# CSL - CSL Limited



## kaisong (16 December 2004)

Topical biotech company, price goes all the way down from start and later start raising!! watch this one, it may raise to $60 in the next few yrs!


----------



## Jay-684 (14 July 2005)

*Thoughts on CSL*

any one have any thoughts/technical analysis on CSL?

I'm thinking of buying, as its popped up a few times over the past weeks with good reviews, however given its recent run, I dont know if buying now would be a good thing, or if the recent run would suffer a correction in the near future.

Any advice would be great, as I havent been able to find anything else here about the company


----------



## Knobby22 (14 July 2005)

*Re: Thoughts on CSL*

Look at the cervical vaccine thread for more info.

In my view this is a good stock long term (2 years +) as earnings will increase and there are some upsides including a new drug on the horizon.
This year may be a bit flat as they have to pay a % of their earnings to the company that they took their plasma production factories off.

Short term maybe a techie has an opinion.


----------



## RichKid (14 July 2005)

*Re: Thoughts on CSL*

Just thought I'd post some graphs as people are interested, I'm a novice at this so don't take it as advice, haven't done much work on this but I'm surprised again at the fact that this is the third ASX200 stock I've noticed this week which appears to be forming a double top (others are UTB, AMP(triple top?), MAY).

The broader market index is also having another go to get through previous tops, so a lot of uncertainty in my view. From memory you need a break below the support/neckline of the double to for it to be confirmed. The higher lows now need a higher high for confirmation of the uptrend, perhaps on a lower trajectory if it come good- but might be the last gasp of the current uptrend. Likely to range bw 25 & 35 imo if it can't break through the resistance. For going long I'd personally wait for break of resistance and setlling above the top on volume but that's just my idea of a safe trade.

The longterm chart shows a nice double bottom and small H&S reversal pattern with a strong run until the recent break of the uptrend and current attempt at breaking through old highs. I haven't done any fib lines or retracement levels on this but it would be useful- appears to be oscillating around the 50% retracement level (ie midway bw previous high and low as shown on longterm chart).


----------



## michael_selway (1 November 2005)

*CSL - Question?*

Hi i noticed CSL dropped BIG from Jan 02 to Jun 03, then it began to rise again

Does anyone know the reasons why it dropped? any links?

thanks

MS


----------



## ice (1 November 2005)

*Re: CSL - Question*

Not one I follow but world over-supply of plasma was the big issue from memory.

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/02/18/1045330601931.html


ice


----------



## Prospector (14 December 2006)

*Re: CSL  - why no posts for a share that has risen $25 in 12 months?  Ethical too!*

Dredging this one up from the archives.......

The CSL story this year has been spectacular in terms of ethical shares.  Most recent has been the Gardasil story with regard to prevention of almost all cervical cancers. And last week they reduced the price so that all teen girls could be treated.  (as an aside Barnaby Joyce said that girls shouldnt be treated because it might encourage them to become promiscuous.  Yeh, right! Can you see the hormonally driven 17 year old thinking ...... "I musnt have sex in case I get cervical cancer!" pfft to that!)

But that is just one of the good news stories it has released.

Not to mention the share price which yesterday rose $4.89 to close later at $62.75.  

Curious though, it has increased over $25 in 12 months (well, actually more like 9 months ) and not one mention on the forum!


----------



## Knobby22 (14 December 2006)

*Re: CSL - Question*

Out of fashion (high PE) and the fact that McNamee went up against the big boys and risked the company by going into plasma. there was also distressed plasma company that had low technology that deliberately sold its plasma cheap to force someone to buy it.  McNamee used the low plasma price to double the size of the plasma business by buying a good plasma business off a strong competitor.  Oversold badly, it amazes me how a trend has momentum of its own.

I own quite a few. It is a very good company with good management and blue sky that invrests heavily in research. My personal valuation of the stock is around $85 neglecting blue sky so I will not be a seller at these prices. If the company stopped spending money on R+D the bottom line would be much higher.

I mentioned them a while back in this forum.

For my mind, the only true quality growth stock in the ASX

K22


----------



## Prospector (14 December 2006)

*Re: CSL - Question*

And currently up another $3.15 atm!  Sorry Nobby, didnt see your post about CSL!  I just did a search and came up with this thread and thought that duplicate threads were verbotten here!

The Ferret did a rather nice report on CSL today!


----------



## michael_selway (14 December 2006)

*Re: CSL - Question*



			
				Prospector said:
			
		

> And currently up another $3.15 atm!  Sorry Nobby, didnt see your post about CSL!  I just did a search and came up with this thread and thought that duplicate threads were verbotten here!
> 
> The Ferret did a rather nice report on CSL today!




Great stock

Earnings and Dividends Forecast (cents per share) 
2006 2007 2008 2009 
EPS 184.2 231.3 293.3 365.5 
DPS 68.0 80.5 102.9 122.6 



> Date: 14/12/2006
> Author: Eli Greenblat
> Source: The Australian Financial Review --- Page: 13
> CSL is expected to enjoy strong profits in 2007, but analysts warn that 2008 could see a downturn. The Australian-listed biotechnology company reported on 13 December 2006 that profits will reach $A440m to $A460m in 2006-07. Analysts say a plasma shortage in the US has led to increased prices. However, they say the increase will be shortlived. The latest earnings guidance was 10 per cent up on the August 2006 forecast..





thx

MS


----------



## chops_a_must (22 January 2007)

*Re: CSL - Question*



			
				michael_selway said:
			
		

> Earnings and Dividends Forecast (cents per share)
> 2006 2007 2008 2009
> EPS 184.2 231.3 293.3 365.5
> DPS 68.0 80.5 102.9 122.6



Some crazy EPS forecasts there. Does anyone think there will be a negative impact on the share price when Gardasil gets competition later in the year?


----------



## michael_selway (22 January 2007)

*Re: CSL - Question*



			
				chops_a_must said:
			
		

> Some crazy EPS forecasts there. Does anyone think there will be a negative impact on the share price when Gardasil gets competition later in the year?




heres some updated ones

*Earnings and Dividends Forecast (cents per share) 
2006 2007 2008 2009 
EPS 184.2 246.7 305.9 366.0 
DPS 68.0 86.6 104.4 123.5 * 

thx

MS


----------



## billhill (30 January 2007)

Just read that CSL say they have developed a bird flu vaccine.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200701/s1836551.htm

Very promising especially if they recieve orders from some of the SE asian countries.


----------



## Prospector (2 February 2007)

*CSL - why so quiet about this company?*

I cant find a thread for CSL which surprised me given that this company has soared in the last few months.  Maybe the Mods will find it for me.

This is one share that I decided to buy several months ago because while I thought it would be a good performer price wise, it is a company that provides state of the art medical research to the world (Gardasil, Bird Flu vaccine to name the 2 most obvious) and so has become my ethical share.

Todays announcement has seen it rise $2 today, yet barely a mention on the forum.

Why is that?  Are biomedical shares simply not exciting enough?  Gardasil will save so many lives, save $$$ in medical treatment in the prevention of cervical cancer, yet barely a whisper -  please tell me it isnt because its about women?  Or do they need to discover a cure for prostate cancer before it gets talked about


----------



## TheAbyss (2 February 2007)

*Re: CSL - why so quiet about this company?*

Hi

try looking here, CSL - CSL Limited


----------



## Prospector (2 February 2007)

Why didnt it come up in the search function then!  Dammit, now it does!  I wonder who had the blonde moment!


----------



## fleathedog (2 February 2007)

> Todays announcement has seen it rise $2 today, yet barely a mention on the forum.




STOP REMINDING ME!!!!

I was personally told by a mates dad Prof. Ian Gust, a world renown expert on virology, that CSL was good buying at $15. Usually I am sceptical of even very knowledeable people talking about stocks. Great products don't necessarily mean great businesses. 

But why, at a PE of 15 (if my memory serves me), with a consistant history history of profitability in a resiliant industry DID I F***ING IGNORE HIM?!?!?!?


----------



## Knobby22 (2 February 2007)

*Re: CSL - why so quiet about this company?*



			
				Prospector said:
			
		

> Todays announcement has seen it rise $2 today, yet barely a mention on the forum.
> 
> Why is that?  Are biomedical shares simply not exciting enough?  Gardasil will save so many lives, save $$$ in medical treatment in the prevention of cervical cancer, yet barely a whisper -  please tell me it isnt because its about women?  Or do they need to discover a cure for prostate cancer before it gets talked about




I was thinking of posting. 

The announcement today is great showing the great business sense of CSL management.

Also saw the following:-

Revenues ahead of expectations. Gardasil revenues were US$155 for the quarter and US$235m for the calendar year. CSL earns a net ~6% royalty on Gardasil sales. Excluding the $10m Gardasil sales in CSL’s FY06 year, the ramp-up of sales has outpaced MRE’s estimates for 1H07 by 44.7%. As a result, MRE have upgraded their FY07 royalty number by $10.9m to $52.0m ahead of CSL’s original guidance of $40–50 given at the FY06
result.

McNamee will be awash with cash soon and have a lazy balance sheet. We may get another takeover happening or a buyback next year. I predict that CSL will be a top 10 company in 5 years.

Also, don't forget this cervical vaccine makes up only a small amount of profit for this company. They have an amazing world wide plasma business and some great future drug prospects since taking over Zenyth (which I also had shares in). This includes an asthma cure!


----------



## Prospector (2 February 2007)

fleathedog said:
			
		

> STOP REMINDING ME!!!!
> 
> I was personally told by a mates dad Prof. Ian Gust, a world renown expert on virology, that CSL was good buying at $15. Usually I am sceptical of even very knowledeable people talking about stocks. Great products don't necessarily mean great businesses.
> 
> But why, at a PE of 15 (if my memory serves me), with a consistant history history of profitability in a resiliant industry DID I F***ING IGNORE HIM?!?!?!?




You ignored Prof Gust    Serves you right then :


----------



## >Apocalypto< (2 February 2007)

This is a great share for the shorrt medium and long.

But I am only in short term trades. I have been having lots of fun since 11/06 I only added it to my list then!

I just got out yesterday pulled out a nice 6 dollar chunk!


----------



## >Apocalypto< (2 February 2007)

*Re: CSL - why so quiet about this company?*



			
				Prospector said:
			
		

> I cant find a thread for CSL which surprised me given that this company has soared in the last few months.  Maybe the Mods will find it for me.
> 
> This is one share that I decided to buy several months ago because while I thought it would be a good performer price wise, it is a company that provides state of the art medical research to the world (Gardasil, Bird Flu vaccine to name the 2 most obvious) and so has become my ethical share.
> 
> ...





Your ethical share that is a great way of selecting!


----------



## CanOz (2 February 2007)

Another one to go short on next week. Looks like its closed well off the highs today. It is Friday though. Been a pretty hard run for it lately.

Cheers,


----------



## Prospector (21 February 2007)

Currently up $7.70 in 10 minutes.  Any record?


----------



## chops_a_must (21 February 2007)

Prospector said:
			
		

> Currently up $7.70 in 10 minutes.  Any record?



A rather large gap up. Lol! Big dividend increase, fantastic.


----------



## michael_selway (21 February 2007)

chops_a_must said:
			
		

> A rather large gap up. Lol! Big dividend increase, fantastic.




lets see what the new forecasts will be, below is before annoucement

*Earnings and Dividends Forecast (cents per share) 
2006 2007 2008 2009 
EPS 184.2 249.0 301.8 367.3 
DPS 68.0 86.6 103.7 126.6 

EPS(c) PE Growth 
Year Ending 30-06-07 249.0 28.2 35.2% 
Year Ending 30-06-08 301.8 23.2 21.2% * 

thx

MS


----------



## chops_a_must (23 February 2007)

Is someone able to do a wave count on this? Because it looks pretty interesting on the 10 year chart.


----------



## dhukka (23 February 2007)

michael_selway said:
			
		

> lets see what the new forecasts will be, below is before annoucement
> 
> *Earnings and Dividends Forecast (cents per share)
> 2006 2007 2008 2009
> ...




Michael if you want to understand the value of CSL looking at earnings is only half the story. If you look past the headline result of a 46% increase in profits you''ll see that $53m (mainly exchange rate losses) was written off directly against equity. Taking these charges into consideration NPAT is up just 5.3% on pcp. Fair value of CSL is around $35 -  $40. One of the most overpriced large cap stocks on the ASX IMHO.


----------



## Knobby22 (23 February 2007)

dhukka said:
			
		

> Michael if you want to understand the value of CSL looking at earnings is only half the story. If you look past the headline result of a 46% increase in profits you''ll see that $53m (mainly exchange rate losses) was written off directly against equity. Taking these charges into consideration NPAT is up just 5.3% on pcp. Fair value of CSL is around $35 -  $40. One of the most overpriced large cap stocks on the ASX IMHO.




Dhukka

This is an international company, the way I read it is that the foreign exchange rate losses represent the fall in foreign currencies and assets held in that currency against the $A. When the $A falls it will reverse.

This is an international biotech drug company with high barriers to entry, increasing profits, real growth dues to research and takeovers such as Zenyth (which has a possible asthma cure among others).
What about the $85 mil "lost" on research?

It is not an Aussie bank and should be looked at differently.


----------



## dhukka (23 February 2007)

Knobby, 

Since CSL earns most of its money in foreign currencies the movements in exchange rates represent a normal part of business. However CSL reports results as if they those currency movements were abnormal. Whilst its instructive to show the effect of exchange rate movements on earnings if you are truly interested in valuing a company's shares then looking at the underlying growth in equity is more important than earnings. If you just look at earnings and ignore changes in s'holders equity your missing the big picture.

You're right this is not a bank but it should not be valued any differently. CSL is a well managed profitable business but at current prices anyone interested in seeking value should look elsewhere. 



			
				Knobby22 said:
			
		

> Dhukka
> This is an international company, the way I read it is that the foreign exchange rate losses represent the fall in foreign currencies and assets held in that currency against the $A. When the $A falls it will reverse.
> 
> This is an international biotech drug company with high barriers to entry, increasing profits, real growth dues to research and takeovers such as Zenyth (which has a possible asthma cure among others).
> ...


----------



## Knobby22 (23 February 2007)

dhukka said:
			
		

> Knobby,
> 
> Since CSL earns most of its money in foreign currencies the movements in exchange rates represent a normal part of business. However CSL reports results as if they those currency movements were abnormal. Whilst its instructive to show the effect of exchange rate movements on earnings if you are truly interested in valuing a company's shares then looking at the underlying growth in equity is more important than earnings. If you just look at earnings and ignore changes in s'holders equity your missing the big picture.
> 
> You're right this is not a bank but it should not be valued any differently. CSL is a well managed profitable business but at current prices anyone interested in seeking value should look elsewhere.




I see what you are saying dhukka, but wouldn't you say that as the money and assets stay in the country that it is made then it really doesn't matter.
It would obviously if say the company was importing into Australia but in a real sense they are separate business linked by R&D. I would be horrified if CSL started taking contracts to smooth out the currency fluctuations purely to keep asset prices the same.

Asset value is not to me an important factor unless the buying and selling of the assets i.e. land takes place. That is why in a bank it is more important but not overly so. 
I know Benjamin Graham harped on it in his books but times have changed.   The company is not a selection of assets to be sold but a business.

If you feel it is, then fair enough. Technical indicator investors often think that we fundamental investors see the same things and make the same judgements but the reality is we are as different as they are.

I have had a great run with this stock, buying at the float and at $15 and $20 when they dropped briefly (and have never sold) and the company is starting to get near my estimated value of $85 however I am hopeful to hear of some success on the new drug front and expect CSL to be worth $100 in a years time.

Knobby


----------



## dhukka (23 February 2007)

Knobby22 said:
			
		

> I see what you are saying dhukka, but wouldn't you say that as the money and assets stay in the country that it is made then it really doesn't matter.
> It would obviously if say the company was importing into Australia but in a real sense they are separate business linked by R&D. I would be horrified if CSL started taking contracts to smooth out the currency fluctuations purely to keep asset prices the same.
> 
> Asset value is not to me an important factor unless the buying and selling of the assets i.e. land takes place. That is why in a bank it is more important but not overly so.
> ...





Knobby CSL do use hedges against currency fluctuations. Currency movements are reported net of such hedges. I'm not sure what you're talking about with regard to valuing a company based on its asset values. I don't value banks that way or CSL. I value businesses and the value of a business is reflected by its equity value. That equity is then multiplied by a sustainable ROE to refect its future prospects and then discounted at an apporpriate discount rate to reflect an investors required return and the risk of the business. In doing so and using an ROE at the high end of CSL's historical range I cannot get more tha $35 - $40 a share for CSL. 

I would be interested to see how you come up with $85 a share.


----------



## Knobby22 (24 February 2007)

Dhukka

Here is my valuation, I warn you that you will probably hate the way I do it and its pretty rough.

Firstly you need to confirm earnings are represented in the cashflow statement and are not one off. Secondly you need to ensure debt levels will not be disabling. Finally you have to have confidence in management, Elizabeth Alexander and Brian McNamee are probably the most honest and reputable people in the Australian stockmarket so I have no problem there. 

OK, how my latest estimate:-
I chose an interest rate of 8%. I have not accounted for the inflation rate but assume it remains stable.

I have assumed growth of 60% this year, 20% next year then 25% the year after.
EPS will be $4.41 in 2009.

I then assume that future growth is 20% per year and can sell the shares at a PE of 20.

20 x 4.41 = $88.20   reducing to todays price divide by 1.04 (year half over) * 1.08 *1.08

$72.89

Add dividends (0.88/1.08 + 1.04/1.167 +1.28/1,26) = $2.71

and you get a price of $75.60.

So I guess I have to partially agree with you, the shares are fully priced at the present time.


----------



## ducati916 (24 February 2007)

Impressive discussion chap's, possibly I'll have to pop in a little more often.
I have nothing to add unfortunately as I'm not familiar with this stock.

jog on
d998


----------



## chops_a_must (24 February 2007)

Knobby22 said:
			
		

> So I guess I have to partially agree with you, the shares are fully priced at the present time.



And from an insider, there are no new products or discoveries to be released in the near future to keep the price moving up. Apart from perhaps the iscomatrix adjuvant.

So I'm expecting a bit of a retrace after it goes ex-dividend.


----------



## dhukka (25 February 2007)

Knobby22 said:
			
		

> Dhukka
> 
> Here is my valuation, I warn you that you will probably hate the way I do it and its pretty rough.
> 
> ...





