ReportWire

Tag: Pfizer

  • TrumpRx is launched: How it works and what Democrats say about it

    WASHINGTON  — The White House’s TrumpRx website went live Thursday with a promise to instantly deliver prescription drugs at “the lowest price anywhere in the world.”

    “This launch represents the largest reduction in prescription drug prices in history by many, many times, and it’s not even close,” President Trump said at a news conference announcing the launch of the platform.

    Drug policy experts say the jury is still out on whether the platform will provide the significant savings Trump promises, though it will probably help people who need drugs not commonly covered by insurance.

    Senate Democrats, meanwhile, called the site a “vanity project” and questioned whether the program presents a possible conflict of interest involving the pharmaceutical industry and the Trump family.

    What is TrumpRx, really?

    The new platform, trumprx.gov, is designed to help uninsured Americans find discounted prices for high-cost, brand-name prescriptions, including fertility, obesity and diabetes treatments.

    The site does not directly sell drugs. Instead, consumers browse a list of discounted medicines, and select one for purchase. From there, they either receive a coupon accepted at certain pharmacies or are routed directly to a drug manufacturer’s website to purchase the prescription.

    The White House said the reduced prices are possible after the administration negotiated voluntary “most favored nation” agreements with 16 major drugmakers including Pfizer, Eli Lilly and Novo Nordisk.

    Under these deals, manufacturers have agreed to set certain U.S. drug prices no higher than those paid in other wealthy nations in exchange for three-year tariff exemptions. However, the full legal and financial details of the deals have not been made public, leaving lawmakers to speculate how TrumpRx’s pricing model works.

    What does it accomplish?

    Though the White House has framed TrumpRx as a historic reset for prescription drug costs, economists said the platform offers limited new savings.

    But it does move the needle on the issue of drug pricing transparency, away from the hidden mechanisms behind how prescription drugs are priced, rebated and distributed, according to Geoffrey Joyce, director of health policy at the USC Schaeffer Center for Health Policy and Economics.

    “This has been a murky world, a terrible, obscure, opaque marketplace where drug prices have been inconsistently priced to different consumers,” Joyce said, “So this is a little step in the right direction, but it’s mostly performative from my perspective, which is kind of Trump in a nutshell.”

    Still, for the uninsured or people seeking “lifestyle drugs” — like those for fertility or weight loss that insurers have historically declined to cover — TrumpRx could become a useful option, Joyce said.

    “It’s kind of a win for Trump and a win for Pfizer,” Joyce said. “They get to say, ‘Look what we’re doing. We’re lowering prices. We’re keeping Trump happy, but it’s on our low-volume drugs, and drugs that we were discounting big time anyway.’”

    Where does it fall short?

    Early analyses by drug policy experts suggest many of the discounted medications listed on the TrumpRx site were already on offer through other drug databases before the platform launched.

    For example, Pfizer’s Duavee menopause treatment is listed at $30.30 on TrumpRx, but it is also available for the same price at some pharmacies via GoodRx.

    Weight management drug Wegovy starts at $199 on TrumpRx. Manufacturers were already selling the same discounted rates through its NovoCare Pharmacy program before the portal’s launch.

    “[TrumpRx] uses data from GoodRx, an existing price-search database for prescription drugs,” said Darius N. Lakdawalla, a senior health policy researcher at USC. “It seems to provide prices that are essentially the same as the lowest price GoodRx reports on its website.”

    Compared to GoodRx, TrumpRx covers a modest subset of drugs: 43 in all.

    “Uninsured consumers, who do not use or know about GoodRx and need one of the specific drugs covered by the site, might benefit from TrumpRx. That seems like a very specific set of people,” Lakdawalla said.

    Where do Democrats stand?

    Democrats slammed the program this week, saying it would not provide substantial discounts for patients, and called for greater transparency around the administration’s dealings with drugmakers. To date, the administration has not disclosed the terms of the pricing agreements with manufacturers such as Pfizer and AstraZeneca.

    In the lead-up to the TrumpRx launch, Democratic members of Congress questioned its usefulness and urged federal health regulators to delay its debut.

    “This is just another Donald Trump pet project to rebrand something that already exists, take credit for it, and do nothing to actually lower healthcare prices,” Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) said Friday. “Democrats will continue fighting to lower healthcare costs and push Republicans to stop giving handouts to billionaires at the expense of working-class Americans.”

    Three other Democratic senators — Dick Durbin, Elizabeth Warren and Peter Welch — raised another concern in a Jan. 29 letter to Thomas March Bell, inspector general for the Department of Health and Human Services.

    The three senators pointed to potential conflicts of interest between TrumpRx and an online dispensing company, BlinkRx.

    One of Trump’s sons, Donald Trump Jr., joined the BlinkRx Board of Directors in February 2025.

    Months before, he became a partner at 1789 Capital, a venture capital firm that holds a significant stake in BlinkRx and led the startup’s $140-million funding round in 2024. After his appointment, BlinkRx launched a service to help pharmaceutical companies build direct-to-patient sales platforms quickly.

    “The timing of the BlinkRx announcement so closely following the administration’s outreach to the largest drug companies, and the involvement of President Trump’s immediate family, raises questions about potential coordination, influence and self-dealing,” according to an October 2025 statement by Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

    Both BlinkRx and Donald Trump Jr. have denied any coordination.

    What’s next?

    The rollout of TrumpRx fits into a suite of White House programs designed to address rising costs, an area of vulnerability for Republicans ahead of the November midterms.

    The White House issued a statement Friday urging support for the president’s healthcare initiative, dubbed “the great healthcare plan,” which it said will further reduce drug prices and lower insurance premiums.

    For the roughly 8% of Americans without health insurance, TrumpRx’s website promises that more high-cost, brand-name drugs will be discounted on the platform in the future.

    “It’s possible the benefits will become broader in the future,” Lakdawalla said. “I would say that the jury remains out on its long-run structure and its long-run pricing effects.”

    Gavin J. Quinton

    Source link

  • Donald Trump’s Big Pharma Showdown Ends with a Whimper

    It’s hard to find things that Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders agree on, but one point of consensus is that pharmaceutical companies have long been ripping off Americans by charging extortionate prices for prescription medications. “Americans are being screwed, and it’s no good. They’re not going to put up with it,” Trump said in February, at a White House event. In May, he issued an executive order declaring that the Administration would impose lower prices by fiat if drugmakers didn’t align their U.S. prices with what they charge in other countries. “I agree with President Trump,” Sanders commented in a statement. “It is an outrage that the American people pay, by far, the highest prices in the world for prescription drugs.”

    In addition to threatening to introduce price controls, the Trump Administration was preparing the way for tariffs on drugs and their ingredients, many of which come from abroad. Wall Street paid attention to these threats. Between Trump’s election last November and the beginning of April, a period in which the stock market as a whole rose sharply, drug stocks fell by about twenty per cent. That was then. Last week, the President, standing alongside the C.E.O. of Pfizer, Albert Bourla, announced plans for a government-run website, TrumpRx, on which Pfizer would list some of its drugs at prices discounted up to eighty-five per cent. A White House fact sheet said the Administration and Pfizer, the world’s fourth-largest pharmaceutical company by revenue, had reached an agreement to “bring American drug prices in line with the lowest paid by other developed nations (known as the most-favored-nation, or MFN, price).” Wasn’t this more bad news for drugmakers? Investors didn’t think so. In two days, Pfizer’s shares jumped up by fourteen per cent. The stocks of other pharmaceutical companies also rose strongly based on predictions that they would strike similar deals. By the end of the week, the S. & P. Pharmaceuticals Select Industry Index had surpassed its November high.

    A closer inspection of the Pfizer agreement shows that Trump has turned out to be a paper tiger. “It’s a lot of nothing,” Craig Garthwaite, the director of the health-care program at Northwestern’s Kellogg School of Management, told me. “For most people, it will have very little effect on drug prices.” Rena Conti, an economist and expert on the biopharmaceutical industry who works at Boston University’s Questrom School of Business, issued a similar assessment: “Top line is: it’s a win for Pfizer, but not a win for American patients.” Rather than radically restructuring drug pricing and distribution, the agreement amounted to “fiddling around the edges,” she said.

    In the American drug industry, practically anything that preserves the status quo is a victory for Big Pharma firms, which, according to a study by the Journal of the American Medical Association, boast a net profit margin of 13.8 per cent compared to 7.7 per cent for S. & P. 500 companies in other sectors. Years ago, I asked a senior executive at a prominent drugmaker why it employed so many lobbyists in Washington. After looking at me as if I were a naïf, he explained that the industry generated most of its revenues and the vast majority of its profits in the U.S. In other countries, such as Britain and France, companies were forced to negotiate the prices they charged with government-run or single-payer health-care systems that have a lot of bargaining leverage. But in this country—where health care is balkanized and the largest public drug-buyer in the U.S., Medicare, was legally prevented from negotiating with drugmakers—the industry was able to charge much higher prices. It was well worth paying an army of lobbyists to try to preserve this privileged position.

