Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Biotech / Medical : Merck -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: David C. Burns who wrote (1547)	11/9/2007 10:49:27 AM
From: Carey Thompson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1580

This $4.5 billion settlement of the VIOXX cases is good for Merck. I still think Merck did the right thing pulling VIOXX off the market back in 2004 when Merck discovered VIOXX could linked to heart disease and strokes. Remember VIOXX did not cause heart disease and strokes but it did not help either. So, Merck followed the Hipprocratic oath to "do no harm". Financially, the $4.5 bill charge to 4q2007 earnings may result in yearly revenues of $26 bill and yearly net income of $1.5 bill. Before I estimated the same revenues but net income of $6.3 bill. For perspective, recent actual amounts are: revs net income billions of $$$s 2006 22.6 4.4 2005 22.0 4.6 2004 22.9 5.8 2003 22.5 6.8 So operationally, Merck is making more money and its price should follow its improved earnings. I hope the VIOXX charge does not overshadow Merck's improved profitability.