You make a good point concerning a changing price per voucher. It's entirely possible that they have negotiated different pricing (volume incentives, etc.) with various pharma companies. Likewise, the revenue share may vary by EHR platform. The "competitive reasons" cited may be flexibility with their own partner and client contracts rather than strictly competition.
I appreciate your voicing of concerns. I became aware of this story last year and started accumulating shares with the Vicis buyout. For the past year I've been weighing the enormous potential of this business with the execution risk of a fairly inexperienced management team. My confidence has ebbed and flowed here more than any other company I follow, mainly due to a lack of proactive communication. As examples, I felt that they could have been more transparent/timely about the Stastney situation, the LDM suit/settlement, and now, as you've pointed out, the Allscripts and Novartis delays that they were fully aware of on the April 1st call. However, each of these issues seems to have reached a positive resolution, and I've been impressed by just how quickly new partner and pharma relationships have developed.
In management's defense, they've been operating without a CFO, so I have hope communication will now improve going forward. They've always been pretty responsive to concerns raised on the quarterly calls (we even got a PR today after it was recommended!). I've never gotten the sense that they're trying to mislead investors, but rather just aren't always familiar with best practices.
