Amgen Inc. (AMGN)

All Comments on AMGN

  • commenter
    GSlusher
    Aug 08 11:19 AM
    Which CEOs Have the Best and Worst Approval Ratings? [view article]
    Jakw: While the approval rating of "Congress," as an institution, is quite low (in part because the Republicans keep blocking the process), the ratings of INDIVIDUAL Representatives and Senators by their own constituents (the only ones who matter) are usually pretty good, much better than President Bush's. Do your homework. Reply
  • commenter
    jakw
    Aug 08 08:26 AM
    Which CEOs Have the Best and Worst Approval Ratings? [view article]
    Hey Maney, you along with most opinionaters, like to compare unfavorability ratings with President Bush's 30% approval rating WITHOUT acknowledging the congressional approval rating between 9 and 14%. GOOD GRIEF ... when you are looking for low marks why not exhibit real understanding of what low really is. Congress wins the lump of coal and columnists who think they are writing dramatic revelations overlook the most dramatic, obvious reference. Congress is so low it should be unplugged from life support. Reply
  • commenter
    htroute66
    Aug 08 08:15 AM
    Which CEOs Have the Best and Worst Approval Ratings? [view article]
    I don't know which article Zinny was reading, but AOL was not mentioned anywhere in this article! Reply
  • commenter
    Zinny
    Aug 08 05:19 AM
    Which CEOs Have the Best and Worst Approval Ratings? [view article]
    Randy Falco (AOL CEO) needs to take a good look at customer service. It is key to any company's success. NOT a company's greed. Greed is never successful in the long run! Reply
  • commenter
    Zinny
    Aug 08 05:17 AM
    Which CEOs Have the Best and Worst Approval Ratings? [view article]
    I realize I made some spelling errors. I was in a hurry... and I failed to proofread my comment. Reply
  • commenter
    Zinny
    Aug 08 05:14 AM
    Which CEOs Have the Best and Worst Approval Ratings? [view article]
    It is funny that AOL is mentioned in this article. It is downright ironic. Today, I had a very horrible experience with AOL customer service. It is such a convoluted situation, that to explain all the minutiae would bring me to the edge of madness again. I resign myslef to madness, then. The gist is that the SUPERVISOR told me that it was my duty to call AOL regularly to find out the best deals. I had contended that it was the duty of AOL to market to its existing (LOYAL) customers any promotional offers. Admittedly, $9.99 per month is not a lot, but over the course of 13 years, our monthly fees can add up. We simply asked the rep to credit 2 months of the monthly fees, as we were not informed of the FREE e-mail only options. We actually were willing to pay the 2 months, but on a different credit card. We were trying to fix a promo rate on our credit card which would take our payments and only apply them to the lower rate of the transferred amount, not the monthly recurring fees from AOL. So, we would be paying 22.99% on $9.99 every month. Yes, credit card companies are slithering shysters, also. The rep could not (would not) do anything. The supervisor kept accusing me of what I did wrong. Is this good customer service to incite a customer to ANGER? I kept my cool, and the SUPERVISOR at AOL said, "I have credited $19.90 (left out 8 cents) (9.99 x 2 = 19.98), thank you for calling AOL. Have nice day." ...And then she hung up! AOL/Time Warner/TWX deserves a slow and horrible death. Time Warner promised me that throughout the month of July, they were upgrading the HD service in North Orange County California. A girl told me this at the end of June, when I call to cancel and switch to AT&T U-Verse. She said "Will you at least not cancel until after we roll out these new services all through the month of July?" I said yes, and she was able to add me as another sucker that did not cancel. It is now more than 1 month later, and the Hi-Def channels she was promising still are not available. What HORRIBLE customer service. I will be cancelling my AOL/Time Warner as soon as I can call DISH/U-VERSE/DIRECTV or anything that has beeter service than Time Warner. Reply
  • commenter
    abetterplace
    Aug 07 03:42 PM
    Stocks At or Near 52-Week Highs [view article]
    First of all, I am not a Democrat and will not vote for a Democrat.
    I think most investors had a strong feeling that between now and election time, the Republicans would apply extreme pressure anywhere and in anyway they could to boost the market. They are having some success it seems. However, they can do the most in controlling commodity prices. Getting them down as we see happening now. Low and high estimates as needed to influence commodity prices, along with personal pressures applied to those in most control of the targeted commodities. No telling how low we will see some go in the near, but hold on after 2008.     Reply
  • commenter
    muley101
    Aug 07 01:49 PM
    Stocks At or Near 52-Week Highs [view article]
    I realize that IBM is not in the S&P, but it is a Dow component and near its 5 year high. It has had a great run. Reply
  • commenter
    amgendude
    Aug 07 11:51 AM
    Amgen Should Start Paying a Dividend [view article]
    I agree and have been saying this for years. Erbitux is from ImClone, not AMGEN. Reply
  • commenter
    MD
    Aug 07 10:37 AM
    My Website
    Amgen Should Start Paying a Dividend [view article]
    I'm not sure anyone's too concerned about Amgen not being around for long... this is a 70 billion dollar company! But your point is well stated. Most pharma companies pay generous dividends, and Amgen can certainly afford it with nearly 5 billion dollars of free cash flow. With no generic biodrugs in the U.S. for the forseeable future, their legacy drugs will continue to bring in loads of cash.

    Steve
    magicdiligence.com     Reply
  • commenter
    tigerdanger
    Aug 05 04:57 PM
    Top Rated StockScouter Stocks [view article]
    user 1997: actually ive been following MSN stockscouter for a long time. it actually does better when the market is flat or down. it's because it focuses on the best stocks at any given time. when the market is falling, particularly led by large-cap stocks, those declining stocks get the lowest ratings. ... this shows that if you only AVOID the WORST stocks, you dont actually have to own the BEST to outperform the market. Reply
  • commenter
    truthinvesti
    ng
    Aug 02 04:09 PM
    My Website
    PowerShares FTSE RAFI Healthcare: Big Bets on Dow Dogs [view article]
    nice article in my bargain bin thread those top 3 holdings are all my selections as well. Reply
  • commenter
    Jmar11
    Aug 01 03:12 PM
    Top Rated StockScouter Stocks [view article]
    Shh- No one tell User 199 that the market is going down.

    I like DVN and other nat gases. Though I'm not sure how it'll be affected by a pullback in oil. Interesting thoughts by this author: www.greenfaucet.com/tr...     Reply
  • commenter
    User 199792
    Aug 01 02:24 PM
    Top Rated StockScouter Stocks [view article]
    It works when the market goes up. Of course most things work when the market goes up Reply
  • commenter
    knowsevenmor
    e
    Aug 01 11:55 AM
    FDA Delivers Another Blow to Amgen’s Anemic Drug Sales [view article]
    Who was the author on the study and in what Journal was it published? Please cite the source. Reply
Loading...
Symbols:
Authors:
Quick Links: