Valeant is a sham

As the title says, Valeant IS A SHAM.

http://www.fool.ca/2013/06/03/canadian-stocks-fall-led-by-valeant-pharmaceuticals/

The above is a link. Sure, it's a few days old, but it shows EXACTLY what Valeant and it's shady investors are all about.
Hint...read between the lines...I know that is tough for some of you wallstreet pricks and wall street wannabe's, and I know you "won't get it", but for the rest of us who have more than a pea size brain, WE GET IT, WE SEE IT, AND WE WANT NOTHING TO DO WITH IT.

 

No problem, I will buy your shares so you can get out how does ten bucks sound seeing as you want nothing to do with it. Fucken moron.

 

They won't keep any of us around for it matter, so you're a fucking moron.

 

Is this English?

 

Let me spell it out for you...unless you stay until 2016 those shares mean nothing. You think you'll survive for 3 years here, lol????

 

You think I am dumb enough to have shares in Valeant?
YOU ARE THE MORON.
For fuck sakes, you jerkweeds are blind. And dumb.

 

They gave them to us you ignorant nobody.

 

shares are at 83.77...double what they were a year ago

 

Agreed, got mine as the old bioavail at 13 bucks. The moron must have got his yesterday. I tell you there are some real inbred Jeds on this site. Valeant has made me rich while he packs his lunch to go to work a Mcdicks.

 

So that's all that matters, huh? As long as the shareholders make money (for now), we're all OK with MP destroying one company after another. Congratulations on your short term profit at the cost of long term stability and the livlihoods of thousands of people (by the time he's done). I'm happy for you that you can retire well - I'm sure you won't lose sleep thinking about all those (acquired and terminated by Valeant) who paid for your gains with their future.

 

And please do tell us, how long do your shares have to vest before you can sell them off....Lol.
By the time you can cash in, Valeant's shares will be worth less than junk bonds.
YOU IGNORANT DUMBFUCK.

 

beach blanket banana tits bingo

 

Good question so how long do your shares have to vest before you can sell them off Hot Shot!!! Do tell.

 

Oh grow up - business is in business to make money and provide a return to shareholders - not to be a nursery-school for employees. Extra employees cost money - and need to go to improve shareholder equity. If you want a nursery-school environment, then go get a government job. As a US Capitalistic moron, you should already know this.

 

That's right you ignorant Canadian...everyone in America is a greedy, capitalistic, warmonger just as everyone in Canada is an idiot, liberal socialist. Correct?

 

Well, if you are employed by Valeant, it will depend upon your employment terms...
But seeing as how you asked this question, and assuming you are directing it at me since you quoted me, I will assume you are not employed at Valeant, or you are simply a jerkoff shareholder with no ties to the company other than your joke of an investment.
Either way, go fuck yourself, you useless waste of human skin.

 

What a simplistic, naive viewpoint. I'll disregard the name calling for the sake of the argument. I'm talking about corporate social responsibility as well as balancing profit maximization with a corporation's long-term ability to remain viable. There is MUCH conversation right now about Valeant's debt load and the lack of organic growth as indicator's of financial trouble on the horizon.

If you're interested in expanding the scope of your understanding on the subject, you can search the "shareholder vs. stakeholder debate." If a company is interested in developing a stable, sustainable, long-term business, it makes NO sense at all to continue to decimate the employee population. Most educated people would agree that this is not a long-term sustainable business strategy and certainly not a smart thing to do in a regulated industry. Based on Valeant's growth through acquisition business model, the logical conclusion is that Pearson isn't interested in a sustainable future for Valeant, its employees, customers, and other stakeholders, but is using this company as a hedge fund. If you have a thoughtful, intelligent reply, sans name-calling, please continue the debate.

 

"Based on Valeant's growth through acquisition business model, the logical conclusion is that Pearson isn't interested in a sustainable future for Valeant, its employees, customers, and other stakeholders, but is using this company as a hedge fund."

Model seems like Buffet's BRK PLUS the debt load.

 

Good Lord, i have to say that the CSR debate is a no win discussion when pinned to the needs of the employees themselves - its too incestuous. CSR is a broader subject and NOT about retaining excess resources just to be a "good company" in the community like you imply. Bottom line is this - Valeant will sever excess people to improve bottom line results for shareholders and that is their duty. To wave a Social responsibility flag to justify not laying off employees is a weak argument and highly self serving. Get ready for a right sizing of B&L, its already in the news in Rochester. Search it up.... CSR is a buzz phrase! Cash is and always will be king in the medical world - people who need treatments wont give a rats ass if the company built a new library when it comes to drug brands...and employees need work and will flock to where there is a job regardless of the CSR profile of the company. For every article you find on the pluses of CSR, I can find one that suggests its simply a marketing strategy (Something that VPI does not need). Bottom line, get off the social high-horse and get ready for your black folder; its coming. Capitalism is the American way, and Mike represents that philosophy perfectly.

 

Hope Mike enjoys his Father's Day with his kids. I am sure they are so proud of their POS father that doesn't give a flying #$%^ about people. What goes around comes around Mikey.