IBJNews

WellPoint reaffirms 2012 earnings forecast

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

WellPoint Inc. is sticking with a 2012 earnings forecast that it had cut in July, and the nation's second-largest health insurer said it expects next year's earnings to be on par with this year's performance.

The Indianapolis company on Tuesday reaffirmed its forecast for 2012 adjusted earnings of $7.30 to $7.40 per share, which doesn't count investment gains and litigation or acquisition costs. That means the forecast doesn't count costs tied to its acquisition of fellow insurer Amerigroup Corp., a $4.46 billion deal WellPoint expects to close later this month.

Analysts expect, on average, earnings of $7.46 per share, according to FactSet.

WellPoint said July 25 it was cutting its outlook from a previous forecast of $7.57 per share after enduring a tough month of May and seeing enrollment slip. The insurer also reported that day second-quarter earnings that both fell and missed expectations.

CEO Angela Braly then resigned in August as investor frustration started to surface over the performance of the insurer, which runs Blue Cross Blue Shield plans in 14 states and trails only UnitedHealth Group Inc. in size.

WellPoint then trumped Wall Street expectations in the third quarter, when the insurer recorded its first quarterly, year over year, increase in earnings since early 2011.

WellPoint said Tuesday it expects 2013 earnings to be "relatively stable" with 2012. The insurer has said it will focus next year on preparing for 2014, when the health care overhaul will expand coverage and provide subsidies or tax credits to help people buy insurance. WellPoint plans to spend as much as $300 million next year to prepare for those expansions.

The company will release a specific earnings forecast for the new year in early 2013.

WellPoint's shares climbed 57 cents, to $58.78 each, Tuesday afternoon, while broader trading indexes rose less than 1 percent. WellPoint shares have slipped about 11 percent so far in 2012.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. How can any company that has the cash and other assets be allowed to simply foreclose and not pay the debt? Simon, pay the debt and sell the property yourself. Don't just stiff the bank with the loan and require them to find a buyer.

  2. If you only knew....

  3. The proposal is structured in such a way that a private company (who has competitors in the marketplace) has struck a deal to get "financing" through utility ratepayers via IPL. Competitors to BlueIndy are at disadvantage now. The story isn't "how green can we be" but how creative "financing" through captive ratepayers benefits a company whose proposal should sink or float in the competitive marketplace without customer funding. If it was a great idea there would be financing available. IBJ needs to be doing a story on the utility ratemaking piece of this (which is pretty complicated) but instead it suggests that folks are whining about paying for being green.

  4. The facts contained in your post make your position so much more credible than those based on sheer emotion. Thanks for enlightening us.

  5. Please consider a couple of economic realities: First, retail is more consolidated now than it was when malls like this were built. There used to be many department stores. Now, in essence, there is one--Macy's. Right off, you've eliminated the need for multiple anchor stores in malls. And in-line retailers have consolidated or folded or have stopped building new stores because so much of their business is now online. The Limited, for example, Next, malls are closing all over the country, even some of the former gems are now derelict.Times change. And finally, as the income level of any particular area declines, so do the retail offerings. Sad, but true.

ADVERTISEMENT