3.70k followers • 12 symbols Watchlist by Yahoo Finance
Follow this list to discover and track stocks that have set 52-week lows within the last week. This list is generated daily, ranked by market cap and limited to the top 30 stocks that meet the criteria.
PetroChina Company Limited
China Petroleum & Chemical Corporation
Banco de Chile
DCP Midstream, LP
Qurate Retail, Inc.
Qurate Retail, Inc.
Sage Therapeutics, Inc.
EnLink Midstream, LLC
AMC Networks Inc.
Santander will cut the pension allowance of its UK chief executive Nathan Bostock by more than £400,000 over the next two years, the biggest reduction in a sector-wide clampdown on executive benefits. The move by Santander means the UK’s five largest high-street banks will all have lowered their chiefs’ pay by next year. Mr Bostock’s total pension cut of £436,000 is expected to be the largest among any UK banking executive.
Looking for stocks to buy? Get analysis of large-cap stocks like Amazon, Alibaba and Dow Jones stocks GE and Microsoft to see if it's time to buy — or sell.
T-Mobile and Sprint go to court today to defend their long-sought merger from a challenge by a coalition of state attorneys general opposed to the deal.
The states seek to prove in Manhattan federal court that the deal between the No. 3 and No. 4 wireless carriers would raise prices, particularly for users on prepaid plans. The state attorneys general, all Democrats, asked Judge Victor Marrero to order the companies to abandon the deal. Sprint Chief Marketing Officer Roger Sole testified that the company's strategy for enticing customers from competitors included slashing prices.
(Bloomberg) -- China announced the creation of its long-planned national oil and gas pipeline company, officially kicking off one of its biggest energy revamps aimed at helping supply keep pace with swelling demand.The move marks a “key step” in China’s efforts to deepen reforms of its oil and gas sector, the official Xinhua News Agency said Monday.The government will merge the networks operated by its three state-owned giants under a single company, an important step toward removing barriers that have hampered domestic production, and which dovetails with efforts to use more gas instead of coal. The government will also encourage local oil and gas pipeline firms to integrate with the national company in “market-orientated ways,” Vice Premier Han Zheng said, according to a statement.Click here for a QuickTake Q&A explaining China’s national pipeline planA main development to watch is the valuation of assets, said Neil Beveridge, an analyst at Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. It may take six to nine months for that detail to emerge, based on a similar reform of telecom carriers in 2015 that created China Tower Corp., Beveridge said.The pipeline company’s creation has been considered since at least 2014 and is part of President Xi Jinping’s drive to streamline industrial capacity among state-owned enterprises. The government is seeking to spur wider natural gas distribution and upstream exploration by shifting ownership from competing producers into a single operator, which can make decisions based on overall national energy needs.The reform is also designed to help smaller private or foreign firms, which have found access to infrastructure blocked or prohibitively expensive. With the assets stripped from the hands of the big three state firms, other companies can gain access and move supply to where it’s needed.Sector OverhaulThe plan follows other Chinese reforms aimed at a more level playing field for private and state-owned enterprises. As well, the nation has been accelerating the overhaul of its energy sector in recent years, including changes to its gas pricing policy and merging power giants.Media representatives of the new pipeline operator didn’t respond to an email seeking comment. The State-owned Assets Supervision & Administration Commission, which oversees centrally owned enterprises, didn’t respond to a faxed request for comment. Nobody answered calls to the media departments of the three companies involved -- China National Petroleum Corp., Sinopec Group and China National Offshore Oil Corp.Policy makers have also embarked on a campaign targeting pollution, replacing coal with gas for industrial and residential uses. That’s boosted demand for the cleaner-burning fuel faster than pipelines can support it, giving China added urgency to push forward the latest reform.Shareholding StructureThe change will mainly affect PetroChina Co., the listed unit of CNPC, which controls about 70% of the nation’s networks. Its shares in Hong Kong sank to their lowest since 2004 last week amid concern the company’s earnings and cash flow would be diluted as it loses one of its most prized assets. The stock rose as much as 2.8% Monday following a gain in oil prices last week.CNPC may take a 30% stake in the pipeline company, while Sinopec holds 20% and CNOOC 10%, Economic Information Daily and 21st Century Business Herald reported. SASAC will own the remaining 40%, they said, citing unidentified sources.Zhang Wei, general manager of CNPC, will likely be appointed as chairman of the pipeline company, according to local media.(Updates with government plan to integrate local pipeline firms in third paragraph.)\--With assistance from Ramsey Al-Rikabi, Jing Yang, Aaron Clark and Dan Murtaugh.To contact the reporters on this story: Alfred Cang in Singapore at firstname.lastname@example.org;Jasmine Ng in Singapore at email@example.comTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Ramsey Al-Rikabi at firstname.lastname@example.org, Jason RogersFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
We'll track a dozen beaten-up stocks that could be subject to tax-loss selling at the end of 2019 to see whether they can stage comebacks in 2020.
