RE:RE:RE:RE:Can't see the forest for the treesI personally like value. Let's say 2 auto sales businesses make the same amount of money. But I can buy a used vehicle sales lot for half the price of a new vehicle sales lot. I'll buy the used vehicle sales lot. I know they don't manufacture the automobiles and they buy many of their used autos from the big boys, but they are the better business because of the valuation. I view CXR like this, further down the chain, but there's still good money there.
CNInvesting wrote: I don't invest based on morality or what the companies do for society. The markets are amoral in this regard and it's about the best capital allocation. Sometimes the positive effect a company can have on the world with its operations is a very big factor in making an investment decision, and on valuating such a business. Other times, we have companies that are good until they're not. I agree that the drug companies are good for society but since we're in the game of taking a step back, why are drug companies good for society ? Because we are afflicted by different types of health issues. How did the industry came about helping society with this ? Research. The research part of the business is the one with the highest moral value. It's about improving things. I'm not as optimistic as you on what Concordia does that's ''good'' and I don't think it's relevant too much. This is business, Concordia isn't, like any other company, in the concession-type of business. If they do reduce prices, although I doubt it, it's not out of benevolance for the other drug companies's ability to do research, it's about money. Take a hard look at the management team of this company. What do you ask yourself about the management before making a decision ? Since every long here seem to approach this as value-investing, I'll give you some points in the 15-points list of legendary Philip Fisher. After reading it, ask yourself if Concordia's management is the best in this business, because why give them your capital otherwise ?
A) Does the management have a determination to continue to develop products or processes that will still further increase total sales potentials when the growth potentials of currently attractive product lines have largely been exploited? All markets eventually mature, and to maintain above-average growth over a period of decades, a company must continually develop new products to either expand existing markets or enter new ones.
B) How effective are the company's research-and-development efforts in relation to its size? To develop new products, a company's research-and-development (R&D) effort must be both efficient and effective.
C) Does management talk freely to investors about its affairs when things are going well but "clam up" when troubles and disappointments occur? Every business, no matter how wonderful, will occasionally face disappointments. Investors should seek out management that reports candidly to shareholders all aspects of the business, good or bad.
D) Does the company have a management of unquestionable integrity? The accounting scandals that led to the bankruptcies of Enron and WorldCom should highlight the importance of investing only with management teams of unquestionable integrity. Investors will be well-served by following this warning that regardless of how highly a company rates on the other 14 points, if there is a serious question of the lack of a strong management sense of trusteeship for shareholders, the investor should never seriously consider participating in such an enterprise. wallop13 wrote: If you look at the big picture, drug companies are good for society. It's easy to attack a company for charging too much for a drug, or for the fact that they do little or no research. If you take a step back and look at the overall accomplishments drug companies have made in the medical field it's clear to me that I would not want a world without them. Even Concordia, doing little to no research is good because they offer generics at reduced prices. They also allow larger drug companies the ability to divest drugs, giving them funds to continue research on new breakthrough drugs. Whether these companies are good investment prospects or not has to be made by the investor, just like every other company.