Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
People can understandably probably take issue with aspects of this article, but I thought it was a compelling look at how a company that wasn't anything revolutionary or helpful to mankind has done extraordinarily well over decades (and this, despite the fact that the industry it's in has been in decline for a while.)
Always hate these kinda (success) good company stock stories, reminding Me "What If", I just would have taken $2 a week when I was young and bought one share of a Major U.S. company, salted those shares away for 40-50 years? Can you spell Multi- millionaire at 50? Note:My first paycheck was $28 wk. working for $1 hour, would have never missed $2wk. (invested), never seen that much money before in my hand All filed under "Opportunities to get rich in the U.S. (investing)"
I know Peter Lynch advised similarly to seek boring companies that nobody liked, sanitation, mortuaries, etc...and companies with little or no analyst coverage...off Wall Street's radar. Though not sure that's possible anymore in US at least.
Wonder what financials look like for cocaine or other illicit/illegal drugs/trade.
As for Motely Fool website, I long ago stopped visiting...too many teaser ads/articles just...though maybe it is improving, since this particular article is pretty clear of that stuff, pop-ups, etc.
The drug dealing business has always been extremely profitable because the supply-demand equation bucks the fundamental marginal utility law of economics. If you're an addict, the more drugs you have, the more you want. So it's no surprise that Altria is one of the world's most successful companies. It sells an addictive product that people are literally willing to kill themselves to consume. Depressing but true.
I know Peter Lynch advised similarly to seek boring companies that nobody liked, sanitation, mortuaries, etc...and companies with little or no analyst coverage...off Wall Street's radar. Though not sure that's possible anymore in US at least.
Wonder what financials look like for cocaine or other illicit/illegal drugs/trade.
As for Motely Fool website, I long ago stopped visiting...too many teaser ads/articles just...though maybe it is improving, since this particular article is pretty clear of that stuff, pop-ups, etc.
I think there are very few companies that are off radar. There are some companies that are maybe not "household names" or the first thing that people think of. I own Ecolab (ECL) and International Flavors and Fragrances (IFF). Especially love the latter - as I've noted before, when people think of the supermarket, they think of Kraft, Kellogg, etc, they don't think of the few companies that provide the flavors for the majority of what you find in the supermarket. Ecolab is one of the world's largest hygiene co's and also has water and energy divisions. I wouldn't add to either at this point (especially IFF after what it did after the quarter the other day), but they are long-term holdings.
I think most consumer names are overvalued at this point, but the "boring" has - over long periods of time - done well.
I don't visit Motley Fool ever, but I thought that article was kinda interesting.
@Scott - good stuff and I appreciate your line of thought. Neither of the two you mentioned meet, or met, my minimum yield threshold of 3% so I went with the likes of Legget & Platt and McCormick instead. I'm pretty sure not many are aware of the former but everyone most likely has a bottle of something distributed by the latter in their kitchen. It was the swoon in 2008-9 that dished up these goodies.
@scott I'm just curious, if you will indulge me. How many individual stocks do you own at one time? You seem to have a good handle on why you invest in them, so I am not questioning your rationale or ability to track them.
12:14PM Flag "The drug dealing business has always been extremely profitable because the supply-demand equation bucks the fundamental marginal utility law of economics. If you're an addict, the more drugs you have, the more you want. So it's no surprise that Altria is one of the world's most successful companies. It sells an addictive product that people are literally willing to kill themselves to consume. Depressing but true."
Mister, I Guarantee you use drugs everyday, if its only an aspirin or cancer medication, I don't care......... any overused product can become Addictive, what about Fat people to kill themselves with food, is that why food companies are successful?, is too much sugar, too much salt good for anyone, how many people are killed by cars each year? should we not sell these overused products? better think, before condemnation....... I don't get your logic...
As an addict myself I feel okay saying that I've never met a chemo patient yet who honestly couldn't wait to get their next hit. Tobacco is not a necessity for life as we know it.
@Tampa: I merely stated the facts, Tampa, not asserted any morality to them. Addictive products tend to be immensely profitable ones. And it's no accident by the way that Philip Morris, now Altria also once owned a snack food business. Sugar has been shown to be as addictive as crack. I never said companies shouldn't sell the products, merely that there is a perverse economics to them. If you want to kill yourself with cigarettes and sugary foods, be my guest.
@Tampa: I merely stated the facts, Tampa, not asserted any morality to them. Addictive products tend to be immensely profitable ones. And it's no accident by the way that Philip Morris, now Altria also once owned a snack food business.
"Sugar has been shown to be as addictive as crack."
I wish I had $5 for every time that I've seen that "has been shown to be" routine. Almost anything in the entire world can be made to be "shown to be" if you set up the comparison so as to prove what you set out to prove.
