Walgreens has been on something of a growth spurt lately, and the latest proposed acquisition of the nearly 4,600 Rite Aid stores suggests their appetite for enlargement isn't slowing down. If the deal goes through, the result will be a more than 50 percent increase in the number of Walgreens stores (to about 12,700). This will put them well ahead of CVS (roughly 9,500 after the Target deal), their next closest competitor.

Some are concerned that the resulting megachain will negatively impact market competition, and there has already been talk about the need for Walgreens to "divest" some of the acquired stores. An article in the Chicago Tribune said they might be "willing to unload up to 1,000 stores in order to win regulatory approval."

So maybe some of these Rite Aid stores will have a "For Sale" sign in their windows shortly? Adam Fein, author of the popular Drug Channels blog, mentions in a comment on his own site that "perhaps an enterprising pharmacist could get financing to buy one." Maybe.

Anyone want to go halves with me?

What we are seeing in the pharmaceutical market is that — pardon the expression — size really does matter. According to Walgreens CEO Stefano Pessina, the deal was needed to "strengthen our presence and coverage nationally across the U.S." The merger has been publicly described as a means to save money by taking advantage of business synergies (e.g. greater purchasing power) and not primarily as a way to leverage their size against declining PBM margins.

I think we all just sort of smile and say "sure."

Of course, we all realize this $17 billion dollar deal isn't really about buying locations or merchandise or employees. They are buying patients. They are buying prescriptions. They are buying market share.

Walgreens is betting on their ability to manage those prescriptions more cost-effectively so they will appreciate a decent return on their investment. Although they won't come out and say it, greater market share will undoubtedly give them the muscle to turn down unattractive reimbursement contracts from third parties.

Investors don't appear to be quite so confident, as Walgreens' stock price (WBA) has dropped since the news broke.

Many Rite Aid pharmacists have a practical question about this merger: Who will I be working for? Will Walgreens merge stores in close proximity? Will Rite Aid management assume comparable roles once the acquisition is complete?

These are all good questions. And while it is impossible to predict exactly what will happen in each location, it is at least reasonable to assume the combining of stores and prescriptions will eliminate the need for some jobs. It is almost always less expensive to operate one busy store than two moderately busy stores.

In the Northeast in particular, there is a large overlap of Walgreens and Rite Aid locations. A few minutes playing with the store locator for each business is all you need to figure out that trouble is afoot.

Pharmacies have been introducing many efficiencies to reduce the pharmacist staffing needs already, like robotics and unit-of-use packaging. If I were working in any of these locations, I would at least be freshening up my resume.

Personally, I have mixed feelings about the merger. None of us wants to see the pharmacy job market negatively impacted anymore than it already is.

At the same time, I have to admit I have been generally pleased with Walgreens' strategy and initiatives as an observer. I have pharmacist friends who are happily employed for them, and so transferring their culture and success to the rather stagnant Rite Aid organization cannot be all that bad.

Good pharmacists and technicians working for either company shouldn't panic, but simply be prepared.

So, the corner of happy and heathy just got a bit bigger. But what is coming around the corner for employees of Rite Aid is still up in the air.