Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Biotech / Medical : Oxford Health Plan (OXHP) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Naggrachi who wrote (441)	12/10/1997 1:32:00 AM
From: Michael Burry	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2068

<<As to backruptcy claim made by an earlier poster? pahleeeezzzzz, won't even touch that.>> Agreed. By my calculation, the company has 200-250M in short-term (<6 mos) liquidity left. Make no mistake the 164M NY + 28M other hit to AP is serious. And management has integrity issues. There are problems here, and given management's recent integrity problems, investment here is now speculation. But KPMG certified their > $1B in AR and Cash, which is heartening, and the WSJ article assured us that patients and doctors are not fleeing. After my article, I got hate mail, but I also got good testimonials as to OXHP's ability to please patients and doctors. The story is not all bad. Long term, this one should do well, but only barring further disclosures from management. Remember the Medicare restructuring charges that are sure to come down the pipe. I posted my current opinion on my web site. We all knew we weren't buying an all-good story. The whole world is hating this one now. Let me quote from Microsoft's Research Director Nathan Myhrvold: "We're either really smart or really stupid. Whenever you're greatly at odds with the rest of the world, one of those two things is true." Good Investing, Mike BTW, I authored a review of the Buffettology book on investor.msn.com that is up tonight. It goes through Buffett's methods. It provides a 5 year spreadsheet for doing his ROR calculation. My web site provides a 10 year spreadsheet.

To: Naggrachi who wrote (441)	12/10/1997 1:32:00 PM
From: Andreas	Respond to of 2068

Niggerochi, It seems like the rat I was smelling has surfaced. No I didn't except to make 50% in a few weeks when I bought. I did however expect to make 50% over two to three years. And guess what, I will be hard pressed to accomplish that goal. As to my comments regarding insider trading I still am quite convinced a good deal of that nonsense was going on on Monday. As to other posts' comments regarding Oxford's customer base I respectfully take issue with anyone who thinks that Oxford's health contracts have significant value and are therefore an acquirable commodity for a substantial amount. Those contracts are indeed vulnerable and if a sufficient number are lost then as I stated in an earlier post - "as they evaporate so does Oxford" Yes Wiggins came across well. His hair was combed and his shirt was pressed. Big _________ deal (insert whatever adjective you choose). Point is, let's see if Wiggins, et al. role up their sleeves, get the cost accountants in the building along with the so-called actuarial experts and start doing some serious old fashioned cost accounting and projecting. Oxford is a typical business school case of growth so fast and running to the bank so fast that no-one stayed behind to really get down in the trenches, stay there and figure out what was going on. Oxford needs to know what each segment of their insureds are costing them - in detail. If I had the ability to interview Wiggins I would ask him (among many, many other things) to lay out for me why Oxford did not know (i) its claims experience by segment (ie. location, age, medicare, non-medicare, etc. etc .), (ii) Oxford's basis of G&A allocation to each segment, (iii) percent of historical premiums paid out to cover medical claims by segment, etc. etc. These are fundamental questions which the persons at the helm ought to have etched permanentally in ther minds. Shame on them for not doing their homework; shame on the countless analysts for not doing their homework (albeit apparently one lone analyst who deserves a medal) and shame on investors such as myself for not being more skeptical earlier about the managment skills of a bunch of thirty year olds raking in mega salaries. Query: salaries are based in large part upon past performance of company and desire by Oxford to keep talented hard working people. Wouldn't it be nice if those same persons would be required to disgorge a fair portion of their already received huge salaries based upon the fact that what they were being paid for did not materialize? Sure it would be - that's what lawsuits are all about.