No, Coventry has not bought PMSI. And I don’t think they will.
As of today, there are still several entities looking at the deal, and as near as I can tell the process is nowhere near complete. Is Coventry looking at PMSI? Probably – as the owner of a competing PBM they’d be foolish not to.
But buying PMSI wouldn’t materially strengthen Coventry’s WC offering. Yes, they’d pick up even more MSA business (which they appear to value); yes, they’d get a major position in the DME/Home health business, but they’d also get a PBM business that is deteriorating, due in no small part to Coventry’s ability to take customers from PMSI.
If I’m Coventry (and both parties are glad that’s not the case) why would I pay a couple hundred million bucks for a property that is deteriorating and I’m beating in the market?
That said, stranger things have happened…
Feb
28
I highly doubt that the parent company of PMSI – AmerisourceBergen – is calling Joe Paduda and giving him a play-by-play of who is bidding on PMSI and who is not. Your mindless speculation really adds nothing to the situation. Let’s see – the announcement to sell PMSI was made about a month ago – and the price tag is anywhere from $200 to $600 Million. “the process is nowhere near complete” – you think? I thought a transaction that size would be inked in a few days, not much due diligence would be needed to fork out one-quarter to one-half of a billion dollars.
Your anti-PMSI sentiment is more than mildly annoying.
George –
My speculation is anything but ‘mindless’; you may find it difficult to fathom but there are parties besides ABC involved in the potential transaction. My post was in response to numerous queries from readers and industry folks who had heard rumors about a coventry-pmsi deal.
Re my ‘anti-PMSI’ sentiment – if you can find a way to spin the company’s recent history to make losing customers, turning over staff, laying off employees, and suffering financially sound good, you go boy.
Me, I’ll stick to the facts.
Joe,
I am a bit confused. You say that you will “stick to the facts”, but your post is in response to “rumors?” I don’t understand Joe? What are we to believe?
Johnson – I’m confused that you’re confused.
The post is in response to rumors; it is not an attempt to spread rumors but rather to respond to them with facts.
It is always helpful to read the posts carefully before commenting on same. Especially if the comment is an attempt at sarcasm.