I know a few people who work for, and one who actually started the company. No doubt this company will have issues in the future, but based on their workforce and the mentality these individuals have (military type), I'm sure they will overcome any, and all obstacles. It is still a relatively small company with great foresight and mega profits. I'll buy as many SYK shares at this price as I possibly can!
Oh really? NOT!!! Company was started by Homer Stryker
He passed away in 1980 so I doubt you actually know one of the people who started the company. Look it's a great company and they do employ alot of ex-military but don't try to act like you know something that we don't. Be real.
yeah im still at it, older not wiser and a lot poorer. thankfully my day job business continues to do very well. how is retirement, didnt you sell your business? what about the sports complex, if you have my old email shoot me a line, i am on the east side of the state once a month.
please please RON E would be a great replacement for MAC attack, I agree with almost all of your posts, just not a carpenter fan.
J&J could not buy either Stryker OR Zimmer as either would tip them over an acceptable market share (as they already own DePuy).
This would affect the US and many European markets.
THey would have to divest so much to make it work that it just wouldn't work.
I think J&J will have sold DePuy long before anyone comes knocking at Stryker!
Zimmer is in horrible shape right now and that alone is a great reason to buy Stryker as they have a much cleaner/simpler ortho direction.
Hey Mitee! Good to see you're still at it. We need Ron E. back to run this co. Here are a few thoughts:
1. Syk was always run by sales and marketing people in a fast growing industry. With hard working (average at best was all that was needed) troops, anyone could make money in the 80's and 90's.
2. Now that the gov't is taking over health care, you'll need proven managers with experience in slower growing industries. Carpenter can help here.
3. To keep great people, you have to allow them to "have a life" outside of work. At one time it seemed the company was conservative but became a 7 day a week job for most.
4. They were never "great" at developing their own products. They bought Howmedica at a great steal and got implants and trauma markets at a cheap price. They integrated the two very well.
5. It helps to have steady ownership(the Strykers) but the board has been the same forever. Add some outside talent and get rid of a name or two.
6. Steve Mac has allowed regulatory failure to a company that rarely had it. And it has gotten worse, not better. You can't scimp on quality anymore.
7. Some how, bring Ron E. back.
8. I doubt the feds will allow jnj to buy syk, wishful thinking for someone that bought in the $70 range.
9.You can't make all your estimates on tax savings forever. Building abroad will not be the solution. You've got to build better products, at fair prices and you've got to instill an innovative company again. Why buy someone's junk? The company was founded by a creative, innovative man. Return to your roots.
And yes, someday we've got to meet at the annual meeting.
My followers??? LOL, I am simply a shareholder looking for the most value for my money if we agree to sell, but I don't have much leverage thats for sure.
If anyone wants to meet at the shareholder meeting on Wednesday, I plan on going, let me know what might work.
Lots of interesting points Medsurg, I would tend to agree. I also agree that SYK has been slipping up in several areas over the past couple years. Mitee and his followers are looking for over $100. I do not think a transaction at that price would be entertained. I would think somewhere in the $80 range would get some dialog....
I think you are piling on a little bit, though I agree everything you identified needs to be addressed, and how it is addressed will ultimately show strength or weakness in the current management team.
The way I read it is the regulatory issues are first among my concerns because they happened during the SM's watch, and the issues as well as the response are and will continue to be crucial to the health of the company.
My other principle concern is the response to the current economic crisis. Apart from every radio talk show host and every politician, no one else foresaw a crisis as cataclysmic as what we are experiencing. Furthermore, we have not had enough time to see results or the lack thereof from the measures the SM management team has taken since the crisis just hit in October. I am moderately encouraged that SYK realized constant currency growth even in the "knee-jerk cut all spending and postpone all non-essential procedures" time period following the onset of our current economic crisis. I am in no way suggesting that management has deftly handled the crisis, however. The jury is out and will remain out for some time.
Far less important is the tax. As I said, SYK is under continuous audit. If the IRS does come after SYK for taxes, my guess is that will actually have to go into the JB column because the periods under review are generally several years in arrears, and the issue identified in the conf call, i.e. cost sharing arrangements with Irish factories. I remember when the tax rate came down and the reason cited in annual reports and in analyst calls was Irish manufacturing, might also have included PR manufacturing. This rate movement was definitely during the JB years.
Finally, I never considered OP-1 the salvation of the company, at least not in the last 3 years. I took an economic interest in the company back in 1995. I recall that at that time SYK was already telling the market to expect delays in the approval of OP-1, meaning that the product has been visible in some measure for nearly 20 years. I also remember the long awaited rejection on the approval for non-mending long bone fractures, definitely pre SM. SYK regrouped and got some kind of compassionate use approval and tried again on the spine, but by that time the investment community was baking zero economic impact into their numbers as was SYK when they provided their guidance. I suspect the failures with OP-1 are attributable to a number of reasons, including a proven track record of poor handling. I remember when the product was classified as a device, which was heralded as a major victory because it put SYK in familiar territory. In retrospect, I wonder if that was not a mistake because it put the product in unfamiliar territory for the Device people at the FDA. At this point, however, "what went wrong?" is nothing more than an academic questions as OP-1 has been presented and accepted as a long-shot that would provide some serious icing on the cake if it ever came through.
That is my take based on about 14 years of pretty close attention.