Over the years I have used the example of Blue Chip stocks before early spring of 2000 and nvxe/nvei. My reason for that was to show you could buy more shares of nvei, compared to Blue Chips for the same money. That gave me the opportunity to compare the benefits other than the fun of OTC stocks. Not a very good reason for an elderly person, tho'. But, I enjoy the people here more.
The different brokerage companies and the brokers have always given me more negatives than encouragement of my investment in nvei to counter my optimism of nvei. I took my eyes off of the goal. In the past, I have always just ignored them and did what I thought was best.
However, with the events of the past two years and the negative posting on this board and the cesspool. And, nvei taking longer than any of us anticipated. I didn't give myself credit for what I knew I should have done (buy more nvei).
So I called my broker and ask for the best and most reliable place to invest without touching my nvei shares. His recommendation was Merck and Pfizer and I said let's buy, there is always a need for medicine. Merck at 50.50 and Pfizer at 32.00 including cost. I only have myself to blame. I am not even going to look at how many nvei shares I could have bought with that money.
This news release says it all.
Pharmaceutical area no longer safe haven for jobs
October 24, 2003 1:57:00 PM ET
By Bill Berkrot
NEW YORK, Oct 24 (Reuters) - While jobs in high-tech, transportation, financial services and other industries have disappeared by the tens of thousands since the late 1990s, the pharmaceutical industry had appeared to be a source of endless growth.
But these days at the major pharmaceutical companies -- where it was once believed that job security lagged behind only that of civil servants and tenured college professors -- that perception is fading faster than David Letterman's hairline.
The latest blow -- and it was not a small one -- came this week when Merck & Co. Inc. (MRK) announced it would cut 4,400 jobs, including 3,200 full-time positions, or about 5 percent of its work force.
"Whenever growth starts to slow down, total employee population is going to follow suit," said John Challenger, chief executive of Challenger, Gray & Christmas, the Chicago-based outplacement firm.
To further unsettle employees at the world's third-largest drug maker, Merck Chief Executive Raymond Gilmartin told his troops more job cuts were "highly likely."
Many major drug companies that enjoyed double-digit profit growth year in and year out have hit hard times.
The laundry list of woes includes competition from cheaper generics, a lack of new billion-dollar drugs to replace those that have gone off patent, the cost of government probes into marketing and manufacturing practices and, in some cases, massive litigation over recalled drugs.
Mounting pressure from state officials and advocacy groups calling for price controls in the United States, where prescription drugs are by far the most expensive in the world and account for nearly half of all global sales, also portend tough times for an industry that once seemed immune to such instability.
"There are a number of initiatives out there that are making it a riskier environment for pharmaceutical companies," said Challenger, citing the rising chorus of calls for allowing importation of much less expensive drugs from Canada.
That environment is manifesting itself in the loss of thousands of jobs.
Prior to the Merck announcement, troubled Schering-Plough Corp. (SGP) said in August it planned about 1,000 job cuts.
Pfizer Inc. (PFE) , the world's largest drug maker, has been coy about numbers, but its absorption of Pharmacia Corp. this year is expected to land thousands more industry workers on the unemployment line.
Baxter International Inc. (BAX) and Cerus Corp. (CERS) also announced massive job cuts this year.
"It's a sign of the times in the industry, and the fact is that the companies are going to have to start consolidating from here," said David Moskowitz, an analyst for Friedman Billings Ramsey.
"GARDEN STATE" HIT HARD
New Jersey, with its famed pharmaceutical corridor home to many of the world's largest drug companies, is being disproportionately hit by the industry downturn, which will tax the state's employment resources.
"Any time one of the state's largest employers announces layoffs, it's an issue of grave concern," said New Jersey Labor Commissioner Albert Kroll.
In the past two years, the state has spent more than $2.6 million in training grants to eight pharmaceutical companies, Kroll said. Those costs will surely mount as the state sets into motion its "rapid response team" to help with reemployment assistance and work force transition.
Kroll expressed confidence that the drug industry "will rebound strongly" despite the recent string of setbacks.
But employment expert Challenger said past belief that a good, high-paying job in the pharmaceutical industry was a job for life was always a myth.
"There's no place that's a safe haven, and anybody that thought that pharmaceuticals was a safe haven was fooling themselves," Challenger said.
"There's no business that can constantly be growing. There are always cycles." (Additional reporting by Jed Seltzer) REUTERS
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
