import of the disclosures.
Then, on November 7, 2014, Medbox filed a Current Report on Form 8-K with the SEC stating the November 3, 2014 press release, which quoted Defendant Mehdizadeh, had not been "authorized by Medbox."
On December 30, 2014, before the opening of trading, Medbox issued a press release disclosing that it would be forced to restate the past five quarters of financial reports and potentially its "financial statements for 2012 and for the first two quarters of 2013 . . . as well." The Company further disclosed that the earnings restatement had triggered a default on its debt covenants that had forced it to seek a forbearance from lenders. The release stated that the "steps [being taken were] part of the continued initiative of [Medbox's] new board of directors and new management team to implement better controls and emphasize transparency."
On this news, shares of Medbox fell $0.81 per share, or approximately 12.67%, to close at $5.58 per share on December 31, 2014.
The Pomerantz Firm, with offices in New York, Chicago, Florida, and San Diego, is acknowledged as one of the premier firms in the areas of corporate, securities, and antitrust class litigation. Founded by the late Abraham L. Pomerantz, known as the dean of the class action bar, the Pomerantz Firm pioneered the field of securities class actions. Today, more than 70 years later, the Pomerantz Firm continues in the tradition he established, fighting for the rights of the victims of securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, and corporate misconduct. The Firm has recovered numerous multimillion-dollar damages awards on behalf of class members. See www.pomerantzlaw.com.
CONTACT: Robert S. Willoughby Pomerantz LLP rswilloughby@pomlaw.com
It seems the company ultimately disagreed with his accounting practices as CFO and had to restate earnings to recognize revenue as having occured later:
Interesting idea but since I've never been hired as a shill or a promoter I'm not interested.
If they need help in other areas I could maybe be interested but I doubt I have the skill set for this type of business despite my experience as a healthcare (retiree) actuary.
Legal and compliance work they seem to be doing quite well already. If they need help hunting down any enemies then I'm their man. I have some successful international experience in that.
EPS $0.09 -- way down YOY but hey at least they're still earning and not claiming a cure for all viruses or something stupid like that while hiring sleazy Canadian stock promoters.
During the three-month period ended June 30, 2016, total revenues decreased 45% to $1,249,709 compared to $2,261,105 for the three-month period ended June 30, 2015. For the three months ended June 30, 2016, NCM fees increased by 65% compared to the same period in 2015, while HCO, MPN UR, MBR, and other revenue were lower by 26%, 40%, 78%, 56% and 37%, respectively. The loss of Amtrust North America (“Amtrust”), Companion Property and Casualty Insurance Co. (“Companion”) and a major MPN customer during 2015 has and will continue to have significant negative impact on our revenue during 2016 and until we are able to replace the revenue generated from these customers. Unless we are able to attract additional new customers during 2016, we anticipate revenues will be considerably lower throughout 2016 compared to 2015.
PFHO is down, but not out. Lots of its competitors seem to be doing pretty well, so I'm not sure how long before the lost business gets through the snake.
If they turn it around, it could be a very compelling buy. And those that haven't sold haven't realized a loss, or gain yet. I'm going to be looking at the next few Qs before reaching any decision.
And no, the company doesn't market itself, but it doesn't need paid promoters either, so I like that.
Don't forget the cash dividend paid which is equal to a large percentage higher than the entry price many of us got swing trading in before it ran to "near $90" ;)
Pacific Healthcare Organization, Inc., through its subsidiaries, engages in managing and administering health care organizations (HCOs) and managed provider networks in the state of California. The HCOs are networks of medical providers established to serve the workers’ compensation industry.
Pacific Healthcare Organization, Inc., through its two HCOs, offers injured workers a choice of enrolling in an HCO with a network managed by primary care providers requiring a referral to specialists; or a second HCO, where injured workers do not need any prior authorization to be seen and treated by specialists. The company was formerly known as Clear Air, Inc. and changed its name to Pacific Healthcare Organization, Inc. in January 2001. Pacific Healthcare Organization, Inc. was incorporated in 1970 and is based in Newport Beach, California.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