The Insider Monkey team has completed processing the quarterly 13F filings for the September quarter submitted by the hedge funds and other money managers included in our extensive database. Most hedge fund investors experienced strong gains on the back of a strong market performance, which certainly propelled them to adjust their equity holdings so as […]
We know that hedge funds generate strong, risk-adjusted returns over the long run, therefore imitating the picks that they are collectively bullish on can be a profitable strategy for retail investors. With billions of dollars in assets, smart money investors have to conduct complex analyses, spend many resources and use tools that are not always […]
Morgan Stanley analyst Matthew Harrison maintained an Overweight rating for Sage but lowered the price target from $217 to $125. H.C. Wainwright analyst Douglas Tsao reiterated a Neutral rating and reduced the price target from $160 to $87. Raymond James analyst Dane Leone maintained a Market Perform rating.
Most investors tend to think that hedge funds and other asset managers are worthless, as they cannot beat even simple index fund portfolios. In fact, most people expect hedge funds to compete with and outperform the bull market that we have witnessed in recent years. However, hedge funds are generally partially hedged and aim at […]
The stock was 4% higher in premarket trading on Friday after losing more than half its value on Thursday.
Sage Therapeutics' (SAGE) phase III study on pipeline candidate SAGE-217 for the treatment of major depressive disorder fails to meet the primary endpoint.
Banco Santander Brasil is making new hires as part of a revamp of its investment banking business in an effort to gain market share. Gustavo Miranda, the new head of investment banking at the bank, has hired Renato Boranga, who was formerly at Moelis & Co , as head of mergers and acquisitions. Miranda, who became head of investment banking in October, has also appointed Pedro Leite da Costa, previously at Goldman Sachs and advisory firm One Partners, as head of equity capital markets (ECM).
(Bloomberg) -- SoftBank Group Corp.’s massive investment in WeWork triggered a multi-billion-dollar writedown and a rare apology from founder Masayoshi Son. But one analyst argues the deal is likely to work in the end and SoftBank will have the “last laugh.”Chris Lane of Sanford C. Bernstein says WeWork can have a bright future if SoftBank overhauls the business plan and more carefully focuses on the evolution of the corporate office market. He likens WeWork’s business model to Starbucks’s, where branding, consistency and global scale give it an advantage over the competition.Lane argues WeWork can achieve profitability if it pulls back on extraneous areas and calms a frenetic pace of expansion to focus on filling up existing space. That will allow it to grab an estimated 8% of an emergent market for pre-fitted offices for corporate clients, almost like a white-label tech gadget or home appliance.“We think investors should think of the basic business as being similar to Starbucks,” Lane wrote in a 21-page research report. “While profitable, the scale of profits that can be generated from a single site is small. Starbucks as a corporation only makes sense if you plan to open thousands of outlets.”It’s a contrarian take on a WeWork deal that has been widely viewed as a fiasco. After SoftBank invested in the co-working startup, its planned initial public offering fell apart as investors balked at its enormous losses and conflicted governance. Son conceded “there was a problem with my own judgment” as he announced the writedown last month. SoftBank has put about $14 billion into a startup that’s now valued at less than $8 billion.The Japanese company’s shares are down about 30% from their peak in April. They were little changed on Friday.After discussions with management, Lane explains they see an opportunity for WeWork to move beyond the niche of providing space for entrepreneurs to offering flexible real estate for a broad range of companies. He calls this “managed space as a service” and compares it to “software as a service,” which is the way many companies now buy from Microsoft Corp. and Salesforce.com Inc. WeWork, Lane says, sees the potential to make $500 per month on memberships as “an on-going annuity,” far more than software generates.SoftBank named Marcelo Claure, the former chief executive at Sprint Corp., executive chairman of WeWork and put him in charge of the turnaround effort. Under his leadership, Lane says the company will be able to focus on profitability by stopping any incremental expansion, filling its existing space and slashing overhead by getting rid of expansion staff and non-core businesses. WeWork’s ability to gather data about office-use and optimize layouts -- while not entirely substantiated -- could prove disruptive to the industry, he added.He estimates that WeWork’s revenue will rise from $720 million a quarter to about $1.5 billion if it can push occupancy to 90% on its current portfolio. Once profitable, WeWork will once again try to go public, perhaps in 2023, and then raise additional capital to resume expansion, albeit more slowly than before.With a discounted cash flow model, Lane projects WeWork would have an enterprise value of $28.8 billion in 2025. That would make SoftBank’s 80% stake worth about $19.1 billion, roughly 40% more than the estimated $13.8 billion the company and its Vision Fund have invested.