robb, the entirety of Walgreens future and its eventual share price and market capitalization are linked to outcome in spending reductions for Medicare, Medicaid and other entitlement programs. Among its domestic competitors, CVS has a partial vulnerability but is parhaps better diversified with its PBM revenue and CVS is far more vulnerable to changes in interest rates than to reimbursement pressure compared to WAG.
Many pundits offer up the argument that failure to cut entitlement spending leaves the cost as an inherited burden of Baby Boomer's children, yet the inescapable fact is that of the 55 million Medicaid recipients most recently reported, 27 million of them actually WERE our children. Huge cuts to Medicaid doom the expected life span and care quality for a generation of young Americans who have no other safety net.
The reimbursement pressure that Walgreens has almost stoically resisted for half a decade, first in state actions in Delaware, Washington and others, then its fracas with CVS and most recently in the impasse with ESRX, offer a clue into the corporate position on similar pressures, going forward. The pressures seen in our domestic pharma retail landscape are even more pronounced in most overseas markets, and notably so in those with single payor systems. Healthcare reform is, as you note, is a global issue with common, global pressures and a global economy that can ill afford all the new technology, duplication of capabilities and layer upon layer of cost pyramiding spread among so many well-compensated tiers in the provider food chain.
I think that wicked one made a great point the other day that the WAG/CVS contract is up for renewal this Spring. That is my recollection, as well, and could be the next round in the Walgreens saga. I do know that no PBM is going to pay more for an Rx to be filled in a pharmacy with higher costs because they offer the convenience of store-made sushi, a nail salon and craft beers. We will see...
GLTA,
Yank
