Anyone who bought AMGN in 1987 and sold it in 2000 would have gotten the benefit of numerous splits and a dramatically higher share price. The poor fool who bought it in 2000 and held to the present would have a miniscule gain today. From the opening price of $70 on 1/3/2000 to the present, the TOTAL gain would be about 57%. That works out to around 4% annualized (plus a small dividend which was not initiated until late 2011.) That's a seriously dismal performance by any standard. Those who think AMGN has been a "great" stock are delusional. Virtually all of the gain since 2000 has come in just the past 2 years. It was totally dead money for more than a full decade. Long-term "investors" have nothing to show for their patience. Is this the pattern for the future? It's time to accept the reality that AMGN has not been the easy, get-rich-quick stock most people on this board seem to think. AMGN would have to go to at least $300 to catch up with the gain of the S&P 500 Index over the time period since January, 2000.
AMGN has had an ugly 4 days since hitting an all-time high very near $120. The chart at right looks like a downhill ski slope through a mine field. I've felt for many months that the overall market was way overpriced, and we're beginning to see a badly-needed correction. The Fed has been artificially inflating the market, and that can't go on forever. Keep some powder dry, and don't buy until you see blood in the streets. AMGN has been out-pacing the market lower, and I take that as a very bad indicator.
Did you buy in 1987? My dollar cost avg. is approaching $41 and I've owned since 5/08 [5+ yrs] and approaching a 200% gain. I believe [we] are seeing a lot more interest in large/mega-cap growth stocks which should bode well for AMGN and the like during the following decade.
Well, I don't completely disagree with you...one could have certainly done better with any of a number of biotechs. But you should check your facts: Amgen has outperformed the S&P 500 be a considerable margin. About 60% up for Amgen and 20% or so for S&P500. You may want to check me on this. Of course the S&P 500 has paid a dividend, while Amgen instituted one only recently. So its probably closer than that.
Good luck with your investments.
The most substantial difference is the compounded dividend return of the 500 Index. AMGN has paid a dividend for a whopping nine quarters. Just do a simple chart comparison overlay, and you'll find that the broad market has trounced AMGN since 2000. The only hope I can see is that the new management might be a little better than the previous management. One glaring difference is that they are finally showing some willingness to compensate the shareholders for their patience. There's no way that will make up for so many years of under-performance. I bought AMGN in 1987, so I have the benefit of about 13 years of excellent relative performance. Some very savvy fund managers have taken huge positions, but they're not flawless by any means. The PRIMECAP Group has made AMGN one of the biggest holdings in both the funds they run for Vanguard Group as well as funds they run for their own investors. (But they're the same people who held RIMM through an enormous gain and watched it turn into a disaster when the Apple iPhone ate their lunch.) There may be some hope for AMGN, but it will never again be the same company that George Rathmann founded and ran so successfully for many years. The present management has acknowledged by its most recent takeover that AMGN is no longer a "growth" company on its own. I wouldn't buy the stock here, but I wouldn't short it either. I'd be happy - thrilled is more like it - with 8% annually (including dividends). If they can't achieve at least that, management should be shown the exit door.