According to the press release, the company bought back much more stock than would have been expected in the second quarter - 109.2 million shares costing $2.2B. For the full year, the company wants to buy back $5B to $7B and this $2.2B in Q2 follows $2.1B in buybacks in Q1 so the company is already over 70% of the way to its midpoint guidance of $6B.
Dividing the cost by the number of shares purchased in Q2 results in a cost per share of about $20.15. But for the most part, the stock was doing well during the quarter and there weren't that many days when the stock could have been purchased in the very low 20's.
One period was the few days just before and just after Easter. But other than that, the only other opportunities occurred in the period from June 10 through June 28.
Management must have been quite confident at that time of where the stock was headed; otherwise, why so many dollars expended in Q2? To say nothing of Q1 when early on the stock price was in the high teens.
At any rate, for the company to already have bought back $4.3B in stock when guidance for the year is $6B midpoint, they must have loved the prices.
When will you learn that your opinion doesn't matter?
What you agree or disagree with doesn't count in the least. You're totally insignificant, indeed worse than worthless.
If Chartness's opinion doesn't or never matters, why do you keep arguing with him and see him as your God?
This is getting to be baffling! Something doesn't add up with your constant nagging of someone that's supposed to be worthless and insignificant.
Growing the company through acquisitions can be very dicey - especially when a promising pipeline is largely what the target company has to offer. Nothing at all says that those drugs will be successful. Even when approved, there can be a situation like Pfizer experienced with the Cox-2's. Within two years of the Pharmacia/Upjohn acquisition, what seemed to be a good deal on Pfizer's part was rendered a very bad deal.
A big reason for buying KG was Remoxy and you saw what happened to that one about five weeks ago. Pfizer also bought a small outfit about five years ago for about $2B. That company had two promising pipeline drugs and not much else. One of the drugs didn't make it at all and the other was finally approved after several delays but remains just a very minor seller.
With stock buybacks, those kind of risks just aren't there. Pfizer is big enough right now that they don't have to take chances and pay hefty premiums for the privilege.
I wouldn't want to see PFE pay a big premium to buy an overpriced biotech that was long on PE but short on earnings and revenues. Far better in my book to buy back Pfizer shares after a steep drop.
Buying LLY isn't the only option.
Have you really not noticed that you are always wrong, & that whatever you want PFE to do always makes things worse?
You are a complete, total & utter, idiotic, insane investing ignoramus.
Here is an excerpt from your post:
A company that has no better use for its cash than buybacks is on the road to going out of business. This is especially true of an R & D company.
I couldn't disagree more. If Pfizer was in position to do so, what would I like to see them do more - buy back their stock at $18.14 a share or offer say $45 a share to buy out LLY which will only have slightly higher EPS in three years than Pfizer will?
Which is going to be a bigger help to Pfizer's earnings?