CVS buys Target pharmacies!

[PharFromNormal]

The problem is that the government is in bed with these people, too. When Max Baucus began crafting the Affordable Care Act, his first act was to get the insurance companies, hospital groups, and big pharma in on the act. The reason HillaryCare failed 20+ years ago was because she didn't get the big money interests in the room when they made the legislation. Then you had all the ads that ultimately destroyed their attempts at universal health care.

The problem is that my legislators don't care about monopolies because all it will take is a fat check in their SuperPAC from Caremark and everything is just hunky dory.

I don't care what's happened with regulators in the past. CVS/Caremark's duopoly with Walgreen's isn't good for capitalism, consumers, or healthcare. You and I clearly have a difference of opinion. You prefer the duopoloy and potential monopoly. I oppose it.

So let's go back to the question I originally purposed. What are you going to do/purpose that will actually work to "fix" or improve the status quo while lowering overall healthcare costs?

Sure I don't doubt corporate spending on political activity, independent pharmacy has their own lobbyists as well. You can attempt to change, write or eliminate existing policy and/or operate in the system that is. From my experience working with large corporations, yes they attempt to influence policy to better position themselves however they understand they will have to operate their business regardless of the outcome. When I work I can really care less what people's personal perspective is on the way things "should" be. I've seen clients on both extreme ends. However, if I don't work with my clients in the reality of how things are, then I'm not really giving them real world practical business advice. I'm not a lobbyist, nor pro or anti anything. If policy changes tomorrow my recommended advice to clients might substantially change.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[PharmacistReb]

You've asked me this about 75 times and I've told you 100 times. It should be federal policy that you don't have corporate PBM and corporate pharmacies as the same entity. Just like I don't want McDonald's also in charge of their own food inspection grading. It makes absolutely no sense to have the pharmacy benefit manager and the pharmacy in cohoots.

When I work I can really care less what people's personal perspective is on the way things "should" be.

Well, of course, they're cutting you a check.

 

[PharmacistReb]

What are you going to do/purpose that will actually work to "fix" or improve the status quo while lowering overall healthcare costs?

Do you genuinely believe having 1 or 2 pharmacies that also own PBM's helps lower overall healthcare costs? Be sincere for a second. Take off your money-making cap. That is absurd. Break up the combinations of pharmacies and PBM's is the first step in promoting quality healthcare.

 

[Aznfarmerboi]

Do you genuinely believe having 1 or 2 pharmacies that also own PBM's helps lower overall healthcare costs? Be sincere for a second. Take off your money-making cap. That is absurd. Break up the combinations of pharmacies and PBM's is the first step in promoting quality healthcare.

It can if drug companies are charging 100k for a treatment.

 

[PharmacistReb]

It can if drug companies are charging 100k for a treatment.

Yes, it's better for us to have one pharmacy and one PBM so as to prohibit that dreaded $100k treatment drug that is so commonly picked up in the retail pharmacy setting.

Excellent example.

 

[MountainPharmD]

Yes, it's better for us to have one pharmacy and one PBM so as to prohibit that dreaded $100k treatment drug that is so commonly picked up in the retail pharmacy setting.

Excellent example.

That would be a mandatory fill at the specialty pharmacy also owned by the PBM.

 

[PharFromNormal]

Do you genuinely believe having 1 or 2 pharmacies that also own PBM's helps lower overall healthcare costs? Be sincere for a second. Take off your money-making cap. That is absurd. Break up the combinations of pharmacies and PBM's is the first step in promoting quality healthcare.

Yes I do. Let's take an insanely stupid example. Let's say a PBMs PROFIT in a traditional model is $1 and a pharmacies PROFIT is $1. That's an "excess" of $2 on the system to the health plan/patient. If someone is making money, someone is losing it. Now combine that entity. Let's say the PBM arm of the combination was willing to operate at $0.75 PROFIT and the pharmacy arm at $0.75. They are making a combined $1.50 but the overall "excess" is cheaper to the system. I won't even then get into the resulting economics when you start lowering cost and shifting volume. I'm not saying competition is bad because it isn't, but fragmentation can (not in all cases) increase the cost of care due to more people wanting more from the pot which is traditional business.

 

[PharFromNormal]

You've asked me this about 75 times and I've told you 100 times. It should be federal policy that you don't have corporate PBM and corporate pharmacies as the same entity. Just like I don't want McDonald's also in charge of their own food inspection grading. It makes absolutely no sense to have the pharmacy benefit manager and the pharmacy in cohoots.



