Home > PJ (current issue) > News / News Centre | Search

PJ Online homeThe Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 279 No 7482 p670
15 December 2007

This article
Reprint   Photocopy

  Acrobat Reader


News summary


Former PMI manager claims the business is worth much more than the NPA has offered to pay for it

Members of the Pharmacy Mutual Insurance Company are being asked to approve the sale of its renewal rights for less than their true value, according to former National Pharmacy Association insurance director Glenn Hirchfield. Mr Hirchfield was one of the three people who blocked the approval of the sale on 7 November 2007.

“In my opinion it’s undervalued,” Mr Hirchfield said. “The only way to establish whether my opinion is accurate is to take it to the market and test it.”

Niche insurance businesses have changed hands recently at between 10 and 20 times their profit/earnings ratio, he says, which would make the PMI worth nearer £20m, rather than the £6.4m being offered by the National Pharmacy Association.

It is Mr Hirchfield’s view that PMI members should ignore the total amount they would receive under the proposed sale. A large proportion of that is the company’s reserves, which could be handed back to the members at any time without the need to sell the renewal rights. This has happened on a number of occasions in the past.

Asked whether the value of the PMI was tested on the open market, PMI chief executive Michael Lamb said: “The independent directors, in agreeing the purchase price for the renewal rights, had the benefit of a valuation report by Mazars. The basis used to value the renewal rights is one well recognised in the insurance market, which in general terms involves working out the net present value of the renewal rights using various assumptions as to [the] rate of renewals for the various products sold by PMI and doing something similar for the value of new business, ie, growth.”

He said that the final price was negotiated between the PMI and the NPA and that the independent directors considered £6.4m to be fair and reasonable.

Asked why the company had not been taken to the market, Mr Lamb said that the PMI board had not actively decided to sell the renewal rights. “The approach was made by the NPA and the board felt it had a duty to ensure this was seriously considered. The independent directors were of the view there were significant advantages in selling to the NPA, particularly the reduced need to give warranties and the relative ease of the transfer of the renewal rights themselves, given the NPA’s familiarity with the business.”

He added that the cost and effort of preparing the PMI business, or part of it, for sale to a third party would be disproportionate to any increased purchase price.

The decision to sell the PMI’s renewal rights was made by a committee of the four independent directors before being ratified by the full board, which includes a further five directors who are also directors of the NPA.

PMI members are to vote on the proposed sale on 18 December 2007. Proxies can be withdrawn any time before then.

Back to Top


©The Pharmaceutical Journal