September 30, 2019

No Image

Startups Face Skepticism As They Move To Sell Shares To The Public

Calling yourself a tech company doesn’t work like catnip on investors anymore. Startups riding the tech boom are facing skepticism as they move to sell shares to the public.



MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST:

WeWork is putting off its initial public offering, meaning it will not be selling shares of its stock to the public anytime soon. The company leases office space and then rents that space out to other businesses. Not too long ago, it was seen as full of promise. But as NPR’s Jim Zarroli reports, investors are rethinking their love of new, high-growth companies with slim chances of making a profit anytime soon.

JIM ZARROLI, BYLINE: WeWork has always had a definite Silicon Valley vibe. Its charismatic co-founder Adam Neumann favors black T-shirts with frayed collars. And when he speaks about the company’s business, leasing workspace to young entrepreneurs and mature businesses, he has a casually messianic zeal. Here he is in 2017 at a conference.

(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)

ADAM NEUMANN: Being surrounded by a group of like-minded individuals, being part of something bigger than yourself inspires people to work harder, spend more time at work and just have fun doing it.

ZARROLI: When WeWork announced its initial public offering, it generated lots of excitement. Then investors began looking at its books, and they didn’t like what they saw. Not only was WeWork burning through billions – much more than anyone thought – but its corporate structure and Neumann’s leadership were fraught with problems.

Lise Buyer is founder of Class V Group, which advises companies about IPOs.

LISE BUYER: The terms were so egregious. The governance was an embarrassment. And it took magic – it took a leap of faith greater than the Grand Canyon to see how that business could be profitable anytime soon.

ZARROLI: Last week, Neumann was ousted as CEO. And today, the company said it was shelving its IPO.

IPOs are supposed to be a way for new companies to raise a lot of money in the stock market. But lately, some high-profile offerings have become duds. The Hollywood power player Endeavor Group also scrapped its IPO last week. Companies such as ride-hailing giant Uber and Peloton, which streams exercise classes, started with a lot of buzz. But almost right away, their stock price fell victim to gravity.

Lise Buyer says investors have become much more skeptical about young companies that aren’t turning a profit and don’t know when they will.

BUYER: Investors are less willing to believe in the smoke and mirrors and, trust us; someday this will happen. And they want to understand what needs to happen between today and Day X.

ZARROLI: This shift in sentiment calls to mind the dot-com boom of 20 years ago, when investors threw all kinds of money at young startups, only to lose their shirts when the market crashed. The IPO market is nowhere near that bad today.

Renaissance Capital has an IPO investment fund, and it’s still up for the year, but it’s fallen 12% since the end of July. Renaissance co-founder Kathleen Smith says the mood on Wall Street has definitely changed.

KATHLEEN SMITH: Investors basically said, no more. And I would characterize it as an IPO buyers strike or a boycott of IPOs that look like the ones that have been failures so far.

ZARROLI: Smith says this isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Investors are getting more realistic. She says, eventually, the IPO market will rebound, but it will take a while.

SMITH: We anticipate that the IPO market will be pretty much virtually shut down for the next couple months.

ZARROLI: As for WeWork, the company says it plans to do another IPO later, though it’s not saying when. That means it’s not going to get the huge infusion of cash that it was hoping for anytime soon. And The Wall Street Journal reported today that it will have to compensate by laying off thousands of employees and selling off Neumann’s $60 million corporate jet.

Jim Zarroli, NPR News, New York.

(SOUNDBITE OF MUSIC)

Copyright © 2019 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

College Athletes In California Can Now Be Paid Under Fair Pay To Play Act

A new California law allows college athletes to get paid in certain scenarios. That’s setting up a clash with the NCAA, the governing body of college sports.



AUDIE CORNISH, HOST:

A bill making it legal for college athletes in California to get paid is now law. Governor Gavin Newsom has signed the Fair Pay To Play Act, giving college athletes the right to make money off their name, image and likeness. He did so over the objections of the NCAA, which oversees college sports. It sees the law as a threat to the traditional model of amateurism in college athletics. NPR’s Tom Goldman reports.

TOM GOLDMAN, BYLINE: It was a bill signing California-style. Governor Gavin Newsom sat in a barber’s chair on the set of basketball superstar LeBron James’ HBO show “The Shop.” James has been an outspoken supporter of the bill. He and the other guests on the show watched as Newsom put pen to paper.