“We believe WeWork’s valuation is justified if you believe in the long-term, ‘office space’ will be a managed service outsourced to professionals – and that WeWork will be the leading global player,” Lane wrote. “Despite the huge embarrassment WeWork has been for SoftBank this year, we suspect SoftBank will have the last laugh when they bring the company back to market in a few years – bigger and profitable.”(Updates with shares in the sixth paragraph.)To contact the reporters on this story: Pavel Alpeyev in Tokyo at email@example.com;Takahiko Hyuga in Tokyo at firstname.lastname@example.orgTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Edwin Chan at email@example.com, Peter ElstromFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
Shares of Sage Therapeutics collapsed Thursday after the biotech company's depression treatment, dubbed SAGE-217, failed to meet its key goal at day 15 in a late-stage study.
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- The merger floodgates broke open five years ago, and now U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren wants to close the hatch. Her proposed bill to substantially restrict big corporate tie-ups is more a presidential campaign statement than viable legislation — and it certainly won’t score her any more points with the Wall Street crowd — but she is calling attention to the maniacal pace of dealmaking in corporate America and the need to modernize antitrust laws that have permitted some recent problematic transactions.More than $7 trillion of takeovers of U.S. companies have been announced since this day in 2014 — 52,694 companies to be exact.(1) That compares with just $4.4 trillion of deals in the previous five-year period. The transactions grew over time as balance sheets flush with cash and income statements desperate for growth created a perfect storm, which more often than not was stoked by pliable regulators. The Walt Disney Co. acquired 21st Century Fox Inc.; Charter Communications Inc. bought Time Warner Cable Inc.; CVS Health Corp. took over Aetna Inc.; Marriott International Inc. merged with Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide Inc.; and T-Mobile US Inc. is trying to buy Sprint Corp. Those are just some of the more recognizable names. Warren, one of the top-polling candidates heading into the Democratic primaries, wants to ban deals in which one company has annual revenue of more than $40 billion, or both businesses generate more than $15 billion in sales, according to a draft of the bill reviewed by Bloomberg News. (A notable exception would be companies facing insolvency.) That could effectively prevent every top airline, insurer, manufacturer, oil producer, retailer, technology platform and other conglomerates — perhaps even Warren Buffett’s M&A vehicle, Berkshire Hathaway Inc. — from making any acquisitions. It would sound the M&A death knell. The idea, however, is unlikely to gain broad support among lawmakers.Even so, it’s hard not to notice the rising drumbeat of politicians concerned about overreach by corporate giants, particularly those in the tech field. Senator Amy Klobuchar, another Democratic presidential candidate, plans to introduce separate antitrust legislation soon, Bloomberg News reported, citing a person familiar with the matter. (Michael Bloomberg, the founder and majority owner of Bloomberg LP, the parent of Bloomberg News and Bloomberg Opinion, is also campaigning for president.)For the Trump administration’s part, the U.S. Justice Department is already investigating whether tech giants — namely Apple Inc., Amazon.com Inc., Facebook Inc. and Google — are using their unchecked power to engage in harmful business practices. But as I wrote in July, if regulators are so concerned about protecting consumers from tech overreach, their glowing endorsement of T-Mobile’s takeover of Sprint is a funny way of showing it; it will shrink the U.S. wireless market from four to three major carriers and remove a company that’s helped to keep customer prices in check.Antitrust regulation under President Donald Trump has at times created questionable optics. Makan Delrahim, the Justice Department’s top antitrust enforcer, seemed to switch his stance on AT&T Inc.’s takeover of Time Warner Inc. as Trump railed against the deal. Time Warner was the parent of CNN, which Trump views as his personal nemesis. (I’ve argued that whatever the case, scrutiny of the megamerger was warranted considering the broad market power it gave to AT&T as media companies without such scale struggle to compete.) By comparison, Disney and Fox, which was controlled by Trump pal Rupert Murdoch, closed their megadeal with few regulatory hiccups. Warren has criticized other giant deals, such as the merger of SunTrust Banks Inc. and BB&T Corp. and the combination of seed makers Bayer AG and Monsanto Co. Given that they aren’t household names, though, most Americans are unfazed by or unaware of such deals, even though they may feel the effects later. Her bill would direct the government to take into account not just whether a merger will lead to higher prices but also what the impact might be