Worldwide Business Search Engine

Loading

Sunday, May 2, 2010

Two Stocks I Like - BioPharmaceutical


When it comes to stocks, I’m of the Peter Lynch School, which says that you shouldn't purchase a stock unless you can, a) rationalize your purchase in few sentences, and b) draw what the company does with a crayon. These companies fit the bill.

I have no idea whether these stocks will go up or down in the next 6 hours, days, or weeks, and don’t know anyone who does. My intention is to hold them (I own both) until at least the peak of the next market cycle, or until the company proves to be something other than what I thought (for example, the dreaded words, “accounting irregularities.”)

Note that both of these companies are relatively unknown and relatively low-priced, which puts them squarely in the "speculative" category.

____






CRTX – Cornerstone Therapeutics Inc.

To quote from the 2004 10-K report (honesty at its finest): “We were incorporated in Delaware on July 14, 2000. Since our inception, we have incurred significant losses each year. As of December 31, 2004, we had an accumulated deficit of $58.5 million. We expect to incur significant and growing losses for the foreseeable future…we expect our operating losses to continue to increase over the next several years as we continue to fund our development programs and prepare for potential commercial launch of our product candidates. We do not expect to achieve profitability in the foreseeable future; and we cannot assure you that we will achieve profitability at all.”

In those heady days of rising housing markets and consumer glee, Cornerstone (formerly Critical Therapeutics) was trading at about $70 per share, despite having no earnings whatsoever. That was then. Fast-forward to 2010, and Cornerstone touts rapidly increasing sales at great margins and with no long-term debt; yet, its share price is only 1/10th what it was as a purely speculative play in 2005.

Cornerstone’s specialty is respiratory ailment medications. Although Cornerstone is engaged in research, it is more interested in acquisitions. That is, CRTX finds established products that are poorly marketed, and re-launches them for a quick earnings boost. It also acquires late-stage development products that it can push for FDA approval and bring to market. Once products have been acquired or approved, Cornerstone uses a highly focused sales force of 113 agents to market these products.

The only thing I don’t like about Cornerstone is that, like many growing companies, is has been regularly increasing its number of outstanding shares (essentially printing money) for acquisitions. Having said that, when it does issue shares the purpose is to acquire product rights for added revenues – a good sign.

CRTX Statistics (at time of writing):
$6.77 per share
P/E of 8.8
No long-term debt
Gross margin 76.6%

____





SKBI – Skystar Bio Pharmaceutical

Skystar is a Chinese pharmaceutical company (incorporated in Nevada) that primarily engages in medicines, vaccines and related health care for animals, both personal (pets) and commercial (livestock and poultry).

In one of those ridiculous transitions that can only happen in the world of speculative stocks, Skystar was incorporated in 1998 as “Hollywood Entertainment Network,” which was an independent film company. In 2000, riding the wave of the technology boom, it changed it’s name to “Cyber Group Network Corp” and became a security hardware and software developer. Several paragraphs of 10-K report later, and Skystar is now a bio pharmaceutical company. Normally I wouldn’t invest a dime with a change-your-line-of-business-a-thousand-times company, except for one important factor: Skystar is now legitimate.

In 2009, Skystar had over 33.8 million in revenue at 51% gross margin. Skystar manufactures a long list of products, including medications, microorganisms, feed additives and vaccines, while employing over 200 people. It has research and development facilities in China. And it has solid, growing earnings.

I suspect that Skystar's shaded past has a lot to do with its low stock price.

China's stock market is firmly in bubble territory and volatile of late, so expect this share price to move around a lot.

SKBI Statistics (at time of writing):
$9.75 per share
P/E of 7.17
No long-term debt
Gross Margin 51.09%

_____


Disclosure
Do not buy stocks, or take this or any other financial advice without doing your own analysis; including, but not limited to: reviewing business models, financial statements, management style and philosophy, recent developments, market macroeconomic analysis, and chart analysis. If you do not know how to do these things, you shouldn't be buying stocks in the first place. Seek the advice of professionals, as appropriate.

Friday, April 30, 2010

Goldman Sachs - Buy or Sell?