(SOUNDBITE OF TV SHOW, “THE SHOP”)

GAVIN NEWSOM: All right. Well, let’s do it. Let’s do it, man. All right.

(APPLAUSE)

GOLDMAN: Newsom explained why the Fair Pay To Play Act was important.

(SOUNDBITE OF TV SHOW, “THE SHOP”)

NEWSOM: It’s going to change college sports for the better by having now the interest, finally, of the athletes on par with the interests of the institutions.

GOLDMAN: The law will allow California student athletes to earn money from endorsements, sponsorship deals and other activities related to their athletic skill. They’ll be able to hire agents. The bill will not require colleges and universities to pay players, but schools – and certainly the NCAA – aren’t happy about it. There’s concern California schools will have an unfair advantage when recruiting athletes and that the law will push college sports toward professionalism.

Of course, many Division I college sports certainly appear professional, with palatial football stadiums, huge TV contracts and coaches making multi-million-dollar salaries. The NCAA wouldn’t comment today about an earlier warning that California schools could be banned from NCAA championships because of the law. But Governor Newsome doesn’t think that’ll happen.

NEWSOM: They can’t afford to do that, can’t afford to lose the state of California. It’s truly a nation state. And the economic consequences of it would be profound. No. 2, I don’t think they have the legal right to do that.

GOLDMAN: The Pac 12 Conference, which includes four prominent California universities, says it’s also disappointed with the new law. Among its criticisms, the law will have a negative impact on female athletes, which the original bill’s author, California Senator Nancy Skinner, says is wrong – because, she says, women don’t have the same opportunities as men to become professional athletes after college.

NANCY SKINNER: For women, this might be the only time they could make any money.

GOLDMAN: Several other states are considering similar laws to the Fair Pay To Play Act. California’s law is scheduled to take effect in 2023. Tom Goldman, NPR News.

Copyright © 2019 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

A Biopsy Came With An Unexpected $2,170 ‘Cover Charge’ For The Hospital

An unexpected charge related to a biopsy threatened the financial security of Brianna Snitchler and her partner.

Callie Richmond for Kaiser Health News


hide caption

toggle caption

Callie Richmond for Kaiser Health News

Brianna Snitchler was just figuring out the art of adulting when she scheduled a biopsy at Henry Ford Hospital in Detroit.

Snitchler, 27, was on top of her finances: Her student loan balance was down and her credit score was up.

“I had been working for the past three years trying to improve my credit and, you know, just become a functioning adult human being,” Snitchler said.

For the first time in her adult life, she had health insurance through her job and a primary care doctor she liked. Together they were working on Snitchler’s concerns about her mental and physical health.

One concern was a cyst on her abdomen. The growth was about the size of a quarter, and it didn’t hurt or particularly worry Snitchler. But it did make her self-conscious whenever she went for a swim.

“People would always call it out and be alarmed by it,” she recalled.

Share Your Story And Bill With Us

If you’ve had a medical-billing experience that you think we should investigate, you can share the bill and describe what happened here.

Before having the cyst removed, Snitchler’s doctor wanted to check the growth for cancer. After a first round of screening tests, Snitchler had an ultrasound-guided needle biopsy at the Henry Ford Health System’s main hospital.

The procedure was “uneventful,” with no complications reported, according to results faxed to her primary care doctor after the procedure. The growth was indeed benign, and Snitchler thought her next step would be getting the cyst removed.

Then the bill came.

The patient: Brianna Snitchler, 27, a user-experience designer living in Detroit at the time. As a contractor for Ford Motor Co., she had a UnitedHealth Group insurance plan.

Total bill: $3,357.52, including a $2,170 facility fee listed as “operating room services.” The balance included a biopsy, ultrasound, physician charges and lab tests.

Service provider: Henry Ford Health System in Detroit.

Medical procedure: Ultrasound-guided needle biopsy of a cyst.

What gives: When Snitchler scheduled the biopsy, no one told her that Henry Ford Health System would also charge her a $2,170 facility fee.

Snitchler said the bill turned out to be far more than what she had budgeted for. Her insurance plan from UnitedHealth had a high deductible of $3,250, plus she would owe coinsurance. All told, her bills for the care she received related to the biopsy left her on the hook for $3,357.52, with her insurance paying $974.

When Brianna Snitchler scheduled the biopsy for a cyst on her abdomen, no one told her that the Henry Ford Health System would charge a $2,170 facility fee, listed on her bill as “operating room services.” (Note: This photo has been edited to redact private information.)