Well, of course, they're cutting you a check.

Are you referencing McDonald's inspections by federal/state agencies? I'm confused? Yes McDonald's has to sell food that's usda approved, like the pharmacies sell products that's FDA approved. I'm pretty sure CVS is still susceptible to board of pharmacy and DEA visits. I'm failing to see the parallel here.

You would think if they were cutting me a check I would coyly play to their personal beliefs on how the healthcare system should be I don't. Some don't like the way it is, but I'm not there to tell them what they want to hear I'm there to tell them the way it is.

 

[PharFromNormal]

Do you genuinely believe having 1 or 2 pharmacies that also own PBM's helps lower overall healthcare costs? Be sincere for a second. Take off your money-making cap. That is absurd. Break up the combinations of pharmacies and PBM's is the first step in promoting quality healthcare.

Quality =/= cost.

 

[PharFromNormal]

Do you genuinely believe having 1 or 2 pharmacies that also own PBM's helps lower overall healthcare costs? Be sincere for a second. Take off your money-making cap. That is absurd. Break up the combinations of pharmacies and PBM's is the first step in promoting quality healthcare.

And since you know so much about quality tell me more about Kaiser Permanente and how they have the payer, physicians, and pharmacy under one roof. That is absurd!

 

[PharmacistReb]

Yes I do. Let's take an insanely stupid example. Let's say a PBMs PROFIT in a traditional model is $1 and a pharmacies PROFIT is $1. That's an "excess" of $2 on the system to the health plan/patient. If someone is making money, someone is losing it. Now combine that entity. Let's say the PBM arm of the combination was willing to operate at $0.75 PROFIT and the pharmacy arm at $0.75. They are making a combined $1.50 but the overall "excess" is cheaper to the system. I won't even then get into the resulting economics when you start lowering cost and shifting volume. I'm not saying competition is bad because it isn't, but fragmentation can (not in all cases) increase the cost of care due to more people wanting more from the pot which is traditional business.

Well then this is just proof that monopoly works. Thanks for the hypothetical, fabricated scenario that is a clear representation of how CVS/Caremark will save us all billions in healthcare dollars. Wonderful news.

 

[PharmacistReb]

Yes I do. Let's take an insanely stupid example. Let's say a PBMs PROFIT in a traditional model is $1 and a pharmacies PROFIT is $1. That's an "excess" of $2 on the system to the health plan/patient. If someone is making money, someone is losing it. Now combine that entity. Let's say the PBM arm of the combination was willing to operate at $0.75 PROFIT and the pharmacy arm at $0.75. They are making a combined $1.50 but the overall "excess" is cheaper to the system. I won't even then get into the resulting economics when you start lowering cost and shifting volume. I'm not saying competition is bad because it isn't, but fragmentation can (not in all cases) increase the cost of care due to more people wanting more from the pot which is traditional business.

So let's take this example. CVS/Caremark competes with other PBM's and pharmacies. The consumer saves 50 cents using CVS/Caremark because CVS/Caremark is only interested in health outcomes and saving people money, naturally. So when all the other pharmacy chains and PBM's have to concede defeat to CVS/Caremark, will CVS/Caremark continue to only profit the combined $1.50? When there's nobody left with which to compete, why would a corporation that has investors and a bottom line not raise the combined profit to $3 or $5? Who will the consumer turn to? And why would CVS not make the decision to make more money? Isn't part of their strategy market control? Isn't that the strategy of any company?

Other than throw around well-imagined hypotheticals, you've done absolutely nothing to defend against the notion that monopolization of the market will drive up prices.

 

[PharFromNormal]

Well then this is just proof that monopoly works. Thanks for the hypothetical, fabricated scenario that is a clear representation of how CVS/Caremark will save us all billions in healthcare dollars. Wonderful news.

Actually no and I never said anything as such. I'm speaking on behalf of the healthcare system not on the corporation. If you read what I said I actually said competition is good for! But Consolidation in a market segment in which they are in has potential to hurt them just as much as it gives them leverage. The government has the authority to step in when there is a threat to the system. Given that the government is a major payer into the system I can assure you it's not overlooked. Healthcare and the related spending is front and center in our country right now.

