Is your Strong Buy sentiment for JNJ or for GSK? Do you know what board you're posting on? I'm glad you found a GSK booster rave to cut and paste, but of the six analysts I follow, five have GSK as a HOLD. Don't know who you think are shorts in this thread, but you'd have to be a fool to short GSK at its current level. And while I'm overjoyed that you've found a stock to love, I'm still going to keep my JNJ for another couple of decades.
How short are you? Maybe you and our resident mba should have a debate - in my IGNORE box. Short seller versus buying opportunity pumper. Fascinating stuff.
If you're investing for long term income, not a bad choice. But, GSK earnings are forecast to decline or remain flat for several years. And the dividend payout ratio has risen sharply to 86%, which makes it unlikely that there will be any significant increases in the dividend for coming years. There's a chance for a takeover by PFE, so you might have a chance for a premium bonus. I worked at GSK for years, never wanted to own the stock, cashed in options the day they vested. Good luck with your switch, but as a very long term investor, I would much rather hold JNJ than GSK.
And I just realized my math error. That's a 50% increase you're predicting - in a few months. And of course, along with it, a 50% increase in the P/E, from an already borderline high of 20 to a ridiculously high level of 30. Despite the math error, it still took 12 years to get from $50 to $75 after the last split, which is a 4% annual price increase. About what you can expect from a major pharma.
That's just silly wishful thinking. After the 2001 split from $110 to $55, it took 12 YEARS for the stock price to increase by 25%. You're predicting it will do that in a few months? Put me on the side of the doubters.
If you don't believe what I've been posting, read what Motley Fool has to say about the five key quotes in the conference call. Either a major acquisition or company breakup. Got to happen.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but there seems to be a lot of misunderstanding in some of the posts. KMI is NOT a limited partnership, and was NEVER a limited partnership. KMI pays out dividends, not distributions. There is no problem with holding KMI in an IRA. If you hold it outside an IRA, when you sell it there is no complex tax form to fill out - you just report a capital gain or loss based on purchase and sale prices. The limited partnerships that were part of the KMI operation, and which could be held separately from KMI, will cease to exist. KMI will operate as a standard corporation, continuing to pay dividends, at a very nice rate. Am I wrong about any of this?
When PFE management starts listening to all the geniuses posting on this board and doing everything they suggest - guarantee that will do it. Heck, maybe PFE should just let the Yahoo message board posters run the company. We obviously know much more about how to run a major pharma than they do.
On the contrary, we can absolutely throw him out. That's what the IGNORE feature does. Each time I log in, his latest post appears for just the briefest of moments, and I watch it disappear, banished to the faded list of IGNORED posts on the bottom of the page. Take back the message boards. Use the IGNORE feature.
Companies don't do acquisitions with the goal of increasing market cap. They do them to increase earnings. After most acquisitions, much of what is acquired is sold off. Many of the best performers have used acquisition for decades. Look at JNJ, the best example in the pharma sector. History proves exactly the opposite of what you claim - acquisition and consolidation is a natural phenomenon, and those processes have created the vast shareholder wealth we now share in. "Turning R&D around" is a re-organization myth, consisting of rearranging the chairs and giving the therapeutic areas new names. PFE is simply too big to grow adequately on organic, in-house efforts alone. It must make a major acquisition.
My goodness, you're really the pugnacious little twit, aren't you. I should "shut-up with my fear mongering!!!" Unless PFE is able to complete a major acquisition to expand its product lines, it will be unable to show adequate growth in earnings. Major corrections take all stocks down, for an extended period, and we are due for a major correction based on historical market performance norms. An alternative scenario is for PFE to complete the three-way breakup of the company that it has already prepared for, loading one of the three with devastating amounts of debt. If that's fear mongering, so be it. NO, YOU SHUT UP. Wow, they shouldn't let children post on the board.
PFE stock price is not a key factor in an acquisition. The lower market cap of GSK will make the financing easier, and a lower acquisition price means sooner accrual to the PFE bottom line. GSK has lots of parts that can be divested to offset the purchase price. It would be a good fit for PFE in many areas.
The China problem is a tiny bump in the road. All major pharmas have problems of this kind. GSK has a desirable portfolio of products. Some company is going to acquire it, right now the price is close to a bargain, and my hope is that PFE will grab it. The bribery issue will go away just as soon as a bribe is paid to the right officials.
How about if a 50 year old invested in PFE in 1997? How much capital gain would he have?
Welcome back, glad to see that you continue to post unsubstantiated criticism. Do you ever read responses to your drivel, or do you just drop by to take a few shots. And, just out of curiosity, what in the world is an "over populated bank?" Perhaps you would be more comfortable posting in your first language, since English seems to be something of a challenge for you.
Are you saying that European banks were first to drop interest rates to 0%? I thought the US led in that, and that the Euros followed. I agree that as rates come back up, it will be easier for banks to show a profit, but I'm not convinced that Euro rates are keeping US rates down. Can you provide a link to a reference for that? Thanks.
"would rather PFE MGT focus on it's own R&D" is not a realistic approach for PFE to grow earnings. It must acquire a portfolio of products, of major size, and do so quickly. The old model of pharma depending on internal discovery for its products is no longer viable. It takes too long - 15-20 years from concept to market. If your investment strategy is based on the idea that "One has to believe PFE is going to find some support" you are in deep trouble. There are no safe havens, no widows and orphans stocks in today's world. Diversify and set loss-limit sell orders. We're in for a 15-20% correction, 24 months of pain in the market. And the correction will include PFE. Good news is that other companies, GSK for example, will become cheap enough for an acquisition. PFE MUST acquire a company of that size and stature.
"Broke support" is a silly concept unless it's related to something tangible. In the case of a regional bank stock, yield would be the most relevant, measurable, indicator of a fair price. There are many stocks available with yields in excess of 3%, with long histories of increasing dividends, with P/E values comparable to RF, and there is no reason why any sane investor would want to buy RF until the price falls low enough to compete on yield, or the dividend is raised enough to support a higher price. Wow, indeed.
No, because he rants incessantly, off topic. It's a PFE board, and there are lots of places where he can vent. And, actually, just by ignoring him, the board comes back to being mostly about PFE. Don't care which side of the political spectrum he's on, just don't want to see it on this board. Hope that's okay with you.