on workers, privacy and industry innovation. To justify the cost of buying another large company, dealmakers tend to come up with ambitious estimates of synergies, a euphemism for layoffs. It’s clear that the meaning of “harm” needs to be expanded in the antitrust sense, and laws need to take a more holistic view of the potential consequences of M&A as the lines between industries continue to blur. The Big Tech factor also needs to be weighed, as some deals are being done in part to respond to companies like Amazon that are spreading their tentacles into new areas. On Wednesday, TV-network operators CBS Corp. and Viacom Inc. completed their own merger, a bid to cut costs and create more scale to compete against a new roster of even more powerful media giants: Amazon, Apple, AT&T and Disney. Even then, ViacomCBS Inc., as the merged entity is now called, may not be big enough, and so it may be only a matter of time before it gets swallowed. Warren’s overly broad proposal likely isn’t the answer. But Democrats do seem ready to at least try to rein in a market that’s gotten out of hand. For dealmakers, this may be last call at the M&A party.(1) Data compiled by Bloomberg as of Thursday morning. Excludes terminated deals.To contact the author of this story: Tara Lachapelle at firstname.lastname@example.orgTo contact the editor responsible for this story: Daniel Niemi at email@example.comThis column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.Tara Lachapelle is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering the business of entertainment and telecommunications, as well as broader deals. She previously wrote an M&A column for Bloomberg News.For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinion©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- Investors in Sage Therapeutics Inc. woke up Thursday to every biotech investor’s nightmare. The company’s closely watched lead medicine, SAGE-217, failed to hit a key mark in a critical trial in patients with major depressive disorder. The stock was down a bruising 55% in early trading, cutting the firm’s market value by more than $4 billion. Investors have a tough decision to make. They could join the many abandoning ship, assuming that the drug isn’t as effective as hoped and that additional continuing studies of the drug may fail. Or they can see this as a buying opportunity of an oversold stock. Sage’s executives spent a call with analysts Thursday outlining several reasons for optimism, and depression trials are notoriously difficult and fickle. Eating a significant loss or betting on recovery will both take a strong stomach.Drugs to treat depression almost always have a tough path to market. Patient improvement is difficult to assess, placebo effects are real and variable, and it’s hard to ensure drug compliance. Plenty of drugs have succeeded in mid-stage trials only to run into difficulty when tested in a larger population. Sage’s drug is both riskier and more promising because it takes a novel approach to treating the condition rapidly. Sage has a few explanations for why the drug failed this study even though it succeeded in a late-stage trial in postpartum depression patients earlier this year. Some patients may not have taken the drug as directed or at all, which could have influenced results. The study also included a higher proportion of patients with less severe symptoms than previous tests. Sage also pointed to the fact that the drug worked better at interim endpoints as evidence that the drug is active and that the study was “directionally” positive. Optimistic investors may find this convincing. But there are plenty of valid reasons for the stock sell-off, too. The drug’s impact was substantially less pronounced than in previous studies, which may mean that it simply isn’t that potent and raises concerns that its effect may fade over time. Even compelling after-the-fact explanations of failed trials are somewhat unreliable. The company’s positive earlier trial in patients with major depressive disorder looked at a small number of patients; it may have exaggerated the drug’s impact. If the medicine does make it to market, it may treat a narrower group of patients than the company had once anticipated. Sage could mount a comeback in a generally buoyant biotech market if future trials confirm that this failure was an unlucky fluke or if regulators are receptive to its various arguments. That’s a ride for only brave and patient investors; another failure would be received even less kindly than this one, and even good depression drugs are a gamble. To contact the author of this story: Max Nisen at firstname.lastname@example.orgTo contact the editor responsible for this story: Daniel Niemi at email@example.comThis column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.Max Nisen is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering biotech, pharma and health care. He previously wrote about management and corporate strategy for Quartz and Business Insider.For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinion©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
On Thursday morning, Sage announced that a Phase 3 trial of its depression drug SAGE-217 failed to perform better than a placebo in reducing depression after 15 days. Its stock is down about 60%.