    Between 1998 and the middle of this year, according to data from OpenSecrets, a public-interest group that tracks money in politics, Big Pharma spent more than $6.3 billion on lobbying. During that period, the most significant reform related to drug pricing came in the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, which empowered Medicare to haggle prices with drug companies. In principle, this was a landmark development, but the negotiated prices won’t go into effect until next year and will initially apply to just ten prescription drugs, out of thousands. (In subsequent years, the number is scheduled to grow.) If Trump was really determined to stand up to Big Pharma, he would be pressing for a rapid expansion of this initiative, but he isn’t doing that. And, even if he did, he would have to corral Republicans in Congress to support the new legislation required, which certainly wouldn’t be easy: the I.R.A. was passed without a single G.O.P. vote.

    In place of real reform, we now have the Pfizer agreement, and its headline proposal to launch TrumpRx. In a press release about the deal, Pfizer said it would offer many of its primary-care medications at prices averaging half their list prices. This sounded promising, but industry analysts quickly pointed out that about ninety per cent of Americans get their prescribed medications through insurance plans. For these people, it would still likely be cheaper to get the drugs the traditional way and pay the co-payment. Garthwaite said buying drugs through TrumpRx could conceivably benefit “a small subset of people,” principally among the population that doesn’t have any insurance coverage. But many medications would still be prohibitively expensive. Conti calculated that, even with Pfizer’s announced forty-per-cent discount for Xeljanz, a popular treatment for arthritis and other inflammatory diseases, it could still cost patients more than fifteen thousand dollars a year.

    John Cassidy

    Source link

  • Meet the Suspicious 8: Dividends Over 6% With Plenty of Problems

    Meet the Suspicious 8: Dividends Over 6% With Plenty of Problems

    Source link

  • FDA head says Trump-Pfizer deal to lower prescription drug costs is



    FDA head says Trump-Pfizer deal to lower prescription drug costs is “major step” – CBS News










































    Watch CBS News



    President Trump announced plans to reduce the prices of prescription drugs. Americans will be able to buy them at discount on a “TrumpRx” website that rolls out next year. Nikki Battiste spoke to FDA Commissioner Marty Makary.

    [ad_2]
    Source link

  • Trump says some medications will be sold at reduced



    Trump says some medications will be sold at reduced “most-favored nation cost” in Pfizer deal – CBS News










































    Watch CBS News



    President Trump announced Tuesday that Pfizer has agreed to lower prices for some prescription drugs. The president said that some drugs could see price cuts of 50-100%. CBS News White House reporter Olivia Rinaldi has more.

    [ad_2]
    Source link

  • Trump announces drug-pricing deal with Pfizer



    Trump announces drug-pricing deal with Pfizer – CBS News










































    Watch CBS News



    President Trump on Tuesday announced a new partnership with Pfizer to sell its medication through Medicaid at lower prices. CBS News White House reporter Olivia Rinaldi has more.

    [ad_2]
    Source link

  • Women say birth control shot caused brain tumors—”it completely changed me”

    Contraception is often used to prevent pregnancies and manage menstrual cycles—which is exactly why Sandra Somarakis, now 61, and Nicole Ryan, 60, chose it for over a decade.

    Both women opted for medroxyprogesterone (a type of birth control injection) called Depo-Provera, owned by Pfizer, valuing the convenience of no periods and a quick doctor’s visit every three months.

    However, both Somarakis and Ryan later developed a type of benign brain tumor called meningioma and required surgery to remove it. While these tumors are not cancerous, both women have suffered long-term side effects.

    In January, researchers from the University of British Columbia’s Faculty of Medicine reported that women who used Depo-Provera for more than a year were roughly 3.5 times more likely to develop meningiomas compared with women using other forms of hormonal birth control.

    From Routine Exam to Life-Altering Diagnosis

    According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 24.5 percent of sexually active women have used the injectable contraceptive. Sandy began using Depo-Provera in 1996, until 2010.

    Somarakis, from Oregon, told Newsweek that, during a routine mammogram in July 2008, doctors urgently summoned her back when they noticed swelling in her left eye.

    “I thought my eye was watering and sore because of hay fever,” Somarakis said. “They sent me for an MRI, and an ophthalmologist called almost immediately: they’d found a tumor in my left eye socket.

    “Within days, I was diagnosed with a meningioma,” Somarakis added.

    The following year, the tumor was removed, and Somarakis continued to use the contraception.

    “I was never told that Depo-Provera might be linked to meningiomas,” Somarakis said. She added that, 16 months later, she started suffering from severe headaches, and another tumor was found. “The neurologist was shocked,” Somarakis said.

    In January 2010, she underwent surgery to remove her second tumor, followed by six weeks of radiation. She stopped using the injection after being told that radiation would leave her infertile.

    “Radiation was horrible,” Somarakis said. “It completely changed me. I had been a 911 operator and a project manager—sharp, fast, making good money.

    “It felt like my mind was wiped. My hair started falling out; I couldn’t swallow; and, for a time, I lived on yogurt and crushed crackers with milk.

    “Even now, I’m not the person I used to be. I’ve lost many cognitive skills, and I can no longer work in the kind of high-pressure jobs I once excelled at,” Somarakis said.

    “I have tinnitus and have lost the hearing in my left ear—I’ll need a hearing aid for the rest of my life. I still get terrible headaches; it feels like my frontal lobe is about to explode. My left eye is still watery, swollen, and sometimes it pops out slightly.”

    In 2024, both Somarakis and Ryan learned of an ongoing multidistrict litigation (MDL) involving lawsuits filed against Pfizer over Depo-Provera and its alleged link to an increased risk of meningioma brain tumors.

    “When you go through something like this as a healthy person, you wonder what you did to cause it,” Somarakis told Newsweek. “I was crushed when I found out.”

    Nicole Ryan’s Symptoms and Surgery

    Ryan, who lives in California, was diagnosed in 2014 after suffering from constant lightheadedness, near fainting spells and hearing loss in her left ear.

    “I wasn’t surprised, but I was relieved to finally have confirmation of what was causing all my symptoms,” Ryan said. “Although the surgery was successful, I was left with permanent side effects such as permanent ringing in my left ear, poor balance, and headaches where the tumor was taken out.”

    Legal Action and Claims Against Pfizer

    Newsweek also spoke to Ellen Relkin, an attorney who is currently representing hundreds of women who claim they developed meningioma from Depo-Provera. The plaintiffs are seeking financial compensation and litigation has been filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida, Pensacola Division.

    Relkin said: “Meningioma, the majority are ‘benign’ only in the sense that they do not metastasize to other organs. But it is in the brain and can grow.

    “The brain controls sight, cognitive abilities, hearing. Clients have lost vision, some have become blind, others lost hearing.”

    Relkin is a partner at Weitz & Luxenberg and chair of the firm’s Drug & Medical Device Litigation group. She has decades of experience representing thousands of plaintiffs in pharmaceutical, medical-device, and toxic-tort cases and has served in numerous court-appointed leadership roles.

    Relkin told Newsweek about the core legal arguments: “One is failure to warn. They never warned about this risk of meningioma or to be on the lookout for the symptoms. Many of our clients had excruciating headaches or dizziness for years, and no one connected it to the drug.

    “The second is safer alternative design. Depo-Provera is extremely high dose—150 milligrams. Pfizer got approval in 2004 for a lower-dose version, Depo-SubQ Provera—104 milligrams, which is equally effective. If you can give a lower dose that’s equally effective, why give more? The dose makes the poison.”

    In the plaintiffs’ latest filing on September 22, in response to Pfizer’s attempt to have the case dismissed on federal preemption grounds, they say that Pfizer “refused to study or warn” about the risk of meningiomas for decades despite growing scientific evidence.

    They add that when the company finally requested approval for a label change it “omitted crucial information and peer-reviewed studies,” failing to give the FDA the full picture of the dangers to patients.

    Lack of Warnings in the US

    Relkin claims there aren’t warnings about meningioma. She said: “Gynaecologists and clinics don’t tell patients because it’s not in the label.

    “When women get these symptoms, doctors assume it’s something common like migraine and don’t make the causal connection. Then they keep taking the drug as the tumor grows.”

    At minimum, Relkin added that the most-serious type of warning the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issues—known as a black-box warning—should be applied.