Knobby, 

Valuations by nature are subjective. I don't hate your valuation method but I'm not sure about the logic behind it. Essentially you are performing a 3 year DCF but using eps instead of free cashflow. By using eps you are not discounting free cashflow as eps is after depreciation, amortisation, interest and tax, but maybe that's your intention? You are assuming CSL can grow earnings at 20% indefinitely, thats fairly optimistic, its standard practice by analysts to use a 3 - 4% terminal growth rate in DCF calcs. Just for the record I'm not a fan of DCF valuations. However you are making the same mistake analysts make when using DCF's - double counting of cashflows. If you are going to add dividends to your valuation you need to deduct them from eps or else you are counting the cashflow twice, once as retained earnings and once as a distribution in the form of dividends. You can't have it both ways.  



			
				Knobby22 said:
			
		

> I then assume that future growth is 20% per year and can sell the shares at a PE of 20.




If you accept that the value of a business is independent of its price as quoted on the ASX, then how can you use price as an input in determining value? The price has nothing to do with the value of the business.


----------



## Knobby22 (26 February 2007)

Dhukka

To me eps is the real crux of a company, so you are right, it is intended however you still need to look at cashflow, debt, market competitors, long term factors etc. as a seperate exercise.

I disagree that you should not count dividends as it is double counting as a valuation should reward the giving of dividends by a company as it is a gain you get in your hand rather than leaving it in managements hand. Maybe I should have put in a adjustment factor that depends on franking and reduces total value however in this case, dividends affect the valuation of CSL only marginally as they are so small.

Regarding the selling price at a PE of 20. Finally, I am not using price as an input value. I am assuming a level of growth and then providing a resonable price based on that growth. So price is an output, not an input. 

Using 4% growth just bacause it is standard practice is silly, CSL is a high growth company. Assuming 20% growth and therfore a PE of 20 may be too low but I am being conservative. We all know the market doesn't price for indefinitely but for one or two years in advance.

Knobby


----------



## ducati916 (26 February 2007)

*knobby22*

It would seem that you are using a variant of the *GARP* methodology.
If so, is that your general methodology, or due to the current bull market?

jog on
d998


----------



## Knobby22 (26 February 2007)

ducati916 said:
			
		

> *knobby22*
> 
> It would seem that you are using a variant of the *GARP* methodology.
> If so, is that your general methodology, or due to the current bull market?
> ...




Your right. it is very similar! I appear to be though I didn't know of it. My valuation methods are my own invention but of course nothing is original. Thanks for that, there is a lot of interesting information to read.

And the second point is valid also. The parameters change depending on economic outlook and the state of the market. (In other words there is a fudge factor) 

Also, this methodology only works for industrials with a track record.


----------



## ducati916 (26 February 2007)

Knobby22 said:
			
		

> Your right. it is very similar! I appear to be though I didn't know of it. My valuation methods are my own invention but of course nothing is original. Thanks for that, there is a lot of interesting information to read.
> 
> And the second point is valid also. The parameters change depending on economic outlook and the state of the market. (In other words there is a fudge factor)
> 
> Also, this methodology only works for industrials with a track record.





Interesting that you reached this methodology independantly.
I would say that *most* fundamental valuation models require some form of track record.

The *fudge factor*...........don't we all?

jog on
d998


----------



## stoxclimber (26 February 2007)

Dude, your perpetual growth forecast is bigger than your cost of capital..


----------



## dhukka (26 February 2007)

Knobby22 said:
			
		

> Dhukka
> 
> To me eps is the real crux of a company, so you are right, it is intended however you still need to look at cashflow, debt, market competitors, long term factors etc. as a seperate exercise.




Knobby,

Without taking into account what percentage of earnings are retained and how much is paid out as dividends, changes in earnings earnings cannot accurately measure the change in the value of equity - which afterall is what you are trying to do. If you look at cashflow debt, competition and other factors how do you  account for that in your valuation? Do you just adjust your assumed growth rate by an arbitrary number?



			
				Knobby22 said:
			
		

> I disagree that you should not count dividends as it is double counting as a I valuation should reward the giving of dividends by a company as it is a gain you get in your hand rather than leaving it in managements hand. Maybe I should have put in a adjustment factor that depends on franking and reduces total value however in this case, dividends affect the valuation of CSL only marginally as they are so small.Knobby




I didn't say you shouldn't count dividends, dividends are a cashflow to the equity holder and therefore must be counted. I'm saying that your are double counting them. Earnings can only grow through the retention of previous earnings, then re-employment of those earnings and existing equity or by increasing return on equity. 

By discounting the full value of eps of $4.41 you are assuming it is investment cashflow in the hands of the equity holder - which it is if the equity holder sells his/her shares in that year (which I think is what you are assuming?) 
But then you value the dividends again separately in effect double counting them. However since you are discounting eps and not cashflow you may already be be dedcuting enough from cashflow to compensate for double counting the dividend. 


Look at it another way -it's the same as valuing a bond paying 8% by counting the interest payment as a cashflow to the investor and then assuming it is reinvested again which of course it can't be if its paid out already. 



			
				Knobby22 said:
			
		

> Using 4% growth just bacause it is standard practice is silly, CSL is a high growth company. Assuming 20% growth and therfore a PE of 20 may be too low but I am being conservative. We all know the market doesn't price for indefinitely but for one or two years in advance.




I agree CSL can probably increase earnings at the rate you suggest over the next 2 1/2 years however I read your original post as assuming that CSL can grow at 20% indefintely into the future. If that is your assumption it is very far from conservative.


----------



## Knobby22 (26 February 2007)

dhukka said:
			
		

> Knobby,
> 
> Without taking into account what percentage of earnings are retained and how much is paid out as dividends, changes in earnings earnings cannot accurately measure the change in the value of equity - which afterall is what you are trying to do. If you look at cashflow debt, competition and other factors how do you  account for that in your valuation? Do you just adjust your assumed growth rate by an arbitrary number?




In affect, yes but not the growth rate!  I adjust the interest rate which is really the expected rate of return.  In this case it is 8%, for a company with worse management, more competition etc. I will raise the amount substantially. For a small company with low liquidity it may be something like 30%! It is really risk analysis. This is a skill that needs to be developed, but it is a valuable skill. 

The intangibles like competition are very important. One of the things I like about technical analysis is that it is more concerned about the future. These skills can also be supplied through fundamental analysis by looking at the strengths and weaknesses of a company and adjusting your valuation accordingly. In CSL's case you are saying it is well led, has demonstratable advantages, has blue sky that can be very blue. It should be treated more favourably!


Dhukka

I will give you a challenge. Look at RDF and give me a valuation. And I will then give you one and we can compare results.
RDF results are out tomorrow and if the margins are improving this could be a killer company.

Knobby


----------



## dhukka (26 February 2007)

OK Knobby. I've never  looked at this one before but here is my valuation before tomorrows result. Currently generating an uninspiring 14.6% return on equity. Of course if margins improve as you suggest the valuation will go up but at the moment I can get no more than $0.75 - $0.80 cents a share.


----------



## Knobby22 (27 February 2007)

I only get $1.40  but there has been a great increase in contracts the last six months. Better change to RDF thread  (thread drift).


----------



## Gurgler (12 March 2007)

Knobby22 said:
			
		

> the company is starting to get near my estimated value of $85 however I am hopeful to hear of some success on the new drug front and expect CSL to be worth $100 in a years time.
> 
> Knobby




Knobby - clicked over to $80 today. Read your impressive discussion with Dhukka (didn't understand it fully, but hey, not trained in that area!). There's quite a variation between your valuations. You still rate this as a $85 value target? In fact, this matches FN Arena's target of $85.21.


----------



## Knobby22 (13 March 2007)

Gurgler said:
			
		

> Knobby - clicked over to $80 today. Read your impressive discussion with Dhukka (didn't understand it fully, but hey, not trained in that area!). There's quite a variation between your valuations. You still rate this as a $85 value target? In fact, this matches FN Arena's target of $85.21.




It's all a bit subjective. I have not allowed much for blue sky as it is unknown and I am trying to be consevative. I would not be surprised to see the price continue to rise as we are in a strong bull market.

I heard McNamee on the weekend on the ABC. He has two drug programs trials after taking over Zenyth (which I also used to own). One is for asthma, the other for athritis. The trial results should be due within a year. If either is good, watch out! Otherwise CSL looks fully priced at present, though not overpriced.


----------



## investforwealth (24 March 2007)

CSL was the first stock I ever bought... a few days before the recent correction hit.  Thought about dumping it when i was down a few grand, but very glad I didn't... how much has it soared in the last couple of days.

I hadn't expected this sort of price action for at least six months, but you won't hear me complaining.  It's given me a 7.8% return on my investment in less than four weeks.  Now my only regret is that I only bought 50k worth and not 500!

There seemed to be a decided lack of sellers on this stock today, but my concern is that all of you who got in around $15 or even $50 are thinking it might be time to take profits and start dumping them.

Anyone got any opinions on where it might end up next week?


----------



## Prospector (24 March 2007)

I bought in at around $37 and thought about selling a few weeks ago.  I have decided not to sell, maybe ever, as I feel this company really still has a long way to go.  One thing which has always puzzled me is the way the price will rise $3 a day, with no announcement and barely a ripple in the media; wheras a share like Telstra will increase 3 cents and everyone talks about it.


----------



## vishalt (24 March 2007)

Prospector said:
			
		

> I bought in at around $37 and thought about selling a few weeks ago.  I have decided not to sell, maybe ever, as I feel this company really still has a long way to go.  One thing which has always puzzled me is the way the price will rise $3 a day, with no announcement and barely a ripple in the media; wheras a share like Telstra will increase 3 cents and everyone talks about it.



Yeah it's so true hey, but I guess not as many people own CSL as they do Telstra so it gets less attention, but, who cares?

Pharmaceuticals are insanely good performers in a bull phase!

Personally i'm very interested in seeing which Australian stock will reach $100 first! PPT @ $76, MBL @ 81, CSL @ 83, COH @ 63, RIO @ 77..

very interesting times


----------



## investforwealth (26 April 2007)

Despite just about every analyst in the country being bearish on this stock and rating it a SELL, it just continues to smash through previous highs.  Looks like it could win the race to $100 a lot sooner than anyone thought possible if it continues this trend.  I took a nice profit out of it a while back, but soooo wish I'd hung on now!


----------



## Knobby22 (26 April 2007)

True, I sold 1/13th of my holding and regret it.


----------



## Gurgler (26 April 2007)

From earlier this week:

*CSL Should Crack $100 This Year, Says Tech Wizard
FN Arena News - April 23 2007 


The Tech Wizard has observed shares of blood provider CSL (CSL) have been running up the top Bollinger band over the past six month. He explains this is a sign of strong buying in the market.

Supported by ongoing equity broker upgrades and a bullish MACD indicator the outlook for CSL shares continues to look positive, he believes.

The Tech Wizard believes the shares should be in a position to crack the $100 level at some point this year.*


At that time, shares in CSL were higher - the stock was up $1.92 or 2.3% to $86.92.

Today, they cracked 90.08; *now sitting at $90.01.*


----------



## Prospector (26 April 2007)

Still holding......and watching the race with MBL to crack the ton!  And bought CSL and MBL  in the $30's


----------



## Gurgler (28 May 2007)

What a difference a week makes! Last Tuesday the sp was 96.50 and they were talking about the race to $100 with MBL and RIO. Only the later is still in the ballpark.

Mind you, Prospector, at you purchase price I guess you're unfazed.


----------



## Prospector (29 May 2007)

True gurgler, but still dont like to see profit disappearing
Ah, not enough letters; is there a reason why this is happening?


----------



## purple (20 July 2007)

all quiet on the CSL front? looks like they're heading for the ol' breakout signal..

Bloomberg did a compilation of analysts' report on a couple of companies. CSL was mentioned with 12 analysts covering it to give an average target price of $95.94 in about 6-18months.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=conewsstory&refer=conews&tkr=CSL:AU&sid=a1gg.tyOTehI


----------



## purple (21 July 2007)

been trading in and out of CSL in the past.

but right now the controversy building on its Gardasil drug has me a bit edgy and wanting out.


----------



## Gurgler (21 July 2007)

Purple: what are you basing these current reservations on. All the news I have found seems to be 2 months old. Have you come across more recent developments?

That pennant of yours appears to be heading to a breakout: you seem to be suggesting downward. Why?


----------



## purple (21 July 2007)

Gurgler,

nope, the breakout i suggested is actually up. if you read my previous post, I noted that 

*"Bloomberg did a compilation of analysts' report on a couple of companies. CSL was mentioned with 12 analysts covering it to give an average target price of $95.94 in about 6-18months."*

tha'ts about a 6% share price target increase.

it's because I can't find any recent updates to the Gardasil stuff taht I'm posting to see if anyone has any news/insights on it.


----------



## Gurgler (23 July 2007)

Sorry, Purple, I didn't read enough before I posted. Yes, lack of news is a little unsettling - but maybe no news is good news(I'm a 'glass half full' person!)


----------



## purple (23 July 2007)

No worries, Gurgler. Well if CSL/Merck do get Gardasil to be mandatory use for the girls, then that’s going to be major $$ for them. Maybe that’s why the analysts had the sp increase target…


----------



## zzodr (24 July 2007)

CSL up $2.71 today (3.07%) at the close, looks like some good news from the US about Merck helped things along. Which is good because I am long with CFDs with them and could use some good news!


----------



## Gurgler (31 August 2007)

Quite a recovery over the past week; the financials certainly helped and it looks like $100 is the next level of resistance (albeit emotional).


----------



## Gurgler (3 September 2007)

Third day in a row there was sizeable trading 'after the bell', this time sustaining the drive through $100 - finishing on 100.48. Anyone know whether this is typical with a stock like this?

It will be interesting to see how it sustains itself from here.

PS Prospector - now the only one of RIO, MBL & CSL in the ballpark ATM.


----------



## Judd (3 September 2007)

But when it goes to $33.33 per share after the 1 for 3 share split (if approved) does that change the value of the company?  Nope.  So much for the share price.


----------



## Gurgler (3 September 2007)

Judd said:


> But when it goes to $33.33 per share after the 1 for 3 share split (if approved) does that change the value of the company?  Nope.  So much for the share price.




So true - missed that ann  

SO, Judd, do you credit the improvement in sp to the financials or will the 4.5% on-market buy-back have already begun?


----------



## vishalt (3 September 2007)

i accidentally longed it at $98 (thanks CMC) and put a limit at $100, well done to CSL!

hopefully RIO breaches $100 soon (again) and doesnt go back below triple-digits for a while, CSL's super-high P/E still worries me hence I don't see it as a long-term stock, and any product recall can damage medical stocks hard (take a look at resmed haha)


----------



## Judd (3 September 2007)

Gurgler said:


> So true - missed that ann
> 
> SO, Judd, do you credit the improvement in sp to the financials or will the 4.5% on-market buy-back have already begun?




It should be the research value.  The HPV anti-virus took more than 15 years to get to the market.  CSL has many more research projects on the go.  Some may work, some may not and a bit of it is pure, as opposed to applied, research.  Pity that not many have the patience to wait 15 or more years to see the results of research.  Too many txt msgs to send and the need for instant gratification.

You know, those who bought into the float at $2.40 and have held them have had about three times that value returned just in dividends.  Talk about free carry!


----------



## vishalt (3 September 2007)

Judd said:


> Pity that not many have the patience to wait 15 or more years to see the results of research.  Too many txt msgs to send and the need for instant gratification.




i think most people would rather be rich tomorrow than in 15 years time ? assuming CSL is going to take "15 years" to show me its results influencing the share price id rather be enjoying the commodity boom/retail boom with rio tinto and david jones

and don't forget, this was CSL once upon a time:


----------



## Prospector (3 September 2007)

On our news today, not even one mention of it breaking $100 - our news reports are so unsophisticated!

OK, watching channel 2 and Allan Kohler has been very informative.


----------



## Judd (3 September 2007)

vishalt said:


> i think most people would rather be rich tomorrow than in 15 years time ?




Fortunately, I am not "most." And apparently I need to expand this bloody post to at least 100 chars
:drink::drink:


----------



## vishalt (3 September 2007)

Judd said:


> Fortunately, I am not "most." And apparently I need to expand this bloody post to at least 100 chars
> :drink::drink:



now im curious, can you explain the logic why you'd have the returns from stocks later, rather than sooner?


----------



## Judd (3 September 2007)

vishalt said:


> now im curious, can you explain the logic why you'd have the returns from stocks later, rather than sooner?




Because I am patient.  Most on this forum look at price and consider that is all a company produces.  If that were actually the case then capitalism does not exist.  Trade by all means, it makes a market, just leave me with dividends which, over time (oh, dear that word again which implies patience) makes up about 50% of the return from shares.  I no longer consider shares risky which is why I invest, as opposed to punt, on them.


----------



## reece55 (16 September 2007)

Every time I review CSL, I am just amazed at what a strong trending stock it is......

Amongst the turmoil of a credit crisis, etc, CSL barely moved an inch. Attached is the monthly chart and truly, it is a sight to behold. Now with a capital recon (3 is for 1), they would have to be one of the few large entities in Australia that has reconstructed themselves capital wise (which I find unusual, as it is such a popular thing to do in the states). This is a long term investors dream stock and makes me think - how do I catch a ride on one of these??????

However, equally on the flip side I remember the dark days were I had a mate who invested at $40 in 02 to watch his investment go down some 2/3'rds.. I wonder if he is still holding now?

Cheers


----------



## vishalt (16 September 2007)

I might purchase the split entity lol. 

Are you sure stock splitting is a popular thing to do in the US? I haven't seen many of the top companies do it, Apple/Google/Goldman Sachs are ridiculously expensive to purchase. 

Oh and Berkaway Hathshire lol..


----------



## reece55 (16 September 2007)

vishalt said:


> I might purchase the split entity lol.
> 
> Are you sure stock splitting is a popular thing to do in the US? I haven't seen many of the top companies do it, Apple/Google/Goldman Sachs are ridiculously expensive to purchase.
> 
> Oh and Berkaway Hathshire lol..




Hi Vishalt
Yep, it certainly is US wise..... Funny you mention Apple, they did a 2:1 split in Feb 05, but they are well overdue for one. For Google, it's clearly an icon status thing!

Take a look at just about any tech company - RIMM (Research in Motion, makers of the blackberry) are the latest to do it, I think theirs is a 3:1 too.

Cheers


----------



## Gurgler (17 September 2007)

Judd said:


> Trade by all means, it makes a market, just leave me with dividends which, over time (oh, dear that word again which implies patience) makes up about 50% of the return from shares.




Judd
You must have to wait a long time and have expansive patience, as unless I'm missing something, 0.49 and 0.55c return on each $100 share does not make great return over the current year - just one percent.


----------



## Judd (17 September 2007)

Gurgler said:


> Judd
> You must have to wait a long time and have expansive patience, as unless I'm missing something, 0.49 and 0.55c return on each $100 share does not make great return over the current year - just one percent.




You are absolutely correct: if one had bought at $100.  However, try the yield calculation based on the float price or any price up to $20.