Callie Richmond for Kaiser Health News


hide caption

toggle caption

Callie Richmond for Kaiser Health News

“She shrugged it off,” Snitchler’s partner, Emi Aguilar, recalled. “But I could see that she was upset in her eyes.”

Snitchler panicked when she realized the bill threatened the couple’s financial security. Snitchler had already spent down her savings for a recent cross-country move to Austin, Texas.

In an email, Henry Ford spokesman David Olejarz said the “procedure was performed in the Interventional Radiology procedure room, where the imaging allows the biopsy to be much more precise.”

“We perform procedures in the most appropriate venue to ensure the highest standards of patient quality and safety,” Olejarz wrote.

The initial bill from Henry Ford referred to “operating room services.” The hospital later sent an itemized bill that referred to the charge for a treatment room in the radiology department. Both descriptions boil down to a facility fee, a common charge that has become controversial as hospitals search for additional streams of income, and as more patients complain they’ve been blindsided by these fees.

Hospital officials argue that medical centers need the boosted income to provide the expensive care sick patients require, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.

But the way hospitals calculate facility fees is “a black box,” said Ted Doolittle, with the Office of the Healthcare Advocate for Connecticut, a state that has put a spotlight on the issue.

“It’s somewhat akin to a cover charge” at a club, said Doolittle, who previously served as deputy director of the federal Center for Program Integrity at the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.

Hospitals in Connecticut billed more than $1 billion in facility fees in 2015 and 2016, according to state records. In 2015, Connecticut lawmakers approved a bill that forces all hospitals and medical providers to disclose facility fees upfront. Now patients in Connecticut “should never be charged a facility fee without being shown in burning scarlet letters that they are going to get charged this fee,” Doolittle said.

In Michigan, there’s no law requiring hospitals and other providers of health care services to inform patients of facility fees ahead of time.

Snitchler’s procedure took place on campus at Henry Ford’s main hospital site. When she got her bill, with its mention of “operating room services,” she was baffled. Snitchler said the room had “crazy medical equipment,” but she was still in her street clothes as a nurse numbed her cyst, and she was sent home in a matter of minutes.

With Snitchler’s permission, Kaiser Health News shared her itemized bill, biopsy results and explanation of benefits with Mark Weiss, a radiologist who leads MediCrew, a company in Flint, Mich., that helps patients navigate the health system.

Weiss said it probably wasn’t medically necessary for Snitchler to go to the hospital to receive good care. “Not all surgical procedures have to be done at a surgical center,” he said, noting that biopsies often can be done in an office-based treatment center.

Resolution: Hoping for a reasonable explanation — or even the discovery of a mistake — Snitchler called her insurance company and the hospital.

A representative at Henry Ford told her on the phone that the hospital isn’t “legally required” to inform patients of fees ahead of time.

In an email, Henry Ford spokesman Olejarz apologized for that response: “We’ll use it as a teachable moment for our staff. We are committed to being transparent with our patients about what we charge.”

He pointed to an initiative launched in 2018 that helps patients anticipate out-of-pocket expenses. The program targets the most common elective radiology and gastroenterology tests that often have high price tags for patients.

Asked if Snitchler’s ultrasound-guided needle biopsy will be included in the price transparency initiative, Olejarz replied, “Can’t say at this point.”

In addition to the pilot program to inform patients of fees, Olejarz said, the hospital also plans to roll out an online cost-estimator tool.

For now, Snitchler has decided not to get the cyst removed, and she plans to try to negotiate on her bill. She has not yet paid any portion of it.

“You should always negotiate; you should always try,” Doolittle said. “Doesn’t mean it’s going to work, but it can work. People should not be shy about it.”

“We are happy to work out a flexible payment plan that best meets her needs,” Olejarz wrote when Kaiser Health News first inquired about Snitchler’s bill.

The takeaway: When your doctor recommends an outpatient test or procedure like a biopsy, be aware that the hospital may be the most expensive place you can have it done. Ask your physician for recommendations of where else you might have the procedure, and then call each facility to try to get an estimate of the costs you’d face.

Also, be wary of places that may look like independent doctor’s offices but are owned by a hospital. These practices also can tack hefty facility fees onto your bill.

If you get a bill that seems inflated, call your hospital and insurer and try to negotiate it down.

Bill of the Month is a crowdsourced investigation by Kaiser Health News and NPR that dissects and explains medical bills. Do you have an interesting medical bill you want to share with us? Tell us about it!

Let’s block ads! (Why?)