    “A black box would be ideal because then everyone would know. They’ll say it’s rare, but it’s not so rare—thousands of women are impacted because the drug is so widely used,” Relkin said.

    Pfizer’s Response and Listed Side Effects

    The Pfizer label highlights the following possible serious side effects of the drug. However, Somarakis and Ryan said that they were only made aware of weight gain when they opted for the injection in the late 1990s and 2000s:

    • Bone loss
    • Breast cancer
    • Blood clots and stroke
    • Ectopic pregnancy
    • Severe allergic reactions: including serious eye problems or loss of vision
    • Other health effects: may trigger migraines, depression, seizures, or liver problems.

    A Pfizer spokesperson told Newsweek: “The Company stands behind the safety and efficacy of Depo-Provera, which has been used by millions of women worldwide and remains an important treatment option for women seeking to manage their reproductive health.”

    Source link

  • First Hawaiian Bank Buys 3,531 Shares of Pfizer Inc. $PFE

    First Hawaiian Bank lifted its stake in shares of Pfizer Inc. (NYSE:PFE – Free Report) by 6.9% in the first quarter, HoldingsChannel.com reports. The fund owned 54,455 shares of the biopharmaceutical company’s stock after acquiring an additional 3,531 shares during the quarter. First Hawaiian Bank’s holdings in Pfizer were worth $1,380,000 at the end of the most recent reporting period.

    A number of other institutional investors have also added to or reduced their stakes in PFE. Gould Capital LLC boosted its holdings in shares of Pfizer by 97.2% in the 4th quarter. Gould Capital LLC now owns 1,000 shares of the biopharmaceutical company’s stock worth $27,000 after purchasing an additional 493 shares in the last quarter. GKV Capital Management Co. Inc. bought a new stake in Pfizer in the 1st quarter worth approximately $27,000. Bayforest Capital Ltd purchased a new stake in Pfizer in the first quarter worth approximately $28,000. North Capital Inc. bought a new position in Pfizer during the first quarter valued at approximately $28,000. Finally, Bernard Wealth Management Corp. purchased a new position in shares of Pfizer during the fourth quarter worth approximately $30,000. Institutional investors own 68.36% of the company’s stock.

    Pfizer Stock Performance

    Pfizer stock opened at $23.91 on Friday. The company has a current ratio of 1.16, a quick ratio of 0.85 and a debt-to-equity ratio of 0.65. The firm has a 50-day moving average of $24.79 and a 200-day moving average of $24.28. The firm has a market cap of $135.94 billion, a P/E ratio of 12.72, a P/E/G ratio of 0.88 and a beta of 0.55. Pfizer Inc. has a 1-year low of $20.92 and a 1-year high of $30.43.

    Pfizer (NYSE:PFE – Get Free Report) last announced its quarterly earnings results on Tuesday, August 5th. The biopharmaceutical company reported $0.78 earnings per share (EPS) for the quarter, beating analysts’ consensus estimates of $0.58 by $0.20. Pfizer had a return on equity of 21.42% and a net margin of 16.84%.The company had revenue of $14.65 billion for the quarter, compared to the consensus estimate of $13.43 billion. During the same quarter in the previous year, the business earned $0.60 EPS. Pfizer’s revenue was up 10.3% compared to the same quarter last year. Pfizer has set its FY 2025 guidance at 2.900-3.100 EPS. Sell-side analysts expect that Pfizer Inc. will post 2.95 EPS for the current year.

    Pfizer Announces Dividend

    The firm also recently declared a quarterly dividend, which was paid on Tuesday, September 2nd. Investors of record on Friday, July 25th were paid a $0.43 dividend. The ex-dividend date of this dividend was Friday, July 25th. This represents a $1.72 dividend on an annualized basis and a yield of 7.2%. Pfizer’s dividend payout ratio (DPR) is presently 91.49%.

    Analyst Upgrades and Downgrades

    A number of brokerages have recently issued reports on PFE. Jefferies Financial Group upped their price objective on shares of Pfizer from $32.00 to $33.00 and gave the company a “buy” rating in a research note on Wednesday, May 21st. HSBC cut their price target on shares of Pfizer from $27.00 to $26.00 and set a “buy” rating for the company in a research report on Monday, May 19th. Morgan Stanley lifted their price objective on Pfizer from $32.00 to $33.00 and gave the stock an “equal weight” rating in a report on Wednesday, August 6th. Citigroup increased their target price on Pfizer from $25.00 to $26.00 and gave the company a “neutral” rating in a report on Wednesday, August 6th. Finally, Berenberg Bank reduced their price target on Pfizer from $28.00 to $25.00 and set a “hold” rating on the stock in a research report on Thursday, May 29th. Two analysts have rated the stock with a Strong Buy rating, four have issued a Buy rating, eleven have given a Hold rating and one has issued a Sell rating to the company. According to data from MarketBeat, Pfizer has an average rating of “Hold” and a consensus price target of $28.12.

    Read Our Latest Stock Report on PFE

    Pfizer Profile

    (Free Report)

    Pfizer Inc discovers, develops, manufactures, markets, distributes, and sells biopharmaceutical products in the United States, Europe, and internationally. The company offers medicines and vaccines in various therapeutic areas, including cardiovascular metabolic, migraine, and women’s health under the Eliquis, Nurtec ODT/Vydura, Zavzpret, and the Premarin family brands; infectious diseases with unmet medical needs under the Prevnar family, Abrysvo, Nimenrix, FSME/IMMUN-TicoVac, and Trumenba brands; and COVID-19 prevention and treatment, and potential future mRNA and antiviral products under the Comirnaty and Paxlovid brands.

    See Also

    Want to see what other hedge funds are holding PFE? Visit HoldingsChannel.com to get the latest 13F filings and insider trades for Pfizer Inc. (NYSE:PFE – Free Report).

    Institutional Ownership by Quarter for Pfizer (NYSE:PFE)



    Receive News & Ratings for Pfizer Daily – Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts’ ratings for Pfizer and related companies with MarketBeat.com’s FREE daily email newsletter.

    ABMN Staff

    Source link

  • Work stops at David Werner, Metro Loft’s Pfizer HQ conversion over suspected fire

    Authorities responded to a suspected fire at the former Pfizer headquarters in Manhattan, the site of a highly anticipated Nathan Berman and David Werner residential conversion.

    Work stopped at the massive construction site at 235 East 42nd Street, resulting in hundreds of construction workers milling on the sidewalk while the fire department investigated the situation, according to eyewitness accounts and videos viewed by The Real Deal. Work halted for about 20 minutes, according to a member of the construction crew. 

    According to Berman’s Metro Loft, no fire actually occurred, but the New York Fire Department was called due to smoke coming from the construction site. No damage has been reported, and work resumed after a brief NYFD investigation.

    The Midtown site is home to the largest office-to-resi conversion in New York City. Nathan Berman’s Metro Loft reached a deal in March 2024 to convert the former Pfizer headquarters into approximately 1,500 rental units.

    Berman purchased a minority stake in the site from David Werner, who had bought the interests in the property five years earlier when Pfizer relocated to Tishman Speyer’s Spiral. 

    Werner owns the leasehold of the larger of the two buildings, the 33-story 235 East 42nd Street, after purchasing it for $407 million. He bought the smaller 10-story 219 East 42nd Street in partnership with life sciences developer Alexandria Real Estate Equities for $142 million before buying out the real estate investment trust.

    The developers have gone through several rounds of financing for the massive undertaking. In May, the pair secured a $700 million construction loan from Madison Realty Capital, a record amount for a residential conversion project in New York. 

    Northwind Group last summer provided a $75 million loan to the joint venture for the property at 219 East 42nd Street, which is also slated for redevelopment. In January, the firm supplied another $135 million for the site. 

    Construction is expected to wrap the last quarter of 2027. The combined property, which will host a mix of luxury rentals and affordable housing through the 467m tax abatement program, will include more than 100,000 square feet of amenities and 30,000 square feet of retail space. 

    Read more

    Nathan Berman plots largest office-to-resi conversion with former Pfizer HQ


    David Werner, Metro Loft land $135M loan for Pfizer HQ conversion 


    Metro Loft, David Werner Near Record Loan for Conversion

    Metro Loft, David Werner near nabbing record loan for Pfizer HQ conversion 


    Jake Indursky, Sheridan Wall

    Source link

  • Why I’m Buying This Beaten-Down, High-Yield Dividend Stock Hand Over Fist

    Why I’m Buying This Beaten-Down, High-Yield Dividend Stock Hand Over Fist

    I owned shares of Pfizer (NYSE: PFE) when the COVID-19 pandemic started. Watching the stock soar over 60% in roughly two years was fun. Seeing Pfizer’s share price fall nearly 60% from its peak wasn’t so fun.

