Jump to content
RemedySpot.com

Re: Laidlaw selling AMR

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

AMR isn't hurting as far as I know. Judging by the financials listed

in the article, it seems to be true.

EMS Insider

August Featured Article

Laidlaw Selling American Medical Response

By Mannie Garza

According to a story in The Deal, Laidlaw International put American

Medical Response (AMR), the nation's largest ambulance company, on

the auction block in August. Laidlaw is also auctioning off EmCare,

its emergency physician practice group.

A high-end business newsletter, The Deal, reported Aug. 19 that " top-

tier private equity firms including Bain Capital LLC, Cypress Group,

Carlyle Group and H. Lee Partners LP placed first-round bids

for the companies in early August. Second round bids are expected in

September. " Stanley is running the auction.

Sides, AMR vice president for corporate communications, had no

comment, and Laidlaw did not return calls seeking comment.

The Deal speculated that Laidlaw could reap between $720 million and

$920 million from the combined sale of AMR and EmCare. Laidlaw

purchased AMR in 1996 for $1.1 billion and paid $400 million for

EmCare a year later.

The newsletter also reported that Laidlaw's most recent Security and

Exchange Commission filing indicates that A. Sanger, chief

executive officer of both AMR and EmCare, will receive a bonus equal

to 5% of the enterprise value of AMR in excess of $410 million and 5%

of the enterprise value of EmCare above $125 million if Laidlaw sells

those companies.

Laidlaw's most recent quarterly report shows AMR's revenues rose to

$265.6 million in the third quarter of 2004 from $259.8 million in

the third quarter of 2003. AMR brought in $790 million in the nine

months ending May 31 compared to $759.3 million in the nine months

ending May 31, 2003.

Watch the EMS Insider for more news as this story evolves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

--- Eddie wrote:

> AMR isn't hurting as far as I know. Judging by the financials listed

> in the article, it seems to be true.

Really? This article doesn't list enough to make that assumption. Let's

look at what it DOES say:

> The Deal speculated that Laidlaw could reap between $720 million and

> $920 million from the combined sale of AMR and EmCare. Laidlaw

> purchased AMR in 1996 for $1.1 billion and paid $400 million for

> EmCare a year later.

>

> The newsletter also reported that Laidlaw's most recent Security and

> Exchange Commission filing indicates that A. Sanger, chief

> executive officer of both AMR and EmCare, will receive a bonus equal

> to 5% of the enterprise value of AMR in excess of $410 million and 5%

> of the enterprise value of EmCare above $125 million if Laidlaw sells

> those companies.

So they're selling these companies AT A LOSS (~$250MM for EMCare, ~$250MM

for AMR - alltogether a loss of $500MM on both). Also, they've pretty

much exposed their " floor " price - $410MM for AMR and $125MM for EMCare,

which if they sold at that price would be closer to a BILLION dollar loss.

> Laidlaw's most recent quarterly report shows AMR's revenues rose to

> $265.6 million in the third quarter of 2004 from $259.8 million in

> the third quarter of 2003. AMR brought in $790 million in the nine

> months ending May 31 compared to $759.3 million in the nine months

> ending May 31, 2003.

What were their operating expenses? Were they net profit or net loss? My

guess is that they're net loss. Someone else on here can do the research

on that... I don't have time.

Mike :)

__________________________________________________

Link to comment
Share on other sites

--- Eddie wrote:

> AMR isn't hurting as far as I know. Judging by the financials listed

> in the article, it seems to be true.

Really? This article doesn't list enough to make that assumption. Let's

look at what it DOES say:

> The Deal speculated that Laidlaw could reap between $720 million and

> $920 million from the combined sale of AMR and EmCare. Laidlaw

> purchased AMR in 1996 for $1.1 billion and paid $400 million for

> EmCare a year later.

>

> The newsletter also reported that Laidlaw's most recent Security and

> Exchange Commission filing indicates that A. Sanger, chief

> executive officer of both AMR and EmCare, will receive a bonus equal

> to 5% of the enterprise value of AMR in excess of $410 million and 5%

> of the enterprise value of EmCare above $125 million if Laidlaw sells

> those companies.

So they're selling these companies AT A LOSS (~$250MM for EMCare, ~$250MM

for AMR - alltogether a loss of $500MM on both). Also, they've pretty

much exposed their " floor " price - $410MM for AMR and $125MM for EMCare,

which if they sold at that price would be closer to a BILLION dollar loss.

> Laidlaw's most recent quarterly report shows AMR's revenues rose to

> $265.6 million in the third quarter of 2004 from $259.8 million in

> the third quarter of 2003. AMR brought in $790 million in the nine

> months ending May 31 compared to $759.3 million in the nine months

> ending May 31, 2003.

What were their operating expenses? Were they net profit or net loss? My

guess is that they're net loss. Someone else on here can do the research

on that... I don't have time.

Mike :)

__________________________________________________

Link to comment
Share on other sites

--- Eddie wrote:

> AMR isn't hurting as far as I know. Judging by the financials listed

> in the article, it seems to be true.

Really? This article doesn't list enough to make that assumption. Let's

look at what it DOES say:

> The Deal speculated that Laidlaw could reap between $720 million and

> $920 million from the combined sale of AMR and EmCare. Laidlaw

> purchased AMR in 1996 for $1.1 billion and paid $400 million for

> EmCare a year later.

>

> The newsletter also reported that Laidlaw's most recent Security and

> Exchange Commission filing indicates that A. Sanger, chief

> executive officer of both AMR and EmCare, will receive a bonus equal

> to 5% of the enterprise value of AMR in excess of $410 million and 5%

> of the enterprise value of EmCare above $125 million if Laidlaw sells

> those companies.

So they're selling these companies AT A LOSS (~$250MM for EMCare, ~$250MM

for AMR - alltogether a loss of $500MM on both). Also, they've pretty

much exposed their " floor " price - $410MM for AMR and $125MM for EMCare,

which if they sold at that price would be closer to a BILLION dollar loss.

> Laidlaw's most recent quarterly report shows AMR's revenues rose to

> $265.6 million in the third quarter of 2004 from $259.8 million in

> the third quarter of 2003. AMR brought in $790 million in the nine

> months ending May 31 compared to $759.3 million in the nine months

> ending May 31, 2003.

What were their operating expenses? Were they net profit or net loss? My

guess is that they're net loss. Someone else on here can do the research

on that... I don't have time.

Mike :)

__________________________________________________

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...