Walgreens buying Duane Reade

[wellwell]

Interesting...

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hZiPMh6XSTUhGJxV2U57HkljEkxgD9DTUBSG0

Walgreen buying drugstore operator Duane Reade
(AP) – 27 minutes ago
DEERFIELD, Ill. — Walgreen is buying drugstore operator Duane Reade Holdings in a move to expand operations in the New York City metropolitan area.
Walgreen Co. says the deal is worth about $1.075 billion but that includes an undisclosed amount of debt.
The deal would include all 257 Duane Reade stores in the New York City metropolitan area, along with the corporate office and two distribution centers. Walgreen, one of the nation's biggest drugstore operators, already has 70 stores in the same area.
Walgreen says it will fund the buyout with existing cash and expects the deal to close by Aug. 31.
The deal is expected to cut into Walgreen earnings per share through the next 12 months, but will cut costs between $120 million and $130 million by the third year.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[297point1]

Another one bites the dust... My how the landscape has changed in the last 15 years.

There is not much left for CVS and Walgreens to acquire...Kerr? Kinney? Rite-Aid?

 

[npage148]

I, for one, welcome my new pharmacy overlords

 

[willrocks]

This is bad news.

 

[Argentium]

rite aid is next!!!

 

[PharmaTope]

This is bad news.

this is terrible news!!!!

laws should have been enacted that mandated pharmacies MUST be owned by a licensed PHARMACIST.

this is the death of pharmacy ladies and gentlemen.

 

[IrishHammer]

this is terrible news!!!!

laws should have been enacted that mandated pharmacies MUST be owned by a licensed PHARMACIST.

this is the death of pharmacy ladies and gentlemen.

To what end would having the place owned by a pharmacist serve? I mean, sure, it would almost certainly lead to more favorable working conditions (the pharmacist who owns the store is likely to be more sympathetic to that sort of thing), but how would that help alleviate the problems in pharmacy regarding buyouts and expansion? Not trying to be a smartass, I'm genuinely curious because I've heard this mentioned several times now.

 

[PharmaTope]

To what end would having the place owned by a pharmacist serve? I mean, sure, it would almost certainly lead to more favorable working conditions (the pharmacist who owns the store is likely to be more sympathetic to that sort of thing), but how would that help alleviate the problems in pharmacy regarding buyouts and expansion? Not trying to be a smartass, I'm genuinely curious because I've heard this mentioned several times now.

well people wonder how dentistry profession has been protected it is from this model.

all dental practices must be owned by an individual dentist. chain dentistry does not work out because they must be owned by a dentist by law.

so no CVS, Walgreens putting all the independents out of business and destroying pharm profession IMO.

 

[wellwell]

this is the death of pharmacy ladies and gentlemen.

Quick, head for the hills!

 

[Old Timer]

well people wonder how dentistry profession has been protected it is from this model.

all dental practices must be owned by an individual dentist. chain dentistry does not work out because they must be owned by a dentist by law.

so no CVS, Walgreens putting all the independents out of business and destroying pharm profession IMO.

This shows you have zero-10% understanding of pharmacy economics. Explain how using small words and hand signs why Walgreens was founded in 1901, CVS in 1967 (the pharmacy part) and Rite Aid in 1967 had no and I mean no impact on independent community pharmacy until the mid 1990's? Do you understand that most of the time an independent would have gladly opened right next to chain and survived quite nicely.

The chains have the financial ability to survive in the current market place. Most independents do not. That's why the number of independents keeps falling year after year. The chains are not the cause of the current conditions, they are the result...

 

[StevePerry]

This shows you have zero-10% understanding of pharmacy economics. Explain how using small words and hand signs why Walgreens was founded in 1901, CVS in 1967 (the pharmacy part) and Rite Aid in 1967 had no and I mean no impact on independent community pharmacy until the mid 1990's? Do you understand that most of the time an independent would have gladly opened right next to chain and survived quite nicely.

The chains have the financial ability to survive in the current market place. Most independents do not. That's why the number of independents keeps falling year after year. The chains are not the cause of the current conditions, they are the result...

Well spoken, but that still doesn't address the point that was made. If every pharmacy had to be owned by an individual pharmacist as in dentistry, chains could not exist as they do today. PBM's would be forced to reconsider reimbursement rates at a fair level. Remember, your cause and effect scenario works both ways. In whichever Dakota (North or South) that has that law... does anyone know if the major PBM's operate there? Unless they completely boycott the state, this shows that the model could work (and would definitely work if ALL states did it). But face it, because of corruption/collusion, this will never happen.

 

[Old Timer]

Well spoken, but that still doesn't address the point that was made. If every pharmacy had to be owned by an individual pharmacist as in dentistry, chains could not exist as they do today. PBM's would be forced to reconsider reimbursement rates at a fair level. Remember, your cause and effect scenario works both ways. In whichever Dakota (North or South) that has that law... does anyone know if the major PBM's operate there? Unless they completely boycott the state, this shows that the model could work (and would definitely work if ALL states did it). But face it, because of corruption/collusion, this will never happen.

I was responding to the comment that the chains put the independents out of business. That's a load of crap. You can pass any law you want but that does not mean the chains are the problem. They are the result....

 

[genesis09]

Until the 1980s or so, most people did not have prescription insurance. Once that became the norm, it became harder for independents to make a profit. The PBMs are always trying to decrease reimbursements. The chains can buy in bulk and get a discount from the wholesalers but independents cannot. The reason why many independents are struggling has very little to do with the chains but more with PBMs.

 

[BelleMD2B]

Not a pharmacist, but I do work in finance, and I am trying to figure out why everyone is so up in arms about this. I thought the acquisition was bottom line/expansion only, and that the DRs would continue to operate as they currently exist. How does that affect pharmacists at all?

 

[type b pharmD]

Not a pharmacist, but I do work in finance, and I am trying to figure out why everyone is so up in arms about this. I thought the acquisition was bottom line/expansion only, and that the DRs would continue to operate as they currently exist. How does that affect pharmacists at all?

in this case, it's a benefit. Sentiment is that duane reade is one of the worst run pharmacies to work for.. Walgreens new system is probably going to make some peoples' jobs easier. Ask aznfarmerboi what he thinks of duane reade.

 

[lorain]

so Wags cuts rph hours to raise money to buy other companies?

 

[Aznfarmerboi]

in this case, it's a benefit. Sentiment is that duane reade is one of the worst run pharmacies to work for.. Walgreens new system is probably going to make some peoples' jobs easier. Ask aznfarmerboi what he thinks of duane reade.

I hate Duane Reade with a vengence. They are a grimey company. With that said, I dont think it is the end of pharmacy. Walgreen has limited stores in the city.

However, if Rite Aid was to be acquired... then the end is near. Think of the pharmacists who would lose their jobs (like when Rite Aid took over Eckereds)!

 

[netrx]

I strongly agree! There should be a law for that. I'll be happy not to answer to non-rph management.

 

[willrocks]

I doubt the FTC would allow Rite Aid to be wholly acquired by one other company without splitting it up first.