----------



## Gurgler (17 September 2007)

Thanks Juddie, now I understand your perspective better. Unfortunately, I only bought in a year ago at $65; admittedly it has been a good year, as Reece pointed out. I don't wish to appear greedy, but it just so happens that this week I received  a dividend of 2 cents on a share of 0.42-cent value and the contrast struck me.

I guess I would be hopeful to expect that the dividend would remain at .55 after the upcoming share split.


----------



## Gurgler (18 October 2007)

Is anyone else having trouble locating CSL on Westpac after the share split? Is it just Westpac or has the code changed OR do we have to wait until 31 Oct to trade?


----------



## Judd (18 October 2007)

CSLDA is the code.


----------



## Gurgler (18 October 2007)

Thanks very much Judd; there was probably notification of that somewhere but I missed it in my malaise. Cheers.


----------



## brilliantmichael (18 October 2007)

Haha At least I know there's _somebody_ out there who also uses Westpac! Haha.

Gurgler and Judd what do you think of our "beloved" Westpac's brokerage rates? Would you say they're competitive?


----------



## Prospector (18 October 2007)

OK, so what happens now, I am with NAB, and CSL shows as zero, with no mention of CSLDA.  The portfolio looks a bit sick without it.  When will it show up?

The last stock split I had was with Gunns - except that time my holding doubled  until NAB worked it out.


----------



## Judd (20 February 2008)

Absolutely amazing.  One of the better managed and innovative companies on the ASX which reported today and not a word from the ASF brighter sparks.  Dead since October 2007 until this post.  What a shame.

I suppose the wanna's are too tied up with perceived gains to be made from properties or resources minnows to care.


----------



## Prospector (20 February 2008)

Hey Judd, if you do a track back through this thread, that has been the story of CSL for a long time.  Maybe it is too much an ethical share?     Sometimes seems like I am the only one following it.  Yet for me I have held since the price of $37, rose to almost $100, then the split issue.  So not only makes you feel good by its benefits to mankind, but has made me some nice money too.
You know, it only prevents cancer, doesnt have any other glitz to it.


----------



## Judd (20 February 2008)

Prospector said:


> So not only makes you feel good by its benefits to mankind, but has made me some nice money too.
> You know, it only prevents cancer, doesnt have any other glitz to it.




True on both points.  And the blood products it makes and provides are even less glitzier.  Strange world.

Also I have read that Gardasil is also effective for older women, so there is another avenue for income for CSL.  Mind you, if it were provided to older women, I am sure Family First and others will claim that it will turn these gentle creatures into promiscuous *****s as it already does for "young gels."  Like who cares if assists in preventing a truly awful disease.


----------



## michael_selway (20 February 2008)

Prospector said:


> Hey Judd, if you do a track back through this thread, that has been the story of CSL for a long time.  Maybe it is too much an ethical share?     Sometimes seems like I am the only one following it.  Yet for me I have held since the price of $37, rose to almost $100, then the split issue.  So not only makes you feel good by its benefits to mankind, but has made me some nice money too.
> You know, it only prevents cancer, doesnt have any other glitz to it.




Thing is never understimate a biotech, they coudl coem up with new geart medicines & vaccines at any time 

*Earnings and Dividends Forecast (cents per share) 
2007 2008 2009 2010 
EPS 96.8 122.4 159.8 197.3 
DPS 34.3 44.0 55.0 70.0 *

thx

MS


----------



## Knobby22 (21 February 2008)

A lot of us just sit back smiling and don't feel any need to "push" it.
A beautiful company that can survive and prosper even during major shocks to the economy.

I find it interesting that the buyback may not occur because McNamee is keeping his eye out for a bargain.


----------



## brendan87 (22 February 2008)

I agree. I look at CSL as a kind of "quiet achiever".

But perhaps the lack of popularity could be due to its 75% fall from grace post-9/11 when it went from market darling, tripling in under 2 years, to dog after the plasma glut in 01/02. 

That would have sworn some l-t investors and trader alike off CSL for life, especially given its 'blue-chip' status. Few top 20 companies can boast such as a rapid and severe fall in SP in recent history. 

But that's not to rag CSL, I'm a happy holder from $48 (pre-split) so I've doubled my $$ on this beauty!


----------



## Gurgler (13 March 2008)

This from FN Arena today:

*Time For A Pull Back For CSL, Says Tech Wizard
FN Arena News - March 13 2008 

The Tech Wizard has noted that shares of CSL (CSL) have held up quite well over the past six months despite all the market turmoil and many an other stock being hammered throughout the market correction. However, the Wizard also believes that the time for a pull back has finally arrived for CSL.


Having spiked above the top Bollinger band twice, forming a so-called Tweezer top candle stick reversal pattern, price action is now at the 20 moving average (M/A) and should continue to hover down to test the lower Bollinger band at $32.00, he says.


The good news is there is good support at $31.00, he says. He doesn't see any reason why that shouldn't hold.


The Tech Wizard has informed us he doesn't own shares in the company.*

However I guess we'll just continue the  sideways movement of the past 5 months, some more after that!


----------



## nizar (4 May 2008)

Hi,

Does anybody have, or know where I could find, an un-adjusted (longterm) chart for this champion?


----------



## Spineli (7 May 2008)

Here is a long-term chart incorporating the share split.

Had the share split not occurred, its share price would have been competing with IPL for the highest priced local stock.


----------



## MichaelD (7 May 2008)

Gurgler said:


> This from FN Arena today:
> 
> *Time For A Pull Back For CSL, Says Tech Wizard
> FN Arena News - March 13 2008
> ...




Just happened upon this little gem of a quote.


Analysis on 13-Mar-2008 from guru.

- candlestick reversal pattern
- should continue to hover down to test the lower Bollinger band at $32.
- support at $31.


What ACTUALLY happened.

Basically it has gone straight up. The EXACT date of the bottom was in fact the day this analysis was published.


The lesson? Analysts are very good at predicting the past.


----------



## Caliente (16 July 2008)

Hi - just got a report from CSL fresh from my broker (ML) [15/07/08]. 

"Multiple compression accelerated on HPV unwarranted 
In the past six weeks CSL has fallen 15.5% with its FY09 PE compressing to 
20.9x (from 24.7x) despite a market fall of only 13.8% and comparables such as Baxter and Grifols both gaining 6.9% (PE 18.8x) and 2.1% (PE 27.3x) respectively. As previously highlighted the sensitivity to a HPV low case given recent concern is only -1.3% in FY09. Hence the accelerated compression relative to CSL’s peer group, and that of the market (given CSL’s growth profile), appears to us unwarranted. Buy recommendation and $45.00/ share PO maintained We continue to see upside risk on earnings leverage to new plasma sales, commercialisation of R&D and acquisitive growth opportunities in plasma or immunology. Downside risk is present in currency earnings expectations."

They like it to a price objective of $45 in 12 months. 

My strategy is to start diversifying out of the resources game and into good quality defensives. CSL with its strong cash position, expanding profits, and position in healthcare (one of the last areas of economy to be compromised)
fits the bill.

Picked up a 1000 units this morning.

Cheers
-Cali


----------



## michael_selway (16 July 2008)

Caliente said:


> Hi - just got a report from CSL fresh from my broker (ML) [15/07/08].
> 
> "Multiple compression accelerated on HPV unwarranted
> In the past six weeks CSL has fallen 15.5% with its FY09 PE compressing to
> ...




Yep looks good CSL

*Earnings and Dividends Forecast (cents per share) 
2007 2008 2009 2010 
EPS 96.8 127.7 161.2 200.0 
DPS 34.3 48.0 57.0 69.8 *


thx

MS


----------



## Judd (14 August 2008)

Was the result and activity from CSL so ordinary that it does not rate a mention on ASF - apart from this one?

If successful with the purchase it probably will have around 25% of the world's plasma production.


----------



## Knobby22 (14 August 2008)

Judd said:


> Was the result and activity from CSL so ordinary that it does not rate a mention on ASF - apart from this one?
> 
> If successful with the purchase it probably will have around 25% of the world's plasma production.




Good buy during high Aussie dollar credit crunch and avoiding the dodgy US stock market.

However... last time McNamee bought big the share price got the wobbles before it recovered. These big investors often don't have enough long term focus.


----------



## Bruza (1 September 2008)

Judd said:


> Was the result and activity from CSL so ordinary that it does not rate a mention on ASF - apart from this one?
> 
> If successful with the purchase it probably will have around 25% of the world's plasma production.




Yes Judd,

I was hoping to find some discussion about the pros & con's re the SPP.

I would be interested to hear of other (average) investor's thoughts on the Plan.

Personally I am considering $3000 worth, as have often thought "I would like
to increase my holdings in this Co.", given the opportunity.

I have given it a through "health test" & it comes out a big winner, also compared to XJO on a percentage basis over the last year, come out way in front.


----------



## mshepherd (1 September 2008)

It looks similar to the GDY SPP set-up of a few months ago, i.e. The price held above the SPP price until the day of issue, whereby it fell to about the offer price then gravitated around that price for a while. It has now dropped quite a bit below the SPP, so there is no reason CSL cannot do the exact same thing. Its a great company with great potential, although GDY was the same and also got a huge number of share holders taking up the SPP and also gave out quite a few free options aswell, GDY has since dropped. Yes it seems like a good offer, although there have been others similar (or even more attractive) which have since fallen substantialy.

I wonder if a way to play this would be to wait until after the shares are issued and hope that some are offloaded cheaply?  on the other hand CSL's recent aquisition is valuable and the company has a well worn up trend - look at the 5 year chart, also fundamentals of an ageing population may help boost their industry. As like GDY, CSL seem to be amongst the leaders of exciting and promosing technologies, aka zero-emmission energy and biotech.

I think ill once again wait to the last moment before deciding whether to sign up to the SPP.


----------



## Sean K (17 October 2008)

One of just 9 ish companies in the ASX200 to actually be up this year. 

Every 1% decline in the AUD adds $6.9m to the bottom line.

With interest rates forecast to be slashed dramatically, means $$ for CSL. Pending US rates of course...

On my close watch list for when (if) the tide turns.

Article on sharecafe for those interested.


----------



## CAB SAV (17 October 2008)

kennas said:


> One of just 9 ish companies in the ASX200 to actually be up this year.
> 
> Every 1% decline in the AUD adds $6.9m to the bottom line.
> 
> ...




What you can call a legitimate defensive stock. Has products, some life saving, that will sell regardless of market conditions.


----------



## drlog (12 December 2008)

I have been in the share market for about 8 months now - fun times 

Anyway, from what I understand, the forecast earnings of CSL have been going *UP* but the share price has been going *DOWN*. I don't have that much experience but this doesn't make sense to me!

Oh well, I'll hold, it HAS to go up at some point


----------



## tcoates (12 December 2008)

On the news (Commsec page) for CSL.... at least you have a director buying now. Better than watching a director selling

Tim


----------



## hotbmw (15 December 2008)

whats happening to CSL? it was a darling safehaven until the past 2 days? anyone heard anything???????????????


----------



## Prospector (15 December 2008)

hotbmw said:


> whats happening to CSL? it was a darling safehaven until the past 2 days? anyone heard anything???????????????




I heard on the radio that after Jan 1 the govt will not be providing free gardasil to girls. From a preventive health aspect this really sucks and from a share market it obviously does too


----------



## hotbmw (15 December 2008)

i knew there must have been a reason other than profit taking.

i wonder how much of the annual profits this product wipes out?


----------



## chops_a_must (15 December 2008)

Prospector said:


> I heard on the radio that after Jan 1 the govt will not be providing free gardasil to girls. From a preventive health aspect this really sucks and from a share market it obviously does too



Seriously???

WTF???

And it's not just a preventative health measure for girls either, but obviously the impacts are much greater for them.

I guess with all the data coming out, they either had to extend the free vaccinations to boys as well, or cut them completely.

Still, it seems exceptionally stupid, and with all the money they spend on preventative public health in this area, this is something that does have a material impact. Bizarre. 

But if I had kids, boys or girls, I would pay for it regardless.


----------



## nikemi (15 December 2008)

hotbmw said:


> i knew there must have been a reason other than profit taking.
> 
> i wonder how much of the annual profits this product wipes out?




According to Business Day on 23 July 2008 Gardisil accounts for around 15% of total earnings. 

However the Deparmtne of Health mentions nothing about not funding Gardasil from Jan 09. Their website still says that they are funding it. Go figure?!


----------



## Prospector (15 December 2008)

nikemi said:


> According to Business Day on 23 July 2008 Gardisil accounts for around 15% of total earnings.
> 
> However the Deparmtne of Health mentions nothing about not funding Gardasil from Jan 09. Their website still says that they are funding it. Go figure?!



I was shocked too. I am in Tasmania and heard it here. I think it costs over $100 per shot. Will do some googling about it.  Seriously stupid if true. Let's hope Tassie got it wrong.


----------



## Gundini (15 December 2008)

This is all I could find on Google: November 2006

Prime Minister John Howard yesterday announced schoolgirls will begin being immunised with Gardasil from next April after the government struck a deal with CSL (csl.ASX:Quote,News).

The company has agreed to a 25 per cent cut in its original $600 million asking price for the four-year program, which will now cost $436 million.

At least it says the program is in place until November 2010, or more likely April 2011. 

Does sound like nothing in place for a change yet officially, whispers?

Did knock the stock around a bit, bought my second parcel @ $28.

Could not resist!


----------



## Gundini (15 December 2008)

hotbmw said:


> i knew there must have been a reason other than profit taking.
> 
> i wonder how much of the annual profits this product wipes out?




Thinking more about this:

If the Gov agreed to a deal for a 4 year term, starting April 2007, then it would seem unlikely that events in March 2011 would be affecting the share price now. Besides, what a retraction it would be for the Gov?

Political disaster if you think about it.

More than likely it was short selling, IMO.

After market there was plenty of volume @ $28.11


----------



## chops_a_must (15 December 2008)

Gundini said:


> More than likely it was short selling, IMO.



Ummmm...... wuttttt?????

No way.

If it wasn't this funding retraction, the chart looks like it has been defying gravity for some time.

Largely because of the USD strength. But it looks like the USD is weakening somewhat, and I think that has more to do with it...

I think it will head to 23 or thereabouts, and it might tickle my fancy then.


----------



## Gundini (15 December 2008)

Yes, I can see what you mean....

That is good news!

I think the USD will gain in the longer term, and remain the major currency even if good or bad news comes out. The flight to safety on bad news will be supporting this theory IMO. 

Also, looking forward to the Aussie being at .98 again. Missed the opportunity last time, but will be prepared for the next!

With the short selling, I think I got confused with TPI... They have really got stuck into this one of late.... But that's for another thread.


----------



## Prospector (16 December 2008)

OK, I sent an email to CSL and this was their reply:

_Thankyou for your enquiry of CSL.  The catch-up program for Gardasil (women aged 13-26) is due to cease on June 30, 2009, although women who have had even just one dose by this time will be able to complete the course of three doses free of charge from their GP. A single cohort of girls aged 12-13 in the first year of secondary school will continue to be vaccinated through the schools program once the catch-up program lapses._


So those of you who have girls, they will continue to receive the vaccination at ages 12 - 13.  But older girls/young women won't after June 30 2009 unless they have already started their course.  I guess this makes sense, although some people might delay having their girls vaccinated at the ages of 12 because they think this is too young.  I am also on a parenting site - I was amazed to read that some women wont get their daughters immunised at this age because of its association with sexual behaviour .  Might just let them know that if they wait it will cost them.


----------



## mark_au (23 December 2008)

> So those of you who have girls, they will continue to receive the vaccination at ages 12 - 13.  But older girls/young women won't after June 30 2009 unless they have already started their course.  I guess this makes sense, although some people might delay having their girls vaccinated at the ages of 12 because they think this is too young.  I am also on a parenting site - I was amazed to read that some women wont get their daughters immunised at this age because of its association with sexual behaviour .  Might just let them know that if they wait it will cost them.




I too am a (new) parent and im shocked and dismayed as the level of ignorance of health issues for children in general..when you read some of the views of parents its had to believe were in 2008 and not the dark ages


----------



## Econinvestor (2 January 2009)

*CSL's strange movements*

I noticed CSL dropped precipitously a few weeks ago to 27ish, but is now up around 33... Two questions: (1) Why did it drop? Was it due to (unwarranted) reports in the UK about gadrisil causing problems? (2) The company has no debt and has a USD revenue stream. Why on earth is it so far below its intrinsic valuation???


----------



## Go Nuke (8 January 2009)

I know ver VERY little about shorting, but to me CSL after it made a lower high would seem to be a good stock to short.

Would anyone agree or disagree with this and why?

I know its a top teir company, but the sp chart just screams short to me
Especially if we see it break $28!


----------



## cutz (8 January 2009)

I guess charts are open to interpretation, looking at today’s action it looks like CSL may be forming a higher low, just needs some confirmation from MACD.

Therefore the way I see it, shorting CSL could be playing with fire.

Any comments from resident Techies ?


----------



## nomore4s (8 January 2009)

A bit of volume starting to appear at those lows as well, a sign of strength imo.

Look for signs of strength in weakness and signs of weakness in strength.

I've actually been watching this stock for a while.  Wanted to see a retrace to $30.00 and volume come in again and it looks like we have.

Also now looks like a small H&S pattern.

May go lower but I wouldn't be shorting it, too many warnings signs imo.

Might post a chart up tonight if anyone is interested.


----------



## rhen (9 January 2009)

_US FDA staff backs CSL, GTC blood clot drugs


By Susan Heavey and Lisa Richwine of Reuters

WASHINGTON - Two proposed therapies to treat rare blood disorders appear safe and effective for US approval, including one made from genetically engineered goats, Food and Drug Administration staff reviewers said in documents. _

...read on...

http://www.businessspectator.com.au...GTC-blood-clot-dru-N3NP7?opendocument&src=rss

...hence the jump in price today?


----------



## Knobby22 (9 January 2009)

rhen said:


> WASHINGTON - Two proposed therapies to treat rare blood disorders appear safe and effective for US approval, including one made from genetically engineered goats, QUOTE]
> 
> Genetically engineered goats!!
> I read a science fiction story where women would rent out one breast to be modified on their body to produce special medicines that could be sold back to the drug company.
> ...


----------



## hotbmw (10 January 2009)

if the US$ severely depreciates in the coming year or so, how much of CSL's income is derived from the US?

Is it significant? 10%? 20%?

I want to invest into CSL but i feel there could be a considerable discount in the near future but im not sure how invested they are to the US$?

Any concerns here by current shareholders?


----------



## rhen (11 January 2009)

rhen said:


> _US FDA staff backs CSL, GTC blood clot drugs
> 
> 
> By Susan Heavey and Lisa Richwine of Reuters
> ...