Of course they want to compete with their competitors, that is natural business. I'll refrain from countering with irrational extremes as you like to do, so I won't talk about how you just talk about the benefits of marketplace collusion. But I see your point, you want to ensure that no one is taking what you think is righteously yours and that goes back to the benefits of vertical consolidation. It provides economic competitive advantages to think across the healthcare system.

Let's say I accept your notion that a combined entity doesn't lower costs, are you suggesting that it currently raises cost above trend? Are you purposing that breaking up the entity right now actually will lower costs on the overall system? If so I'd love to hear the rationale because your scenario about them being a monopoly isn't the world we live in today, it's doomsday talk of an unpredictable future.

But what about your McDonalds example, care to better explain that one for me?

Oh and the Kaiser question? If you wish to engage in healthy debate please answer the questions raised as I do to you.

 

[PharFromNormal]

So let's take this example. CVS/Caremark competes with other PBM's and pharmacies. The consumer saves 50 cents using CVS/Caremark because CVS/Caremark is only interested in health outcomes and saving people money, naturally. So when all the other pharmacy chains and PBM's have to concede defeat to CVS/Caremark, will CVS/Caremark continue to only profit the combined $1.50? When there's nobody left with which to compete, why would a corporation that has investors and a bottom line not raise the combined profit to $3 or $5? Who will the consumer turn to? And why would CVS not make the decision to make more money? Isn't part of their strategy market control? Isn't that the strategy of any company?

Other than throw around well-imagined hypotheticals, you've done absolutely nothing to defend against the notion that monopolization of the market will drive up prices.

And to be completely fair the combined PBM/pharmacy model isn't the only combination. There's hospitals that own outpatient pharmacies. Health insurers combined with physician groups. Health insurers combined with PBMs and the classic example of Kaiser. But again if we are focusing in on how only one part of the whole system is suffering then I guess we can remain talking about the microcosm of pharmacy in the bigger picture of stressors on healthcare expenditures (or profits depending on what your job is).

 

[Old Timer]

Do you genuinely believe having 1 or 2 pharmacies that also own PBM's helps lower overall healthcare costs? Be sincere for a second. Take off your money-making cap. That is absurd. Break up the combinations of pharmacies and PBM's is the first step in promoting quality healthcare.

No data to back this up. We get the healthcare we deserve.



That's our problem. We walk down the middle of the road and get squished, just like grape. We do not have a wholly capitalistic system as the payer (usually the employer) is NOT the consumer. The consumer has almost no incentives, short of punitive co-pays to control costs, it's not his money. We also don't have a wholly socialized system so you don't get the control you get in a single payer world.....

 

[Old Timer]

Well then this is just proof that monopoly works.

The problem is we don't have monopolies we have oligopolies. They are probably more dangerous as they imply choice when in reality they don't supply the choice or the savings.

 

[MountainPharmD]

The problem is we don't have monopolies we have oligopolies. They are probably more dangerous as they imply choice when in reality they don't supply the choice or the savings.

http://www.twst.com/news/1785-express-scripts-holding-company-esrx-grows-free-cash-flow-ev

McQueen first got involved with the company in 2013, when Express Scripts experienced some hiccups from a merger with Medco and sentiment became negative. McQueen, on the other hand, saw a company in an oligopolistic industry with a lot of free cash generation that was trading at a discount to intrinsic value. - See more at: http://www.twst.com/news/1785-expre...-grows-free-cash-flow-ev#sthash.Of63LU7L.dpuf

This is a quote from a hedge fund manager on why he thinks Express Scripts is a good investment. He freely admits the PBM industry is an oligopoly. This is the problem. As OT says walk down the middle of the road and you get squished.

The only solution to the current problem is a single payer health care system like every other industrialized nation in the world has.

 

[MountainPharmD]

Wow! Start taking about socialized medicine and a single payer system and the thread dies!

The government is involved in our healthcare and there is no turning back. The Supreme Count made it's second major ruling in favor of Obama Care this morning. The Republicans can posture all they want but Obama Care is here to stay.

The problem right now is the government is only half way involved. This is due to the big Pharma and PBM lobbyist who spend millions every year promoting the status quo. The logical progression of Obama Care is to a government run single payer system. Obama Care's ultimate success depends on it. We cannot continue walking down the middle of the road with Pharma and PBMs partially running the show.

