This stock was under $17 3 1/2 years ago. Trading now at 32x trailing earnings. It is growing at a moderate rate, as is the mountain of debt it carries and hopes to add to. Getting cashed out of 50% and getting stock in the new company run by someone who cares about shareholder value rather than their own pocketbook and power sounds like a good deal to me. Remember...pigs get fat and hogs get slaughtered. That we (shareholders) paid for management's tax obligations as a result of the inversion is proof enough to me that shareholders are not their primary concern...as it absolutely should be.
interesting piece from bloomberg just now about the "culture clash" between myland and teva...basically, myl shareholders pay high expenses and salaries for their management (and get good results) while teva pays a fraction of that in salaries and expenses and gets good results. hmmm...maybe myl needs to adopt tevas practices in this area as it would be good for the SHAREHOLDERS who actually own the company. that does not appear to me to be a reason that myl should spend SHAREHOLDERS money to keep SHAREHOLDERS from profiting greatly from tevas offer that will have fantastic synergies and create a truly great global company.
The regulatory thing is a smokescreen. ACT is much bigger and there are other generics out there. Nor is there a huge hurdle to get into the business, so regulators are not the problem. MYL apparently has some strong desire to stay independent. Given that management had the company pay their personal capital gains taxes on the inversion, they seem to think that MYL is their personal piggybank that they can do with as they please. Truth is, the company belongs to the shareholders and I think the shareholders are going to want the TEVA deal to go through. It might require a couple more bucks to close it...say $85, but it is a good deal for both of them as it truly creates a worldwide generic company to be reckoned with. It will be likely be good for world wide drug consumers too. This is a winner for all except a few at the top of MYL and I suspect they will come out ok too.
Not sure this really deserves a response, but here goes...there is no way on earth that apple will sell a million gold watches...or even 100k...or even 10k. I would think that they would be busting it if they sell a thousand of them. Who wants a watch that is going to be technologically obsolete in a couple years...especially a gold one...they won't even make decent paperweights. I might be wrong, but I think this is the equivalent of 3D tvs...the watch only works if you have a new iphone in your pocket. If they came with the iphone for free or cost 49.95, maybe...we will see.
Let's not confuse self-interested capitalists with "long time loyal shareholders". I am "loyal" only as long as management makes sound decisions that increase the value of the stock. The latest decision of management makes it difficult to remain "loyal" as they are triggering a tax event where none is absolutely necessary. If one believes that the tax inversion is absolutely accretive on a continuing basis and that the acquisition involved makes the company a better earnings model, then perhaps one can make a case that a shareholder should pay the tax and hold the stock going forward. Those are pretty big assumptions...especially in light of the fact that management is paying for the taxes that management will incur in the transaction. That fact alone makes me think that the mid-term may not be so great and that if there is going to be a "payoff" it will be well down the road...and only if their decisions about our company work out for the best. I am dubious of the mid-term prospects and am opposed to the transaction as being totally tone deaf to the best interests of the shareholders that are not on the management team.