    Have I been tempted to sell during this major decline? Nope. Instead, I’m buying this beaten-down, high-yield dividend stock hand over fist.

    Through the dark clouds

    It’s understandable why Pfizer stock has fallen so much. The drugmaker has faced some big challenges and has more on the way.

    Pfizer’s revenue in 2023 fell 42% from the previous year. Sales for the company’s top-selling product, COVID-19 vaccine Comirnaty, sank 70% year over year. Sales for Pfizer’s COVID-19 pill Paxlovid plunged 93%. Ouch.

    Those COVID woes weren’t Pfizer’s only problem areas. Sales for six of the company’s cancer drugs that generate $180 million or more annually fell by double-digit percentages. Revenue for Pfizer’s best-selling cancer therapy, Ibrance, dropped 7% year over year in 2023.

    To make matters worse, the key U.S. patents for seven of Pfizer’s products expire by 2027. All were blockbusters last year.

    So why am I buying Pfizer stock? I can see the sun peeking out through the dark clouds. I’ve observed the tremendous productivity of the company’s pipeline in recent years, with a record number of Federal Drug Administration (FDA) approvals in 2023. I’ve also watched Pfizer use the massive cash stockpile accumulated during the peak COVID period to gobble up several smaller drugmakers. These deals have bolstered the company’s pipeline considerably.

    The numbers look good

    As I see it, Pfizer’s numbers look very good. Let’s start with valuation. The stock trades at a forward price-to-earnings ratio of under 11.5. Compared to the S&P 500‘s forward-earnings multiple of 20.5, Pfizer is dirt cheap.

    Granted, this valuation metric is useless if Pfizer’s revenue and earnings continue to plummet. However, I don’t think that’s going to happen. This year should be the low point for the company’s COVID-19 product sales. Pfizer expects new products and indications will generate enough additional revenue to make up for the impact of the upcoming patent expirations and then some. Analysts are somewhat less optimistic but still project much of the revenue loss resulting from the patent cliff will be offset by new products.

    Another number I like is Pfizer’s dividend yield of over 6.5%. The big pharma company’s share price doesn’t have to grow much for the stock to deliver a double-digit total return.

    That leads me to the third number that looks good for Pfizer: the roughly $25 billion in new annual revenue the company expects by 2030 from business development deals. This estimate seems attainable, in my opinion, considering the new products and pipeline candidates Pfizer has as a result of its acquisitions of Seagen, Arena, Biohaven, and Global Blood Therapeutics. I suspect business development will enable the company to grow its revenue and earnings at least by the 3.5% per year needed for an average annual total return of 10%.

    Setting myself up for later

    I plan to reinvest any dividends from Pfizer over the next few years. However, buying more shares now should set me up later for retirement.

    Pfizer’s dividend generates solid income at its current level. I expect the company to increase its dividend over time. That seems like a good bet since Pfizer’s management lists dividend growth as its top priority.

    What should be done with a stock that could deliver double-digit total returns and be a great component of a long-term retirement strategy? My answer is to buy it hand over fist.

    Should you invest $1,000 in Pfizer right now?

    Before you buy stock in Pfizer, consider this:

    The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and Pfizer wasn’t one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years.

    Consider when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005… if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $537,557!*

    Stock Advisor provides investors with an easy-to-follow blueprint for success, including guidance on building a portfolio, regular updates from analysts, and two new stock picks each month. The Stock Advisor service has more than quadrupled the return of S&P 500 since 2002*.

    See the 10 stocks »

    *Stock Advisor returns as of April 22, 2024

    Keith Speights has positions in Pfizer. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Pfizer. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

    Why I’m Buying This Beaten-Down, High-Yield Dividend Stock Hand Over Fist was originally published by The Motley Fool

    Source link

  • Bellecapital International Ltd. Grows Stock Holdings in Pfizer Inc. (NYSE:PFE)

    Bellecapital International Ltd. Grows Stock Holdings in Pfizer Inc. (NYSE:PFE)

    Bellecapital International Ltd. raised its holdings in shares of Pfizer Inc. (NYSE:PFE – Free Report) by 41.3% in the fourth quarter, Holdings Channel reports. The institutional investor owned 46,123 shares of the biopharmaceutical company’s stock after acquiring an additional 13,491 shares during the period. Bellecapital International Ltd.’s holdings in Pfizer were worth $1,328,000 as of its most recent filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

    A number of other hedge funds and other institutional investors have also recently modified their holdings of PFE. Moneta Group Investment Advisors LLC increased its stake in shares of Pfizer by 89,592.7% in the fourth quarter. Moneta Group Investment Advisors LLC now owns 161,143,638 shares of the biopharmaceutical company’s stock worth $8,257,000,000 after purchasing an additional 160,963,976 shares in the last quarter. Norges Bank purchased a new stake in shares of Pfizer in the fourth quarter worth $3,150,472,000. Charles Schwab Investment Management Inc. increased its stake in shares of Pfizer by 10.9% in the third quarter. Charles Schwab Investment Management Inc. now owns 95,772,746 shares of the biopharmaceutical company’s stock worth $3,161,261,000 after purchasing an additional 9,393,992 shares in the last quarter. Morgan Stanley increased its stake in shares of Pfizer by 10.3% in the fourth quarter. Morgan Stanley now owns 79,499,361 shares of the biopharmaceutical company’s stock worth $4,073,547,000 after purchasing an additional 7,419,929 shares in the last quarter. Finally, Renaissance Technologies LLC bought a new position in shares of Pfizer during the first quarter worth $311,238,000. 68.36% of the stock is owned by hedge funds and other institutional investors.

    Pfizer Price Performance

    Pfizer stock opened at $27.75 on Monday. The stock has a market cap of $157.14 billion, a price-to-earnings ratio of 77.08, a price-to-earnings-growth ratio of 1.24 and a beta of 0.61. The company has a debt-to-equity ratio of 0.69, a current ratio of 0.91 and a quick ratio of 0.69. Pfizer Inc. has a 1 year low of $25.61 and a 1 year high of $42.22. The firm has a 50-day moving average of $27.44 and a two-hundred day moving average of $29.37.

    Pfizer (NYSE:PFE – Get Free Report) last posted its quarterly earnings results on Tuesday, January 30th. The biopharmaceutical company reported $0.10 EPS for the quarter, beating the consensus estimate of ($0.19) by $0.29. Pfizer had a net margin of 3.62% and a return on equity of 10.88%. The business had revenue of $14.25 billion during the quarter, compared to analyst estimates of $14.37 billion. During the same quarter in the previous year, the business posted $1.14 EPS. The company’s quarterly revenue was down 41.3% compared to the same quarter last year. On average, research analysts forecast that Pfizer Inc. will post 2.22 earnings per share for the current year.

    Wall Street Analyst Weigh In

    A number of brokerages have issued reports on PFE. Guggenheim began coverage on shares of Pfizer in a report on Friday, February 23rd. They issued a “buy” rating and a $36.00 price target on the stock. UBS Group reduced their price target on shares of Pfizer from $34.00 to $27.00 and set a “neutral” rating on the stock in a report on Thursday, December 14th. TD Cowen downgraded shares of Pfizer from an “outperform” rating to a “market perform” rating and set a $32.00 price target on the stock. in a report on Thursday, January 4th. Truist Financial reduced their price target on shares of Pfizer from $42.00 to $36.00 and set a “buy” rating on the stock in a report on Thursday, December 14th. Finally, Argus downgraded shares of Pfizer from a “buy” rating to a “hold” rating in a report on Friday, March 22nd. Twelve analysts have rated the stock with a hold rating and six have given a buy rating to the company’s stock. According to data from MarketBeat, the stock presently has an average rating of “Hold” and a consensus price target of $36.88.

    View Our Latest Analysis on Pfizer

    About Pfizer

    (Free Report)

    Pfizer Inc discovers, develops, manufactures, markets, distributes, and sells biopharmaceutical products in the United States, Europe, and internationally. The company offers medicines and vaccines in various therapeutic areas, including cardiovascular metabolic, migraine, and women’s health under the Eliquis, Nurtec ODT/Vydura, Zavzpret, and the Premarin family brands; infectious diseases with unmet medical needs under the Prevnar family, Abrysvo, Nimenrix, FSME/IMMUN-TicoVac, and Trumenba brands; and COVID-19 prevention and treatment, and potential future mRNA and antiviral products under the Comirnaty and Paxlovid brands.

    Featured Stories

    Want to see what other hedge funds are holding PFE? Visit HoldingsChannel.com to get the latest 13F filings and insider trades for Pfizer Inc. (NYSE:PFE – Free Report).