 

[PharFromNormal]

Wow! Start taking about socialized medicine and a single payer system and the thread dies!

The government is involved in our healthcare and there is no turning back. The Supreme Count made it's second major ruling in favor of Obama Care this morning. The Republicans can posture all they want but Obama Care is here to stay.

The problem right now is the government is only half way involved. This is due to the big Pharma and PBM lobbyist who spend millions every year promoting the status quo. The logical progression of Obama Care is to a government run single payer system. Obama Care's ultimate success depends on it. We cannot continue walking down the middle of the road with Pharma and PBMs partially running the show.

I agree single payor is probably the best scenario in terms of reducing healthcare costs and improving outcomes. As we are seeing, corporations are consolidating more and more to that "oligarchy" referred to above. Single payor obviously won't be achieved without an act of congress. Maybe it'll happen maybe it won't... However, I do encourage everyone to do some research into what pharmacists make and what they do in countries with single payor. Again I think it's probably excellent "for the greater healthcare system" if we were to get there but that would involve a lot of people giving something up which no one likes to do freely.

 

[ang g]

I'm surprised more target pharmacists have not responded...

So I've worked for target for a few years and just wanted to point out that it is no where as great as these posts make it out to be... it kinda sucks. Yes, I know most retail sucks, but some days target is really really awful. I used to tech years ago at CVS, and even though it's not the same position, it was nowhere near as bad as target. I am almost kind of excited for the CVS takeover because in my head think, how could it possibly get any worse?

It can depended on the store, but there is usually a huge disconnect between the pharmacy and the rest of the target store. I am used to having low tech, often ZERO tech hours with no store support. I often run around like a chicken with my head cut off. Today I wore my fitbit and walked 7800 steps in 6 hours solely in the phamacy. My boss, who knows nothing about pharmacy, lectures me on metrics several times a week and HR will often come by to complain and ask something like why wouldn't I fill a pts control early. All manager and assistant managers in the store want you to make sure the "guest" has an "amazing experience," but they have zero knowledge or insight into pharmacy laws and rules.

Target actually requires me to take a lunch. I don't enjoy it. First off it comes out of my hourly paycheck and second, when I come back from lunch I am then behind and have to hurry up and verify all the waiters that are literally standing at the counter waiting for me to come back. Target has always been a store first and a pharmacy second. Their pharmacist turnover rate is very high. I can only think of 2 or 3 over the age of 35. They just don't get it when it comes to running a pharmacy.

 

[M0df]

I did my rotation at target. It has been a few years back. Both pharmacists at that target were former CVS pharmacists. They liked it better at target. Obviously things have changed with both companies since then. I know that tech hours at target have been cut (same as CVS), which is why target is not high on job satisfaction lists here too. I can tell you that I would be 'ok' doing ~10 hour shift filling ~100 scripts with no tech help at CVS. When I was browsing the job market, I did not jump at any of the target openings right away because I did not feel it a significant enough upgrade in work conditions.

 

[PharmtoCS]

It can depended on the store, but there is usually a huge disconnect between the pharmacy and the rest of the target store. I am used to having low tech, often ZERO tech hours with no store support. I often run around like a chicken with my head cut off. Today I wore my fitbit and walked 7800 steps in 6 hours solely in the phamacy. My boss, who knows nothing about pharmacy, lectures me on metrics several times a week and HR will often come by to complain and ask something like why wouldn't I fill a pts control early. All manager and assistant managers in the store want you to make sure the "guest" has an "amazing experience," but they have zero knowledge or insight into pharmacy laws and rules. Target actually requires me to take a lunch. I don't enjoy it. First off it comes out of my hourly paycheck and second, when I come back from lunch I am then behind and have to hurry up and verify all the waiters that are literally standing at the counter waiting for me to come back. Target has always been a store first and a pharmacy second. Their pharmacist turnover rate is very high. I can only think of 2 or 3 over the age of 35. They just don't get it when it comes to running a pharmacy.

This was my experience when I did my rotation at Target. There was never enough tech help, and the software (PDX) that Target used at that time was ancient and inefficient. It was often just me and the PIC in the pharmacy.

 

[Aznfarmerboi]

I'm surprised more target pharmacists have not responded...

So I've worked for target for a few years and just wanted to point out that it is no where as great as these posts make it out to be... it kinda sucks. Yes, I know most retail sucks, but some days target is really really awful. I used to tech years ago at CVS, and even though it's not the same position, it was nowhere near as bad as target. I am almost kind of excited for the CVS takeover because in my head think, how could it possibly get any worse?