GS has taken a beating recently, both with the public flogging its members have taken from Congress as well as its stock price. Just how much is Goldman’s image damaged? Is it the same company it was? For my opinion, I refer you to the MS Outlook note I scheduled for myself next week:

"Buy more Goldman Sachs if share price has stabilized."

Goldman is a company of sharks, whose ambition is to make money no matter what the circumstances: usually, this is one of their selling points. Goldman taking bets against its own large clients is similar to college girls flashing their breasts during spring break: shocking, but not surprising.

In a large financial institution it’s common for one arm to take a position opposite to another, sometimes without either side knowing. For example, in one bank I know, the brokerage arm was recommending natural gas stocks to clients, as well as taking long positions in its own portfolio. The trading arm of the same firm was shorting natural gas futures. Traders for large firms are given significant independence.

Salespeople at brokerages generally have to go with the recommendations of their analysts, even if the salespeople themselves think the investments are garbage. As strange as this may sound, it is a necessity. Investing is an art, not a science, and it is highly unlikely that all brokers at a firm would agree whether a stock is a “buy” or a “sell.” For obvious reasons, a firm can’t have one broker advising clients to buy a stock while the broker at the next desk is advising them to sell it. In addition, if a broker sells something they personally recommend (but analysts of the firm don’t), they can be sued if that investment turns sour. For all these reasons, brokers must sell whatever their company’s “squawk box” is touting. Yet, when investigators find evidence of a broker selling stock that they personally hate, it’s presented in the media as “proof” that the company is corrupt.

Goldman is the same company that it was two weeks ago, only a) it could owe a large fine and face criminal charges, and b) its stock price is 27% lower. Unless Goldman is fined 20 billion dollars (the approx. market capitalization it has lost since 2 weeks ago) its stock is now a bargain.

Goldman Sachs is no angel, and never has been. It is still a company of sharks, intent on making money. It is still the firm that every broker wants to work for. And its P/E ratio is 6.1.

Goldman is a buy.



Price (at time of writing): $145.20

____

“As a public company, Goldman Sachs will have the financial strength and strategic flexibility to continue to serve our clients effectively as well as to respond thoughtfully to the business and competitive environment over the long term.”
Henry (Hank) Paulson, former U.S. Treasury Secretary, during his time as Goldman Sachs CEO, June 1998.
____

Disclosure
Do not buy stocks, or take this or any other financial advice without doing your own analysis; including, but not limited to: reviewing business models, financial statements, management style and philosophy, recent developments, market macroeconomic analysis, and chart analysis. If you do not know how to do these things, you shouldn't be buying stocks in the first place. Seek the advice of professionals, as appropriate.

Monday, April 26, 2010

Canadian Debt II

Nothing confirms things like a good old-fashioned survey.

When I wrote about the perils of Canadian debt (Spending 'til it Hurts) I had no idea that CMHC would soon be confirming those ideas; but they did, with the spin cycle set on high.

Today, CMHC released the results of a survey showing that Canadian consumers are not - in the least - concerned about their high debt levels. In fact, 68% of new homeowners feel that they will be able to pay off their mortgages early, which means that they expect free cash flow and good times ahead.

The report also confirms that Canadian consumers feel they are savvy real estate investors, due to the extensive "self-education" they undertake before making purchases. This self-education includes consulting mortgage brokers, lenders, and real estate agents (all of whom have a vested interest in selling homes).

As a side note, the CMHC report frequently reads like an advertisement for mortgage brokers, including this gem: "According to mortgage consumers, the benefits that mortgage brokers offer are that they are able to get the best deal or rate for their clients, they are convenient, and they offer time-savings when obtaining a mortgage." On the same page is a photo of a smiling, embracing couple: presumably homeowners.

Hubris and propaganda continue to feel the love in Canada.
____

CMHC survey

CNBC article (regarding CMHC survey)
____

"(It's) actual mandate today, which is different from what it was back 20 or 30 years ago, is really just to get people into houses...and that's always been something that bothers me, because it really doesn't have a stability mandate."
David Dodge, former Governor of the Bank of Canada, describing the role of the Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC), February 2010.