    Institutional Ownership by Quarter for Pfizer (NYSE:PFE)

    Receive News & Ratings for Pfizer Daily – Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts’ ratings for Pfizer and related companies with MarketBeat.com’s FREE daily email newsletter.

    ABMN Staff

    Source link

  • What To Know About Easy Marijuana Sublinguals

    What To Know About Easy Marijuana Sublinguals

    Sometimes you want something quick to either chill or reduce some anxiety.  If you can’t or don’t like smoking or drinking alcohol, there is an answer.  Here is what to know about marijuana sublingual strips.  They are a bit of a niche with vaping, gummies and traditional flower (joints, bowls, bongs) being more popular.  But using a sublingual strip or oil is easy, mess free and discreet.

    Sublinguals refer to a type of product that is absorbed under the tongue, or sublingually. Pfizer made it mainstream in 2002 when they brought out the Listerine mouthwash strips. The cannabis industry paid attention and now you can sublingual cannabis in oil, tablets, tinctures, and rapidly dissolving strips.  The positive is they are great for a quick hit to relax, chill, manage pain, or anxiety.

    RELATED: Here’s What You Should Know About CBD Canned Drinks

     

    Using a sublingual is easy.  First, swallow before using to avoid the saliva from capturing the product. Swallow quickly after use can wash away the cannabinoids providing a different and likely less effective experience. Instead, after swallowing, you’ll need to hold your sublingual THC product until it dissolves. This can be done in a variety of ways, from letting it sit under the tongue to pressing it into the cheek. Once the product has been absorbed, wait up to ten more minutes before eating or drinking. This will ensure the most optimal experience.

    You should start feeling the effects in about 15 – 30 minutes. Because of the way they are absorbed, sublinguals are as fast-acting as vaping or smoking, so it’s important to dose carefully.  The other good thing is there is no smell, so it can be perfect for discreet usage.

    RELATED: Here’s What You Should Know About CBD Canned Drinks

    Treating pain with sublingually administered cannabis extracts is preferred by many physicians, as it may be regarded as easier to obtain from the pharmacy, and to consume. Sublingual administration might also have the benefit of a more consistent dosing regimen while avoiding the adverse effects of smoking.

    Terry Hacienda

    Source link

  • Have $2,000? 2 Magnificent Stocks Ready for a Bull Run

    Have $2,000? 2 Magnificent Stocks Ready for a Bull Run

    Stocks across a range of industries and sectors have dealt with unique challenges over the last few years. While some companies are still dealing with the effects of a slowdown in growth following pandemic highs, it’s important to look at the underlying businesses and not just stock prices to see if a long-term buying proposition remains intact.

    If you have $2,000 to invest in stocks right now, there are plenty of wonderful businesses begging to be bought. Here are two such names to consider for your buy basket right now, both of which the market has heavily discounted over the trailing 12 months.

    1. Pfizer

    Pfizer (NYSE: PFE) has had a significant adjustment as a business after the height of its successes during the pandemic from the COVID-19 vaccine, Comirnaty, and oral antiviral medication, Paxlovid. While it was inevitable that there would be a steep sales cliff after the pandemic-era demand for these products waned, investor sentiment has not been kind to the stock in recent months.

    Over the last year, the stock has declined by over 30%. Now, shares of Pfizer are trading at a price-to-sales multiple of around 2.6. While a low valuation in and of itself is never the sole reason you should purchase a stock, it’s definitely food for thought when you’re looking at one of the world’s largest pharmaceutical companies with a broad portfolio of medicines and considerable growth potential still to come.

    There’s no denying that the momentum of COVID-19 products slowing has had a notable impact on Pfizer’s balance sheet. Still, Pfizer pulled in full-year revenue of just shy of $59 billion in 2023. And excluding COVID-19 products from the mix, its top line grew by a healthy 7% from the prior-year period, which is a solid growth rate for a business in this stage of maturity.

    Pfizer was profitable in 2023 — net income according to generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) totaled $2.1 billion — but that was a steep decline from one year ago when 2022 net income came to $31.3 billion. That isn’t just a function of declining product sales. Pfizer is investing heavily in the future growth of its business, which is also affecting the performance of its bottom line.

    Last year, Pfizer completed one of the biggest acquisitions in the history of the company when it bought Seagen, a company that specializes in cancer medicines. This is one very important cog in the machine of Pfizer’s overall strategy to add $25 billion in annual revenue to its balance sheet by 2030 through external business development deals.

    The company had more products approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration than any other last year, and it’s working toward a goal of $70 billion to $84 billion in non-COVID revenue by the year 2030. Management also noted in the 2023 earnings call that Seagen’s medicines along with other portfolio additions are expected to add a minimum of eight new products with blockbuster potential to Pfizer’s lineup by 2030.

    In the meantime, investors are benefiting from Pfizer’s lackluster share price performance, in the sense that its dividend yield has soared. That yield is about 6% at the time of this writing. Over the years, Pfizer has steadily raised its dividend, with a total growth rate of about 17% in the trailing five-year period alone.

    The company is in the midst of a transition period, and any investor who buys a slice of the company is going to feel the impact of that in its share price performance, likely for the foreseeable future. However, patience may pay off for long-term investors looking for a steady portfolio performer and passive dividend income.

    2. Teladoc

    Teladoc (NYSE: TDOC) has been heavily sold off by investors in recent months. As of the time of this article, shares are down about 43% from one year ago and 34% just from the start of 2024. I’ve been a faithful shareholder in this business for a few years now, and I can attest to the fact that it hasn’t been an easy ride. While the negative tides of investor sentiment seem to be firmly against this stock at the moment, I have maintained my position in this business, which I still think holds considerable potential for long-term investors.

    Investors seem to be stuck on a few core issues that have driven the sell-off of the business. One is the notable slowdown in growth from Teladoc’s pandemic heights. While growth has certainly moderated from pre-pandemic and early pandemic times, there’s no denying that the pandemic brought about a supercharged period of growth for the business that otherwise may have been realized over a much longer period of time.

    Following that pandemic stretch, a normalization of that trajectory was to be expected. This is a mature business that remains a global leader in the telehealth industry, a space that is still expanding steadily as the demand for quality virtual healthcare solutions continues worldwide.

    The other sticking point for investors has been its continued unprofitability. While Teladoc did record close to $14 billion worth of impairment charges in 2022, almost all of that amount was a noncash expense. Accounting losses aren’t great, but they are infinitely better than actual operational losses.

    As of the fourth quarter of 2023, Teladoc shrunk its net loss to just around $29 million, compared to the $3 billion net loss it reported in the final stretch of 2022. Moreover, adjusted earnings came in at $328 million for the full year, a 33% increase from 2022.

    It’s also worth pointing out that revenue is on the upswing, and the company is raking in cash at a healthy pace. Teladoc’s 2023 revenue totaled $2.6 billion, an 8% increase from one year ago, while full-year cash from operations came in at $350 million.

    Total visits on Teladoc’s platform were down slightly year over year, but the company ended 2023 with 89.6 million integrated care members and 1.2 million chronic care enrollees. Those cohorts represented increases of 8% and 14%, respectively, from the end of 2022.

    Investors shouldn’t expect pandemic-spurred growth numbers from this business, most likely, but that doesn’t mean its best days are behind it, either. The growth story for Teladoc isn’t over, and for forward-thinking investors, this beaten-down stock could represent an intriguing buying opportunity at its current valuation.

    Should you invest $1,000 in Pfizer right now?

    Before you buy stock in Pfizer, consider this:

    The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and Pfizer wasn’t one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years.

    Stock Advisor provides investors with an easy-to-follow blueprint for success, including guidance on building a portfolio, regular updates from analysts, and two new stock picks each month. The Stock Advisor service has more than tripled the return of S&P 500 since 2002*.

    See the 10 stocks

    *Stock Advisor returns as of March 8, 2024

    Rachel Warren has positions in Teladoc Health. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Pfizer and Teladoc Health. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

    Have $2,000? 2 Magnificent Stocks Ready for a Bull Run was originally published by The Motley Fool

    Source link

  • German Man Receives 217 Covid Vaccines

    German Man Receives 217 Covid Vaccines

    A German man who voluntarily received 217 Covid 19 vaccines in the span of 29 months has experienced no negative health effects, according to researchers, although doctors still do not endorse hyper-vaccination to boost immunity. What do you think?

    “Looks like someone has Pfizer stock.”

    Sandra Bodnar, General Fireproofer

    Marianne Williamson Successfully Primaries Biden In All 63 Counties Of Astral Plane

    “Uh oh, now he’s got to get 217 boosters!”