It can depended on the store, but there is usually a huge disconnect between the pharmacy and the rest of the target store. I am used to having low tech, often ZERO tech hours with no store support. I often run around like a chicken with my head cut off. Today I wore my fitbit and walked 7800 steps in 6 hours solely in the phamacy. My boss, who knows nothing about pharmacy, lectures me on metrics several times a week and HR will often come by to complain and ask something like why wouldn't I fill a pts control early. All manager and assistant managers in the store want you to make sure the "guest" has an "amazing experience," but they have zero knowledge or insight into pharmacy laws and rules.

Target actually requires me to take a lunch. I don't enjoy it. First off it comes out of my hourly paycheck and second, when I come back from lunch I am then behind and have to hurry up and verify all the waiters that are literally standing at the counter waiting for me to come back. Target has always been a store first and a pharmacy second. Their pharmacist turnover rate is very high. I can only think of 2 or 3 over the age of 35. They just don't get it when it comes to running a pharmacy.

I just want to say welcome to the team!

It is nice to get insight from a Target pharmacist. I feel that for the most part, things will get better for you. For one thing, the company has made it clear that they support pharmacists professional discretion in filling controls, and even mandate a stricter policy company wise than most state laws.

 

[HouTX]

I just want to say welcome to the team!

It is nice to get insight from a Target pharmacist. I feel that for the most part, things will get better for you. For one thing, the company has made it clear that they support pharmacists professional discretion in filling controls, and even mandate a stricter policy company wise than most state laws.

no $hit, they got fined out the wazoo and couple of stores lost their license to dispense controls so they wise up. has it always been pharmacist's discretion? don't try to spin it like the corporate overlords got your back

 

[pillpharmer14]

I'm surprised more target pharmacists have not responded...

So I've worked for target for a few years and just wanted to point out that it is no where as great as these posts make it out to be... it kinda sucks. Yes, I know most retail sucks, but some days target is really really awful. I used to tech years ago at CVS, and even though it's not the same position, it was nowhere near as bad as target. I am almost kind of excited for the CVS takeover because in my head think, how could it possibly get any worse?

CVS years ago =/= CVS now. The metrics have multiplied and the tech hours have diminished. Granted, this happens everywhere, but no one is piling on the metrics like CVS (absurd metrics I might add).

My boss, who knows nothing about pharmacy, lectures me on metrics several times a week and HR will often come by to complain and ask something like why wouldn't I fill a pts control early. All manager and assistant managers in the store want you to make sure the "guest" has an "amazing experience," but they have zero knowledge or insight into pharmacy laws and rules.

You can expect more of this at CVS. Three times as many metrics (not exaggerating) and action plans for these specific metrics must be filled out and updated every month if you are PIC. CVS claims to be run by pharmacists but these people have not practiced in 15 years and obviously a lot has changed. I think this is probably worse than the target situation because at CVS they can pull the whole "I'm a pharmacist too so I know how much volume is too much volume for 1 person to handle".

Target actually requires me to take a lunch. I don't enjoy it. First off it comes out of my hourly paycheck and second, when I come back from lunch I am then behind and have to hurry up and verify all the waiters that are literally standing at the counter waiting for me to come back.

I really don't get your point here. The situation you're describing upon returning from your lunch break is what happens all day every day at CVS. You're always behind and there are always people standing around staring at you. If you aren't behind then your tech hours are about to be cut because staying behind is how CVS creates "efficiency". So really the only difference is the food; you're currently getting some and the CVSers are not.

Of course, they aren't going to cut your store out of a target and put it on a corner so you likely won't get the typical CVS experience (which is good). It's kind of hard to predict what it will be like because you won't be in a typical CVS store.

 

[ang g]

CVS years ago =/= CVS now. The metrics have multiplied and the tech hours have diminished. Granted, this happens everywhere, but no one is piling on the metrics like CVS (absurd metrics I might add).



You can expect more of this at CVS. Three times as many metrics (not exaggerating) and action plans for these specific metrics must be filled out and updated every month if you are PIC. CVS claims to be run by pharmacists but these people have not practiced in 15 years and obviously a lot has changed. I think this is probably worse than the target situation because at CVS they can pull the whole "I'm a pharmacist too so I know how much volume is too much volume for 1 person to handle".