I wouldn't be the least surprised if there is a test lab somewhere with "shown to be" on one door, and "shown not to be" on another door on the other side of the building. Pay your money, get the answer that you want.
@Old Joe. The highly addictive nature and toxicity of sugar was discussed on 60 Minutes in this segment. : cbsnews.com/news/is-sugar-toxic-01-04-2012/ The addictive nature is discussed starting on minute 9:56. But 60 Minutes and the universities doing the sugar research must be run by Marxists trying to topple the sugar industry, right?
@Old Joe. The highly addictive nature and toxicity of sugar was discussed on 60 Minutes in this segment. : cbsnews.com/news/is-sugar-toxic-01-04-2012/ The addictive nature is discussed starting on minute 9:56. But 60 Minutes and the universities doing the sugar research must be run by Marxists trying to topple the sugar industry, right?
LOL.
When I was a kid, I actually stopped drinking regular Coke because I was at a zoo where they were doing a demonstration of how much sugar is in a Coke. It's one of those things where as a kid you know something's bad for you but you don't see how much of the bad for you is in it. As I'm watching the person dump more and more (and more and more and more) sugar in, I'm sitting there thinking, "Holy ****."
I think it was literally from about that day where I stopped drinking regular Coke...and started drinking Diet, which isn't good for me, either. The funny thing is that I can't even drink regular Coke now because it tastes so aggressively sweet to me.
So, probably won't work for everyone, but show someone literally how much sugar is in Coke and they may reconsider drinking it.
But why sugar? How about salt or caffeine? There are a number of substances that in large amounts are harmful. Everything in moderation. Part of the equation that has been overlooked here is the activity level of society these days. People who drank soda pop way back did not develop weight issues and disease like we do now. People were more active years ago. All this has to be included in the equation. Additionally, the switch from sugar to HFCS had a large effect.
@LewisBraham, to answer your questions; None of the media sources interest me. As you already know, viewership of network news has been dropping as well as newspaper reading. While I might catch some news here and there, I make up my own mind on the news rather than believe whole stock and barrel what the MSM reports. It is all opinion and biased.
I also do not need to read the Princeton study. I do know what too much sugar does over time as I have diabetes type 2. That was my doing. I had a sweet tooth before. But I could have taken too much salt and developed high blood pressure, or taken too many Tylenol and ruined my liver.
They should do experiments on me in terms of ability to tolerate the latter. As for salt, I can't believe how much is in some packaged foods these days.
" Part of the equation that has been overlooked here is the activity level of society these days"
@Old_Joe, the same lab has a door labeled "4 out of 5 ? recommend"
Salt isn't bad for everyone, I have low blood pressure and my doctor's always said my tendency to abuse salt is probably helpful. Its certainly not causing a problem.
Altria is a brilliant company. Where else will you find a company that doesn't need to spend money on expensive advertising, has huge market share with enormous barriers for anyone else wanting to take that away, and a price so dominated by tax that you can raise your prices 10 percent every year and no one notices (that's Altria's price increase, not taxes)? I think these days tax authorities are far more addicted to cigarettes than most people are.
I keep both Altria and Philip Morris International on my list of stocks to watch because they've been worth investing in for years. Whenever the price drops for some reason I buy, love the dividend and have always made a good capital gain on top of it.
And all this to stress MY point: that you should invest in any Damn Legal product that makes money, no matter if it is " Depressing" to anyone else......I do
@LewisBraham: "But 60 Minutes and the universities doing the sugar research must be run by Marxists trying to topple the sugar industry, right?"
Well, Lewis, you must be pretty new here. I can assure you that our more conservatively oriented contributors are getting a pretty good laugh at your implication regarding my political perspectives.
well, i come from a llllong line of addicts. booze addicts, pill addicts, various odd-religion addicts, etc etc. my three main contributions to this family's tale of woe have been addictions to cigarettes, sugar and salt. salt i haven't been able to kick. it took me 12 years to stop smoking. and sugar i beat in a week. damn that salt. it'll be the death o me yet!
As I said to the guys who built our house a few years back and they all asked if they could smoke around the property, "Sure, as long as its Marlboro." And they all had'em in their pockets. Bought the stuff mid-90's rock bottom flying by the seat of my pants. BTW, it makes up for Shearson who recommended BAC, and the financial adviser who thought Lynas Corp was just the thing. (Both long since fired.) As long as the success outweighs the disasters, I guess...
Comments
reminding Me "What If", I just would have taken $2 a week when I was young and bought one share of a Major U.S. company, salted those shares away for 40-50 years?
Can you spell Multi- millionaire at 50?