    Doug Rinaldo, Trivia Aggregator

    “Jeez, I can’t imagine getting more than 150.”

    Cyrus Sprecher, unemployed

    Source link

  • S&P index error may have sparked turbulence in Morgan Stanley, Pfizer shares, traders say

    S&P index error may have sparked turbulence in Morgan Stanley, Pfizer shares, traders say

    By Suzanne McGee and Tatiana Bautzer

    (Reuters) – An error by S&P Dow Jones Indices may have contributed to volatility in shares of Morgan Stanley, Pfizer, PNC Financial Services Group and other stocks in recent days, traders said.

    At issue was a list of pending changes to the Dow Jones U.S. Dividend 100 Index that S&P Dow Jones Indices released late on March 1, naming 10 companies slated for addition to the index and two for deletion. The changes were to take effect on March 18.

    A total of 23 stocks were affected by the changes, according to trading desk notes obtained by Reuters.

    A S&P spokeperson said an unspecified error led to the wrong names being provided to clients.

    S&P Dow Jones issued a replacement pro forma list with a total of 11 additions and three deletions after the market’s close on Tuesday.

    Morgan Stanley and PNC were among the companies that were to be added to the index on the original list.

    Their shares rose on Monday, but gave back those gains on Wednesday. By contrast, shares of Pfizer, which were slated for deletion on the initial list, fell on Monday but rose on Wednesday when the revisions were published and it was clear that it would remain in the index.

    Trading volumes for all three companies were 50% to 80% higher than their 90-day averages this week.

    Morgan Stanley and PNC declined to comment. Pfizer did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

    “This is not that common an occurrence,” said Bryan Armour, an analyst at Morningstar who tracks exchange-traded funds.

    The error triggered a scramble on trading desks to help their own clients unwind trades made in anticipation of what proved to be incorrect upcoming changes, traders said.

    The Dow Jones U.S. Dividend 100 Index is designed to offer investors a benchmark composed of stocks in companies with strong fundamentals and a record of paying high dividends consistently. It is used by some index funds to build portfolios.

    Some traders also seek to buy on announcements of upcoming changes before they take effect and any asset management firms using it as a benchmark must adjust their own portfolios.

    (Reporting by Suzanne McGee; Editing by Ira Iosebashvili and Jamie Freed)

    Source link

  • The Bull Market Left These 3 Stocks Behind, but They’re Buys Right Now

    The Bull Market Left These 3 Stocks Behind, but They’re Buys Right Now


    With the stock market recently hitting new all-time highs again, times are exciting for people who are fully invested, but these conditions can be more frustrating for those who have cash available to put to work. Higher stock prices do make it a bit tougher for bargain hunters to find deals, but stocks don’t all rise or fall on a synchronized schedule. Some invariably lag behind those broad-market patterns.

    The tough part of seeking out bargains among those laggard stocks is that there’s usually a good reason why a company’s shares didn’t participate in the rally. Still, even when there’s a good reason, at the right prices, out-of-favor stocks may well be worth buying.

    With that in mind, three Motley Fool contributors went looking for stocks the recent bull market has left behind that might have a bit of life ahead of them, despite Wall Street’s pessimism. They came up with Pfizer (NYSE: PFE), Confluent (NASDAQ: CFLT), and Kinder Morgan (NYSE: KMI). But only you can decide whether they’re cheap enough to be worth a spot in your portfolio.

    A mighty drug maker brought low by the market

    Eric Volkman (Pfizer): With rare exceptions, star power rarely lasts forever. One example of a company that recently experienced the downside of this dynamic is pharmaceutical giant Pfizer.

    A few years ago, Pfizer was a hot item thanks to its heavy involvement in the fight against COVID-19. It was the co-developer of the go-to coronavirus vaccine Comirnaty. On top of that, it is the company behind the well-known COVID antiviral treatment Paxlovid.

    In the thick of the pandemic, when hundreds of millions of people were eager to get inoculated, and when treatments for the disease were in high demand, Pfizer experienced big leaps in revenue and profitability.

    Even the mightiest company would find it challenging to follow up that sort of performance with a similar second act, and Pfizer is falling short in the minds of many. After all, both its recently released fourth-quarter and full-year 2023 headline figures were down substantially as the pandemic has evolved into an endemic and the public health crisis has receded. Revenue for Q4 and the full year fell by more than 40% on a year-over-year basis, with non-GAAP (adjusted) net income nose-diving by 91% in the quarter.

    Yet those fourth-quarter figures beat the collective estimates from analysts, who were expecting the pharmaceutical giant to post a fairly deep adjusted net loss. Much of the upside surprise was due to Comirnaty, which is still making its way into the arms of people who are aware that COVID-19 remains a threat.

    However, sales of several of Pfizer’s top products fell, compounding the generally bearish reaction to the earnings report. For example, in the face of intensifying competition, cancer treatment Ibrance saw a nearly 13% year-over-year decline in sales. Looming patent expirations for Ibrance and other top sellers are also making investors fret.

    They really shouldn’t. Pfizer still has a solid lineup of blockbuster drugs, and it has a robust pipeline with potential blockbusters in development.

    Meanwhile, its valuations look sickly, and will surely improve once the market gets past the idea that the company can’t sufficiently recover from the decline in its COVID-related revenues.

    Its forward P/E is barely over 12, and its trailing price-to-sales ratio is a feeble 2.3. I don’t think it will continue to trade at such bargain levels for long. Strengthening the buy case is the company’s dividend, one of the most steady and reliable in the healthcare sector. At the current share price, it yields more than 6% — sky-high for a once and future blue chip stock.

    Don’t call it a comeback

    Jason Hall (Confluent): One look at the chart below may make investors think that Confluent is in trouble.

    CFLT Chart

    CFLT Chart

    From its early 2023 low to its high point, Confluent’s stock price doubled, but then headed lower again before tumbling sharply back past that prior low when it reported third-quarter results in November.

    What sent its shares tumbling? Frankly, the usual volatility of being a younger, still-developing business. Confluent is a leader in data streaming, and investors are focused on its growth rates and customer expansion. When it reported some churn with a few big customers that would carry over into early 2024, the market kind of freaked out.

    My analysis says this was an overreaction. Confluent’s growth story remains intact.

    Revenue was up 32% in the third quarter, and Confluent Cloud revenue was up 61%. Its growth has slowed, and investors expect to hear that it slowed further to 22% and 43% in the fourth quarter. (The company will report results for that period on Wednesday.) But Confluent Cloud (its version of Kafka built to live in AWS, Azure, etc) is still expected to grow by more than 40% per year.

    Customer growth is still in the high-teens percentages, and the number of customers spending $100,000 or more with it annually is growing even faster. As a result, margins are improving and cash flows are getting stronger. The company forecast that it would be free-cash-flow breakeven in the fourth quarter, and expects to start generating positive free cash flow in 2024.

    So while the market sees risk, I see a company that’s getting stronger and safer with each passing quarter. Now’s the time to buy this upstart in the brave new world of how businesses manage and use data.

    This company’s industry still has decades of life left in it

    Chuck Saletta (Kinder Morgan): Oil and natural gas may not be the sexiest forms of energy these days, but they remain in strong demand throughout the world. Indeed, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration’s most recent Annual Energy Outlook, oil and natural gas use is expected to stay approximately stable between now and 2050.

    Beyond that, it’s not too far a stretch to project beyond 2050 and presume that even if our supplies of greener energy continue to grow, it will still take a long time after that to completely eliminate oil and natural gas from the world’s energy mix. After all, you can’t really go from about 20 million barrels of oil per day and 30 trillion cubic feet of natural gas use per year to absolutely nothing overnight.

    In addition, even if you do factor in a decline in oil and natural gas use over the very long haul, pipeline companies like Kinder Morgan are likely to be among the longest-lasting parts of the industry. Pipelines have high up-front costs to build, but they benefit from relatively low costs per barrel of oil or cubic foot of natural gas to transport that energy.

    As a result, as long as oil and natural gas are needed and have to move from where they’re produced to where they’re processed and consumed, pipelines will still be needed to move them around. Other transportation methods — like trucks and trains — will likely see their use for oil and natural gas transportation drop before pipelines do.

    Despite those decent prospects for decades to come, Kinder Morgan’s shares have basically gone nowhere for more than five years, even as its dividends have continued to recover. Its market capitalization is around $38 billion, and it generated around $5.6 billion in cash from operations over the past 12 months. At that valuation — less than 7 times its cash-generating ability — the market is virtually giving up on the company, despite those solid decades likely ahead of it.

    Kinder Morgan may not be the fastest-growing company on the planet, but given its prospects, its shares certainly look cheap enough to be worth considering at the moment.