I really don't get your point here. The situation you're describing upon returning from your lunch break is what happens all day every day at CVS. You're always behind and there are always people standing around staring at you. If you aren't behind then your tech hours are about to be cut because staying behind is how CVS creates "efficiency". So really the only difference is the food; you're currently getting some and the CVSers are not.

Of course, they aren't going to cut your store out of a target and put it on a corner so you likely won't get the typical CVS experience (which is good). It's kind of hard to predict what it will be like because you won't be in a typical CVS store.

Ok you win; your job at CVS is worse than mine!

Several posts on here refer to how easy target pharmacists have it and how lucky they are to be able to close for lunch. I was simply pointing out the other side. I would much rather forgo the lunch, put an extra 30 bucks in my pocket and not have to play catch up from while I was gone. Not to mention how annoying it is to tell everyone who drops off right before lunch that their rx will be an extra 30 minutes because the pharmacist has to break for lunch. Target literally requires me to punch in and out, and will write you up for going into compliance if you don't.

 

[baronzb]

Here it is, just as everyone had speculated:

"Profitability. Target's pharmacy business was losing money. Chief Financial Officer John Mulligan confirmed that the pharmacy business posted "modestly negative" results in the company's last fiscal year, despite $4 billion in sales."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2015/06/15/target-cvs-pharmacy-sale/71248932/

Target just lost billions in a failed Canadian expansion. This might be related...

 

[pillpharmer14]

Ok you win; your job at CVS is worse than mine!

Several posts on here refer to how easy target pharmacists have it and how lucky they are to be able to close for lunch. I was simply pointing out the other side. I would much rather forgo the lunch, put an extra 30 bucks in my pocket and not have to play catch up from while I was gone. Not to mention how annoying it is to tell everyone who drops off right before lunch that their rx will be an extra 30 minutes because the pharmacist has to break for lunch. Target literally requires me to punch in and out, and will write you up for going into compliance if you don't.

Haha I wasn't trying to prove that CVS was worse, just trying to understand your position. It's sad that your pharmacy closes for lunch you get called lazy or lucky. That should be the standard but unfortunately you're the outlier. CVS purchasing Target pharmacies just means one less employer of pharmacists that doesn't allow for lunch breaks, and it just becomes more normal. Sad, sad, sad.

 

[Dr Wario]

Hey, does anyone think that maybe this will go the other way and CVS will adopt Target's lunch model?

Anyone?...
Anyone?
:-(

 

[zelman]

Hey, does anyone think that maybe this will go the other way and CVS will adopt Target's lunch model?

Anyone?...
Anyone?
:-(

Nope. They do this in some states already per local laws. It hasn't spread across the country before, and it won't now.

 

[trailerpark]

The most annoying thing is when I turn the light off at 1:25 and lower the gate by a few feet, people will still try to get in line and then when I come back at 2 I constantly hear old farts asking if the pharmacy is closed. They try to look through the gates so now I won't return till 1:58

 

[mentos]

My doctor's office sent an Rx to a Target Pharmacy at 11:15am today. I called Target Pharmacy at 1:30pm and it was closed. Okay, I'll just go there in person and it'll be open by the time I get there. I get there at 2pm and there were no customers, the tech was playing on her phone, there was no drive-thru, and no one calling the pharmacy. Told the tech my name. It took her a few minutes to find it and she said the pharmacist was on lunch so she can't verify it, and asked me to come back at 2:45. Wtf? A typical CVS customer would be at the pharmacy at 11:30am and make a scene if it wasn't ready yet. I can see why Target failed at pharmacy.

 

[trailerpark]

When I called Target this morning for a transfer they answered with "CVS Health". How embarrassing to have to say that.

 

[samuricool]

When I called Target this morning for a transfer they answered with "CVS Health". How embarrassing to have to say that.

Actually, they are supposed to say, "Thanks for calling CVS Health formerly Target pharmacy," and then the rest of their spiel.

 

[owlegrad]

When I called Target this morning for a transfer they answered with "CVS Health". How embarrassing to have to say that.

I always thought 'be well' was kinda corny.

Not sure why CVS Health should be embarrassing, it's the name of the company.

