Upcoming Catalysts For These BioPharmas Provide Potential Upside [View article]
Scott, like your take on Trius. I've been watching them for a while. MRSA still kills thousands every year according to the CDC. Interesting vaccine discussion we've got going on here...I wonder why small pox and polio are gone...
Thank you for your insightful comment. Your points are challenging indeed. My response:
The point I was making about dividends has less to do with recommendations for a growth strategy than an academic point about Wall Street itself. It's not that I "like" dividends and therefore recommend them. Far from it. They are not enough. Rather, the point is that a stock that does not pay dividends has no intrinsic value, and the only value of it is in second-guessing someone else’s valuation of it, which in turn second-guesses someone else in an inherently unstable loop of group-think. The point is that this leads to an intrinsically speculative and volatile, rather than investment driven based on actual numbers and stable, stock market. In terms of making money, you are correct. You need both capital growth and dividends these days. That’s what’s so sad. Capital growth itself used to depend on dividends, which in turn depended on earnings. This is no longer the case, and that is the tragedy.
You may be correct that HNZ has better growth prospects than CPB. But I personally would never buy a stock at its all-time high no matter what the prospects are, especially with the global fiscal situation so unstable. It is the biggest and best companies whose stock prices fall hardest when governments lose control of their fiat currencies. Assuming that will happen this coming year or next, HNZ could get clobbered despite, or perhaps even because of people fronting its growth prospects. CPB may get hit too, but not from the top, as it is not currently there.
Dividends do fluctuate, that is true. I was taking a snapshot in time in order to illustrate a basic market point about intrinsic stock value that has been lost for some generations rather than make a pick based on one quarter’s readings. Readers are free to analyze all quarters and do the math if they are serious about investing their money.
HNZ earnings during the great recession did not drop off on an annual basis. See here. Their stock price certainly did, so they could afford to up their dividends per share. A great company indeed, however, due to the inherently speculative nature of Wall Street, they could not escape the scary drop even though they are a dividend-paying stable company. That goes back to my original point. Due to the systemic infection of speculatism and second-guessing, assuming capital growth from earnings growth does not always work. That’s what makes HNZ’s current price so dangerous. CPB may not be as good a company on that front, but they cannot fall as far if speculative fever goes sour again, which I expect it will sometime this coming year or early 2014.
I do not know if OFI will break out at all. I was using them only as an example for someone who wants to make a more speculative and risky bet in the sector. The central point of this piece was more philosophical/macroeco... as to the function of the stock market in general, to look at the state of the market rather than individual stock picks.
Bottom line of what I believe in terms of individual stock picks though, HNZ’s price looks dangerous, CPB less so, OFI looks justified and if their recovery continues could climb significantly. The smaller the market cap, the less a stock tanks when speculatism goes bad. If OFI does not break out, I’d bail out after a bounce from support at $4, and SOUP.OB is the binary lose-it-all or win-big in the sector no matter what happens to Wall Street in 2013 and beyond.
Merck Gives InSite A Gift; What Does It Mean? [View article]
Your reading it completely wrong. Read the press release. Merck gave what is tantamount to a cash infusion to Insight based on their belief that the company will perform well to their benefit. Why else would any company agree to give more money?
This article is sub par at best. While the author did mention the very positive news from Thursday regarding the clinical trials, he really missed the mark with respect to the financial health of the company. You would think that an author who knew well enough to mention the $7 million dollar recent raise from Neuralstem, would have been responsible enough to add that to the cash portion of the balance sheet he is telling us about. If anything it should be seen as extremely positive that a Biotech early stage company has no difficulty to continuously raise money. It is no secret that early stage biotech companies are often only have burn rates until they complete Phase I or Phase II trials. I am currently have no position in CUR, nor do I plan on having any during the coming week.
Pershing Gold Continues To Shine, Especially Compared To Peers [View article]
Pershing Gold Continues To Shine, Especially Compared To Peers [View article]
Pershing Gold Continues To Shine, Especially Compared To Peers [View article]
Pershing Gold Continues To Shine, Especially Compared To Peers [View article]
Upcoming Catalysts For These BioPharmas Provide Potential Upside [View article]
Freeport Jumps, Buy These 2 Gold Stocks Instead [View article]
Wall Street Back To Basics [View article]
The point I was making about dividends has less to do with recommendations for a growth strategy than an academic point about Wall Street itself. It's not that I "like" dividends and therefore recommend them. Far from it. They are not enough. Rather, the point is that a stock that does not pay dividends has no intrinsic value, and the only value of it is in second-guessing someone else’s valuation of it, which in turn second-guesses someone else in an inherently unstable loop of group-think. The point is that this leads to an intrinsically speculative and volatile, rather than investment driven based on actual numbers and stable, stock market. In terms of making money, you are correct. You need both capital growth and dividends these days. That’s what’s so sad. Capital growth itself used to depend on dividends, which in turn depended on earnings. This is no longer the case, and that is the tragedy.
You may be correct that HNZ has better growth prospects than CPB. But I personally would never buy a stock at its all-time high no matter what the prospects are, especially with the global fiscal situation so unstable. It is the biggest and best companies whose stock prices fall hardest when governments lose control of their fiat currencies. Assuming that will happen this coming year or next, HNZ could get clobbered despite, or perhaps even because of people fronting its growth prospects. CPB may get hit too, but not from the top, as it is not currently there.
Dividends do fluctuate, that is true. I was taking a snapshot in time in order to illustrate a basic market point about intrinsic stock value that has been lost for some generations rather than make a pick based on one quarter’s readings. Readers are free to analyze all quarters and do the math if they are serious about investing their money.
HNZ earnings during the great recession did not drop off on an annual basis. See here. Their stock price certainly did, so they could afford to up their dividends per share. A great company indeed, however, due to the inherently speculative nature of Wall Street, they could not escape the scary drop even though they are a dividend-paying stable company. That goes back to my original point. Due to the systemic infection of speculatism and second-guessing, assuming capital growth from earnings growth does not always work. That’s what makes HNZ’s current price so dangerous. CPB may not be as good a company on that front, but they cannot fall as far if speculative fever goes sour again, which I expect it will sometime this coming year or early 2014.
I do not know if OFI will break out at all. I was using them only as an example for someone who wants to make a more speculative and risky bet in the sector. The central point of this piece was more philosophical/macroeco... as to the function of the stock market in general, to look at the state of the market rather than individual stock picks.
Bottom line of what I believe in terms of individual stock picks though, HNZ’s price looks dangerous, CPB less so, OFI looks justified and if their recovery continues could climb significantly. The smaller the market cap, the less a stock tanks when speculatism goes bad. If OFI does not break out, I’d bail out after a bounce from support at $4, and SOUP.OB is the binary lose-it-all or win-big in the sector no matter what happens to Wall Street in 2013 and beyond.
Merck Gives InSite A Gift; What Does It Mean? [View article]
Merck Gives InSite A Gift; What Does It Mean? [View article]
What Next For Neuralstem? [View article]
This article is sub par at best. While the author did mention the very positive news from Thursday regarding the clinical trials, he really missed the mark with respect to the financial health of the company. You would think that an author who knew well enough to mention the $7 million dollar recent raise from Neuralstem, would have been responsible enough to add that to the cash portion of the balance sheet he is telling us about.
If anything it should be seen as extremely positive that a Biotech early stage company has no difficulty to continuously raise money. It is no secret that early stage biotech companies are often only have burn rates until they complete Phase I or Phase II trials.
I am currently have no position in CUR, nor do I plan on having any during the coming week.
NovaBay: Biotech, Pharma, And Profiting On FDA Induced Jumps [View article]