Wed, Mar 4, 2015, 2:32 AM EST - U.S. Markets open in 6 hrs 58 mins

Recent

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

WebMD Health Corp. Message Board

limpingbull 40 posts  |  Last Activity: Feb 25, 2015 6:05 AM Member since: May 10, 2006
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    Not so shabby:

    by limpingbull Feb 25, 2015 3:50 AM
    limpingbull limpingbull Feb 25, 2015 6:05 AM Flag

    Marty is probably working on the big picture and leaves day-to-day business to the CEO, as he should, as Chairman of the Board. If he is confident that the CEO knows what he is doing, of course, which, apparently, he is.
    After hours don’t mean a thing because of very limited volume and MMs doing their adjustments. Let’s wait for the opening.

  • limpingbull by limpingbull Feb 25, 2015 3:50 AM Flag

    For the year 2014

    Adjusted EBITDA + 29%

    Adjusted Net Income + 116%
    or per diluted share + 148%

    Guidance for the year 2015

    Adjusted EBITDA + 13% to 20%

    Net Income + 23% to 45%

  • limpingbull by limpingbull Feb 12, 2015 5:17 AM Flag

    There are some indicators that show us were the company is going:

    1) The in-and-out of Icahn.
    Carl Icahn is not a long term investor, but a short term opportunist who aims to profit from special situations.
    He probably went into the company with the intention of forcing a sale and make a nice profit in the procedure. However, as he ran into opposition from Marty and his buddies, he preferred to sell his position to the company and walk away with a small profit or perhaps even a small loss.
    For the combined know-how and connections of Marty and Icahn it shouldn’t have been any problem to find a suitable buyer for this company.
    That a sale did not result should be indicator enough even to the most stubborn speculators that this company is not for sale.

    2) Competition
    The closest competitor is far smaller Everyday Health, a company that yet has to make a profit.

    3) The partnership with Walgreens
    When the leading health portal and the largest drug retailing chain in the United States, and perhaps the world, form a partnership, they don’t do it just to hold hands together but to increase revenues and profits for both of them.
    Remember this exchange between an analyst and David Schlanger at the last earnings conference:

    Question:
    Are you thinking that (the partnership) more as a revenue generator? Or is it really more about the marketing presence, being in the stores? And do you see opportunities for this kind of partnership, either doing something deeper with Walgreens or with other partners?

    Answer:
    Well, I would say yes to all of the above.
    We are certainly pleased with the economic terms of the agreement.
    We think it’s a terrific opportunity to leverage Walgreens’ substantial reach with consumers.
    They get 8 million store visits a day, to make WebMD content and tools more accessible to people where they are.
    And lastly, because of the breadth of Walgreens’ organization, we certainly see additional opportunities to work with them beyond what we’ve already contracted for.

    After cooperating with Apple’s HealthKit and Qualcomm Life, this is an even more important step on WebMD’s way on becoming the octopus of healthcare.

  • Reply to

    LEERINK-WEBMD CONFERENCE

    by stevecrf Feb 11, 2015 11:23 AM
    limpingbull limpingbull Feb 11, 2015 11:46 AM Flag

    It did come up, and Schlanger was not at all concerned about it!

  • Reply to

    LEERINK-WEBMD CONFERENCE

    by stevecrf Feb 11, 2015 11:23 AM
    limpingbull limpingbull Feb 11, 2015 11:41 AM Flag

    “As expected this Leerink discussion with David Schlanger provided no greater insights into WebMD strategies for Revenue Enhancement…”

    Which, of course, was hardly to be expected 13 days before their Fourth Quarter Earnings Release Date and Conference Call…

  • Reply to

    Major owners

    by limpingbull Feb 11, 2015 3:10 AM
    limpingbull limpingbull Feb 11, 2015 11:15 AM Flag

    My point is that highly respected outfits like BlackRock and Vanguard don’t buy more than 5% of any company without having an in-depth discussion with that company’s management and without knowing exactly where those people are going.
    As for yesterday’s announcement by Google I do hope you all listened to David Schlanger’s presentation at Leerink.

  • limpingbull by limpingbull Feb 11, 2015 3:10 AM Flag

    Vanguard has now 6.04%

  • Reply to

    BLACKROCK, INC.

    by stevecrf Feb 2, 2015 1:22 PM
    limpingbull limpingbull Feb 10, 2015 5:01 PM Flag

    Institutional? With such small volume?
    I don't think so!
    WBMD's stength lies with Medscape, not with some gimmicks that can be copied by others. Just Watch tomorrows reply at Leerinks

  • Reply to

    WELLS FARGO ANALYST-PETER STABLER

    by stevecrf Feb 10, 2015 2:10 PM
    limpingbull limpingbull Feb 10, 2015 2:26 PM Flag

    This is a very small segment of what WBMD is doing. Hardly of any importance. So please try not be hysterical.