 

[knight on horse]

The key is the Minute Clinics and Target Clienteles. Young, married women with a baby. As they entered their 30s, their beauty will start to fade. These clinics will be providing cosmetic treatments like Botox, skin treatment, etc. for a reasonable price. No appointment needed.

I think it more likely they will be making money off our new resident mestizo population

Get rid of the middle class, use the middle class to subsidize their replacements, and make money off the newcomers

 

[Son_Goku]

I always thought 'be well' was kinda corny.

Not sure why CVS Health should be embarrassing, it's the name of the company.

They scrapped that.

 

[6GodPharm]

I'm surprised they haven't canned the RX sups at Target yet. I'm hearing a good amount of Targets in the red even though they do 150 a day. Seems like for now they are a seperate entity. WeCare is not scored against the "real CVS" stores. PCQ is yet to roll out in the stores. We'll see how long they take to hammer down on these pharmacies

 

[samuricool]

At least in my area they are saying that this is back firing. They expected people to leave the stand alone stores and start using the cvs in target, but the opposite has been happening.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

 

[BMBiology]

At least in my area they are saying that this is back firing. They expected people to leave the stand alone stores and start using the cvs in target, but the opposite has been happening.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

Where are they going? Walgreens?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

 

[6GodPharm]

Where are they going? Walgreens?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

No they are coming to the original CVS stores. I've had so many people leave the cruddy target ones to come to us. I'm not going to say all, but most Target pharmacists and technitions are just not very good. I've seen it first hand. They are slow and used to no metrics. Just wait until Store Health comes into play for them in the near future.

 

[BMBiology]

No they are coming to the original CVS stores. I've had so many people leave the cruddy target ones to come to us. I'm not going to say all, but most Target pharmacists and technitions are just not very good. I've seen it first hand. They are slow and used to no metrics. Just wait until Store Health comes into play for them in the near future.

That is good for CVS. Target reported foot traffic is down. Obviously bad for Target pharmacists.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

 

[BMBiology]

This article makes it sound like Target is losing prescriptions to competitors (not CVS): https://www.thestreet.com/story/13680344/1/campbell-s-once-scorching-stock-has-gone-ice-cold.html


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

 

[lane one]

I'm surprised they haven't canned the RX sups at Target yet. I'm hearing a good amount of Targets in the red even though they do 150 a day. Seems like for now they are a seperate entity. WeCare is not scored against the "real CVS" stores. PCQ is yet to roll out in the stores. We'll see how long they take to hammer down on these pharmacies

My sig other works for "CVS in Target" now and I've gone back and forth on how all the metrics will impact them. You would think they would be crushed by the pressure of going from 0 metrics to >50 but I think most of the stores are such low volume that they're able to handle it. Someone who works there can prove me wrong, but I believe the majority of their stores do < 1000/wk. In CVS land, that's dead slow.

No they are coming to the original CVS stores. I've had so many people leave the cruddy target ones to come to us. I'm not going to say all, but most Target pharmacists and technicians are just not very good. I've seen it first hand. They are slow and used to no metrics. Just wait until Store Health comes into play for them in the near future.

Being a former CVSer myself, I actually think Target has/had better techs than the chains. They paid a lot better so most of their techs were seasoned WAG/CVS techs that got tired of the BS.

 

[lane one]

This article makes it sound like Target is losing prescriptions to competitors (not CVS): https://www.thestreet.com/story/13680344/1/campbell-s-once-scorching-stock-has-gone-ice-cold.html


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

That link is about campbell soup.

 

[6GodPharm]

My sig other works for "CVS in Target" now and I've gone back and forth on how all the metrics will impact them. You would think they would be crushed by the pressure of going from 0 metrics to >50 but I think most of the stores are such low volume that they're able to handle it. Someone who works there can prove me wrong, but I believe the majority of their stores do < 1000/wk. In CVS land, that's dead slow.



Being a former CVSer myself, I actually think Target has/had better techs than the chains. They paid a lot better so most of their techs were seasoned WAG/CVS techs that got tired of the BS.

I agree, the stores are just so slow where metrics really don't matter. We'll see what happens when PCQ is added and a couple of other things but with the volume who knows.

I however disagree about most of the pharmacist and techs at target. Yes, they shined in there old target stores but the same people can't even hit a 50 on Wecare now. Better yet, if you placed these same techs and pharmacist in 2000-2500 scripts a week at real CVS stores they would crumble. CVS pharmacist and techs don't get enough credit for what they do. Especially stores that do over 2000 a week.