Note:My first paycheck was $28 wk. working for $1 hour, would have never missed $2wk. (invested), never seen that much money before in my hand
All filed under "Opportunities to get rich in the U.S. (investing)"
Thanks Scott.
Does seem paradoxical at several levels.
I know Peter Lynch advised similarly to seek boring companies that nobody liked, sanitation, mortuaries, etc...and companies with little or no analyst coverage...off Wall Street's radar. Though not sure that's possible anymore in US at least.
Wonder what financials look like for cocaine or other illicit/illegal drugs/trade.
As for Motely Fool website, I long ago stopped visiting...too many teaser ads/articles just...though maybe it is improving, since this particular article is pretty clear of that stuff, pop-ups, etc.
I think most consumer names are overvalued at this point, but the "boring" has - over long periods of time - done well.
I don't visit Motley Fool ever, but I thought that article was kinda interesting.
LewisBraham
12:14PM Flag
"The drug dealing business has always been extremely profitable because the supply-demand equation bucks the fundamental marginal utility law of economics. If you're an addict, the more drugs you have, the more you want. So it's no surprise that Altria is one of the world's most successful companies. It sells an addictive product that people are literally willing to kill themselves to consume. Depressing but true."
Mister, I Guarantee you use drugs everyday, if its only an aspirin or cancer medication, I don't care......... any overused product can become Addictive, what about Fat people to kill themselves with food, is that why food companies are successful?, is too much sugar, too much salt good for anyone, how many people are killed by cars each year? should we not sell these overused products? better think, before condemnation.......
I don't get your logic...
I wish I had $5 for every time that I've seen that "has been shown to be" routine. Almost anything in the entire world can be made to be "shown to be" if you set up the comparison so as to prove what you set out to prove.
I wouldn't be the least surprised if there is a test lab somewhere with "shown to be" on one door, and "shown not to be" on another door on the other side of the building. Pay your money, get the answer that you want.
The addictive nature is discussed starting on minute 9:56. But 60 Minutes and the universities doing the sugar research must be run by Marxists trying to topple the sugar industry, right?
When I was a kid, I actually stopped drinking regular Coke because I was at a zoo where they were doing a demonstration of how much sugar is in a Coke. It's one of those things where as a kid you know something's bad for you but you don't see how much of the bad for you is in it. As I'm watching the person dump more and more (and more and more and more) sugar in, I'm sitting there thinking, "Holy ****."
I think it was literally from about that day where I stopped drinking regular Coke...and started drinking Diet, which isn't good for me, either. The funny thing is that I can't even drink regular Coke now because it tastes so aggressively sweet to me.
So, probably won't work for everyone, but show someone literally how much sugar is in Coke and they may reconsider drinking it.
Here's an Article in the New York Times: nytimes.com/2014/12/23/opinion/sugar-season-its-everywhere-and-addictive.html
Just out of curiosity: what is a credible news source for you?
@Scott,
I know. I've seen a couple of videos on sugar in soda too. It is really remarkable.
@LewisBraham, to answer your questions; None of the media sources interest me. As you already know, viewership of network news has been dropping as well as newspaper reading. While I might catch some news here and there, I make up my own mind on the news rather than believe whole stock and barrel what the MSM reports. It is all opinion and biased.
I also do not need to read the Princeton study. I do know what too much sugar does over time as I have diabetes type 2. That was my doing. I had a sweet tooth before. But I could have taken too much salt and developed high blood pressure, or taken too many Tylenol and ruined my liver.
They should do experiments on me in terms of ability to tolerate the latter. As for salt, I can't believe how much is in some packaged foods these days.
" Part of the equation that has been overlooked here is the activity level of society these days"
Completely true.
Salt isn't bad for everyone, I have low blood pressure and my doctor's always said my tendency to abuse salt is probably helpful. Its certainly not causing a problem.
Altria is a brilliant company. Where else will you find a company that doesn't need to spend money on expensive advertising, has huge market share with enormous barriers for anyone else wanting to take that away, and a price so dominated by tax that you can raise your prices 10 percent every year and no one notices (that's Altria's price increase, not taxes)? I think these days tax authorities are far more addicted to cigarettes than most people are.
I keep both Altria and Philip Morris International on my list of stocks to watch because they've been worth investing in for years. Whenever the price drops for some reason I buy, love the dividend and have always made a good capital gain on top of it.
Well, Lewis, you must be pretty new here. I can assure you that our more conservatively oriented contributors are getting a pretty good laugh at your implication regarding my political perspectives.
BTW, it makes up for Shearson who recommended BAC, and the financial adviser who thought Lynas Corp was just the thing. (Both long since fired.) As long as the success outweighs the disasters, I guess...
best, hawk