The Cambridge-company's shares fell by more than half on Thursday morning, shaving more than $3 billion off its market value.
(Bloomberg) -- Sage Therapeutics Inc. lost almost two-thirds of its value after an experimental treatment for major depressive disorder failed to reach its primary target in a key study.The late-stage trial, dubbed “Mountain,” showed patients receiving SAGE-217 didn’t get more relief than those taking a placebo for two weeks, regardless of the dose. The results cast doubt on the future of the drug, which had been a key part of investors’ broadly bullish stance on Sage.The shares tumbled a record 62% to the lowest level in more than two years, wiping out more than $4.6 billion in in market value.Given past trial results, Wall Street had hoped the medicine would show a benefit at both day 15 and through longer-term follow-up. That wasn’t the case. Even when looking only at patients with more severe disease who faithfully took the medicine -- the group most likely to respond to treatment -- the drug didn’t significantly ease depression more than placebo after 42 days.The study miss “will surprise the entire community” and force the stock to be range-bound between $50 and $90, according to Jefferies analyst Andrew Tsai. “The next steps are bit murky now and creates some near-term stock volatility,” he said in a note.“It’s clear the study didn’t meet its primary endpoint, but if you look at the rest of the data points, even from the original analysis, it’s pretty clear that the study directionally is very supportive of drug activity,” Sage Chief Executive Officer Jeff Jonas said by phone.A sub-group analysis conducted after the original review suggested that patients with more severe depression and those who actually took a high dose of the medicine, with measurable amounts of it in their bloodstream, responded to treatment, the company said in a statement. Those getting a lower dose of the drug did no better than those on placebo.Two patients developed serious adverse events after getting the high dose, including one who attempted suicide and who who developed a bile duct stone. Both patients had suffered from similar struggles before starting the trial.“Nine percent of the overall population had undetectable drug levels,” Jonas said. “This is a long-acting drug, so low levels like that really indicates they just didn’t take the drug.” The challenge of patients not taking the drug was limited to a small number of sites, he said.A key selling point for SAGE-217 compared to existing medicines has been its rapid activity, which Jonas says was showcased by signs of improvement as early as day three. That, combined with a safety profile that may allow it to try a higher dose, gives the company hope, Jonas said.The drug likely missed its primary target because of some “very simple technical factors,” Jonas said.Stifel analyst Paul Matteis was also reluctant to throw in the towel and recommended that clients buy shares after Thursday’s plunge.“These data will inevitably take the ‘halo effect’ off SAGE-217 in the eyes of investors,” he wrote in a research note. “But, in our minds, we still think the drug has blockbuster potential, even if that may be delayed.”The failure marks Sage’s first setback with the drug after delivering earlier-stage wins and two pivotal studies showing benefit in major depressive disorder and postpartum depression. Three other large trials of the drug are still underway.Jonas said the company intends to continue analyzing the results and discuss the findings with U.S. regulators. Additional data are expected to be presented at an upcoming medical congress.(Updates with share movement in third paragraph, adds analyst commentary starting in the second paragraph)To contact the reporter on this story: Bailey Lipschultz in New York at firstname.lastname@example.orgTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Catherine Larkin at email@example.com, Michelle Fay CortezFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
Dec.09 -- Robert McDowell, former FCC commissioner and a partner at Cooley, discusses what’s at stake for T-Mobile US Inc. and Sprint Corp. as the companies head to court this week against a group of states seeking to block a $26.5 billion deal between the companies. He speaks on "Bloomberg Markets."