ROCKVILLE, Md., Jan 9 (Reuters) - CSL Ltd's (CSL.AX) experimental treatment for patients with an extremely rare bleeding disorder is safe and effective, a U.S. advisory panel unanimously said on Friday.
http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssHealthcareNews/idUSWBT01036020090109

Hotbmw...yes, very good point, but isn't that why we use charts and a "stop-loss" facility?


----------



## hotbmw (11 January 2009)

yes of course but im asking if anyone knows how invested they are in the US? 

in my mind there is no doubt the US$ will fall once de leveraging takes place, so im on the sidelines for many months to come i feel but if i knew the approx % in the US i may enter sooner.....

anyone know?

cheers


----------



## Econinvestor (17 January 2009)

There is a basic fact about CSL to be aware of. Its products, being serum/theraputic based, vaccines etc (see http://www.csl.com.au/s1/cs/auhq/1187378853158/content/1187378853018/content.htm) are pretty much recession-proof: even a real decline let alone a financial mkts decline has hardly any effect on demand for these items. People get sick at the same rate, possibly higher. And its costs are now lower, due to the word-wide downturn! Therefore, its stock price should not be affected by the current recession: it should be at least 37, which was the average over October and the first half of November last year before investors started panicking. It has little debt, lots of guaranteed revenue. 

Also note: In the USA, health stocks are doing well, I think, because the investor population is a lot better informed and more sophisticated than us; they realize these basic facts about health companies. Still, this provides more opportunity for making money here. I am reminded of this particularly when I see postings that give credence to non-scientific chart reading. One may as well gut a cat and look at its entrails :horse:! I'm not complaining, because the chartists here allow people who use logical analysis to make a lot of money. Wait until the chartists/panickers dump on CSL, then buy. I did this when it hit 27, and it since rose 20%.

In answer to concerns about a possible USD decline expressed in this thread, just look back at when AUD was strong and check CSL's stock price. It was averaging above 35 even when the AUD was between 95 and 85 cents...


----------



## rcm617 (17 January 2009)

hotbmw said:


> yes of course but im asking if anyone knows how invested they are in the US?
> 
> in my mind there is no doubt the US$ will fall once de leveraging takes place, so im on the sidelines for many months to come i feel but if i knew the approx % in the US i may enter sooner.....
> 
> ...




Sales FY08

North America       37%
Europe                 35%
Australia               16%

If Talecris goes ahead sales in the US would of course go up substantially. Interesting to note that CSL converted the money raised from the equity raising to $US at 87c. I dont think there is to much chance of the $Aus going back up to the levels we saw in early 2008 in a hurry, to do that we would need another resources boom.
I agree with econinvestor that this stock is recessionproof and doesnt deserve to go down with the rest of the market. HY09 results will be boosted by the low level of the $Aus and plasma product prices have still been improving during the half in the US.


----------



## Gundini (21 January 2009)

I have held this share from $29, and is now in a tidy profit territory.

It has struggled to bust through the $34 area a few times before, the last on profit taking.

Can any Techies see any reason why it will push through this level now?

I would like to hold them, and lock in $34 as my stop, but it has failed before.

Can you see any momentum building? Seems to be on lowish volume.


----------



## Sean K (21 January 2009)

Gundini said:


> I have held this share from $29, and is now in a tidy profit territory.
> 
> It has struggled to bust through the $34 area a few times before, the last on profit taking.
> 
> ...



It might not, because it has continued to fail there. Odds are it will again.

I am actually waiting to enter this one.

For me, a break through here is a short term signal, or, if it looks like failing another signal.

Could be an inverse H&S down there too, but the overall market bear is telling me it's not going to work.

Never know though....watch and shoot!


----------



## Gundini (21 January 2009)

Yes, very helpful post Kennas, thanks....

Your chart and the trendline says it all.

Might try to lock in a profit this arvo!

Appreciate your wisdom, cheers


----------



## Sean K (21 January 2009)

Gundini said:


> Yes, very helpful post Kennas, thanks....
> 
> Your chart and the trendline says it all.
> 
> ...



It's bound to break through and head to $42 now.



But as I said, I'd be watching for a failure or a break through. 

BHP chart was looking similar recently and was a potential breakout and clear inverse H&S and then had a false break....

Good luck!


----------



## Gundini (21 January 2009)

kennas said:


> It's bound to break through and head to $42 now.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Yes, no doubt!

If it hits my sell price, all well and good!

If not, the lap of the Gods we go!

Your post make it an easy and sensible choice really, and profits are not that easy to come by of late...

Cheers


----------



## nomore4s (21 January 2009)

Gundini said:


> Yes, very helpful post Kennas, thanks....
> 
> Your chart and the trendline says it all.
> 
> ...




A close above $33.75 is a very positive sign, it is actually a close above resistance - would need follow through tomorrow and Friday though.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (21 January 2009)

nomore4s said:


> A close above $33.75 is a very positive sign, it is actually a close above resistance - would need follow through tomorrow and Friday though.



Yes, today seems bullish but I am clueless as to where it is going. Yesterday setup a nice bearish look but now that seems to have been negated so I'll wait for tomorrow.


----------



## Gundini (21 January 2009)

nomore4s said:


> A close above $33.75 is a very positive sign, it is actually a close above resistance - would need follow through tomorrow and Friday though.




Yes, but have sold my holdings and very pleased!

Something about locking in a profit makes me feel good...

Now, I hope it falls off the map 

$33.81 close


----------



## nomore4s (21 January 2009)

Snake I agree about it not being sure which way it wants to head atm but I'm already in the trade with CSL and will be adding to it if we get some strong follow through in the next few days.


----------



## rcm617 (21 January 2009)

Once the results are out it will definately head upwards. Always suprises on the upside and with the lower $aus and favourable market conditions in the blood plasma market this half should be no different.


----------



## nomore4s (21 January 2009)

When are the results due?

Couldn't close above $33.70 again. Will see what tomorrow brings, may have to move my stop up now.


----------



## Gundini (21 January 2009)

Here are the aftermarket couse of sales:

Can somebody explain the 220K and 295K parcels?

Are they instos buying up the market at best close price with the number of shares available?

Or are they derivatives?


4:22:43 pm 33.800 5,051 
4:13:27 pm 33.689 80,437 
4:13:16 pm 33.558 220,000 
4:12:33 pm 33.436 295,457 
4:10:51 pm 33.650 2,003 
4:10:51 pm 33.650 832 
4:10:51 pm 33.650 3,431 
4:10:51 pm


----------



## rcm617 (21 January 2009)

nomore4s said:


> When are the results due?
> 
> Couldn't close above $33.70 again. Will see what tomorrow brings, may have to move my stop up now.




Last year the half year results came out 20th feb so I guess it will be about the same time this year.


----------



## Gundini (21 January 2009)

Gundini said:


> Here are the aftermarket couse of sales:
> 
> Can somebody explain the 220K and 295K parcels?
> 
> ...





Let me be more precise with my question, 

Obviously, the $295 purchase did not cost the buyer $9.75m!

Or did it!

Did they buy all the shares available from the close price: $33.81 to their average purchase price of $33.436 ?


----------



## nomore4s (22 January 2009)

Taken off today, still early though. If it can't close above $33.75 today I think that would definately signal time to exit my trade and maybe even to go short .


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (22 January 2009)

nomore4s said:


> Taken off today, still early though. If it can't close above $33.75 today I think that would definately signal time to exit my trade and maybe even to go short .



Yes, a nice rise today confirming the bullishness with support on the 8th Jan. Now will it hold? 

The early shorters would have been roasted by the extent of today's move.


----------



## Econinvestor (22 January 2009)

nomore4s said:


> Taken off today, still early though. If it can't close above $33.75 today I think that would definately signal time to exit my trade and maybe even to go short .




Sorry to be strident about this BUT: 

What on *earth* is the significance of 33.75??  If there is no negative or positive news about fundamentals of the stock (or concerning other's non-fundamentals-based beliefs), then the movements are just random noise. 

In any case, the price at close 35.28 going towards where it should based on logic-- high 30's for the logical reasons given in my last post. I'm holding on until it gets there...


----------



## nomore4s (22 January 2009)

Econinvestor said:


> Sorry to be strident about this BUT:
> 
> What on *earth* is the significance of 33.75??  If there is no negative or positive news about fundamentals of the stock (or concerning other's non-fundamentals-based beliefs), then the movements are just random noise.
> 
> In any case, the price at close 35.28 going towards where it should based on logic-- high 30's for the logical reasons given in my last post. I'm holding on until it gets there...




lol, $33.70 is resistance as per attached chart. And I'll be holding till the high 30's as well if it gets there and even longer if it goes higher than that

I'm quite happy trading the noise to make money, alot of fundamentals don't mean anything in the current market, alot of profitable companies being punished for no logical reason atm

If you don't respect TA that's fine with me but remember the market can remain illogical longer than you can remain solvent


----------



## rcm617 (23 January 2009)

BAX 4Q results out last night up 19%. Most of the profit increase came from their plasma products with a drag from their renal products. Bodes well for CSL results especially with the weak aussie dollar helping.

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/090122/earns_baxter_international.html?.v=5


----------



## Dutchy3 (24 February 2009)

Yes ...

and what chance a nice day tomorrow breaking to (say) 38.50 ....

Then perhaps a weeks run to 41 - 42 ish?


----------



## Knobby22 (10 March 2009)

I saw in the paper that CSL is now a top 10 Australian company.
I truly wish that it was the only stock I ever invested in this last 5 years as I could have slept better and would have been wealthier.

Congratulations Brian McNamee for turning a sleepy government laboratory into an Aussie top 10 company.


----------



## deadman (12 March 2009)

Sold down pretty heavily today maybe the market knows something i dont. There is a fair bit of jostling in the US pharmaceutical/healthcare market for acquisitions could this have anything to do with it i wonder?


----------



## nomore4s (12 March 2009)

Deadman, the whole healthcare sector has copped it where the sun don't shine in the last few weeks. Not sure why most of the companies have released pretty solid results


----------



## skc (12 March 2009)

I bought CSL at $35.5 and it went up nicely to $38 against a weak overall market, and look poised to break on the upside. Then thump, thump and thump, it lost over 10% in 3 sessions, hitting my stoploss and turned a nice little profit into a loss. 

CSL is one of the most expensive stocks in ASX100 with high PE, although strong profit growth is still being projected. Most analysts seem to like them, and I am also confused as to what changed in the past week or two.

I will probably look for a long re-entry at some stage, given its good fundamentals.


----------



## JTLP (13 March 2009)

CSL earnings are impacted by the USD no? I think the AUD has been bouncing around lately...affecting these guys? 

Also, CSL went ex div recently no?

DNH


----------



## stevenc (13 March 2009)

skc said:


> I bought CSL at $35.5 and it went up nicely to $38 against a weak overall market, and look poised to break on the upside. Then thump, thump and thump, it lost over 10% in 3 sessions, hitting my stoploss and turned a nice little profit into a loss.
> 
> CSL is one of the most expensive stocks in ASX100 with high PE, although strong profit growth is still being projected. Most analysts seem to like them, and I am also confused as to what changed in the past week or two.
> 
> I will probably look for a long re-entry at some stage, given its good fundamentals.




Seems to be one of those stocks that cycles regularly...buy at around 33 see it get to 37 -38 and sell. I imagine many buyers follow the cycle, I bought in at 29 but this is a keeper stock for me. Kind of annoyed at myself I had a ton of these when they had the share split and had to decide whether to sell these or suncorp to buy a boat I wanted. So I had sold my original holdings of CSL and kept Suncorp  tempted to use my suncorp holdings for the next time I need to go to the toilet.


----------



## waz (20 March 2009)

CSL has fallen to $30.50, at which price I bought. A fall of about 20% in the last few days.

I know that that an increasing Au dollar works against it, although the other concern of late has been* 'an oversupply of IVIG'*. Has anyone seen any reports from where this is coming from????

 From what I was aware, CSL has a major marketshare of the IVIG market and there are only a few players that exist. How on earth can there be an oversupply, and by how much. Its not like a GFC will cause less IVIG sales.

Assuming the Au doesnt go above 70 anytime soon, $30 may provide a nice floor for CSL.

I really need to do my research and find out what IVIG is, hehe.


----------



## Muschu (21 March 2009)

I am another who is puzzled by CSL's downturn in what has been a reasonable week in most other sectors.  Is the $USD the factor or are investors just choosing to go elsewhwere?  Too hard for me!
Cheers
Rick


----------



## oldblue (21 March 2009)

The heavy volumes traded lately suggest to me that a major holder is either selling down or out. If so, it could be for some reason unrelated to CSL so its pointless to try and guess.
Meanwhile, CSL joins my list of interesting stocks awaiting an uptrend in the SP.


----------



## Gundini (24 March 2009)

I had a nibble today....

Down on a up day, $30 seems a bit of support for now. 

This stock seems to go opposite to the market. Contrarian stock.

Bought at $30.28 though trying to pick a bottom. 

Happy to hold for the moment.


----------



## waz (25 March 2009)

Up a good 3% today.

Looks like CSL was able to hold ground above $30 even though the Au broke well through 70cents.

In the last few days, 3 analysts RBS, Merryl and JP Morgan all maintained their price targets around the $48 mark. Wish I knew what assumed Au value they are using.

FYI: Since March 6th, while the S&P500 has gone up 20%, healthcare sector has only gone up 10%.

Since November low, S&P500 has gone up 9.36% and healthcare has gone up 5.61%

Point being, gap has widened in the last few weeks, will healthcare catch up in the next few weeks? Lets see.

And Im still to work out what IVIG is.


----------



## matty193 (25 March 2009)

waz said:


> And Im still to work out what IVIG is.




Haha, IV Ig is "intravenous immunoglobulin", which basically is a means of delivering antibodies to people with some immunological and neurological problems.


----------



## skc (25 March 2009)

matty193 said:


> Haha, IV Ig is "intravenous immunoglobulin", which basically is a means of delivering antibodies to people with some immunological and neurological problems.




Armed with that knowledge, go forth and be confident in your trading!!!

That $30 is the most watched level. I got in there at $31. Fingers cross.


----------



## Gundini (25 March 2009)

I grabed $30.28.

Did go down under $30 but held.

I am out of here under $30 on this one. 

Nice mover, happy to trade with a long term view!


----------



## bleach8 (3 April 2009)

CSL , share dropped 4% and with a reasonable increasing in volume. Is this mean it will have another few big drops before recover?


----------



## michael_selway (3 April 2009)

bleach8 said:


> CSL , share dropped 4% and with a reasonable increasing in volume. Is this mean it will have another few big drops before recover?




Yeah interesting this one







*Earnings and Dividends Forecast (cents per share) 
2008 2009 2010 2011 
EPS 126.8 175.6 218.4 258.9 
DPS 46.0 61.0 77.0 92.3* 


thx

MS


----------



## Econinvestor (14 April 2009)

It is puzzling why CSL would fall. It has little debt and lots of guaranteed revenue. But then again, it was way lower than it was worth a few months ago (around 29) and went up to 38. I made nearly 30% 

CSL's products are pretty much recession-proof: recessions don't stop people getting sick. On top of this, its costs are lower, due to the word-wide downturn. Since it averaged around 37 over October and the first half of November last year (before investors started panicking) it should return to this level again. Nothing has changed to affect its fundamentals that I'm aware of.

I don't think the recent AUD strength is a problem either. CSL was above 35 when AUD was between 95 and 85 cents last year...  

I'm buying more in any case.


----------



## Aussiest (14 April 2009)

It is my understanding that people turn to biotechs in times of economic downturn, when other stocks go down?

If the market makes a partial recovery, i wonder whether biotech stocks will hold their value 

I am skeptical on this one, but each to their own


----------



## Junior (14 April 2009)

My theory is that there has been more of an appetite for risk recently.  Hence defensives such as Healthcare have fallen out of favour, funds have moved into financials and miners instead.


----------



## Knobby22 (14 April 2009)

Junior said:


> My theory is that there has been more of an appetite for risk recently.  Hence defensives such as Healthcare have fallen out of favour, funds have moved into financials and miners instead.




Pretty true. It's also that though CSL is cheap there are some amazing bargains out there, if the economy improves. CSL will rise in the second wave if the recession is indeed over. I don't think it is yet unfortunately.


----------



## Econinvestor (14 April 2009)

Junior said:


> My theory is that there has been more of an appetite for risk recently.  Hence defensives such as Healthcare have fallen out of favour, funds have moved into financials and miners instead.




That's possible, but the returns on other stocks would have to be huge. For a start, if what you say is true about defensive stocks and if there is another big drop, then CSL will go up quickly. Moreover, if there is a shortage of capital and CSL went down as people shifted into better returning shares, then it is due to go up when other investors enter the market.



Knobby22 said:


> Pretty true. It's also that though CSL is cheap there are some amazing bargains out there, if the economy improves. CSL will rise in the second wave if the recession is indeed over. I don't think it is yet unfortunately.




 Basically it is a win-win stock to own at this price. Insurance on the downside, and 20% on the upside! What other stock gives you that??


----------



## Julia (14 April 2009)

Econinvestor said:


> It is puzzling why CSL would fall. It has little debt and lots of guaranteed revenue. But then again, it was way lower than it was worth a few months ago (around 29) and went up to 38. I made nearly 30%
> 
> CSL's products are pretty much recession-proof: recessions don't stop people getting sick. On top of this, its costs are lower, due to the word-wide downturn. Since it averaged around 37 over October and the first half of November last year (before investors started panicking) it should return to this level again. Nothing has changed to affect its fundamentals that I'm aware of.
> 
> ...








Econinvestor said:


> That's possible, but the returns on other stocks would have to be huge. For a start, if what you say is true about defensive stocks and if there is another big drop, then CSL will go up quickly.



On what basis are you suggesting this?  We have had more than one big drop and CSL hasn't gone up.  It has been trading sideways with effectively no real increase in SP for the last 18 months.



> Moreover, if there is a shortage of capital and CSL went down as people shifted into better returning shares, then it is due to go up when other investors enter the market.



Why?  As above it hasn't done this previously.

Ecoinvestor, your posts appear to be pretty close to pure ramping imo.

With a SP which is not going up, and a paltry 1.7% dividend, I don't know why anyone would buy this, frankly.  Yes, I know it's considered by analysts to be a good 'core fundamental stock' but if we have the view that we buy stocks to make money from them, I find it hard to see why you'd buy something which has not experienced any sign of an uptrend for a long time.





> Basically it is a win-win stock to own at this price. Insurance on the downside, and 20% on the upside! What other stock gives you that??



More ramping.   You have offered no justification for your suggestions.
What 'insurance' is there on the downside?  Is CSL somehow protected from the possibility of bad news?  '20% on the upside'?????  Really?  Where do you get this figure?


----------



## Aussiest (14 April 2009)

Econinvestor said:


> Basically it is a win-win stock to own at this price. Insurance on the downside, and 20% on the upside! What other stock gives you that??




