Sat, Nov 29, 2014, 4:53 AM EST - U.S. Markets closed

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Walgreen Co. Message Board

  • taiguyandcheeky taiguyandcheeky Jan 22, 2008 6:16 PM Flag

    Off-Topic, for Bananarug

    I believe it was you who, last year bought a Lexus LX SUV. I promised my wife a new car this year and we're leaning towards a Lexus SUV. She wants the RX, but I like the GX or perhaps even the LX. The RX would satisfy our needs, but sometimes you have to splurge and live a little, IMO. How do you like the LX? Any complaints?

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • "sometimes we have to step back and be reminded of the walls of worry of the past."

      This is RIGHT ON! Someone mentioned Sid Dworkin and Revco, who used to be the big player years ago and kept buying up competition (ala CVS) until finally he foolishly got into manufacturing and overextended and went bankrupt. They(Revco) seemed formidable at the time (Fred Canning was VERY happy when Walgreens eclipsed them in sales and profit), but Walgreens stuck to what they did best and kept their business to strictly serving the customer CONVENIENTLY, with neat and clean stores and growing their own PBM and they climbed the wall of worry AGAIN! I hope Walgreens still has the killer instinct that they had when Fred Canning was the President and he would say "if you see a competitor drowning stick a hose down his throat and turn it on"! I know Jeff Rein and Greg Wasson and they do not seem as tough as Fred or even LDJ, but they are VERY smart and I trust their business acumen! The future holds the answer whether another "wall of worry" will be climbed or not or if the "doom and gloom" boys will win (VERY doubtful), but I am NOT selling ANY shares of Wag and I am banking on Wag's future success!

    • <It amazes me that people like Yank think everybody, in every field except themselves are overpaid. Even more stupid is their belief that when the socialistic society takes over they will be one of the "chosen" to become rich and powerful.>

      That is their sick, twisted, elitist views of society. Instead of lifting people up, they want to keep everyone down, "where we belong." They know best, and the rest of us peasants should just fall in line. Cmxsux, glad we at least agree on the important core principles that have made this the greatest, most prosperous country in history.

    • The market share number is a conundrum for the bashers and a perpetual thorn in their side, so they choose to ignore it. When we reach 25% market share, they will still be predicting our demise at the hands of the current chicken little scenario. Maybe the post office will get into pharmacy services. The mailman will bring prescriptions directly to your door. He'll counsel you and instruct you on how to use those suppositories. Walgreens is doomed! LOL!

    • very solid post there taiguy, sometimes we have to step back and be reminded of the walls of worry of the past. Bottom line is going from 15.4% to 17% market share IN ONE YEAR!!! to me that is very big

    • <Walgreens and its overpaid pharmacists>

      The board moron tries to hide his socialists views, but occasionally he slips. He doesn't really believe in markets or supply and demand dictating price/wages. Even though there is a shortage of pharmacists, his solution is to mandate lower wages. Yeah, that'll solve the problem perfectly. What an idiot! He is also too dumb to realize that Wal-Mart pays their RPhs the same and occasionally higher than the chains. The above foolish statement sums ups his socialist mentality pretty clearly. He'll try to weasel and worm his way around, but he'll always be exposed, again and again. In this free society, there will always be Chairman Moas and Comrade Hugos, ready to stoke the flames of class warfare. Some of them will actually be clever and intelligent, unlike our village idiot. LOL!

    • yank.wags_chain yank.wags_chain Jan 23, 2008 11:51 AM Flag

      Why must ALL of you presume the worst and least equitable aspects to universal healthcare? I never said give a tax credit to only Americans that lack coverage. Everyone should get a tax credit that works... period. My scenario actually absolves business of paying for rising healthcare costs vs. global competition that has none!

      The employee chooses how and where to spend the credit. The market determines what options are put on the table. And those that want to purchase more, out of pocket, are still capable of doing so.

      This isn't "oomunism" but good, common sense which is sorely missing in both healthcare and pharmacare. It just tends to benefit low cost providers... which does not necessarily include Walgreens... which is why my view is so wildly unpopular on this board. Remember, on this board if it doesn't reward Walgreens and its overpaid pharmacists and management, it is an unpalatable and unwelcome opinion that surely was rendered by some idiot.

      Yank

    • Yank,

      If you give a tax credit to working Americans who are not covered, doesn't that just give an incentive for all employees to drop coverage?

      Why should tax payers subsidize this?

      On the rest of your post, I agree that the maze needs to be knocked down and burned. It is like many other things, transparency would help everything. I can never understand when I get an EOB that a procedure is charged at say $500, but my insurance only pays 194.50. Who pays the $500? What do the uninsured pay, I'm sure it's not the $500? Is the $500 just for the foreigners who fly to the US for medical care since they get such lousy care in their socialized countries?

    • yank.wags_chain yank.wags_chain Jan 23, 2008 11:25 AM Flag

      You've been listening to the "pumpers" if you assume my position on universal healthcare is all that radical. I believe that all Americans shold have some form of medical and pharmacy care available to them. I actually favor a tax-credit approach that equalizes the prices paid by working Americans that lack coverage with working Americans that have coverage. There are enough entitlements to cover most others that don't fall into these two categories.

      I changed jobs, about a year ago and opted for roughly equivalent insurance as what I had with my former employer. My cost, per month via payroll deduction, went from over $440/mo to about $200/mo, and my dental coverage thru Delta Dental is actually for the identical terms at a reduced cost. Why did I pay so much more, previously, for equivalent coverage? Because my employers was a lousy negotiator... or had fewer employess to leverage? What does this have to do with how much healthcare costs?

      These disparities are ENDEMIC in the maze that healthcare and pharmacare have become! I believe a bidding process for universal coverage would create some surprisingly affordable alternatives by which all Americans might enjoy decent and affordable coverage. And without breaking the bank, just breaking down some of the old insanities that, at present, have Americans paying all over the map for the same service, offset by variable or no coverage anomalies.

      Yank

    • Bananarug,

      Re: I am Legend - bottom line 3-stars, very entertaining

      It was definitely worth my $10, just for the amazing scenes of a completely depopulated New York City. The CG of the city was really quite remarkable and 100% believable. Will Smith did an admirable job in a serious role and won me over, as I usually think of him as the goofball Fresh Prince character. The premise is a slight ripoff of the 28 days/weeks franchise, but with an interesting medical twist. Add in the survivalist/loneliness dimensions and you've got an interesting flick. Overall, the show was very entertaining with decent acting and some great suspense. My only beef was with the super-human abilities of the "creatures." In one scene, an SUV is completely upended by a flying head-butt. Give me a break. Other than that, I give it a big thumbs up (and so does my wife).

      Re: Lexus

      I tend to agree, on strictly financial terms, an equivalent Toyota is the better deal. We had an Avalon, which had all the important parts of the Lexus sedan (ES?), and it was a great car and a real bargain. With a Lexus, after adding tax and all the bells and whistles, we're looking at $45-80k. But my wife is set on a "luxury" vehicle so I'm sure I'd lose that battle. Besides, life is short so why not enjoy? Right now, it's 70%Rx, 30%GX/LX. We may hold out for the 2009 model which apparently will be available in April/May! Either way, based on initial research, I don't think we can really go wrong with a Lexus. Thanks for your input.

 
WAG
68.61+0.14(+0.20%)Nov 28 1:07 PMEST

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.
Exxon Mobil Corporation
NYSEFri, Nov 28, 2014 1:00 PM EST
Energy XXI Ltd.
NasdaqGSFri, Nov 28, 2014 1:00 PM EST