The genius of Steve Jobs was his vision and gift for communicating it--a perfect balance of substance and style. For Jobs' followers, Apple's purpose was not about making money: it was to improve lives through the competitive excellence of products made possible by a free enterprise system. But new management has exchanged the "vision thing" for drumming up subscriptions to its "me too" music rental plan. Tonight, folks at the televised Flint Town Hall Meeting seemed shocked at the cost of equipping 30,000 houses with lead-free water: 1.5 billion dollars. But what's that compared with the cost of a wall protecting our corroded values? Or Apple's forking over 3 billion for Beats Headphones and its trendy mascot? But imagine if Tim Cook had used half of his Beats money to buy lead-free plumbing for Flint: he could have restored priceless trust in Apple and the American "brand" that it once represented so well.
Like many (most?) I picked up these largely "by accident" (I owned OKE) and have done very well by OGS while OKE has tanked. Why is this one immune to the energy glut while OKE appears to be doomed until the day ISIS can no longer support itself by selling cheap gas? (I've sold most of OKE until signs of upward action.)
crocodile tears? These things happen all the time. Many savvy buyers pick up only the companies that stand the chance of a quick profit through a take-over. Much worse happened to a pharmaceutical company I own. I'd owned the stock for almost 10 years, and I woke up one morning several months ago to discover that all of my shares had been sold--saddling me with a big fat tax bill. What happened? The reckless, gun-slinging CEO (as I've found out only now) decided to locate her company off-shore to save a few cents in taxes. So she forced the company (and its shareholders) to endure a "tax inversion"--which is done by finding a suitor off shore who will give you the right to take up occupancy elsewhere under a new tax code. To make matters worse, all of the shares remained in my account and began to rise into triple figures (inducing me to buy more along the way). Then it reversed directions and abruptly plummeted to way below the price of the stock at the time of tax inversion. So I paid capital gains on a sale that involved no transaction or movement of shares. Then I paid again because of the steep losses on shares that tanked after the tax inversion sale.
It's probably a good idea to follow Buffett and others (like Buffett) who condemn tax inversions as unpatriotic (besides benefiting only the corporate hierarchy). The CEOs who do them don't give a twopence for shareholders or the American people in general.
The stock is probably a buy in here. The CEO keeps trying to grow by taking over bigger fish than her own company. She's due to get lucky. Another strategy is to buy one of her targets.
Sorry to hear that. It's up 1.3% today, but that's still below the averages on a blow-out up day. It's got a #1 rating from the big on-line broker. If you can accept the thesis that American consumers will tire of surfing the internet all day (9 hours per day for teens, accdg to a recent study), gardening and pet-owning make a lot of sense. The brands they make and distribute are very familiar, esp. to small critter owners. I simply hate to buy in at a high point for the stock (probably the reasons the buyers aren't more conspicuous), esp. when the PE is double Apple's. Still, this one seems like a safe and solid slow grower.
I'll grant that the stock may (or may not) be overvalued. But it's not a scam. I'd be willing to put in a stop-loss in the low 30s and hope that it doesn't dip below 30. Then when the turnaround begins, I'll proceed to reaccumlate. If you want to park your fortune in XOM, COP, OXY, or your bank's savings account, go ahead and do so. No one's stopping you--at least not on this board. What's your motive for hanging around and trying to taunt honest risk takers? Go out an invent a solar-powered car or do something useful with your sorry lives.
Now I get it. The CEO began her quest this year as the hero of "Monty Python and the Search for the Holy Grail," intent on expanding a midget continent into a more credible piece of the drug-making empire. But along the way the King meets up with the Black Knight who, as you may recall, refuses to allow Arthur to cross a bridge. The mighty ruler impatiently draws his sword against this pesty foe and slices off an arm. Blood spurts out from the socket, while BK says "Tis a scratch." Arthur next takes off a leg. Fountains of blood rain down, but BK says: "A mere flesh wound." Arthur goes for an arm and a leg. BK responds: "I'm invincible." An irritated Arthur finally slices him in half, leaving a mere torso who says: "All right, we'll call it a draw." But as the King walks away, BK screams: "Come back and get what's comin' to you. I'll bite your head off." Arthur ignores him, calling him "loony."
It should be no secret to any Mylan shareholder at the start of this past loony year that we are all Black Knights in a modern "reality-show" version of the above cult movie. But so is Mylan's arrogantly capricious if not deluded CEO. If she doesn't know it, the pharmaceutical universe that she seeks to conquer has, by now, certainly caught on. Mylan may yet succeed in making a deal. But you can bet that the benefactor won't be the once-invincible Mylan.