Lot's of broken parts here. Gonna take at least a year to trim the fat, launch new best of breed products, streamline the org, etc. etc. Big job ahead - along with beheading another 25,000 staffers.
Dead money for 12 months - unless you're short. Then you've got a 10-15% gain this year.
I like this company and believe they will successfully turn the big blue battleship around - eventually.
But, for now, I see no reason to put a nickel into the stock. Dead money until they show Wall St. they have a plan and are executing on it without the need to play accounting games. IBM could be the biggest DOW loser AGAIN in 2015 - that would be three years in a row. Not sure if that's ever been done before...
One year later, to the day, and the downward trend continues for MCD; sales, profits, comps, share price, whatever metric you want to use.
Where is "great trader"? Hope he's OK!
I'm posting a copy of the DJ news item from last week. It's certainly a possibility. Jolllibee is huge and if they have an appetite for a US biz, it's not a stretch to put DNKN on their radar given the big partnership just announced.
I've said before DD doesn't need to be acquired to fulfill their destiny, but for the right terms and price, any business is "for sale". Time will tell.
Philippines' Jollibee says keen to buy a $1 bln U.S. fast food firm
— 5:30 AM ET 01/22/2015
* Jollibee has targeted boosting overseas revenues
* Says acquisition will help it to serve mainstream US mkt (Adds company comments)
MANILA, Jan 22 (Reuters) - Jollibee Foods Corp ( JBFCF ), the Philippines' largest fast food company, said on Thursday it is keen to buy a U.S.-based fast food firm with a market value of at least $1 billion to advance a goal of boosting revenues from outside its home base.
In December, Jollibee, which outsells McDonalds and KFC ( YUM ) restaurants in the Southeast Asian nation, and a partner struck a deal with Dunkin' Brands Group Inc ( DNKN ) to open 1,400 new Dunkin' Donuts cafes in China over the next 20 years. Jollibee, in a stock market filing, confirmed comments on the U.S. market interest made earlier by Chairman Tony Tan-Caktiong to The BusinessMirror newspaper.
Tan-Caktiong had said Jollibee may look for a partner for the possible acquisition but did not say whether the company was in talks with a prospective U.S. target or even if one had been identified.
Cossette Palomar, Jollibee's investor relations manager, said she was not aware of any talks being held by the company's management with a potential target.
A U.S. purchase could help it get a larger foothold in the world's biggest economy where its market is currently limited to Filipino communities.
"If we acquire a U.S. based fast food (firm), that would mean we will be able to serve the mainstream market so the coverage will be wider."
Sit back, relax, and give it time. This JUGGERNAUT story is still gaining momentum. Unreal.
G!! .Any old timers from 2012/13 still hang around here?
A solid, dependable performer. Q after Q, year after year. Like a growth annuity.
And don't forget the ace in the hole they're holding: SABMiller. If InBev finally makes a move for them this year MO will hit $65-$70 in a flash.
MO = CORE HOLDING! Cha, Cha - ching!
Cat & Under - you're both right. It just boils down to timing.
PFEs track record for monetizing acquisitions is spotty, but so is their recent R&D/pipeline. And with so many $$$ generators going off patent recently they needed to make this kind of purchase. Immediately accretive while bolstering a division.
Wall Street seems to like the deal too.
Under, I bought PFE when you did (summer of '10) in the $15's. It's been a homerun for me + all the divvys. And despite those gain, I believe PFE has been underperforming it's peer group (because of those patent/pipeline issues).
Wouldn't surprise me to see more acquisitions of this size/type over the next year or two.
Cat, good luck with your other investments. I think PFE sees $40 + within 12 months. $20 ain't gonna happen. Certainly not now with deals like this plus with launching another blockbuster drug for breast cancer this year.
Just killing it!
Telsey Group raised DNKN to an Outperform and gave the shares a $54 target.
This is nice for two reasons; Dana has one of the best retail minds on the Street and I've a major crush on her since way back in her Bear Sterns days. Smart and cute, just the way I like 'em!
After nearly 20 years of loyal use, I'm saying goodbye to TurboTax.
In the world of tech, consumers have come to expect getting more for less - a la Moore's Law. When you decided, Brad & friends, to do the exact opposite by offering less for more, you not only snubbed your nose at modern convention, you did it in a way that was both deceitful and needlessly greedy.
I realize you've apologized for you poor judgement but really, the damage is done. There are equally competent alternatives available for less money - even with your new "discount".
It was a solid, mutually satisfying relationship, but the level of sleaze here is simply too much and I've come to realize you've lost my loyalty and my trust. Forever.
I thank you for all the memories and accurate tax prep and for being the driving force behind DIY tax filing.I couldn't have done it without you!
Alas, my new tax partner is just a click away, and I, like millions of other scorned customers, have come to realize loyalty has its limits and you guys crossed it. Big Time.
Shame on you,
There's a small handful of alternatives, but at this point I'm leaning toward HR Block. They have a few flavors, reasonably priced, and according to reviews from hundreds, if not thousands of TT defectors (on Amazon), it imports old TT data seamlessly.
I know I would be. Option trading in W is Bullish, the float is drying up as more Institutions take their positions, and with the economy improving, she wants rugs, light fixtures, throw pillows, etc. etc.
W is poised to run hard over the next couple of years as awareness and momentum drive the top line ever higher, with profits not far behind.
You can feel the ground rumbling as the stampede of bulls approaches. Won't be long now.
Good luck shorty! lol
Just went to NASDAQ and checked their stats:
GOOGL @ 80%
CSCO @ 76%
MSFT @ 72%
INTC @ 66%
ORCL @ 60%
AAPL @ 60%
Different numbers, but basically the same story: AAPL very Under Weighted!
I sniffed out one possible reason for today's surge: New racially inclusive emojis now out on iPhone.
Investors from several continents approve, join as AAPL shareholders.
Yes, the ongoing buyback sets a natural buyer. Not sure about the index funds tho, and don't forget, some funds are forced to sell as the value of their AAPL holdings grow to exceed set limits.
The most frequently used, and MISUSED, notion about Apple's inability to grow (which they've proven again and again is simply untrue) revolves around the fancy term, The Law of Large Numbers. The rationale being the bigger Apple gets, the more difficult it will be to grow.
While there may be some truth to that as yet unseen notion, using the LLN to depict it is yet another example of how the media and pundits show their ignorance. Science geeks everywhere scoff at the silly notion that these expert scribes - and talking heads - have any clue at all.
Here's one (accurate) definition of the Law of Large Numbers. After reading it, tell me WHAT this has to do with predicting the future for Apple!!!
In probability theory, the law of large numbers (LLN) is a theorem that describes the result of performing the same experiment a large number of times. According to the law, the average of the results obtained from a large number of trials should be close to the expected value, and will tend to become closer as more trials are performed.
The LLN is important because it "guarantees" stable long-term results for the averages of some random events. For example, while a casino may lose money in a single spin of the roulette wheel, its earnings will tend towards a predictable percentage over a large number of spins. Any winning streak by a player will eventually be overcome by the parameters of the game. It is important to remember that the LLN only applies (as the name indicates) when a large number of observations are considered. There is no principle that a small number of observations will coincide with the expected value or that a streak of one value will immediately be "balanced" by the others (see the gambler's fallacy).