% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Pfizer Inc. Message Board

  • eureka201112 eureka201112 Sep 12, 2011 3:23 PM Flag

    A likely reason for Pfizer's very recent weakness


    The euro has fallen substantially the last seveal sessions. While the company's Q3 international books have been closed since the end of August, the euro weakness could take down Q4-11 earnings by a penny or so.

    If I had my way, currency translations wouldn't be part of adjusted earnings - only GAAP. Currencies have little to do with a company's actual operations and are the lowest-quality element of earnings. I wish they backed it all out and simply compared constant-dollar earnings.

    Investors should NOT be selling because of the prospect of negative Q4 currency translations. What does that really have to do with the company's ongoing operations?

    This topic is deleted.
    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • You existed in 1949, fool. It happened then. You don't have to go back to the Great Depression. Valuations weren't all that low then, but earnings were, Numbers Numbskull.

      As I said, obviously you've never studied market history.

      Don't know GE's P/E in 1973/74, either, but was surely low.

    • That's not unprecedented, fool, which you'd know had you ever studied market history, which obviously you haven't. In actual stubborn fact, you've never studied any subject.

    • Wrong again, as always, Number Dope.

      P/Es were low in March 2009, but so were earnings.

      Secular market trends are based upon valuations. Sometime in the next five years or so, P/Es could be lower than in 2009, but on higher earnings.

      You still don't get it, do you, numbskull?

    • >> It's rather obvious why charty can't do it... <<

      You mean because there is no such thing as "EBIDTA?"

    • better get use to the euro falling saw yesterday one trader predicting 1.30 by year end and back to parity in a couple of years 1buck=1euro

    • The secular bear is not "so-called". It is an arithmetic fact, Numbers Ninny.

      Average P/E has yet to reach the low level of prior secular bears, but possibly there is relatively more money in stocks now than in prior decades, so valuations can't sink as low as previously.

      Eleven years would be a short secular bear.

    • You have to be the most stupid subhumanoid on the planet. You still can't grasp after a decade of detailed explanation, charts, graphs, tables & data of all kinds what is immediately intuitively obvious to people of normal intelligence & numerical & reasoning ability.

      The bear cycle of 2007-09 ended in March 2009, but that doesn't mean there can't be another bear cycle following the bull cycle that began then. In fact, we are now in one. It may or may not see lower valuations than in the prior bear cycle, but there is no reason why it couldn't. Both the prior bear cycle (07-09), the bull cycle following it (09-11) & the current bear cycle (11-??) are all cycles withing the present secular bear market (2000-??).

      Why are these simple facts so hard for you to understand?

      Also, have you really never noticed that whenever you say something cannot or will not happen, it always does?

    • PFE has been weak since April 1999. Since then it has lost about 2/3 of its value, while the Dow has been flat.

    • A likely reason for your lifelong mental weakness is that your mom dropped you on your head repeatedly, hoping to kill you & make it look like an accident.

    • Why should taxes be deducted for adjusted earnings? Better to compare pre-tax earnings for peer companies and avoid one-off changes in tax rates. If one company consistently has a lower tax rate than another, it should affect PE but earnings within the control of the company are pre-tax.

33.62+0.85(+2.59%)Dec 1 4:00 PMEST