Gsk Share Discussion Threads

[lovewinshatelosses] 01/3/2021 10:16

Should already be gone IMO, Spud.

[mister md] 01/3/2021 09:10

When quality FTSE companies get hammered there's usually a fair chance of them recovering over time. I bought Shell (RDSB) on the extreme sell-off at around 900p late last year, now up approx 50% at 1400p.

GSK feels like a similarly over-sold situation at 1200p. DYOR, IMHO etc

[montyhedge] 01/3/2021 08:08

GSK bouncing around their low 1200p, split the best thing ever, another 80p next 12 months dividends to come.The sector out of favour, rather be in GSK, than Astra still further to fall there.

[spud] 28/2/2021 19:26

Below 1000p for any length of time and I get the feeling that not only will EW be long gone, but the Company as well. We shall see. spud

[essentialinvestor] 28/2/2021 16:25

The value of a pharma business is in the current free cashflow/
current medicines- plus the longer term prospects of the pipeline.

You will notice the AZN multi year share re-rating happened
long before the P&L began to improve. That's because the market became
convinced of the increasing value of their pipeline, in AZN's case
of their oncology products.

If GSK can reignite growth in core pharma, it will be the same here,
at least to a degree.

As with AZN, for GSK the oncology pipeline holds the key -
just to a lesser extent because of vaccines.

[netcurtains] 27/2/2021 15:51

Thanks EI: But there comes a point where things go right over my head.
I like to keep it ultra simple like NAV: GSK £20b, MRK $24b. Eg same assets but Merck twice the price.

[essentialinvestor] 27/2/2021 15:31

net, you might want to read the recent FY conference call Q&A where the
post split dividend is addressed in one of the answers.

[daneswooddynamo] 27/2/2021 14:43

Shingrix was powering gsk growth alone before Covid, been a big casualty due to older groups shielding. It is such a game changer for shingles that once Covid abates it will be flying, they are building a new dedicated facility in Belgium to cope with demand

[netcurtains] 27/2/2021 14:31

do we know what Merck's dividend is?
On paper it looks like Merck's dividend is about 1/2 of GSK.

Merck COMPARED to GSK

Mercks
Mkt cap $183.73b
P/E ratio 26.11
Div yield 3.58%
pre-tax profits $8.7b (2020) profit DECLINE of 23%

GSK
Mkt cap £59.91b
P/E ratio 10.44
Div yield 6.7%
pre-tax profits £7b (2020) - profit GROWTH about 12%

On paper just looking at very basic balance sheet GSK is
the bargain here.

[essentialinvestor] 27/2/2021 14:25

Many of the major pharma companies sell on multiples of approx 13.5-15.5x earnings.

That's based on FY 2021 sector estimates.

Merck sells on approx 13.5 x forward earnings, has significantly lower
net debt than GSK, eventhough it is materially more profitable.

With hindsight, the GSK price circa £18 looks like a gift and
arguably also considerably overvalued the business.


LLY and AZN command higher ratings as future earnings growth is estimated
well ahead of average - obviously that growth needs to be delivered on.

The picture changes for GSK if they can reignite growth in core pharma

Their vaccine outlook appears strong( post pandemic)
CH spin off should create value, the ViiV jv is highly successful.

A lot depends on whether the very big bet on oncology delivers and a couple
of recent pipeline failures look to be weighing on the share price

[watfordhornet] 27/2/2021 13:44

Which one. All of Hal's purchases have been reinvestment of dividends from executive savings plan

[careful] 27/2/2021 13:06

Good to see director buying in significant amounts recently.
Always a good sign.

[alphorn] 27/2/2021 12:36

Yes, Tagamet was a SKB product and Zantac's superior marketing, especially in the US, made it (Zantac) a world No1 by 1987. A classic study.

[meijiman] 27/2/2021 12:30

That's a good point. Often its not the originator but the follower who makes the big reward. I used to know this story back to front but as I recall Glaxo improved an existing product made by someone else....possibly something to do with the dosage.
I think it became the worlds biggest revenue grossing drug and laid the foundations for the global company of today. The consumer side came out of the tie up with Smith Kline Beecham.

[alphorn] 27/2/2021 12:21

He was a smart guy - it also makes a classic study on the risk/rewards of fast followers.
(Very apt on the current vaccine topic).

[meijiman] 27/2/2021 12:13

Yes it someone called Paul Girolami who made Glaxo the giant that it became. Took an ulcer drug and improved it..became a world leader product (Zantac). The cashflow from that was phenomenal. Not sure what he would make of the present ceo.

[alphorn] 27/2/2021 11:31

#159. Disagree with 'zero to do with the board', particularly with this industry. Group direction and the science to follow are key. Close to home here the push to bring Zantac to the market behind Tagamet makes a classic study. That was no accident.

[netcurtains] 27/2/2021 11:25

Spud: I doubt he's done a stellar job. Any rise in the share price has more or less zero to do with board. They are all over paid charlies in every company. We need more worker directors like the germans.

[spud] 27/2/2021 11:07

Net - Pascal Soriot was privately educated and has done a pretty stellar job!

spud

[meijiman] 27/2/2021 11:04

I can see where you are coming from. I see this particular ceo as being appointed for PC reasons.
I have had plenty of dealings with ceo's ..many have struck me as having borderline personality disorders. But I could write a book on that.
Notwithstanding the split I believe this company should be managed by someone with a strong pharmaceuticals background. A bubbly personality and relentless optimism might get you the top job, but in reality it gives you a poor skillset to run a multinational.

[netcurtains] 27/2/2021 10:05

meijiman: ceos have little or no affect on share prices. Its market forces.
Ask any small investor we all think the same - directors are all miles and miles over paid useless lot.
ceos used to make money by sacking everyone in UK and off shoring to third world.
To my mind that was not a good ceo - that is a national disgrace. Lets hope women dont ruin UK PLC like the men did.
Gut feeling is private school men see everyone else as cannon fodder. Dont let any privately educated men anywhere near a board room again.

[meijiman] 27/2/2021 09:43

Yes the bad news is that the ceo is not up to it..........