CSL paid $0.43 in dividends last year, and only half of that div was 100% fully franked.

How could that be good value?

CBA paid $2.66 per share in divs last year at an average of around $40.00.


----------



## Econinvestor (14 April 2009)

Julia said:


> On what basis are you suggesting this?  We have had more than one big drop and CSL hasn't gone up.  It has been trading sideways with effectively no real increase in SP for the last 18 months.
> 
> 
> Why?  As above it hasn't done this previously.
> ...




Tsk, Tsk Tsk! You are W R O N G once more. :headshake

December 11th 08, it was $28.11. Feb 26th 09 it was $38.26. You should check your facts before posting flaming rants, Julia. 

I bought at 29, sold at 37. Hmmm, lets see, that's about 30%. I think I'd classify making 30% return in a bit over two months as making money. That's an annual rate of 180%. Or is that not enough for you??

Sour, sour grapes Julia. You were so wrong on CBA now you resort to attack, but don't even bother to check your facts. I'm pretty close to asking the moderator to remove your raving posts. This one is, silly, emotive and plain factually wrong. 

I don't see the point in people posting comments like your's above. It is ad hominem nonsense. How about using some reason and logic instead of attacking people's motives?


----------



## carmen (14 April 2009)

Aussiest said:


> CSL paid $0.43 in dividends last year, and only half of that div was 100% fully franked.
> 
> How could that be good value?
> 
> CBA paid $2.66 per share in divs last year at an average of around $40.00.







CSL = 5 years ago, $10,000 would get you 2,000 roughly shares, now @ $31.5, worth $63,000 (500%+ return) or 100% p/a.

CBA = 5 years ago, $10,000 would get you roughly 333 shares, now @ $36 worth $12,000, 20% return, or 4% p/a. 

CSL has been one of the best performing shares on ASX over past decade. The premium low yeild is well tolerated because ppl expect growth in earnings will continue. Outlook on banks not as positive given GFC. Both are good stocks to hold for different reasons imo. 

Apologies for the crappy looking chart


----------



## bleach8 (14 April 2009)

the reason for the price deline is due to CSL's major share holder selling its holding from about 11% now about 4.8%. FLC stopped selling  in Jan which resulted CSL price increased from 30 to 38. Recently, it started to reduce its holding again. Well, if FLC keep selling at the current speed, its 4.6% holding will disappear in about 2.5 months.
Can someone analyses their short term view on CSL? the price has been around 31-32 for more than a week now ...where will it heading? up or down ?


----------



## Julia (14 April 2009)

Econinvestor said:


> :headshake
> 
> December 11th 08, it was $28.11. Feb 26th 09 it was $38.26. You should check your facts before posting flaming rants, Julia.



Maybe reread my post.  I quoted the last eighteen months  Of course it's gone up and down during that time.  But it has been trading below the MA for most of this time.
See attached screenshot which demonstrates my point.




> I bought at 29, sold at 37. Hmmm, lets see, that's about 30%. I think I'd classify making 30% return in a bit over two months as making money. That's an annual rate of 180%. Or is that not enough for you??



Oh dear.  You cannot annualise a two month return with any sense of realism, surely!  That's just picking out the bits you like?  Show me where the stock has at any stage in the last eighteen months shown an annual 180% increase.  Remember, my comment related to this last 18 months.





> I'm pretty close to asking the moderator to remove your raving posts. This one is, silly, emotive and plain factually wrong.



Please do refer the matter to a moderator.  I am very happy to accept the judgement of any moderator.




> I don't see the point in people posting comments like your's above. It is ad hominem nonsense. How about using some reason and logic instead of attacking people's motives?



I have stated simple fact.   This was in response to your post which had all the qualities of a ramp.
Still waiting for your explanation of the 20% upside for this stock.


----------



## Econinvestor (15 April 2009)

Julia said:


> Maybe reread my post.  I quoted the last eighteen months  Of course it's gone up and down during that time.  But it has been trading below the MA for most of this time.
> See attached screenshot which demonstrates my point.
> 
> 
> ...




Simple easy maths. It was trading at 37 or so in a stable market last year. It went down to 30 or so recently for no fundamental reason. Here is the calculation:

         37 MINUS 30.3 equals 6.7.

          6.7 DIVIDED by 30.3 is over 20%.


Also, of course it goes up and down. That's great for making money. When the fundamentals haven't changed, buy when its low sell when it gets back to the fundamentals. This is all I am saying.

I hope you will confine your comments to analysis rather than motives which you know nothing about. Your accusation is offensive and against the rules of this forum, I believe.


----------



## waz (15 April 2009)

I have been following CSL daily along with movements in the ASX200 and health indexes from overseas for over a month. What I have noticed is that the biggest influence has been movements in the Au dollar. Even on a intraday basis you can notice it.

If I had the time I would negative correlate the two together with a nice chart.

What I figure, is that if this stock is so correlated to moves in the Au dollar, wouldnt the brilliant management hedge against this??? I would think yes.

Also, CSL can lock in prices for its products whenever it wants to at a time when it is convenient to itself and to maximise profit. Its not like CSL is affected by US dollar denominated spot prices. 

The MA chart below is nice, however that statistic doesn't take into account the stock split. Over time the MA line will continue drifting lower, eventually it will trade higher than this line even if it stays steady.


----------



## nomore4s (15 April 2009)

Econinvestor said:


> Simple easy maths. It was trading at 37 or so in a stable market last year. It went down to 30 or so recently for no fundamental reason. Here is the calculation:
> 
> 37 MINUS 30.3 equals 6.7.
> 
> ...




lol, you have got to be kidding me.

Your valuation is based on nothing more than it was trading at $37 in a "stable market". That has got to be the weakest analysis I've ever seen to establish fair value.

You're naive if you think the fundamentals of any stock haven't changed since we had a "stable market"

What are these fundamentals you keep banging on about? All your posts you rave on about fundamentals but I'm yet to see you post any valid fundamental research.


----------



## bleach8 (15 April 2009)

bleach8 said:


> the reason for the price deline is due to CSL's major share holder selling its holding from about 11% now about 4.8%. FLC stopped selling  in Jan which resulted CSL price increased from 30 to 38. Recently, it started to reduce its holding again. Well, if FLC keep selling at the current speed, its 4.6% holding will disappear in about 2.5 months.
> Can someone analyses their short term view on CSL? the price has been around 31-32 for more than a week now ...where will it heading? up or down ?




the reason for the price deline is due to CSL's major share holder selling its holding from about 11% now about 4.8%. FLC stopped selling  in Jan which resulted CSL price increased from 30 to 38. Recently, it started to reduce its holding again. Well, if FLC keep selling at the current speed, its 4.6% holding will disappear in about 2.5 months.
Can someone analyses their short term view on CSL? the price has been around 31-32 for more than a week now ...where will it heading? up or down ?
any comment on this!?  pls plsplsplsplslpslpslpslpslsplspslpsl


----------



## Julia (15 April 2009)

nomore4s said:


> lol, you have got to be kidding me.
> 
> Your valuation is based on nothing more than it was trading at $37 in a "stable market". That has got to be the weakest analysis I've ever seen to establish fair value.
> 
> ...



Thank you, nomore4s, for saving me the trouble of pointing out what you have here.
Probably unproductive to engage in discussion with Ecoinvestor.


----------



## Econinvestor (15 April 2009)

nomore4s said:


> lol, you have got to be kidding me.
> 
> Your valuation is based on nothing more than it was trading at $37 in a "stable market". That has got to be the weakest analysis I've ever seen to establish fair value.
> 
> ...




Go back and look at the share price last year, before the crash and panic. Its share price was trading at around the level 37 for many months. That is what I mean by stable. The simple idea you are failing to grasp is that of a market having a long period in which the participants can judge the company, thus establishing a benchmark value. Now, since 

1. Demand for their product is, if anything, higher in a recession
2. Input costs have fallen
3. They have low debt
4. They have fixed contracts for supply.


This means that nothing in the market has changed *for that company in particular*. Ergo, it will go back to around 37, unless there is a company specific shock such as class action lawsuits, etc.  

In any case, I've done well on CSL, CBA and CTX based on exactly this reasoning and am sharing my opinion on CSL in this forum. If you don't agree with the analysis, that's fine, its your money.


----------



## Econinvestor (15 April 2009)

Julia said:


> Thank you, nomore4s, for saving me the trouble of pointing out what you have here.
> Probably unproductive to engage in discussion with Ecoinvestor.




Probably unproductive to engage in discussions when your arguments are bereft of  logic or reason, you mean. What was it you said about CBA? Its now around $37 just as I predicted based on fundamentals. You said to post in six months, but I think it only took 2 months for it to get to that level. 

Put your money where your mouth is, and tell us where you think things are headed and why. That's what this forum is about, not sniping.

And I'd be perfectly happy if you didn't comment on my posts as you have so far little to contribute but attacks based on your imagination about others motives.


----------



## nomore4s (15 April 2009)

Econinvestor said:


> Probably unproductive to engage in discussions when your arguments are bereft of  logic or reason, you mean. What was it you said about CBA? Its now around $37 just as I predicted based on fundamentals. You said to post in six months, but I think it only took 2 months for it to get to that level.
> 
> Put your money where your mouth is, and tell us where you think things are headed and why. That's what this forum is about, not sniping.
> 
> And I'd be perfectly happy if you didn't comment on my posts as you have so far little to contribute but attacks based on your imagination about others motives.




Um, whos imagination is getting away from them? I suggest you go back and read the CBA thread - *it wasn't Julia that told you to post in six months it was juw177*. 

If you are going to get on your high horse at least get your facts straight.


----------



## Econinvestor (15 April 2009)

nomore4s said:


> Um, whos imagination is getting away from them? I suggest you go back and read the CBA thread - *it wasn't Julia that told you to post in six months it was juw177*.
> 
> If you are going to get on your high horse at least get your facts straight.




Thanks for the information. I'll remind juw177 instead. But I think facts about posters with the same name are pretty trivial compared with facts about the market, which is whole reason for this forum.


----------



## rcm617 (15 April 2009)

bleach8 said:


> the reason for the price deline is due to CSL's major share holder selling its holding from about 11% now about 4.8%. FLC stopped selling  in Jan which resulted CSL price increased from 30 to 38. Recently, it started to reduce its holding again. Well, if FLC keep selling at the current speed, its 4.6% holding will disappear in about 2.5 months.
> Can someone analyses their short term view on CSL? the price has been around 31-32 for more than a week now ...where will it heading? up or down ?
> any comment on this!?  pls plsplsplsplslpslpslpslpslsplspslpsl




Agree with you bleach that FLR selling out is the main reason for CSL being in this price range. CSL is one of the few true growth stocks in the ASX, having grown EPS at 50 and 34 % in the last two financial years. It is bound to slow down a little in this sort of climate, but even half this growth would more than justify present prices. IVIG prices in the USA are still firming and this provides 43% of CSL's revenue. Top notch management. Certainly a lot more risky to be in the banks if our house prices start taking more of a dive with rising unemployment.


----------



## Prospector (15 April 2009)

A quick read back through this thread will indicate my interest in CSL from a number of years ago.  In 2005 primarily because of the 'upside' for CSL in developing a bird flu vaccine.  I bought 100 for $39.  The share price stayed constant for a while, until at its peak climbing to $90; it was a race to see which share - RIO, MBL, CSL and Incitec Pivot   would reach $100.  Eventually however, the share was spilt into 3; taking us back to $30 a share, but now owning three times the number.

I sat on CSL, enjoying the ride, until December last year.  When I sold for a tidy profit.  Why?  The excitement over the Gardasil had waned, Bird Flu was off the Agenda and the SP had just started trailing down. For no other particular reason. I didnt, and still dont, see any upside for quite some time.  I believe it has run its course.  

Just my


----------



## rhen (16 April 2009)

bleach8 said:


> the reason for the price deline is due to CSL's major share holder selling its holding from about 11% now about 4.8%. FLC stopped selling  in Jan which resulted CSL price increased from 30 to 38. Recently, it started to reduce its holding again. Well, if FLC keep selling at the current speed, its 4.6% holding will disappear in about 2.5 months.
> Can someone analyses their short term view on CSL? the price has been around 31-32 for more than a week now ...where will it heading? up or down ?




Looking at a monthly chart (and considering indicators not shown), I am not overly optimistic on CSL making new highs over time. For instance, look at the volume and the price movements of late. 
The daily chart however looks better suggesting short trades *may* be positive...though I think I can find better shares to do so.
I hope everybody remains cautious in this potential boomlet.


----------



## Sean K (16 April 2009)

Econinvestor said:


> I think facts about posters with the same name are pretty trivial compared with facts about the market, which is whole reason for this forum.



Huh? 

Anyone get the gist of this?

Which posters have the same name?

And what facts about the market?

That CSL was $XX once, so it should go back there? That's the fundamental analysis?



And I think you should properly appologise to Julia for accusing her of something she did not say regarding CBA. 

Thanks.


----------



## Prospector (16 April 2009)

kennas said:


> Huh?
> Anyone get the gist of this?  Which posters have the same name?  And what facts about the market?
> That CSL was $XX once, so it should go back there? That's the fundamental analysis?
> And I think you should properly appologise to Julia for accusing her of something she did not say regarding CBA.
> Thanks.




Hear Hear Kennas.  I think Econinvestor has not only provided insufficent analysis of his claims, but then bags those who have.  Let alone accuse Julia of something she didnt even say as a support to their claims, then refuse to properly apologise for their accusation when it is pointed out to them.  Julia has her dog as her Avatar; get the names mixed?  Well maybe, but actually, the names arent even close! Avatars tend to stick!  Probably not a great way to start as a new Poster.


----------



## bleach8 (26 April 2009)

Will the new swine flu have any positive impact on CSL?

I thought they had something about the bird flu...


----------



## Prospector (26 April 2009)

Possibly, and BTA as well.  Both are involved; CSL has a flu vaccine, BTA has the treatment drug.  Will be interesting to see what happens tomorrow.  The impact of this latest issue, and the human to human transmission, along with the Global Financial Crisis is actually really scary.


----------



## drlog (29 April 2009)

Prospector said:


> Possibly, and BTA as well.  Both are involved; CSL has a flu vaccine, BTA has the treatment drug.  Will be interesting to see what happens tomorrow.  The impact of this latest issue, and the human to human transmission, along with the Global Financial Crisis is actually really scary.




Add in global warming, Somali pirates and the Taliban taking control of Pakistan. YAY, now we are all afraid! 

Anyway, back to CSL. From what I can see, they have been growing consistently in the past few years. They have good forecast growth, their fundamentals look good (Quick ratio, current ratio). Their *PEG is 0.64* at the moment!

It doesn't make sense? The company is worth more than the current share price! They are currently growing so why isn't the share price growing as well? I am holding for sure. If I had any money lying around, I would buy more at the current bargain price 

Cool


----------



## waz (7 May 2009)

Massive price fall today on pretty big volume.
Ive seen spreads as wide as 60c this morning.

Its now fallen 10% in a few days.
Since Im expecting the Au to fall in the next few days, Im going long again on this one. May get myself a nice spread.

oops. just got closed, 50c movment in about 10 mins. horay for volatility.

I better do some charting before getting on it again. It hit a low of 31.11 this morning.

EDIT:
Now suspended, someone knows something, nothing official yet.


----------



## Prospector (7 May 2009)

I received this alert today:
"Proposed Acquisition of Talecris"  I know nothing more but it is considered as price sensitive.  Received it at 10.32


----------



## carmen (15 May 2009)

This one is looking like a very juicy short. I am looking to put the short on at about the red dot. (after failed rally to $33) $32.10-$31.90. What do you think?


----------



## skc (15 May 2009)

carmen said:


> This one is looking like a very juicy short. I am looking to put the short on at about the red dot. (after failed rally to $33) $32.10-$31.90. What do you think?
> 
> View attachment 30304




Is it going to get to your price? Where would you place your stop loss? Would you add to your position on break below $30? What would be a profit target, or you would just trail a stop?

Just something to consider. Good luck with the trade.


----------



## bleach8 (15 May 2009)

You are very brave to go short for CSL. The price of CSL is under pressure as a result of the potential FTC’s decision on the acquisition of Talecris. 75% of experts expect the deal will go through some ways, as a matter of how and when. The price for CSL(At current price of 31.5) will go up regardless of the decision from FTC. 

If the deal get approve, the target price will be above $40. 
If the deal get rejected, CSL will conduct a share buyback using its 1.6billion cash reserve. The buyback will increase CSL’s EPS by about 6% even at a price of $36 per share. 

Either way the price will go up. I got the above info from some articles of RBS. I am not saying I am right, but all other institutional investors can obvious see this logic. Soon or later, they will start to buy CSL. 

Also, from today’s chart, reasonable large volumes are appeared to push the price up 1 hour before the market close which can be a positive sign for Monday.  Maybe there are reasons to go short from technical point of view, but overall I think it will be too risky to go short.


----------



## Aussiest (15 May 2009)

bleach8 said:


> Maybe there are reasons to go short from technical point of view




Good point about technicals. If you had taken any long position this week based on technicals alone, you would have been stopped out (if had tight stops). Why? News and sentiment.

I am short CSL, but also long. Price looked shakey. Should have closed out my short, but i think possiblity for down still there. Not too worried about going long as i think it will rise in time.


----------



## skc (16 May 2009)

Aussiest said:


> *I am short CSL, but also long. *Price looked shakey. Should have closed out my short, but i think possiblity for down still there. Not too worried about going long as i think it will rise in time.




Please explain  *With Paulin Hanson tone* 

Do you have a separate long investment holding vs a trading short?


----------



## Nero64 (16 May 2009)

CSL is a defensive stock. It will usually hold its ground in a down market. It did well to come of its low on Friday and held up well the day before when the market fell 3% 

Good luck with the short but I think your barking up the wrong tree. Then again QBE fell $6-7 a few months ago and sometime the best trades are against the consensus. However sell the weak and buy the strong come to mind when I think of CSL. Just to note PRY, HSP, COH and SHL did well last week and CSL only lost 6c. What bleach8 said is probably correct. The market dislikes uncertainty.


----------



## Knobby22 (16 May 2009)

I agree with Nero and bleach but however am hoping CSL will drop with the continuation of the bear market. In fact I have set aside some money to buy when this occurs. 
I'm not game to short them though.


----------



## carmen (18 May 2009)

skc said:


> Is it going to get to your price? Where would you place your stop loss? Would you add to your position on break below $30? What would be a profit target, or you would just trail a stop?
> 
> Just something to consider. Good luck with the trade.




No idea how its going to play out (could end ugly ).  Signal I am looking for is a couple of weak closes above $32.75 ($34.75 would be perfect) and a drift towards  $34/$35 over 1-2 weeks. Target $0? Is that possible?


