Sally G

Sally G
Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
  • J&J Should Not Consider Splitting Its Business  [View article]
    I guess it is a question of philosophy, and maybe I was being judgemental or harsh. I think it may be a question of respect—oddly, as you feel, probably correctly, that I do not have a lot of respect for the raiders. If one sees a company has having a purpose—to sell a good widget, to provide a particular service—then investments that assist that purpose are respectful and “good”; those that leave the company in weaker shape, less able to fulfill its purpose, even if enhancing immediate returns to shareholders, put those new investor desires ahead of the mission of the corporation, and are therefore, in my eyes, disrespectful and “bad”. Relativism is often better than absolutism, probably most of the time, but I do see the search for very quick profits as destructive to the long-term health of companies and thus an overall negative, even if it accomplishes someone else’s goal.
    Feb 1, 2016. 10:19 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • J&J Should Not Consider Splitting Its Business  [View article]
    Maybe the term has become a shorthand for folks who, rather than being long-term investors in companies, focus on maximizing their short-term profit on their new investment and then take their profits and look for a new target. “Activist” may not be the right word; I could suggest “profiteering” if I wanted to be undiplomatic. Yes, I vote my shares, and after reading/skimming the annual report, with thought, and yes, my votes matter mostly to myself, given the number of shares I own. But I consider myself putting the good of the company and thus my long-term profit ahead of a quick short-term gain; the investors of whom we are typing disparagingly here do just the opposite: push to structure the company to give themselves the biggest short-term gain, then leave without looking back.
    Jan 30, 2016. 09:32 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • J&J Should Not Consider Splitting Its Business  [View article]
    So often it seems that these activist investors look superficially, with textbook in hand, not considering the individual corporate structure and culture.
    Jan 30, 2016. 09:25 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • J&J Should Not Consider Splitting Its Business  [View article]
    O.K., that is why I am an amateur! Thanks for the insight from inside a multi-division corporation.
    What do you think about the historic reputation of JNJ? Would that be likely to survive a split?
    Jan 30, 2016. 09:22 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • J&J Should Not Consider Splitting Its Business  [View article]
    The business reason, I would think, is that all 3 segments deal with medical issues, and benefit from internal networking that they would lose as 3 individual companies. For instance, customer preferences can inform pharamceutical offerings, as the pharma wing learns what people prefer from the consumer division. The consumer division can work with the medical device folks to ensure that their products are complementary.
    In addition, and probably more important, JNJ has a solid history of vision and trustworthiness that benefits all 3 divisions—how would that be affected by a split? From my personal perspective—not considering investments/finances—it would mean that a decision was being made that would in some fundamental sense (though I cannot put it into words) abandon or at least discount that unique history. Not a good move, IMHO.
    Jan 29, 2016. 11:20 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • J&J Should Not Consider Splitting Its Business  [View article]
    I would think that it makes sense only when the idea comes from within, in response to a particular obstacle or need, rather than from a number-crunching activist investor. I would give the latter a wide berth, as most are focussed only on the immediate future, at most a couple of quarters, and the employees and long-term investors are left in the lurch down the road. Personally, I invest in companies when I believe for one or more reasons in their product, service, and/or to some extent business model; I expect decent returns, but the long-term integrity of the company into which I bought comes first.
    Jan 29, 2016. 11:14 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • J&J Should Not Consider Splitting Its Business  [View article]
    Agreed, that only-3-AAA fact was almost shocking—and XOM in particular has such a repuation as an exploiter (thinking as a N.J. resident particularly, with our AG’s recent [unappreciated] negotiation down to $225 million of a $9-billion settlement for environmental destruction) that it surely cannot be a role model for a good corporate citizen (despite its PR campaign to be perceived as a cutting-edge clean-energy research company).
    Jan 29, 2016. 11:10 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • IAC Bulls Need A Succession Plan  [View article]
    Yeah, went looking for IACI, nothing there; did an Internet search and found IAC instead. Not sure about what short-term effect restructuring might have, I am an amateur though of long standing, and think it probably better to sit on the sidelines for a while.
    Jan 26, 2016. 09:05 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • IAC Bulls Need A Succession Plan  [View article]
    I had been thinking of buying some shares, given the recent price decline, and went searching for the symbol today to find a restructuring and new symbol. I guess I am waiting a while.
    Jan 26, 2016. 08:20 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Chipotle: Be Greedy, Go Long  [View article]
    Interesting but inconclusive, as (1) “food poisoning” could be related to the CMG visit or not; unless confirmed by medical personnel it is too broad a term and actual food poisoning takes longer than people think, rather than being caused by the last thing eaten and (2) most reviews were positive.
    It would be interesting to analyze Qdoba or another such chain’s reviews similarly for comparison. There does seem to be enough info to investigate further rather than just jumping in.
    Jan 18, 2016. 08:20 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Chipotle: Be Greedy, Go Long  [View article]
    After-hours information could indeed add validity to concerns of manipulation, thanks.
    Jan 17, 2016. 09:36 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Chipotle: Be Greedy, Go Long  [View article]
    I have not been in recently—only a rare customer basically for transportation issues and lack of eating out generally—but I disagree with “built around hype” (other than maybe stock prices, which have seemed crazy high). If quality and/or cleanliness overall has gone down, not just your individual location, then that could be indication of trouble brewing.
    Jan 17, 2016. 09:36 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Chipotle: Be Greedy, Go Long  [View article]
    fair enough
    Jan 16, 2016. 03:10 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Chipotle: Be Greedy, Go Long  [View article]
    I cannot remember when there were 0 stocks bucking the trend. Could be just very good company. I have also seen stocks go down in a bull market, not necessarily because of intrinsic problems. Markets are at best semirational.
    Jan 16, 2016. 03:08 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Chipotle: Be Greedy, Go Long  [View article]
    I see the situations as more similar, though your point about the clear outside cause with JNJ is fair. Still, e coli scares come and go; we have had spinach, lettuce, more that I cannot remember. I seriously doubt an employee; many reasons for possible food contamination, and most restaurants are vulnerable to greater or lesser degree. Unless folks stop eating at restaurants entirely (and a few may), I am reasonably sure that they will recover—maybe not quite to the stock prices of yore, but well. The points about good management and well-planned response are encouraging. Time will tell.
    Jan 16, 2016. 03:06 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
776 Comments
390 Likes