  • Reply to

    BLACKROCK, INC.

    by stevecrf Feb 2, 2015 1:22 PM
    limpingbull limpingbull Feb 10, 2015 2:07 PM Flag

    This is a very small segment of what WBMD is doing. Hardly of any importance. So please try not be hysterical.

  • Reply to

    BLACKROCK, INC.

    by stevecrf Feb 2, 2015 1:22 PM
    limpingbull limpingbull Feb 5, 2015 3:34 AM Flag

    Tracey, if you want to know more about Blackrock and its history, read

    “Larry Fink's $12 Trillion Shadow | Vanity Fair”

  • Reply to

    BLACKROCK, INC.

    by stevecrf Feb 2, 2015 1:22 PM
    limpingbull limpingbull Feb 4, 2015 2:00 PM Flag

    Tracey, I don’t think they have anything to do with Prudentials, most of their shares are being held by institutions, the largest position being held by PNC Financial Services with 21.09%, followed by Norges Bank 7.20%, Wellington Management 6.41%, FMR 4.52%, Vanguard 3.76% and State Street 3.25%.

  • Reply to

    WALGREENS - BOOTS ALLIANCE, INC.

    by stevecrf Jan 8, 2015 10:18 AM
    limpingbull limpingbull Feb 3, 2015 1:36 PM Flag

    Tracey, I think that's it. We are getting older, and less patient.
    And sick and tired of bull.
    But I would hate to give up just when they do what I though they should have done a long time ago!

  • Reply to

    WALGREENS - BOOTS ALLIANCE, INC.

    by stevecrf Jan 8, 2015 10:18 AM
    limpingbull limpingbull Feb 3, 2015 10:44 AM Flag

    They were cv notes. He bought them in the market, and if he wanted to, he could sell them. Probably at a profit, as interest rates are much lower now.

  • Reply to

    BLACKROCK, INC.

    by stevecrf Feb 2, 2015 1:22 PM
    limpingbull limpingbull Feb 3, 2015 4:00 AM Flag

    Why do you suppose Blackrock bought these shares from some other institutions and not over time in the open market and/or through options?
    And wouldn’t it be more interesting to know the reasons why they bought instead why somebody else sold those shares?
    After all, I would think an outfit like Blackrock would have a chat with management before they bought 5.7% of any company, and therefore would have a pretty good idea where the company is going.
    You don’t become the world’s largest asset manager by being stupid.

  • Reply to

    WALGREENS - BOOTS ALLIANCE, INC.

    by stevecrf Jan 8, 2015 10:18 AM
    limpingbull limpingbull Feb 2, 2015 11:42 AM Flag

    The street’s reason is the silence of the company and its analysts. That will change on the 24th of this month.
    Icahn is not an investor. He goes into companies with very short term intentions, sometimes it works, with Marty it didn’t – so he left.
    Soros on the other hand is an investor, and, as far as I know, he is still in it. As are others who have a direct line to Marty.

  • Reply to

    WALGREENS - BOOTS ALLIANCE, INC.

    by stevecrf Jan 8, 2015 10:18 AM
    limpingbull limpingbull Feb 2, 2015 5:34 AM Flag

    It would be very strange if the partnership between the leading health portal and the largest drug retailing chain in the United States, and perhaps the world, would not result in revenues and profits. Once that kicks in, even Marty and his cronies won’t be able to control the stock price. And they wouldn’t want to, either.
    I remember Glasrock in the seventies, when it was sitting at $6-7 for ages. All of a sudden it went up to $70.
    I think, and hope, this is just the calm before the storm.

  • Reply to

    Stock options

    by limpingbull Jan 6, 2015 12:49 AM
    limpingbull limpingbull Jan 22, 2015 8:36 AM Flag

    So far the only options distributed were automatic grants to outside directors under the Company's 2005 Long Term Incentive Plan.
    This suggests to me that we shouldn’t expect any serious upward move of the stock before Marty has distributed to his buddies the options they think they are entitled to.

  • Reply to

    jp morgan healthcare conference 2015

    by limpingbull Jan 11, 2015 12:58 AM
    limpingbull limpingbull Jan 18, 2015 3:07 AM Flag

    Perhaps its just that today’s analysts prefer to wait for the guidance of a company before they stick their necks out. So much easier and safer.

  • Reply to

    jp morgan healthcare conference 2015

    by limpingbull Jan 11, 2015 12:58 AM
    limpingbull limpingbull Jan 16, 2015 9:57 AM Flag

    I find it amazing how little interest the partnership between WBMD and WBA is generating.
    Given that WBMD is the leading health portal and WBA the largest drug retailing chain in the United States, I would have thought at least some analysts would have sat up und taken notice, not to speak of Wall Street as a whole.
    But no – nothing. The silence is deafening…

WBMD
43.90-0.83(-1.84%)Mar 3 4:00 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.