Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated Message Board

Not on this one, I think it is more likely we'll get another rumor about an imminent buyout offer only I think they have gone to that well too many times and they are being sued over it as well

I'd have to do a bit more research but last time I looked KOG and NOG - looked nice. PEG ratio of .4, and NOG's debt to ebitda ratio was very nice. Both had better profit margins at the time as well - actually neither has performed as well as CRZO since I look in february. I might need to take another look at why I'm in CRZO over them

My mistake - borrowing base is up to 530 Million as of April

The revenue increases were generated via acquisition at great cost and the profit numbers are not impressive - they have dropped almost in half

Nice thing about these boards is you can ignore, which is what I'll need to do with you as you have nothing to say. Your thesis is to ignore anyone you think is a short. Pretty smart strategy - good luck with that

Also I agree with you the stock is very cheap, which is why I have posted they should seriously consider doing what CTL has done and cut the divy and buy some shares back, saving $1 for every share they buy a year. Then they could reinstitute the $1 at a much cheaper overall cost

so anyone that points out risk in a stock is a short and all shorts can only lie. Mgt says the dividend isn't going away so it won't and reading financial statements is a waste of time? Again I'll correct you, the companies revenues were down in 2009 so the only financial fact you tried to convey is wrong. Also while you seem enamored of higher revenues, I'm much more interested in profits which are down 45% since 2010. So I'll guess we'll disagree. FYI I own a lot more of this stock than you do

1) what does your comment about dividends being paid before earnings mean. completely nonsensical. Dividends are not on the income statement at all, they are not an expense, they are an equity transaction and show up on the cash flow
2) revenues are not up for 5 years, they dropped in 2009 - try to do a modicum of research before you post
3) the company spent $2 billion in cap ex, $1 billion in acquisitions and issued an additional 186 million shares (1.8 billion) to get those revenues (which did double for $3 to $6B) but unfortunately the company is making $300 million less a year than it did in 2005/6

Seus, did you notice dself comment about serious attempts. Please let the serious posters talk, you haven't a clue what your talking about as you have demonstrated again on your "short squeeze" #$%$ for the past 2 weeks

so you're indicating my numbers above are wrong? Can you read financials?

format messed up my spacing. 1st 4 digits are revenue, next 3 are net income and final 3 are capex. suffice it to say that WIN has gone from revenues of 2.9 billion in 2005 earning 374 million and requiring 357 million in capex to 6.2 billion in 2012 earning 168 million and requiring 1,101 million in capex

I think you have to exclude the changes in working capital, if you don't next qtr when they aren't paying deposits on insurance and items like that you'll think that the companies cash flow is great (like Q1-12 when they received $121K in cash tax refunds). What is troubling is this - if you take the cash flow down to just about the change in operating assets (working capital changes). The business generated 412.2M and the capex was 175.7M = 236.5 net. This quarter those numbers changed to 389.1M and the capex bumped up to 234.5M = 154.6 net. We have been assured the capex will decline in the 2nd half of the year but 18 month ago we were being assured it would reduce by the end of 2012. Time will tell

what financials you looking at Johnny? This is what I'm looking at:

EBTIDA to Debt 12/11 = 5.5 12/12 = 3.5 3/13 = 2.8
No significant debt due till 2018
750 million revolver undrawn, over $350 million available

Looks like your debt-infested thesis is about 15 months old

and since the price hasn't really recovered from the CTL cut at this point I'd say most of a divy cut is priced into this stock - wouldn't you?

Here let me prove my point Seus - you have to admit when people are right on either side if you want to be successful.
MPCS the 3 year chart is fine for a slow steady investment, down 18% but up 30% on dividends nets a 12% gain
up 3% over 12 months
up 3% over 3 months
I'll pass on 24 months as it does not support my argument
Thing about it is if the divy looks safe 12 months from now and the stock goes to $10 and I've collected and reinvested all those 10-12% divies the investment will look really good won't it

review some of my posts and decide if I'm shorting. Been on this board for 3 years. BTW - what difference does that make. Should I assume everything you say is a lie because you are for the stock? By the way, maybe is not an answer. You once again have been proven wrong about your short squeeze thesis - primarily because shorts never have to cover their positions (especially on a stock that is not up as there would be no collateral calls).

Seus you have to admit that you were wrong about a short squeeze unless this stock pops 5-7% this afternoon