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

CR Bard Inc. Message Board

  • drabrc drabrc Mar 20, 2000 6:30 AM Flag

    Be courageous -- DYB!

    With out a merger, Bard is looking at similar
    valuation for next year (12/2001) 15 - 18 PE on estimated
    2001 earnings/share $3.10 = $45 - $55/share and a 2%
    dividend. Not a compelling investment. What will Bard do to
    catch up with its peers? What would likely happen if
    someone did buy Bard? It might be a good idea to borrow
    from the philosophy of Mr. John F. Welch at GE and DYB
    -- that's Destroy Your Business before someone else

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Having read several of your postings, I can't
      agree more Zhoot. Granted, a LOT of R&D projects start,
      then die. Its the nature of the beast, kissing frogs
      so to speak. But BCR's penchant for starting
      projects and letting them run ad nauseum, well past the
      point they should have been killed, is legend. I NEVER
      saw an actual study of the needs of my division's
      market and its needs. So, all we ever seemed to do was
      to pursue line extensions and pet projects. This IS
      NOT a technology company. This is not a good company.
      It is, unfortunately, a company like most others,
      wallowing in uncertainty, lacking direction, but still
      managing to pay a premium price for their so called
      management. Step down, Bill, and let a pro take the reins!
      BTW, Bill Agee would NOT be a good choice.

    • TYC would be good for the BCR shareholders in the
      short term but a TYC/BCR marriage would yeild little
      competitive advantage. Just what do you think TYC will do
      beyond their initial investment? Do you really think a
      company as diversified as TCY (ADT security, electronics,
      etc.)would drive this business. NO WAY! Ya'll are concerned
      with BCR's willingness to rely on purchasing new
      technologies to grow the business. TYC simply buys whole
      companies to psuedo-fuel their growth. US Surg hasn't lit
      it up since their takeover by TYC. The optimal
      merger/takeover would be by a medical device focused company.

    • Yes, from what I have seen they could be but
      Baxter would be better. If anybody gets hold of Bard
      they need to take the various product groups and meld
      them with other like groups to make better sense of
      what Bard have got. Baxter could also be a great fit
      since they are in many of the same areas that Bard are.

    • Would TYCO be a good fit as a possible suitor??

    • and out is where this company is

      If any of you know their history and know what has
      happened to this once powerhouse will understand that in
      todays world there is absolutely no chance they will
      survive in their current form.
      Even if Bard did
      everything perfectly from now on ( which they do not have
      the people or products to do )they would still have
      to deal with an extremely competitive market
      Coupled with the fact that their international business
      is shrinking faster than I can type,I just cannot
      see this company lasting.

    • is going down!! Hostile bid coming soon,in my opinion! Price increase soon!!!!

    • Not4mey who is it? If you are thinking it is Guy Jordan you are wrong. Guy does not report in an R&D capacity.

    • <EOM>

    • Longfield's aversion to technology is the real
      problem. He doesn't have one direct report who is in
      charge of R&D. Until the top dawg sees the importance of
      this area of the business lack of new product asset
      allocation will continue to put Bard behind the competition.

    • Yes new products! Vital R&D, you are singing to
      the choir. For the near term I think JLcfa (msg 1120
      and 1122) summarizes some new and near term
      opportunities. I also understand that other incremental
      improvements are close to release -- OK, sometime this year or
      early next so the story is not as hopeless as it may
      seem. The follow through and replenishment is critical.
      My first overture to this board was to draw
      attention to this. It is not just a single function at
      fault it is a culture defect and functional role
      confusion. Granted R&D are feeble as a group but there are
      many very talented people in that group. Leadership,
      support and clarification of an expanded role are what is
      lacking and needed. If the right people aren't in place
      now then they need to be put there quickly and if
      other people are in the way they need to be moved. It
      is the end of the 1st qtr 2000 now. Time is running
      out and we are still talking about the problem and
      looking for evidence of the solution. You may be right,
      it might be hopeless.

    • View More Messages
215.32+0.32(+0.15%)Aug 25 4:02 PMEDT