I mean these target CVS's start the day with 2-3 pages in QP and maybe 10 things in QT over night and they still turn stuff red left and right. Try coming into 6-7 pages QP and another 4 in QT

 

[lane one]

I agree, the stores are just so slow where metrics really don't matter. We'll see what happens when PCQ is added and a couple of other things but with the volume who knows.

I however disagree about most of the pharmacist and techs at target. Yes, they shined in there old target stores but the same people can't even hit a 50 on Wecare now. Better yet, if you placed these same techs and pharmacist in 2000-2500 scripts a week at real CVS stores they would crumble. CVS pharmacist and techs don't get enough credit for what they do. Especially stores that do over 2000 a week.

I mean these target CVS's start the day with 2-3 pages in QP and maybe 10 things in QT over night and they still turn stuff red left and right. Try coming into 6-7 pages QP and another 4 in QT

Totally agree there. Maybe sig other's district is atypical, but apparently they're all >85 on wecare. It's kind of a weekly contest to see who can get the highest, but its all 85 and up. Sig other's store has been >90 every week since they rolled it out. Again, super super slow store but it seems like their district is handling it ok.

 

[6GodPharm]

Totally agree there. Maybe sig other's district is atypical, but apparently they're all >85 on wecare. It's kind of a weekly contest to see who can get the highest, but its all 85 and up. Sig other's store has been >90 every week since they rolled it out. Again, super super slow store but it seems like their district is handling it ok.

Are they only able to see Target stores on there Wecare? In my district and region it's only the original CVS stores that show up on the Wecare list. Seems like the Target CVS's are on there own

 

[ldiot]

No data to back this up. We get the healthcare we deserve.



That's our problem. We walk down the middle of the road and get squished, just like grape. We do not have a wholly capitalistic system as the payer (usually the employer) is NOT the consumer. The consumer has almost no incentives, short of punitive co-pays to control costs, it's not his money. We also don't have a wholly socialized system so you don't get the control you get in a single payer world.....

I agree that we are not a capitalistic system, but for a different reason. The fact that the direct payer is not the consumer is not in conflict with a system of capitalism. People choosing to manage risk through insurance is not at all in conflict with a free market system. Where our current system DOES conflict with capitalism is, by definition, the high degree of government intervention.

1) Employers are mandated by law to provide insurance to full time employees
2) Citizens are forced by law to pay into Medicare. Medicare is essentially a product that the government forces you to buy
3) Medicaid

These are all anti-capitalism.

Imagine if the money that I pay into Medicare AND the money my employer spends on my insurance went into my pocket. I could go buy any plan I want and I would have all the incentive to manage the costs and my health. The insurance market would also become much more competitive which benefits the consumer.

Here's the problem: Your average American would probably spend the cash like disposable income and not get insurance. The government is essentially saving people from their own stupidity.

Also SS and Medicare are in my opinion a ponzi scheme. The programs are designed based on the assumption that the population is always growing. 10 people are paying for 1 person's benefits. When those 10 people retire you have 100 new people paying into their benefits. You always get more out than you paid in. The problem is that the population cannot grow indefinitely.

 

[ldiot]

I agree, the stores are just so slow where metrics really don't matter. We'll see what happens when PCQ is added and a couple of other things but with the volume who knows.

I however disagree about most of the pharmacist and techs at target. Yes, they shined in there old target stores but the same people can't even hit a 50 on Wecare now. Better yet, if you placed these same techs and pharmacist in 2000-2500 scripts a week at real CVS stores they would crumble. CVS pharmacist and techs don't get enough credit for what they do. Especially stores that do over 2000 a week.

I mean these target CVS's start the day with 2-3 pages in QP and maybe 10 things in QT over night and they still turn stuff red left and right. Try coming into 6-7 pages QP and another 4 in QT

I'm assuming that even without PCQ and increases in volume the stores are worse off due to cuts in tech help. I walk into a Wal-mart filling what I would guess to be 500/day and I see 2 pharmacists and like 6-8 techs back there. At CVS you would have 1 pharmacist and 4 techs. My preceptor at Walmart goes on endless tangents talking about how busy they are and how stressful it is am I'm just nodding my head because their workload is a complete joke compared to my CVS.

So this alone will hurt them, unless of course they are so slow that there were no techs to begin with.