I always wonder why/how despite of any objective measurement (�age�, market cap, sales numbers, headcount, and delivery on promise, excluding superior executive compensation: compare with CEPH, for example) this company continuously gets high marks from analysts. Board of independent (from what?) directors (practically all insiders, associated via third party with influential insiders or sold something to the company in the past) runs this, always promising company, like very exclusive - Member (institutions) only golf club. What do you expect will trigger changes in the future and why?
".I really can't get too upset over Pops..he quadrupled my money between 1995 and 1997"
Maybe you should take any of those profits you have left and buy a calendar, it is 2007. As I noted previously, executive compensation is a decision the board is required to make each year. Then the other question that has been asked before: what is it in the performance of this managment team that justifies the level of compensation they and their lapdog board is approving for themselves?
Its been fun going back and forth but your arguments are becoming silly, always for the same reason, you are a blind supporter of Pops and presumably his team. I don't consider his moving to Chair from CEO as a management change. The SEC pressures firms to split the CEO and Chairman positions and "Big Daddy" is still there and undobutedly impacting the board. The performance of the board has been as bad as teh executived team when it comes to protecting investors. The entire management team and board of directors needs major change, they are failing in their duties to create shareholder value and they have been guilty of mismanagement that should be explored for potential liability.
I agree, I never considered either NKTR or PFE as having made a breakthrough in inhaled insulin. The "bong" product, the problems with absorbing the drug etc. were clear indications that they were not ready for prime time. Never owned either stock. A real breakthrough in diabetes treatment will be a category killer.
If you are right and a change in management would result in a 30% increase in the stock price, Pops et al. should leave today, before lunch. Don't clean out your desks, we will send you your things.
There is nothing wrong with this company that increased stock price couldn't cure. If the price doesn't rise, it is extremely unlikely that the institutional investors and plaintiff's lawyers will allow the current situation to continue.
Successfully applying technology to allow alcoholics to substitute weekly maintainence for daily was a breakthrough. Mis-pricing was management incompetence. It should have resulted in management changes and loss of "merit" bonuses. If that technology can be applied to allow diabetics to avoid daily insulin, that will be a breakthrough. As would inhalable insulin.
Your arguments are always inconsistent, perhaps because you work backwards from the conclusion that management is just dandy and should not be required to answer to the shareholders, the owners of the company. You keep telling us that we don't see the value Pops adds, or the company adds or what have you. The only concept you never seem to address is corporate responsibility. As one poster pointed out, you give Pops credit for every gain, but do not hold him (or apparently anyone else in management or on the board) responsible for underperformance or inappropriate actions.
Shareholders are not going to stand for this. The next annual meeting is in October, my bet is that if there is no deal to sell the company before that, a shareholder class action is inevitable.