    Get started now

    Although the market does occasionally leave solid companies behind when it rallies, true bargains rarely remain bargains for long. That’s why now is the time to take a look for yourself and see if you think these businesses’ shares are worth picking up at their current prices. Even if the market doesn’t end up bidding them up for big rallies, you just might find yourself with stocks of quality companies you’ll be pleased to hold onto for many years to come.

    Should you invest $1,000 in Pfizer right now?

    Before you buy stock in Pfizer, consider this:

    The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and Pfizer wasn’t one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years.

    Stock Advisor provides investors with an easy-to-follow blueprint for success, including guidance on building a portfolio, regular updates from analysts, and two new stock picks each month. The Stock Advisor service has more than tripled the return of S&P 500 since 2002*.

    See the 10 stocks

     

    *Stock Advisor returns as of January 29, 2024

     

    Chuck Saletta has positions in Kinder Morgan and Pfizer and has the following options: long January 2026 $25 calls on Pfizer, short January 2026 $25 puts on Pfizer, short March 2024 $22.50 puts on Pfizer, and short March 2024 $27.50 calls on Pfizer. Eric Volkman has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. Jason Hall has positions in Confluent. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Confluent, Kinder Morgan, and Pfizer. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

    The Bull Market Left These 3 Stocks Behind, but They’re Buys Right Now was originally published by The Motley Fool



    Source link

  • Could Pfizer Stock Help You Become a Millionaire?

    Could Pfizer Stock Help You Become a Millionaire?

    Physician shaking patient’s hand.

    Having at least $1 million in the bank by retirement has long been a popular goal, but it isn’t easy to accomplish. One of the best ways to do so is to invest in stocks, and the earlier one starts, the better. Naturally, all stocks aren’t created equal, and while some will substantially contribute to making investors millionaires, others might do the opposite.

    Which of these categories does pharmaceutical giant Pfizer (NYSE: PFE) fall into? Let’s find out whether this drugmaker can help investors become part of the seven-figure club.

    Pfizer’s business is improving despite appearances

    Suppose an investor starts with capital of $100,000 and has 20 years to reach $1 million. This would require a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 12.2%, which isn’t easy to pull off. Investors might rightly be skeptical regarding Pfizer’s ability to deliver such returns in the next two decades. For one, the company’s performance has been catastrophic this year. Also, even in the past 20 years, Pfizer hasn’t been able to beat the market — quite the opposite, in fact.

    PFE ChartPFE Chart

    PFE Chart

    However, if the past isn’t a reliable predictor of future success, past failures shouldn’t cause investors to conclude that Pfizer will continue to underperform the market over the long run. After all, a lot has happened with the drugmaker lately. CEO Albert Bourla said at the beginning of this year that Pfizer was entering the most crucial 18-month stretch in its (long) history.

    Bourla was talking about the string of brand-new approvals and important label expansions the company was expecting this year, and so far, things have gone almost exactly as planned. Pfizer has launched seven new products, substantially beating its typical annual number of, at most, two. Pfizer’s pipeline is vast and is only getting bigger thanks to acquisitions, including that of cancer expert Seagen.

    Seagen has nearly 40 cancer-focused programs. This buyout could transform Pfizer into a leader in the field of oncology, especially as it combines its deep pockets with Seagen’s proven innovative abilities in this area. The $43 billion Pfizer will pay in cash is possible thanks to its success in the COVID-19 market. So although its sales are declining this year because of a slowdown in vaccinations, the drugmaker is building a solid foundation for the future.

    Pfizer’s work along these lines didn’t start with its coronavirus-related efforts. The company significantly altered its operations in the past few years, most notably by shedding some parts of its business that were doing little to contribute to revenue and earnings growth. Pfizer is a much stronger company with better prospects than just three years ago.

    Dividends matter — a lot

    In my view, Pfizer can deliver somewhat average stock market returns in the next two decades. However, there is something else to consider when looking at a stock’s performance, especially over such long periods: dividends. Over the past 20 years, Pfizer’s returns with and without dividends (total returns include dividends) are night and day.

    PFE ChartPFE Chart

    PFE Chart

    That’s why maintaining a solid dividend program could be an important factor in helping Pfizer turn investors into millionaires in the future. The drugmaker has increased its payouts by just under 58% in the past decade, which is decent. Pfizer’s current cash payout ratio of 112% also does not inspire confidence — it signals that the company’s current cash balance isn’t enough to cover its dividends. Should investors worry about it? I think the answer is no.

    Pfizer generated plenty of cash in the past two years thanks to its COVID-19 success, but it spent much of it on acquisitions. Pfizer’s management is committed to growing dividends over time. Once the business stabilizes, new products start pulling their weight, and the company stops being severely affected by what transpired in the past two years — which were highly abnormal — Pfizer’s cash payout ratio should get back to more reasonable levels.

    In short, Pfizer is still a good dividend stock. Reinvesting the dividend should still be an excellent choice for long-term investors.

    Don’t give up on Pfizer too fast

    While it is true that Pfizer has had issues this year, the company still has a lot to offer investors. Demand for innovative therapies will increase in the next two decades as the population ages. The drugmaker’s strengthening lineup and pipeline, as well as its commitment to growing its dividend, should lead to much better performance soon. And over the next 20 years, my view is that it has an excellent chance of delivering a CAGR of 12.2% with dividends reinvested.

    In short, Pfizer can help investors become millionaires.

    Should you invest $1,000 in Pfizer right now?

    Before you buy stock in Pfizer, consider this:

    The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and Pfizer wasn’t one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years.

    Stock Advisor provides investors with an easy-to-follow blueprint for success, including guidance on building a portfolio, regular updates from analysts, and two new stock picks each month. The Stock Advisor service has nearly quadrupled the return of S&P 500 since 2002*.

    See the 10 stocks

     

    *Stock Advisor returns as of December 7, 2023

     

    Prosper Junior Bakiny has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Pfizer and Seagen. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

    Could Pfizer Stock Help You Become a Millionaire? was originally published by The Motley Fool

    Source link

  • Can A Lawsuit Save Small Cannabis Businesses

    Can A Lawsuit Save Small Cannabis Businesses

    Marijuana has become increasing mainstream.  With 90% of the public open to it being legal in some form. Companies from Pfizer to Miracle Grow have jumped in and other “vice” companies from BAT, Molson Coors, and Heineken to the $22+ billion market.  It seems great, but the industry is struggling. Can a lawsuit save small cannabis businesses?

    The Biden administration has been incredibly slow following up on his campaign promise to bring on federal legalization, the Trump term did nothing, rescheduling is just starting and California and New York have ongoing major issues. The House passed SAFE Banking 7 times and now the Senate is on board with SAFER Banking and the new House Speaker is not a fan of helping the industry.  Small businesses continue to struggle.

    RELATED: California or New York, Which Has The Biggest Marijuana Mess

    Some cannabis companies have turned to superlawyer David Boies who is suing Attorney General Merrick Garland to strike down marijuana restrictions now in place under the federal Controlled Substances act.  This could provide the relief mom and pop businesses need.

    What the public doesn’t understand and Congress refuses to address is owning a small business is a major, hard endeavor, and currently, federal policy makes it even harder.  Small businesses receive very little tax write-offs, can’t use Small Business Adminstration loans, major banks won’t touch them and ding the owners and employees for personal loans if revealed they work for a weed company.

    Ted Olson, a conservative attorney who knows Boies and has opposed him shared “His timing is good. this is the sort of thing this court is looking at”.

    “An overwhelming percentage of the American people believe marijuana sales should be legal and also safe and regulated”, said Boies

    RELATED: Science Says Medical Marijuana Improves Quality Of Life

    There are mixed winds about cannabis right now, the public wants it and Ohio just switched to full recreational.  But Congress is in disarray and the Speaker doesn’t drink, smoke or swear and discourages is staff from doing any of it. Maybe the lawsuit can force the current administration to update the laws and help small businesses.

    Terry Hacienda

    Source link

  • America May Be Missing Out on a Better COVID Treatment

    America May Be Missing Out on a Better COVID Treatment

    Japan is home to an untold number of conveniences and delights that American consumers regularly go without: Faster public transit! Better sunscreen! Lychee KitKats! But as we head into sick season, one Japanese invention would be especially welcome on the U.S. market: an antiviral pill that appears to shorten COVID symptoms, might protect against chronic disease, and doesn’t taste like soapy grapefruit.