----------



## carmen (18 May 2009)

Nero64 said:


> CSL is a defensive stock. It will usually hold its ground in a down market. It did well to come of its low on Friday and held up well the day before when the market fell 3%
> 
> Good luck with the short but I think your barking up the wrong tree. Then again QBE fell $6-7 a few months ago and sometime the best trades are against the consensus. However sell the weak and buy the strong come to mind when I think of CSL. Just to note PRY, HSP, COH and SHL did well last week and CSL only lost 6c. What bleach8 said is probably correct. The market dislikes uncertainty.




I like CSL long term - own it in my superfund, so have noticed how weak its been lately. Fundamentally to get a P/E 20 in a bear market i think you'd have to be doing something exciting, ecspecially when there are soo many dogs running around at 5x. Thats just my thoughts, thanks


----------



## Aussiest (19 May 2009)

skc said:


> Please explain  *With Paulin Hanson tone*
> 
> Do you have a separate long investment holding vs a trading short?




Please explain? I can't, it was a messy trade. The sloppiest thing i have done in a while. Am hoping it will dip down soon so i can get rid of it. Price dipped a bit today, so hopefully will continue down to 31ish.  

I will add to my long position if it dips down anyway. 

Hopefully i'll come out of it without too much damage.


----------



## Nero64 (19 May 2009)

> No idea how its going to play out (could end ugly ). Signal I am looking for is a couple of weak closes above $32.75 ($34.75 would be perfect) and a drift towards $34/$35 over 1-2 weeks. Target $0? Is that possible?




Your post in this thread is a G  up right? You got a reaction out of us. But hey your weak closes above $32 is a good call. I see the same thing. There is a gap at $33.30 that needs to be filled. It's funny, but hey anything is possible in the markets. Considering CSL has 2.7Bill in cash and debts of around 2Bill, I don't think it is getting to $0 unless the need for research into blood plasma goes.


----------



## Trevor_S (19 May 2009)

Julia said:


> With a SP which is not going up, and a paltry 1.7% dividend, I don't know why anyone would buy this, frankly.




I am with Julia on this one, I have been looking at CSL for some time wonder why the hell people are buying it, I see no real value at current prices ?



Julia said:


> Yes, I know it's considered by analysts to be a good 'core fundamental stock'




Which is why I keep looking but then keep assuring myself these guys have NFI what they are talking about and are regurgitating some party line, making a self full filling prophecy.  I will leave it alone and leave it to the day traders, unless it reprices to reflect my idea of value.


----------



## questionall_42 (25 May 2009)

Will be interesting to see how the CSL sp plays out given Talecris has been by US FTC.

1111 [Dow Jones] CSL (CSL.AU) down 1.7% at A$30.38, bounces from 2-month low of A$29.94, despite confirmation that U.S. FTC is taking action to block Talecris takeover. Some traders expecting CSL to hit A$29.00 on this news, but they note the market has recently become less confident of a deal. Speculation of significant FTC hurdles first emerged on May 7, pushing CSL down from A$33.50 the day before. UBS head of Sydney sales trading George Kanaan says today's news may have limited impact because hope of a deal had already cooled and because CSL could do a share buyback. "In a week's time, the market probably won't care about it because they will be able to do a buyback which would be quite accretive at these levels.". CSL chart support currently A$30.00, A$26.85. Resistance A$32.01, A$35.07, according to Dow Jones Newswires technical analysis. (DWR)


----------



## So_Cynical (25 May 2009)

I got in at the open today 30.20...funny cos i didn't give myself much hope 
of getting my low ball buy order filled when i decided to have a go at CSL 
late last nite. 

I could care less whether the take over goes ahead or not....under 30.50 
was my buy zone, happy to hold till im in profit.



Trevor_S said:


> I am with Julia on this one, I have been looking at CSL for some time wonder
> why the hell people are buying it, I see no real value at current prices ?




Don't know how u can look at this chart and say that :dunno:...unarguably buying 
CSL at under 30.50 has been great buying over the last 7 months.


----------



## Nero64 (26 May 2009)

This stock is tracking the Aussie Dollar. It's weak as the Aus $ rises because it does most of its business in US dollars. Makes a good hedging stock against the Aussie dollar weakness as it will rise. 

See chart


----------



## Aussiest (26 May 2009)

So_Cynical said:


> I got in at the open today 30.20...funny cos i didn't give myself much hope
> of getting my low ball buy order filled when i decided to have a go at CSL
> late last nite.
> 
> ...




Look, i bought in at over $31.00 and am happy to hold (sort of, if you know what i mean!!). I think you did well...


----------



## So_Cynical (26 May 2009)

Nero64 said:


> This stock is tracking the Aussie Dollar. It's weak as the Aus $ rises
> because it does most of its business in US dollars.




Have to admit u don't know that much about CSL...for a change i just really liked the 
chart, serves me right as im usually a nut for the fundamentals.



Aussiest said:


> Look, i bought in at over $31.00 and am happy to hold (sort of,
> if you know what i mean!!). I think you did well...




Would of done better waiting for today...still i keep telling myself u just cant get the perfect 
entry or exit...just concentrate on the percentages, don't worry about the small stuff.


----------



## Nero64 (26 May 2009)

> Have to admit u don't know that much about CSL




My chart tells it like it is. If you can't see a pattern then maybe your missing something. Its does a lot of its business in US dollars so don't you think its bottom line would take a hit if the USD went south. None of us work for this company or put together its balance sheets or do the company deals, so none of us really know about this company.


----------



## haunting (26 May 2009)

Been trading this one for quite a while. My 2c at this juncture.

Point 1 - I take that to reflect weakness where buyers were easily overcome by selling at or near the lower trend line

Point 2 - RSI likewise is showing weak momentum

Point 3 - 2 days of high vol spike may kill the downward move, watch the rebound strength, this could present a short term trading opportunity. But with the price dipping over the red support line, the prognosis at this point is the selling momentum is likely to continue, probably due to shorting. See this: http://www.asx.com.au/data/Shortsell.txt.

If the rebound does not materialise, my next move would be to watch the next two lower targets of 28.26 and 24.70 - this would depend a lot on what CSL management is telling the instos with regard to their growth strategy without Talecris, and the treatment with the US$3.1b cash pile.

Operation wise, with the US$ potentially heading towards 76, CSL's profit will be affected as highlighted here: http://www.fnarena.com/index2.cfm?type=dsp_newsitem&n=7A60F50B-1871-E587-E1AF1D5B4A74A1D5, possibly worse if the US$ were to decline further from the current level.


----------



## So_Cynical (26 May 2009)

Nero64 said:


> My chart tells it like it is. If you can't see a pattern then maybe your missing something. Its does a lot of its business in US dollars so don't you think its bottom line would take a hit if the USD went south. None of us work for this company or put together its balance sheets or do the company deals, so none of us really know about this company.




Sorry Nero small typo on my part...meant to say "i don't know much about CSL"
your USD chart makes perfect sense.


----------



## Aussiest (26 May 2009)

haunting said:


> Been trading this one for quite a while. My 2c at this juncture.
> 
> Point 1 - I take that to reflect weakness where buyers were easily overcome by selling at or near the lower trend line
> 
> ...




Yeah, it's not looking good. Big selling pressure today. Weak support at $30, not sure whether it will hold. My thought is that it will fall through $30.00. Not so good for me, but okay for Cynical_guy. I wouldn't be worrying about it if i had bought at $30.00. I'm going to hold. Nothing to lose.


----------



## carmen (28 May 2009)

Nero64 said:


> Your post in this thread is a G  up right? You got a reaction out of us. But hey your weak closes above $32 is a good call. I see the same thing. There is a gap at $33.30 that needs to be filled. It's funny, but hey anything is possible in the markets. Considering CSL has 2.7Bill in cash and debts of around 2Bill, I don't think it is getting to $0 unless the need for research into blood plasma goes.




Hehe $0 was bit of a joke. But anyway you look at its chart, every indicator, every analysis its a screaming sell. Might look good at a buy at $15.


----------



## So_Cynical (28 May 2009)

carmen said:


> But anyway you look at its chart, every indicator, every analysis
> its a screaming sell. Might look good at a buy at $15.




Not so


http://www.sharecafe.com.au/fnarena_news.asp?a=AV&ai=13026

QUOTE:
Bank of America-Merrill Lynch had yet to update its views on CSL (CSL) after it became 
apparent the company's proposed acquisition of Talecris in the US would not be approved 
by regulators. The broker has now rectified the situation, with the good news for shareholders 
being BA-ML still considers the stock to be a Buy.

Post the Bank of America-Merrill Lynch result, the FNArena database shows CSL rated as 
Buy seven times and Hold twice

Or try this analysis

http://money.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=817693


----------



## ROE (28 May 2009)

So_Cynical said:


> Not so
> 
> 
> http://www.sharecafe.com.au/fnarena_news.asp?a=AV&ai=13026
> ...




How many time the broker or analyst got it badly wrong?

You should look at how analyst work, they are a bunch of sheep
that follow a bunch of calculators and a bunch of rules
for the firm they working for.

Most of them doesn't have an in depth knowledge on the business
because they cover so many stocks and they have so little time
to do anything else.

They rarely write anything negative for a big firm fearful
their job maybe at risk.

Look at the guy that wrote about article on Asciano sometimes ago
regarding their debt is much greater than their asset and the stock is pretty much worthless

he got the sack.....doesn't matter how they spin it that they close
down the infrastructure division and has to let him go etc...
if you are a good employee why don't they re-deploy him else where in that massive firm?

I like CSL and I like their business and I like to own it some day at the right price
just be careful on analyst recommendation on a certain price.

I usually find it's better to buy when Analyst are fearful and disown the stock  than to buy when they are cheerful


----------



## skc (28 May 2009)

Fundamentally, CSL has always been one of the more expensive ones on the market because of its growth prospects. If the growth prospect is deemed unattainable, a re rating (through lower PE ratio) may result. Current PE ~19.4, EPS ~$1.50. 

They do have $2.5B cash lying around not earning anything - that is $4.10 a share. Assuming they return this, then the current PE is only ~16.5. So the current price looks reasonable to me from a fundamental point of view. 

A H&S with neckline at $30 has formed, which put a price target of ~$25 (funny enough, the post capital return price!). A nice battle being fought out at $29 at the moment. If that holds, then a tiny rebound to neckline is possible.


----------



## Nero64 (28 May 2009)

> Hehe $0 was bit of a joke. But anyway you look at its chart, every indicator, every analysis its a screaming sell. Might look good at a buy at $15.




Yes a good contrarian trade. I try and stick to buying companies with strong balance sheets and sometimes ignore the technicals at my own peril. I saw support around the $31 mark and just went for it. To me it looks better than QBE, another good performing stock over the last 5-10 years. COH is outperforming them both. 

I can't see anything stopping the price slide if the US Market keeps falling and the AUS $ rising. Still there a buyers on the sidelines and if and when they choose the moment then it might get a good $4-5 bounce. 

Yeah I agree with ROE comments on analysts, but people still listen to them. 

Maybe CSL can invest its cash in some Uranium and CSG assets and make me a happy man...yeah right!


----------



## Julia (28 May 2009)

I haven't followed CSL for many months but was interested to hear on tonight's news that they have a vaccine for the dreaded swine flu.  It still has to undergo clinical trials and get TGA approval, at least three months.
Should surely have a positive effect on the SP unless it's assumed the pig flu will be all over by the time the vaccine is marketable.


----------



## alex90 (28 May 2009)

Yeah I also saw that on the news. However CSL expect to release it after the flu season so doubt it will have any immediate effect on sp


----------



## So_Cynical (29 May 2009)

alex90 said:


> Yeah I also saw that on the news. However CSL expect to release it after the flu season so doubt it will have any immediate effect on sp






			
				bloomberg link said:
			
		

> The drugmaker expects the first batch of its swine flu vaccine to be available in late July or early August, CSL said on its Web site.




http://bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601124&sid=au.0.96Ap54Q&refer=home

After the flu season...since when has August (end of winter) not been flu season, anyway 
the bigger markets in the northern hemisphere will be just starting there flu season.

Still lots to like about CSL


----------



## Real1ty (29 May 2009)

The market didn't like it yesterday when CSL announced it was going to contest the decision to oppose the proposed take over and the sp tanked immediately after the announcement, after it had started to rebound.

This will help sentiment.

http://imagesignal.comsec.com.au/asxdata/20090529/pdf/00956856.pdf


> CSL Receives USD180 million (approximately AUD230 million) Order from U.S. Government to Produce Novel Influenza A (H1N1) Vaccine


----------



## stevenc (29 May 2009)

Gday everyone, I see reports saying that if the Talecris deal falls through overall it is still not a bad thing and possibly CSL will do a share buy back. Ok as I am an amateur re share market what does this mean.  My thoughts have been 

1. Offer existing shareholders opportunity to buy shares at lower price.
2. CSL decreases amount of shares registered increasing value of our existing shares.
3. Do existing shareholders get a cash payment dependant of quantity of shares. 

I have no idea but appreciate some info. 

Thanks


----------



## cutz (29 May 2009)

The company buys back its own shares, and then those shares are cancelled decreasing the amount of shares on issue. Effectively the opposite of the dilution effect that happens with new issues or DRP.


----------



## haunting (29 May 2009)

haunting said:


> Been trading this one for quite a while. My 2c at this juncture...




A follow up.

Point 1 - a good enough candle reversal signal at this point
Point 2 - and it comes with a good volume
Point 3 - plus it rebounds right at the short term channel failure target

I think it's good enough to assume the selling is over at this point. Time to buy if you are brave (I did). The resistance at 30 will be a good test to find out if the rally really has legs.

News wise, CSL is going to fight its case for Talecris, which could take months(?), the growth strategy thru' Talecris is not dead at this point. Most share holders would probably prefer to hold on and adopt a wait and see attitude(?) In addition, the US and the Aussie orders of swine flu shots are both positive to the bottom line. These should help with the rebound. I hope.


----------



## Nero64 (29 May 2009)

> I think it's good enough to assume the selling is over at this point. Time to buy if you are brave (I did). The resistance at 30 will be a good test to find out if the rally really has legs.




Yeah that's what I call absorption buying. 13Mill on the volume. Almost 80c from its low. 

I'm game to go long. Will use a stop loss this time. Don't want to be trapped on the downside if things go wrong.


----------



## sqwark7600 (31 May 2009)

Nero64 said:


> I'm game to go long. Will use a stop loss this time. Don't want to be trapped on the downside if things go wrong.



From the other side of the fence I think it is just a tad early with two EW 3rd wave correctives converging around the $27 mark. The FTC driblings are not helping and it will take some time (Oct-Nov09) for their stupidity to be made lucid before the law; in the meantime marking time allows the market a breath to choose their lead.
 :sheep:
My opinion; your call. Life is your decisions in action.


----------



## ROE (31 May 2009)

stevenc said:


> Gday everyone, I see reports saying that if the Talecris deal falls through overall it is still not a bad thing and possibly CSL will do a share buy back. Ok as I am an amateur re share market what does this mean.  My thoughts have been
> 
> 1. Offer existing shareholders opportunity to buy shares at lower price.
> 2. CSL decreases amount of shares registered increasing value of our existing shares.
> ...




here is another way to look at it.
say you own a business called CSL with 10 partners
2 partners want out so the other 8 buy them out (shares buy back)
next year the 8 partners increase their stake in the business and you have a greater share of the profit


----------



## stevenc (31 May 2009)

Thanks Roe and Cutz for the explanations, doesnt look bad either way I suppose if the deal with Talecris goes ahead or not as a shareholder. For long term shareholders the Talecris deal probably would be the better option I imagine sounds like there is a lot upside for the deal to  go ahead,  just have to wait and see now if CSL can convince the FTC .


----------



## skc (1 June 2009)

Bad news for CSL...

http://business.smh.com.au/business/us-alleges-cartel-behaviour-at-csl-20090529-bqbu.html


And some good news....

http://newsstore.fairfax.com.au/app...mh.com.au/apps/qt/quote.ac?code=csl&submit=Go


----------



## ROE (1 June 2009)

skc said:


> Bad news for CSL...
> 
> http://business.smh.com.au/business/us-alleges-cartel-behaviour-at-csl-20090529-bqbu.html
> 
> ...




Americans are very dirty business people, they want to go into other country and snapped up other people business, yet when anyone else comes to their country and snapped up their business they create all sort of issues and accusation for the company involve...look at ALL and COH as an example
great company only to get bull**** around in the US by their dirty tactics.

CSL look like to be the next target..... As an adopted Australian I feel discussed by the American treatment of Great Aussie company...Buy Aussies stock
support Aussie company  and take the fight to them... they soon bankrupt as a country anyway so we may get them cheap 

PS I dont own CSL, its a wonderful business but only when it trades at bargain price then I have a bit of this business.


----------



## Nero64 (1 June 2009)

> From the other side of the fence I think it is just a tad early with two EW 3rd wave correctives converging around the $27 mark.




Yes I can see your point. Corrective wave 3 starting in March. You could be right. May get down to $24 or lower. I'll be out before then though. 

Today was a weakish thrust on lower volume. People exiting before the close. The daily Candle is like a hanging uncertain Doji. Tomorrow is a new day. See what happens.


----------



## sqwark7600 (2 June 2009)

A good summary of the situation in The Australian this morning. 

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/business/story/0,28124,25565693-5018014,00.html
:sheep:


----------



## haunting (2 June 2009)

FTC, from memory seems to have a good record in blocking M&A and winning them.  The chance of CSL winning this case I believe is quite slim, so it will be big negative on the stock since there's a break fee of 70 million. If they win, the stock price won't go beyond 35 since there's still plenty of work ahead. If they lose, well, it will be 70 + all the legal costs.


----------



## sqwark7600 (2 June 2009)

haunting said:


> FTC, from memory seems to have a good record in blocking M&A and winning them.  The chance of CSL winning this case I believe is quite slim, so it will be big negative on the stock since there's a break fee of 70 million. If they win, the stock price won't go beyond 35 since there's still plenty of work ahead. If they lose, well, it will be 70 + all the legal costs.



Personally I think the probability of a government instrumentality (FTC) getting it wrong has got to be a safe bet. Their "block" has to be tested in the court. Whilst the beaurocrats can hide behind rhetoric they still have to sell the funding of a vigorous court case to the Commissioners and then come up with strong arguments to beat the past precedents on which CSL are assured they can rely.


----------



## bleach8 (2 June 2009)

haunting said:


> FTC, from memory seems to have a good record in blocking M&A and winning them.  The chance of CSL winning this case I believe is quite slim, so it will be big negative on the stock since there's a break fee of 70 million. If they win, the stock price won't go beyond 35 since there's still plenty of work ahead. If they lose, well, it will be 70 + all the legal costs.




