Dana Cole

Pfizer Losing Battle Against Scientific Journals

Who knows what the motives of "scientists" are? When there's a lot of money involved, anything could happen.

What's In Store for Bear on Monday?

Just to add to my previous post:
Suppose the "self-serving analysts and sensationalistic journalists" I mentioned were all 100% right. Shouldn't we be thanking them for warning us of our precarious financial situation and putting out the alarm to sell all our stocks?
In a few, individual cases, perhaps yes. In the broader market sense, NO.
Here is why:
Capitalist economies are based on credit, and credit is based on trust. The current "credit crisis" is based on a loss of trust. Loss of trust comes from fear, and fear grabs attention. Those who use fear merely to get attention are thus undermining our economy. This is why the stocks of many companies that are financially sound are also down now.
I guarantee that the instant no one is interested in the "credit crisis" any more, it will cease to exist.

What's In Store for Bear on Monday?

It appears that the "Banks" (read 'the people who run them') are so greedy that they are willing to put the entire banking system at risk rather than extend credit to each other. This pits Bernanke, who is the de facto banking representative of the American people, against selfish and unethical people who do not have the best interests of America at heart. Included amongst these, of course, are all the self-serving analysts and sensationalistic journalists, who - now that the War in Iraq has become old news and the elections are still a ways off - would rather make a name for themselves in the media by putting out fearful, attention-grabbing headlines than promote the financial well being of the country
When are we ever going to learn that what serves the best interests of all of us serves the best interests of each one?

6 Questions for Long Term Google Investors

I have no idea where Google is going. All I know is that I use it about 30-50 times a day.

Did the Fed's Move Prevent a Stock Market Panic?

What's that red stuff all over the street out there?

Should the US Government Buy Bank Equity?

Is it possible that the banks themselves are causing all these problems by their refusal to extend credit on the very loans they made and then sold to others?

Markets Look Set Up for an Ugly Fall

To quote my own post to a very similar article on another website:

Thank you for the interesting article, but I have come to the conclusion that in connection with the stock market, which is subject to the influence of billions of people:

THERE IS NO WAY TO PREDICT WITH ANY RELIABLE ACCURACY WHAT WILL HAPPEN TOMORROW BASED ON WHAT HAPPENED IN THE PAST.

If someone can convince me otherwise, please cite the evidence. I am more than willing to be wrong.

All charts do is tell you where the market HAS BEEN and where it is NOW. Trying to predict which way it is headed based on chart patterns is like trying to predict which way a flock of birds is going to fly based on where they flew ten minutes ago.

In late January the 10-20-30 day trend lines of TMA were screaming "Buy!" For a little lesson on making a trade based on trend lines, take a look at that chart now.

(My sympathies to those who bought TMA. I have made the same mistake more than once, which is why I am posting this comment.)

In the same way, in late January the 10-20-30 day trend lines on AA spelled doom for the stock. To see what actually happened, check out the chart now.

Anticipating breaks in trend lines - even long-term trend lines - is dangerous because the time when a break appears imminent (or, in other words, as charts looked TODAY) is exactly the time when stocks have become cheapest relative to where they have been. The longer the trend line, the cheaper they are.

Does that mean that charts should not be used? Of course not! They are the only really effective visual ways we have of determining what has happened and where we are now. And to the extent that up and down patterns DO tend to repeat themselves over time, they are highly useful in GUESSING were things are going. It is still just a guess, though.

We must always remember that no stock ever obeyed the dictates of a chart. Just because I draw a line under a price does not mean that that price will not be violated - NOR does it mean that it is at risk of being violated. It is only a line on a chart and that is all.

I'm only trying to save someone some time and a little money here. In the past I would have been grateful if someone had done it for me.

Murdoch On the Economy and Yahoo Bid

Check out the contrast between the two photos at the top of this article.

Another Rotten Jobs Report from February

You know what? We're going to get through this.

It's going to be all right.

8 Market Trends For the Next Few Years

You know what? We're going to get through this.

It's going to be all right.

Is Pfizer Ready For Generic Lipitor?

Well, there's nothing like making a mistake in public to get you humble! I didn't bother to do the math. There's been no other comments on my post, though, so I guess no one saw it - or cared.

Here's the correction: $22 is not 60% down from $38; it's ONLY 42% down. (Of course, it IS 56% down from its 8-year high of 49.)

So maybe there is still more room going down. We'll find out, won't we.

Is Pfizer Ready For Generic Lipitor?

If, as I've read, Lipitor accounts for roughly $12B in annual sales and Pfizer's total annual sales are about $48B, then Lipitor accounts for 25% of Pfizer's annual sales.

Now, at $22 the stock is down almost 60% from its 4-year high of $38. Since it is highly likely that overseas sales, new drugs and biotech acquisitions will replace at least half of that $12B long before 2010, isn't the stock rather undervalued at $22? Just asking.

Incidentally, I wish you had had your interview with Kindler, as I find your columns to be very informative and easy to read. However, it seems to me that the reason they didn't get back to you was because they were trying to decide on who would do the interview, not for personal reasons. At least I hope that's the case.

Sell Side Still Sees S&P 500 Up 20% by Year's End

I should probably resist the temptation to post a comment twice, but it fits this article better than the previous one.
To proceed upwards, we need a really good flush out on the downside. We are not getting it because diehard contrarian buyers are weakly holding prices up. If all today's sellers held back for a week or two, these would happen:

Buyers would be picking up stocks at truly "bargain" prices.

The huge crowd of people out there waiting for a "test of the January lows" would have already had it.

Levels of pessimism would match those that characterize bear market bottoms.

As it is, there's not much room for rallies, since so many folks are scared and trying to get out.

No Bear Yet? Average Stock Already Down 30%

The problem as I perceive it as that we need a really good flush out on the down side, which we are not getting because diehard buyers are weakly holding prices up. This is the same as saying that we have not quite reached the level of pessimism that characterizes bear market bottoms. If most of today's buyers were to step aside for two weeks, they'd find themselves buying at levels which would all but guarantee them great profits. The same cannot be said for sellers holding back, however, since everyone still seems to be looking for a "test of the January lows" and not a rally upwards.

MBIA Gets Moody's Top Rating, Pfizer Downgraded: Is This for Real?

Something very strange is definitely going on. Every since Pfizer initially dropped below 23 in 2004, volume has essentially doubled. The company looks better than it did back then and has tons of cash. Management is making all the right decisions, cutting costs, very cheaply picking up other companies here and there, and the dividend keeps increasing. The Pfizer website also looks terrific. Yet despite all the quiet buying and selling going on, there is very little news except the same old stories that started the long march down. It almost appears as if Pfizer is deliberately being held down until certain funds have acquired enough shares to really make money on the upside. If this turns out to be the case, the turnaround might not be too far off, as this bouncing along the bottom has been happening for a long time now.
P.S. Couldn't find this article on SA's front page. Why not?