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

Pfizer Inc. Message Board

  • fizrwinnr11 fizrwinnr11 Feb 6, 2011 6:15 AM Flag

    Updated stats

    Updated stats are as follows

    11/17/04 -$100,000 ($27.99) Inception of $100,000 investment
    12/31/10 - 066,105 - ($17.51) Year-end 2010 close

    01/03 - 071,465 - ($17.68) 2011 Closing low to date
    01/07 - 096,500 - ($18.34) RSI 76.0, highest in 53 months
    01/21 - 102,880 - ($18.36) Annual LEAPS options expire
    01/28 - 096,085 - ($18.15) RSI 53.8, lowest of 2011 to date
    02/01 - 130,580 - ($19.22) 2012 non-GAAP earnings reaffirmed; new $5B stock buyback plan
    02/02 - 121,925 - ($18.96) Ex-dividend 20 cents
    02/04 - 131,540 - ($19.30) RSI 75.3, decade-long downtrend line shattered

    Every point between $17.50 and $25 means at least 55.9K over time.

    My ultimate goal is to be able to cash out Pfizer options for a million dollars by Inauguration Day 2013. A $29 stock price would likely enable me to do just that. A $25 stock price would mean a cashout of about 800K and a mere $20 stock price still means a cashout of about 520K net of naked puts.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Nonesense. The come bet stands on its own. The casino advantage is a bit over 1.4%. That, in itself, is far better than a place bet on 6 or 8. When a point is rolled immediately after placing the come bet, the disadvantage becomes the same as the disadvantage with a line bet. Assuming a point is rolled you now have the opportunity to make an odds bet in which the house has no advantage. Most casinos allow double odds at the minimum.

      I must assume that when you play, you don't make line bets but simply place the numbers. Of course, place bets are off on come out rolls but at your request, they are on. Simply tell the dealer they are on and you have it.

      You can run this into the ground but the absolute fact remains, you chances are better with a come bet followed with odds than they are placing a number. THAT IS A FACT.

      I suspect you don't know any knowledgeable foot ball bettors. I do however know one very knowledgeable basketball bettor and she told me you are out of your mind paying what you did to get she spread bumped up a half point.

    • By placing the bet on the point originally, you immediately win the FIRST time the number is rolled; you don't have to wait for the point to be established and then rolled again. Obviously the payoff is less on the place bet but that's because it doesn't take as much to collect.

      And then as I said, the 7's have to come up sometime and it's great when they appear on a come-out roll when it's a pass-line winner. But if you are lined up with four or five new come bets, a seven is a loser on each number; the odds portion notwithstanding.

      I don't know of any knowledgeable football bettors that would leave the odds at 2.5 when they have the chance to buy it to 3. Some books won't even allow it - but mine will

    • It was mandatory if you are any kind of a bettor - which you obviously are not. Also, I didn't pay $20 extra - I paid $10 extra. I lost $120 to win $100 on the outcome of the game but I would have lost $110 anyway even without buying the extra half-point. The vig does need to be paid on losing bets - but then what would you know about something like that?

    • Don't worry about this bozo.

      He's as about as useful as simple snail snot.

      (I'm going to have to re-think that statement, snail snot probably has some value).


    • you're not a good gambler,never would be.older you get worse it gets,vegas is your underwear,LOL.

    • Well, paying an extra 20 bucks to up the spread a half point was a brilliant move.

    • I didn't particularly care for how the game turned out either as my wallet is now $285 lighter. I had the Steelers and the Unders.

    • I'd like nothing better than for the stock to oblige me. I don't think it will though as it's just too strong technically and keeps bouncing back after just short, shallow givebacks.

      The difference this time is that the analysts now are on board for $2.25 to $2.30 in 2012, there is no drop in earnings in any year at all and the one-year target is now up to $22. Most of the publicity is good.

      The funny thing is that I really saw nothing at all remarkable that came out during the earnings release or conference call to completely turn around attitudes and perceptions.

      In fact, I would have thought beforehand that slashing R & D in order to do more stock buybacks would have been construed as a negative by the Street.

      The new $5B stock buyback authorization was nice but 2011 earnings guidance was a big disappointment and the lesser expected revenues now for 2012 doesn't thrill me either. So why the excitement?

    • I'd like $18.54 a lot better. I WANT the stock to go down. It isn't too often that I say that but this is one of those times.
      you'ld like anything that fits the your pleasure jeky boy.i wish it was a steeler's rod than a packer's cheese whiz,LOL.

    • You have said is often and the stock obliged you. Be careful what you ask for turd for brains.

    • View More Messages
33.96+0.64(+1.92%)12:47 PMEDT