70m for CSL is not a big deal. 2 billion in the bank- interest at 5% = 50m 
2 billion converted to USD last year above 90c, convert back to AUD now would be at least 150m profit. 

some people estimate CSL will be 150m-200m better off after deduct all the costs. 

i predict the sp will rise to 38 before the release of their annual report.


----------



## sqwark7600 (3 June 2009)

bleach8 said:


> CSL will be 150m-200m better off after deduct all the costs.
> 
> i predict the sp will rise to 38 before the release of their annual report.




There is no point to prediction. Tossing a coin is easier. This game is about probability not prediction.


----------



## haunting (3 June 2009)

haunting said:


> A follow up...




More follow up. (This line is to fill up this message with more than 100 chars, sorry if I have wasted your time and your bandwidth)


----------



## sqwark7600 (9 June 2009)

I'm lost on CSL's open buy-back announcement coincident to their throwing in the towel on the Talecris deal. If market price remains greater than $29, as it is, why would anyone sell their shares back to CSL any lower? To my mind all that it seems to accomplish is place a market stop loss on the price until the offer expires. Methinks it may be a ploy along with the other CSL spin released today to keep a floor under their share price until the dust settles.

http://au.biz.yahoo.com/090608/2/26rwf.html

Anyone?


----------



## bongcso (10 June 2009)

sqwark7600 said:


> I'm lost on CSL's open buy-back announcement coincident to their throwing in the towel on the Talecris deal. If market price remains greater than $29, as it is, why would anyone sell their shares back to CSL any lower? To my mind all that it seems to accomplish is place a market stop loss on the price until the offer expires. Methinks it may be a ploy along with the other CSL spin released today to keep a floor under their share price until the dust settles.
> 
> http://au.biz.yahoo.com/090608/2/26rwf.html
> 
> Anyone?




I don't think there is any sinister ploy involved in the buyback. Last Friday's closing price of 28.98 was used to estimate what the buyback would cost. CSL is trying to return to shareholders the money it raised for the Talecris acquisition which it now does not need. However, they are restricted by ASX to buying back a maximum of 9% of shares in a 12 month period which translates to 54,863,000 shares. However, they will buy back at market price over a period starting from 23 June 2009. You can look at the announcement on the CSL website for more details on the buyback.
http://www.csl.com.au/s1/cs/auhq/1187378853231/news/1242703993084/prdetail.htm

Hope this helps 

Christina
http://sli-smsf.com/


----------



## haunting (10 June 2009)

sqwark7600 said:


> Methinks it may be a ploy along with the other CSL spin released today to keep a floor under their share price until the dust settles.




I am with you on this. It serves two purposes by this action: a) it provides a bottom to the share price at 29.00 (until the buyback scheme ends); b) they get to keep some of the fund through the scheme before the market demands them to return all of it since the takeover is now off the card.

Longer term, investor should ask CSL's management on their growth strategy. At this point, it seems there is none. Without a good growth strategy and with a comparatively high PE against the sector, CSL will be facing pressure in justifying the share price at the current level.  In one of the news reports, an analyst was saying CSL is looking pricey and the sector it is in looking like a maturing sector.

Until it can provide some kind of long term direction and good plan, I am still of the opinion that CSL at the current price is only good for a trade.


----------



## Faithinchartz (17 June 2009)

haunting said:


> Until it can provide some kind of long term direction and good plan, I am still of the opinion that CSL at the current price is only good for a trade.




Hmmm. What about the fact is has no debt, has long term supply contracts for plasma products, is one of a few companies that provides such and so has market power. In addition, what about the fact that CSL is one of only two companies in the world with substantive vaccine-producing capacity (along with Baxter) & the US government has recently signed it up to be (I think) a sole supplier of swine flu vaccine? I think it will reach 35 or even 40


----------



## Gundini (17 June 2009)

I own this stock, and it seems to do not so well when the AUD goes up. 

I think it earns most income in USD. 

Considering selling on that basis, and re enter if the USD ever finds some upside..........


----------



## So_Cynical (17 June 2009)

Faithinchartz said:


> CSL is one of only two companies in the world with substantive vaccine-producing capacity (along with Baxter) & the US government has recently signed it up to be (I think) a sole supplier of swine flu vaccine?




From memory i believe CSL was one of about 4 or 5 vaccine producers to get a contract from the US govt...the big upside for CSL IMO is vaccine production coming into the northern winter...who will the Chinese Govt turn to when they decide they should vaccinate essential services personnel and the armed forces etc?


----------



## bleach8 (18 June 2009)

So_Cynical said:


> From memory i believe CSL was one of about 4 or 5 vaccine producers to get a contract from the US govt...the big upside for CSL IMO is vaccine production coming into the northern winter...who will the Chinese Govt turn to when they decide they should vaccinate essential services personnel and the armed forces etc?





China has a total of 11 drug companies that can produce seasonal flu vaccines. there are only around 36 companies can produce vaccines, and almost 1/3 are based in China. So i dont thik they will buy vaccines from CSL.


----------



## So_Cynical (18 June 2009)

bleach8 said:


> China has a total of 11 drug companies that can produce seasonal flu vaccines. there are only around 36 companies can produce vaccines, and almost 1/3 are based in China. So i dont thik they will buy vaccines from CSL.




Well i had to look...and turns out your correct...quotes from link below.

China has a total of 11 drug companies that can produce seasonal flu vaccines..China's 
annual vaccine production capacity is expected to reach 360 million doses if all the 11 
domestic drug companies were approved for batch production of the vaccines.

http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v5/newsgeneral.php?id=417225

So how come the Americans didn't give the Chinese vaccine producers a contract? or did they?


----------



## iASX (21 June 2009)

My research group, iASX, is just about to publish a new target price for CSL, which I'm sure you'll find proves to be much more meaningful than flawed DCF valuation...


Best,
iASX


----------



## dhukka (21 June 2009)

iASX said:


> My research group, iASX, is just about to publish a new target price for CSL, which I'm sure you'll find proves to be much more meaningful than flawed DCF valuation...
> 
> 
> Best,
> iASX




Oh please tell us your magic valuation kind sir and could you provide a link to your research group that I'm sure has some product I can susbscribe to for a fee.


----------



## sqwark7600 (21 June 2009)

iASX said:


> My research group, iASX, is just about to publish a new target price for CSL, which I'm sure you'll find proves to be much more meaningful than flawed DCF valuation...
> 
> 
> Best,
> iASX




My research group iDUM is just about to ask your research group iASX do you expect a rush of subscribers, lured by your golden beacon of share trading wisdom, to now rush out and buy ignoring our beloved but "floored" DCF valuation.....miASS! Say hullo to the groupies.


----------



## sqwark7600 (21 June 2009)

Gundini said:


> I own this stock, and it seems to do not so well when the AUD goes up.
> 
> I think it earns most income in USD.
> 
> Considering selling on that basis, and re enter if the USD ever finds some upside..........




I'm with you. I would be comfortable owning CSL if it wasn't so tied to the USD, which is coming under more sustained attack from the bond market, and it carries such a high PE in todays market (albeit accompanied by impeccable fundamentals). The trend has been downward since late Feb09. 
As for pig flu revenue IMHO it seems more and more that the demand will peter out along with the threat. Neither EW nor any technicals that I can discover give any hint of an imminent solid turn towards the consensus value targets of $35-38. And then there is the nearing change at the top. 
ANN, HSP or SHL are probably more profitable healthcare targets IHMO.


----------



## So_Cynical (26 June 2009)

So_Cynical said:


> "25th-May-2009" I got in at the open today 30.20...under 30.50 was my buy zone, happy to hold till im in profit...CSL at under 30.50 has been great buying over the last 7 months.




Out at today's high 32.07 for a nice little profit  not spectacular but achieved the minimum i set 
out to achieve, profit and 8% of original capital left in as a long term hold, as per trading plan .


----------



## pursuitute (24 July 2009)

Hi, new here - part time mug-punter, full time woulda/coulda/shoulda.

I had thought CSL would do well ok after the press went nuts with the announcemnt they were first to do human testing on their H1N1 Vaccine.  Orders stacked of 21m hits from our Gov't alone, the WHO telling us there is no point counting those affected anymore and the US keeping CSL on their list of suppliers.

Admittedly, GSK's pre-order for 190m was pretty impressive and BTA responded accordingly but I didn't expect to see CSL slip further on the back of such a positive (in such a negative 

What are the thoughts for CSL if the results of the trial are positive and they begin shipping late Sept early Oct?

Cheers, Scott


----------



## drlog (24 July 2009)

From what I understand (which isn't much ), CSL makes most of its profit from plasma products. So the flu vaccines don't make that much money and therefore don't drive the share price. Meanwhile, there is someone suing CSL for price fixing of their plasma products which is bad news (especially if it's true!)

Someone correct me if I am wrong please 

I am going to hold anyway. The management is good and all of the fundamental indicators still look good.


----------



## pursuitute (24 July 2009)

drlog said:


> .... the flu vaccines don't make that much money and therefore don't drive the share price. Meanwhile, there is someone suing CSL for price fixing of their plasma products which is bad news (especially if it's true!)




Yes they are being sued, of more concern is the FTC's comments about "troubling signs of co-ordinated behaviour".

Re vaccines not making much money, I'd have thought the opposite given the status of H1N1 as a global pandemic.  I'd guess that the spend in the western world would top $10bn on this virus alone.... and there isn't that many companies that have announced they have started [or are about to] start trials.

With global press allover CSL & Vaxine, I just thought it would have spiked a little 

As you mentioned, their fundamentals are strong and I think they are nudging support so it's a hold for me too.


----------



## So_Cynical (24 July 2009)

There,s still potential upside due to the evolving H1N1 situation...however the counter to that is the USD earnings situation, still CSL is a great stock, very liquid and prone to range....ive moved my CSL buy zone down to 28.50

Just my opinion of course.


----------



## sidious (24 July 2009)

CSL is not going up above $32. Management happy to buy back shares at $29. I wonder how much they offered the shares last year? $32? If their capital raising was higher than $29, where will the difference go? Who will pocket it?

In the meantime, my target price is $27. The recent rally have not been helping CSL at all


----------



## Knobby22 (25 July 2009)

The possiblity of problems in the USA and people switching from CSL to stocks likely to move faster in this upswing hasn't helped. However in my view the company is in bargain territory. That's why I just bought some more.

If they get down to $22 I will tak a big mortgage on my house to up the holding. I predict the latest results are going to be very good. There is also talk of men taking the vaccine. It appears that men who engage in oral sex can get all sorts of nasty mouth and throat cancers caused by the same virus.


----------



## fzbkk (27 July 2009)

Well I am as new to trading as you can be, just opened up my CommSec Account about a week ago, and I happened to watch a few news story's about CSL undertaking human trials for the H1N1 virus. I looked up the stock on google finance, looking at the chart they provide, it seemed that at $30 a share I was buying at a great price, and a safe price, and once they rolled out the vaccine it could only go up. Well, I bought 200 shares, and the price has only been going down since, slightly un-nerving for my first ever purchase. I would be happy with $32+ per share and said to myself surely in 3 months it will reach it.


----------



## drlog (27 July 2009)

Hahaha, thats funny! My first buy on the sharemarket was in CSL as well at $42!!! 

Don't worry fzbkk, you got a great price on CSL and they are definitely forecast to grow. I recommend you start looking at fundamental analysis. I am glad I lost money on the market right away since it made me do more research.


----------



## investorpaul (27 July 2009)

fzbkk said:


> Well I am as new to trading as you can be, just opened up my CommSec Account about a week ago, and I happened to watch a few news story's about CSL undertaking human trials for the H1N1 virus. I looked up the stock on google finance, looking at the chart they provide, it seemed that at $30 a share I was buying at a great price, and a safe price, and once they rolled out the vaccine it could only go up. Well, I bought 200 shares, and the price has only been going down since, slightly un-nerving for my first ever purchase. I would be happy with $32+ per share and said to myself surely in 3 months it will reach it.




fzbkk - This is not advice - But $30 x 200 = $6,000. Most books/websites suggest a minimum investment of $2000 in each stock (to help cover the cost of brokerage) so you could have diversified by buying 3 different stocks ($2k in each), this would help take away the pain of seeing your one and only stock dropping.

Secondly you need to work out if your an investor (buying for long term 3, 5 or 10 yrs, etc). Or a trader who wants to make money within a short space of time (days, weeks, months). If you are a trader you need an exit strategy for the trades that go against you, as you dont want to blow your whole account on a few trades that turn sour. This will help determine how much you should be concerned about short term price movements.

Also if you are "trading" you may want to look at some books/sites on technical analysis.

If you look at the newbies/education section there are heaps of posts (with alot more experience/info that what I have) who will help point you in the right direction.


----------



## waz (27 July 2009)

Keep in mind that for the last few months CSL share price normally moves inverse to the Australian dollar.


----------



## bleach8 (27 July 2009)

waz said:


> Keep in mind that for the last few months CSL share price normally moves inverse to the Australian dollar.




not ture for the last few weeks ...

one the trend is .... index goes up...csl goes down...
                          index does down...csl still goes down
                         AUD goes up....csl goes down...
                        AUD goes down...Csl still goes down..

no matter what ..the price is just heading down…
u can argue that funds went to some small stocks for the rally….but it just not justifiable. Look at all other defensive stocks…most of them went up to some extents. 
It just doesn’t make sense. The buy-back stopped for 2 weeks now …why ?!?!  I guess CSL’s report this year will under the estimates. That why CSL has stopped the buy back ..becoz they know that the share price will drop significantly after the release of the financial reports. So they will able to buyback after the announcement at a much cheaper price. Otherwise , if CSL going to post another robust result, they will be mad to stop the buyback at the recent low price level.  

The Court case in U.S is not a major factor to justify the recent share price…. Remember Baxtor has also been sued, and look at its price …not effected at all…


----------



## sidious (27 July 2009)

The way I see it CSL is a dog. All the majors ave risen but CSL is still in its lows. Swine flu is rising, BTA has more than doubled and CSL is still flat. 
I have tried CSL before. I bought at 32 and rose a little bit and dropped to 31, then 30. While all this is happening, the others are rising well. 

What a waste of money and time. Then you get the crap excuse that investing takes time and it's not favoured by the market atm. 

Maybe the price is just too high.


----------



## zacaxel1975 (27 July 2009)

bleach8 said:


> The buy-back stopped for 2 weeks now …why ?!?!  I guess CSL’s report this year will under the estimates. That why CSL has stopped the buy back ..becoz they know that the share price will drop significantly after the release of the financial reports. So they will able to buyback after the announcement at a much cheaper price. Otherwise , if CSL going to post another robust result, they will be mad to stop the buyback at the recent low price level.




I think there is a regulation around buying back their own shares within a certain time before anouncing results?


----------



## fzbkk (27 July 2009)

investorpaul said:


> fzbkk - This is not advice - But $30 x 200 = $6,000. Most books/websites suggest a minimum investment of $2000 in each stock (to help cover the cost of brokerage) so you could have diversified by buying 3 different stocks ($2k in each), this would help take away the pain of seeing your one and only stock dropping.
> 
> Secondly you need to work out if your an investor (buying for long term 3, 5 or 10 yrs, etc). Or a trader who wants to make money within a short space of time (days, weeks, months). If you are a trader you need an exit strategy for the trades that go against you, as you dont want to blow your whole account on a few trades that turn sour. This will help determine how much you should be concerned about short term price movements.
> 
> ...




Thanks for your comments, looking back the decision I made was spur of the moment, and more research on my part should have been conducted. I guess I was just eager to start trading and thought I had found a sure thing. I am not overly concerned because if I make a loss in the short term I will hold as long as it takes, and believe given time I will make money on CSL. In regards to investing or trading, I would like to trade when I have the knowledge to do so. I am 26 years old, so Investing a % or my money in stocks for the long term is also part of my overall still developing strategy. I have 3 books on order, 

1)Starting out in shares:The ASX way
2)Trading CFD's Options and Warrants:The ASX way
3)A Beginners guide to short term trading


----------



## investorpaul (27 July 2009)

fzbkk said:


> Thanks for your comments, looking back the decision I made was spur of the moment, and more research on my part should have been conducted. I guess I was just eager to start trading and thought I had found a sure thing. I am not overly concerned because if I make a loss in the short term I will hold as long as it takes, and believe given time I will make money on CSL. In regards to investing or trading, I would like to trade when I have the knowledge to do so. I am 26 years old, so Investing a % or my money in stocks for the long term is also part of my overall still developing strategy. I have 3 books on order,
> 
> 1)Starting out in shares:The ASX way
> 2)Trading CFD's Options and Warrants:The ASX way
> 3)A Beginners guide to short term trading




Without trying to deviate too much from the topic of the thread. Most of us have been there when we first decided to trade/invest and made a bad first call.

To be honest it is probably better to lose on your first few trades as it forces you to learn and try and find out why you lost. If you just kept winning you would thinkit is all too easy and keep piling money into the market only to be wiped out when it turns pear shaped.

Use the search function and type in "books" there are plenty of recommendations on good books, etc. Also check out the asx website under the education tab there is good free info there as well. Finally google incredible charts and download it for free, then look up the chart of CSL to understand what its share price has been doing over the last couple of months.

With regard to CSL decide whether it is in your L/T of S/T basket of shares and why you bought it. If it still fits your criteria there is no problem holding it, just make sure you know why you bought it and if it still fits in with that strategy. I hope it all goes well.


----------



## 3 veiws of a secret (27 July 2009)

In refrence to FZBKK..

I have been jumping onto CSL selling and the onto BHP & selling ....sort of a cyclic trade. But look carefully and you will notice the slide in CSL .$30 for 200 shares is low ratio to buy into,on hindsight $29 bucks is a closer pitch to hit, the share really struggled in the $29.90>$30.07 zone and when the support gave way well it "shutitself" . For 200 shares I would be gauging for a long term view.
But why jump on a static share ,when the rest of the market is showing momentum till date.? 
Note I'm not interested in holding $25 shares for too long the fluidity & # of trades is king for me. 
Lastly I disagree with the comments that CSL is a dog....give it time ,and if the price reaches further lows I for one will be sniffing again.  
Huntleys have a buy on the share if that soothes your mind -G'luck
Forgot -I at present do not hold CSL -yet I do have a buy on it !


----------



## sidious (27 July 2009)

Wasn't Huntleys one of the brokers who recommended a buy on Allco, BNB, ABC........They had  recommendation of buy on GPT, GMG, MOF up to the point that it hit below 0.3. By the way, by the time they changed their recommendation, a lot of investors have been burned already. My point is not to follow brokers recommendation and DYOR. That's where I'm at now.

As for my statement about CSL being a dog, other stocks have been rising. Assuming I put 10k to CSL starting July 1, by now it would be $9291. But if I put it in BTA, by now its $15600. $5600 in one month. Not bad. I know CSL, it was on my portfolio for sometime but it did not make an money for me.
For a short time frame, CSL may not be preferred stocks. There may be others much better. I guess what ever suits your timeframe. Maybe you might be lucky if your timeframe is 2 years. 