    Ensitrelvir, a drug made by the Osaka-based pharmaceutical company Shionogi, was conditionally approved in Japan last November. Like Paxlovid, ensitrelvir works by blocking an enzyme that the SARS-CoV-2 virus uses to clone itself inside the human body. But for the millions of Americans who will likely get COVID in the coming months, the new drug is almost certain to be out of reach. In 2021, Pfizer waited just five weeks for Paxlovid to receive its emergency use authorization. But ensitrelvir is still sitting in the approval pipeline, stuck in another round of clinical trials that may run well into 2024.

    Existing data (not all of which have been peer-reviewed) show that people with COVID who promptly take ensitrelvir, marketed as Xocova in Japan, test negative about 36 hours faster than people who take a placebo. Fever, congestion, sore throat, cough, and fatigue disappear about a day earlier too. Even smell and taste loss appear to resolve more quickly. The company also has some tentative evidence suggesting that the drug can help protect patients from developing long COVID.

    These findings were not enough for the FDA, but they are extremely encouraging, says Michael Lin, a bioengineering professor at Stanford University who works on drugs for treating coronavirus infections. Xocova “looked as good or a little bit better than Paxlovid,” he says. For instance, Pfizer’s clinical trials failed to show that Paxlovid clears symptoms any faster than a placebo in people who aren’t at high risk of developing severe COVID. Shionogi’s did just that.

    Reshma Ramachandran, a family physician at Yale, told me that if the early Xocova results hold up in additional trials, she’d be inclined to prescribe it to her vaccinated patients in place of Paxlovid, simply because the evidence supporting its use is more direct. She said she’d be especially keen to give Xocova if the long-COVID finding can be reproduced.

    Read: Rebound COVID is just the start of Paxlovid’s mysteries

    No lab or pharmaceutical company has yet published a study that pits Xocova against Paxlovid head-to-head in treating COVID, so it’s impossible to say with certainty which one is better. You can’t draw conclusions just by comparing Pfizer’s clinical-trial results with Shionogi’s: Their drugs were tested in different populations with different levels of immunity at different points in the pandemic when different variants were circulating. Shionogi also required clinical-trial participants to start taking Xocova within three days of feeling sick, whereas patients in the Paxlovid trials began their treatment up to five days after symptoms started. Daniel Griffin, an infectious-disease specialist at Columbia University, told me that timing is everything when it comes to antivirals: In general, the sooner a patient starts taking a drug, the better it works.

    A Pfizer spokesperson told me that the efficacy and adverse-event rates of Paxlovid and Xocova cannot directly be compared, and emphasized Paxlovid’s power to stave off hospitalization and death. (Xocova’s clinical trials were not able to provide meaningful data on those outcomes, which are now much rarer than they were in 2021.) “Since the beginning of the pandemic, we’ve known it will take multiple treatment options and preventative measures for the world to overcome the challenges of COVID-19,” he said in an email.

    Even if Xocova turns out to be no more effective than Paxlovid, it still has several practical advantages. For one thing, it is literally easier to swallow. Paxlovid must be taken twice a day for five days, and each time you have to gulp down three pills: two containing nirmatrelvir (which actively combats the virus), plus one containing ritonavir (which slows the metabolism of nirmatrelvir, keeping it in your system longer). Xocova is taken just once a day for five days, and after the first three-pill dose, it’s one pill at a time. Paxlovid can also cause dysgeusia, a.k.a. Paxlovid mouth—a sour, metallic, taste that may last for hours after swallowing. Xocova seems to taste just fine.

    Read: Paxlovid mouth is real—and gross

    Experts hope that Xocova will be more widely accessible than Paxlovid, too. Pfizer announced last week that the price of Paxlovid will soon rise from $529 to $1,390 when the drug enters the commercial market. Shionogi hasn’t decided on Xocova’s price in the U.S. market, but there’s reason to think it will be cheaper. In Japan, the only market where both drugs are currently available, a course of Xocova costs 51,851 yen (about $346), and Paxlovid is nearly double the price, at 99,027 yen (about $661). And whereas Japanese health authorities—like those in the U.S.—have recommended Paxlovid for use by patients at high risk of severe COVID, Xocova has been shown to benefit people with infections regardless of their risk status. Finally, whereas Paxlovid’s reach is limited by its many harmful interactions with other drugs, Xocova might pose fewer problems because it doesn’t contain ritonavir, Lin told me. The newer drug’s interaction profile is still being ironed out, but a company spokesperson pointed me to a running list from the University of Liverpool. (According to that source, you should avoid taking Paxlovid and Adderall at the same time—but going on Xocova is fine.)

    Xocova may also sidestep one of patients’ most commonly voiced concerns about Paxlovid: that it will make their COVID go away and then return. One recent observational study of COVID patients found that symptoms rebounded among 19 percent of Paxlovid takers, versus 7 percent of nontakers. By contrast, Shionogi has reported that symptom rebound was vanishingly rare in its clinical trials of Xocova.

    Read: Inside the mind of an anti-Paxxer

    Neither Shionogi nor the FDA would give me an estimate of Xocova’s approval timeline in the U.S., but earlier this year, the company’s CEO estimated that it might get the nod in late 2024. This past spring, the FDA gave the drug “fast track” status, which means Xocova will be eligible for an expedited review process once the company submits its application. (The FDA declined to comment on Xocova’s prospects for approval, citing federal disclosure laws.) Until then, it’s running more clinical trials in the U.S. and abroad. One of them, conducted in partnership with the National Institutes of Health, will evaluate the drug’s performance in hospitalized patients. Another will evaluate its efficacy against long COVID, among other things.

    To some experts, Xocova’s track is not nearly fast enough. David Boulware, an infectious-disease specialist at the University of Minnesota, told me that the FDA appears to be “slow walking” the approval process. Lin, too, would like to see more action. But it’s not clear how, exactly, that would happen. “I think the FDA is doing all that they can,” Ramachandran said; an emergency use authorization for Xocova isn’t a realistic option, given that the COVID public-health emergency has expired. Plus, Griffin said, caution is prudent when dealing with new drugs. “We want to make sure it’s safe. We want to make sure it’s effective,” he told me. “We also don’t want to fall into the trap we fell in with molnupiravir,” an earlier antiviral that looked promising at first, but ultimately offered disappointing benefits to COVID patients (though a surprising utility for cats).

    If the FDA were to approve Xocova tomorrow, demand for Paxlovid likely wouldn’t disappear, experts told me. Lin said the two drugs might compete for users, like Motrin and Aleve. People who are in danger of being hospitalized or dying from COVID could still opt for Paxlovid. “But there’s a much larger group of people who just feel crummy, and they just want to feel better,” Griffin told me. For them, Xocova could make more sense. They just won’t have a choice until the FDA approves it.

    Rachel Gutman-Wei

    Source link

  • Pfizer Will Charge $1,390 For 1 Course Of COVID Drug Paxlovid On Commercial Market

    Pfizer Will Charge $1,390 For 1 Course Of COVID Drug Paxlovid On Commercial Market

    Pfizer told pharmacies and clinics this week it will soon price a five-day course of COVID-19 treatment Paxlovid at almost $1,400, more than two-and-a-half times what the federal government has paid for the antiviral pills.

    The Wall Street Journal first reported Wednesday that Pfizer plans to price a course of the oral antiviral at $1,390, far higher than the U.S. had paid at $529. The drug was authorized in the U.S. in 2021 and quickly became a key tool to help treat those at risk of developing severe infections from COVID-19.

    While the figure will be the drug’s list price on the commercial market, many health plans will likely negotiate far better terms that will limit copays or out-of-pocket charges for people who need the pills, the Journal reported.

    Those on Medicare, Medicaid and the uninsured will also still be able to access Paxlovid via the Department of Health and Human Services for free through the end of 2024. HHS added that Pfizer would run a program between 2025 and 2028 for un- and underinsured people to help assist with the cost.

    But as Axios notes, the list price on the commercial market could make it more difficult for patients to access the drug. The U.S. has so far maintained the exclusive purchasing agreement with Pfizer for Paxlovid.

    “Pricing for Paxlovid is based on the value it provides to patients, providers and health care systems due to its important role in helping reduce COVID-19-related hospitalizations and deaths,” a spokesperson for Pfizer told the Journal, adding that many people will pay “as little as $0” under the copay assistance program through 2028.

    Multiple studies have shown reductions in hospitalization for adults who test positive for COVID-19 and are treated with Paxlovid. The Food and Drug Administration gave its full approval to Paxlovid in May, advising treatment for adults with high risk of getting severely ill from COVID-19.

    Pfizer recently cut its sales forecast for the year due to a plunge in Paxlovid prescriptions and sales of its COVID-19 vaccines. Company CEO Albert Burl said recently the U.S. was “in the middle of COVID fatigue, where everyone wants to forget about the disease.”

    Source link