For now, I'm trying to make the most money as possible before the next market correction / consolidation. BTW I'm not an expert nor a financial adviser. Don't make decisions based on my post.


----------



## 3 veiws of a secret (28 July 2009)

sidious said:


> Wasn't Huntleys one of the brokers who recommended a buy on Allco, BNB, ABC........They had  recommendation of buy on GPT, GMG, MOF up to the point that it hit below 0.3. By the way, by the time they changed their recommendation, a lot of investors have been burned already. My point is not to follow brokers recommendation and DYOR. That's where I'm at now.




Sidious....in fact I was going to ramble on about how experts place BUYS and pull the carpet with an update....Do you remember Ambro !!!! & others some don't exist now ! ...it was "BUY Bye Bye!" . I was caught out in Montevideo ,Uruguay at the time when the crash started to come thick ,and the public woke up to a nightmare scenario. 
Still CSL +29 cents as I type...... With recent gains in hmmm is it 10 days now ?,I must admit I was expecting a profit taking day soon .....but it just shows how the market operates. 

I saw somebody state CSL's price operates in sync with the Aus $ ...


----------



## urgalzmine (28 July 2009)

I dont know why everyone is comparing allco, BNB, ABC... etc to CSL.

CSL is the market leader of plasma blood. It doesnt have debt that cant be repaid like the above companies had. 

CSL with approx $2.1billion in cash

Mr. McNamee( CSL’s chief executive officer and managing director ) had said 
*"CSL expects to be debt-free once the buyback is completed*, McNamee told analysts on a separate call. That will give the company the “financial capacity to do important transactions that will help the company continue to grow,” he said. On a later call with reporters, McNamee said he’s interested in acquiring non-plasma companies such as vaccine makers or biotechnology-based drug developers. He didn’t name any targets.  

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601081&sid=aYr6Q_ACA6cU (9th June 2009)

I am not saying that brokers advise is wrong or right, but looking at just debt CSL to be ok? wouldnt anyone agree?


----------



## drlog (28 July 2009)

I agree. The fundamentals look good, they didn't stop growing during the GFC and the management is excellent.

Everyone is having a whinge because the share price has been going down over the last few weeks rather than tracking the All ords up.


----------



## 3 veiws of a secret (28 July 2009)

urgalzmine said:


> I dont know why everyone is comparing allco, BNB, ABC... etc to CSL.




Sorry you may of misunderstood us.......It was Huntleys & other brokers that where telling everybody to buy shares prior to the crunch .The refrence is too Huntleys etc ONLY.... I was impling that Huntley's &/or Ambro did not provide good service to its clients proir to the credit crash......the shares mentioned are a good & fair example to what Sidious was saying~ Sidious is CORRECT .

Sorry 4 the confusion.....back to CSL ! its still a BUY by Huntleys ! Buy it or Leave it


----------



## Jazzee (28 July 2009)

I am interested to hear what you are all thinking about the US hospital suing CSL for price fixing (with Baxter), I am of the opinion that it is having the greatest effect on the price, at least stopping it from breaking out.  I currently own a reasonably large parcel of the shares, my plan was half for 'shorter term' trading and half for long term growth.  In the shorter term my view is that the uncertainty around the legal action - I'm hoping for some clarification from CSL mgt in the shorter term.


----------



## bleach8 (28 July 2009)

Jazzee said:


> I am interested to hear what you are all thinking about the US hospital suing CSL for price fixing (with Baxter), I am of the opinion that it is having the greatest effect on the price, at least stopping it from breaking out.  I currently own a reasonably large parcel of the shares, my plan was half for 'shorter term' trading and half for long term growth.  In the shorter term my view is that the uncertainty around the legal action - I'm hoping for some clarification from CSL mgt in the shorter term.




do u guys read my comment at all?!!? look at the price of Baxter after the court case news broke out!!! it explains everything!!!! its not material at all!! a small hospital suing a company with 1.1 billion in profit? the chance of winning is too small! even the FTC has little resources to org such a big case! 

can you please read my post regarding to the price weakness ..see if it make sense to you.


----------



## Knobby22 (29 July 2009)

bleach8 said:


> do u guys read my comment at all?!!? look at the price of Baxter after the court case news broke out!!! it explains everything!!!! its not material at all!! a small hospital suing a company with 1.1 billion in profit? the chance of winning is too small! even the FTC has little resources to org such a big case!
> 
> can you please read my post regarding to the price weakness ..see if it make sense to you.




I agree. There is a ridiculous number of lawyers in the US always touting for work. I will be only be worried if that hospital convinces others it has a case and launches a class action. So far that appears unlikely to say the least.
Not to say that isn't effecting the share price.


----------



## fzbkk (5 August 2009)

As A noob I will be interested to see what happens (or doesn't) tomorow with the announcement of, Notice of initial substantial holder (Barclays Group) that was posted at 4:57pm today, I have no idea what this really means.


----------



## So_Cynical (5 August 2009)

fzbkk said:


> As A noob I will be interested to see what happens (or doesn't) tomorow with the announcement of, Notice of initial substantial holder (Barclays Group) that was posted at 4:57pm today, I have no idea what this really means.




I don't think it means anything other than Barclay's wanting a bit of exposure to the CSL share price....banks buy in and out of big stocks all the time.


----------



## drlog (6 August 2009)

There is a "price sensitive" column on the ASX page. If there is a red *!* then it will possibly affect the price. There hasn't recently been any price sensitive announcements from CSL.


----------



## Knobby22 (19 August 2009)

EPS 192.5, higher than forecast.
final dividend of 40c, very nice.
Plenty of cash in hand.
Looking cheap to me. Glad I bought some more last month, may buy more.


----------



## drlog (19 August 2009)

Yeah, it looks awesome. Congratulations CSL!

If the price doesn't move today, I will buy more too. However, I think it will be moving up


----------



## Knobby22 (19 August 2009)

drlog said:


> Yeah, it looks awesome. Congratulations CSL!
> 
> If the price doesn't move today, I will buy more too. However, I think it will be moving up




I did buy another tranche, quite a bit dearer than my previous one 34.51. i just think we its underpriced.


----------



## zacaxel1975 (19 August 2009)

Knobby22 said:


> I did buy another tranche, quite a bit dearer than my previous one 34.51. i just think we its underpriced.




Its down about 4% from that price. I dont know why, I thought the result was very good. Had a bit of a run up coming into the result though.


----------



## Knobby22 (19 August 2009)

zacaxel1975 said:


> Its down about 4% from that price. I dont know why, I thought the result was very good. Had a bit of a run up coming into the result though.




Don't I know it!  It appears that the guidence for FY10 is less than expected if present currency levels are maintained. Bit neboulous I would have thought. PE is around 17. This to me is inexpensive for such a good company.


----------



## fzbkk (19 August 2009)

Knobby22 said:


> EPS 192.5, higher than forecast.
> final dividend of 40c, very nice.
> Plenty of cash in hand.
> Looking cheap to me. Glad I bought some more last month, may buy more.




I expected it to be up after news like that, instead it peaked today at $34.65 up over 2% early but fell to $33.12 down 1.3% for the day. Anyone care to explain?


----------



## Aussiest (19 August 2009)

fzbkk said:


> I expected it to be up after news like that, instead it peaked today at $34.65 up over 2% early but fell to $33.12 down 1.3% for the day. Anyone care to explain?




Look, i think it's a psychological thing with CSL. It has been struggling for a few weeks-months now. Around a month ago, it had trouble exceeding $32.00. Also, divs aren't that good. Plus, my guess is that alot of people bought in at $29-30, and have now reached a good profit... 

Just my


----------



## Not Rene (19 August 2009)

Makes no sense to me, profits up 63%. Almost double final dividend from last year. Shares go down?

But Qantas profits dive by 66%. No dividend to be paid this year. Shares go up!????


----------



## ROE (19 August 2009)

They could open their wallet a bit more for higher yield 
their dividend isn't that great.

and the market has move on from defensive to a risk taker that 
may offer higher reward


----------



## drlog (20 August 2009)

Hahaha, it has gone down even more today! 

There is only one thing I can think of. With the expected growth of this financial year and the current price, the PEG is about 1(ish). That supposedly means that the stock is at a "fair" price.

The thing is, CSL tends to (from what I have seen) underestimate its revenue.

Oh well, I'll buy more, its a good price


----------



## fzbkk (20 August 2009)

down over 3% as of 11:22 great! Who would have imagined. Well I for one won't be selling until it hits minimum $35.00


----------



## M34N (20 August 2009)

CSL has been a classic case of 'buy on the rumour, sell on the fact', share price build up over the past few weeks and now correcting back down. Should prove some good support around $31.00 level from my quick analysis. Maybe consider buying there... just my  though, not an avid follower of CSL but have been watching their price and it has come up on my watch list.


----------



## So_Cynical (20 August 2009)

So_Cynical said:


> buying CSL at under 30.50 has been great buying over the last 7 months.




IMO nothing has changed since i posted the above on the 25th May 09...im constantly amazed at the reasons why people top buy ranging stocks.


----------



## ashahriar (21 August 2009)

Absolutely frustrating.

It took 2 weeks to gain 10% and 2 days to loose 7.5% after declaring the best report among the blue chips. It should be 35 at least.


----------



## fzbkk (25 August 2009)

Frustrating, yesterday big rally, CSL doesn't move, today down around 1.7% in early trade, I purchased 200 at 29.865, now I wonder if I will be selling to break even.


----------



## heartemp (18 September 2009)

*CSL Share buyback*

A couple of questions from a beginner.

Does the share buyback keep a lid on prices or push prices higher?
What will happen to the price when the share buyback ends?


----------



## Knobby22 (19 September 2009)

*Re: CSL Share buyback*



heartemp said:


> A couple of questions from a beginner.
> 
> Does the share buyback keep a lid on prices or push prices higher?
> What will happen to the price when the share buyback ends?




Theoretically it will push up the price but the price often rises before the buyback in anticiapation so in reality it has no effect.

When the buyback ends what the shares do can vary greatly. What sometimes happens is that there are buyers waiting for the buyback to finish hoping to get them on a downswing but if there are too many of them the share price can rise quitre quickly. Very hard to predict.


----------



## Not Rene (10 December 2009)

From my limited knowledge of the way things work it looks to me that CSL's buy back will be finished within 3 weeks time. I hope that will signal the start of something positive for a change. Otherwise I may abandon ship for some finer seas


----------



## dannyjak (14 January 2010)

Hi all

Beginner here. I've read so much about CSL and it seems like an extremely promising company. Great track record, a good outlook, great management, and at today's prices, pretty good value too.

If this is the case, why has their share price been so stagnant for a while.

Always thought that buying into a business of this calibre would reap rewards. Perhaps market has already priced all of this in? however various peolpe have price targets of much more than this

What's your feeling?


----------



## enigmatic (14 January 2010)

I too am quite surprised on CSL lack of performance..
since March i haven't seen any positive action if anything it has been negative due to the Share Buy back reducing number of shares on issue.

Holding for now but unclear on were this one is heading.


----------



## Knobby22 (15 January 2010)

The compnay earns a lot of its profit in foreign currencies and the $A is still going up. Also, I have noticed over the years that the price usually does nothing for most major companies when a buyback occurs. Don't know why, must be psychological.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (15 January 2010)

Just watch out for a takeover or positioning.

Folk in merchant banks such as MQG are not the brightest stars in the sky.

"CSR" one says over a latte.
Muppets scratch heads and other round objects bankers carry.
"Hey , how about getting some fees from forners for a tilt at CSL."
And then they are off running

gg


----------



## Not Rene (20 January 2010)

Well that's as comprehensible as your latin.

Anyway, maybe the 'market' is sitting on it's collective hands waiting to see what happens with the class action against them in the States re alleged price fixing practices?


----------



## GumbyLearner (20 January 2010)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Just watch out for a takeover or positioning.
> 
> Folk in merchant banks such as MQG are not the brightest stars in the sky.
> 
> ...




Hey Garp 

Is your reference to "forners" a phonetic pun on a certain accent?  
Or are you just having a laugh about the tools employed by MQG involved in takeover bids? LOL


----------



## wanlad1 (8 February 2010)

Seems to be quite a few brokers placing buys on CSL

Investsmart have a broker consensus
7 buys
3 hold
0 Sells 

Then today
Gary Glover, Novus Capital

BUY RECOMMENDATIONS

CSL Limited (CSL)

This blood products group has underperformed the sector and, recently, the general market. This has been primarily due to a rising Australian dollar as the core of CSL’s earnings is in US dollars. Expect to see continuing strong organic growth in the plasma proteins business, which should be positive for CSL’s share price. Any correction in the Australian dollar could lead to a positive re-rating for the stock.

http://www.thebull.com.au/articles_detail.php?id=9255

Seems to be starting to shape up for a run, stop loss under the support line


----------



## Knobby22 (23 February 2010)

wanlad, you were right.

Unfortunately, the $A is rising again which will take the wind out of its sails.

THe results were excellent though, surprising on the upside, a real quality company.


----------



## drlog (23 February 2010)

I would say that the increase in share price lately is due to the half year report looking so good. Their fundamentals are great and that will drive the share price up.

Like you said, a quality company.


----------



## So_Cynical (5 March 2010)

Julia said:


> 15th-April-2009 With a SP which is not going up, and a paltry 1.7% dividend, I don't know why anyone would buy this, frankly. I find it hard to see why you'd buy something which has not experienced any sign of an uptrend for a long time.






Trevor_S said:


> 19th-May-2009I am with Julia on this one, I have been looking at CSL for some time wonder why the hell people are buying it, I see no real value at current prices ?






So_Cynical said:


> 25th-May-2009 I got in at the open today 30.20...funny cos i didn't give myself much hope of getting my low ball buy order filled when i decided to have a go at CSL late last nite.
> 
> I could care less whether the take over goes ahead or not....under 30.50 was my buy zone, happy to hold till im in profit.
> 
> Don't know how u can look at this chart and say that :dunno:...unarguably buying CSL at under 30.50 has been great buying over the last 7 months.






So_Cynical said:


> 27th-June-2009 Out at today's high 32.07 for a nice little profit  not spectacular but achieved the minimum i set out to achieve, profit and 8% of original capital left in as a long term hold, as per trading plan .




Totally out today at 35.77  who the hell is buying this at over 35 dollars a share ive no idea :dunno:...to each there own i suppose.

As ive said many times in this thread, CSL is and has been a great ranging stock with clear buy and sell levels....have to say i am surprised it took so long to get to the very top of that channel.

For those interested my buy is in Green and sells in Red...love it when a plan comes together. 
~


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (5 March 2010)

I would have expected it to retrace earlier if the AUD/USD were a major factor. I think it will go up next week if the overall market heads up, just looking at the volume on that chart SC.

Scratchy balls at MQG must have a buy on it with his pet muppets.

gg


----------



## zacaxel1975 (23 April 2010)

Does anyone know why CSl would drop 8.5% in early trade this morning? I cannot find any news online.


----------



## drlog (23 April 2010)

The only thing I cant think of is this:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/04/23/2880763.htm

But I am not sure if that would be the entire reason? Does anyone else have an insight?


----------



## overhang (23 April 2010)

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aRo4AfKyyQPE
"Baxter, a maker of blood products and vaccines, projected earnings, excluding one-time items, of $3.92 to $4 a share, below the average $4.24 estimate  of 16 analysts surveyed by Bloomberg. Baxter said earnings for the year will be reduced by an increase in Medicaid rebates and a change in the taxes for retiree prescription drug benefits required under the health- care law enacted in March. The company also forecast lower use of plasma products than previously expected. "
Looks like it has rippled through all blood plasma stocks, I'm guessing in CSL's case a lot of stops were hit along the way?


----------



## sparfarkle (23 April 2010)

gotta be more to it,fundamentally cheap at $37,decent forecasts etc,etc then to suddenly have its biggest ever one day drop on the highest daily volume ever recorded with absolutely no sign of it coming.
how often does that happen because your rival puts out a crappy report.
i hope these crook kiddies recover soon!!


----------



## So_Cynical (23 April 2010)

sparfarkle said:


> fundamentally cheap at $37,decent forecasts etc,etc then to suddenly have its biggest ever one day drop on the highest daily volume ever recorded with absolutely no sign of it coming.




Fundamentally cheap at $37 you say...then what the hell was it at $31 just 9 weeks ago  and with a crappy dividend yield of around 2% @ $37 how is that Share price sustainable.:dunno: i stand by my post of a few weeks ago.



So_Cynical said:


> who the hell is buying this at over 35 dollars a share ive no idea :dunno:...to each there own i suppose.


----------



## McCoy Pauley (24 April 2010)

So_Cynical said:


> Fundamentally cheap at $37 you say...then what the hell was it at $31 just 9 weeks ago  and with a crappy dividend yield of around 2% @ $37 how is that Share price sustainable.:dunno: i stand by my post of a few weeks ago.




It was fundamentally cheaper, obviously! 

Couldn't resist with the 7-8% drop and took a position at $33.75.  I think I heard on the radio this morning that CSL reiterated its guidance for FY10, notwithstanding Baxter's announcement.

It's obviously not good that a child in WA is in a coma, but there's still a long way to go before CSL should be pinned for the cause of the febrile convulsions suffered by the children.  Hopefully, if CSL is at fault, it's no more than a bad batch of vaccines.


----------



## Judd (18 August 2010)

Traders obviously have a view on this share.  Me, I am content that the dividend yield on one group of my share holdings is yielding around 60% and the dividends have paid off the purchase price.  Haven't bought any in quite a while.


----------



## Knobby22 (18 August 2010)

Pretty good result.
Profit up 22%
Dividend up 13%
Another share buy back.
No debt.
New drugs to hit market.

I'm happy.


----------



## Knobby22 (18 August 2010)

Actually let me take back what I said.
Profit is up 22% in constant currency terms.
Actually the profit in A$ was flat. Not so hot.


----------



## robusta (18 August 2010)

A$ goes up, A$ goes down. Buy CSL when out of fashion and hold for stella long term growth.


----------



## McCoy Pauley (18 August 2010)

robusta said:


> A$ goes up, A$ goes down. Buy CSL when out of fashion and hold for stella long term growth.




Yep, took the opportunity to add to my holding in CSL today on the sell-off after the report.  Seems to me that most sellers looked at the profit guidance for the FY2011 and didn't take into account the new drugs coming into the market in the next few years.

Plus CSL announced a $900 million on-market share buyback, which seems to have gone unnoticed.


----------



## malachii (19 August 2010)

Have to say I stocked up as well.  I dont think the report was as bad as the market reaction and I'm sure in the not too distant future we will think this was a cheap price.

malachii


----------



## Knobby22 (19 August 2010)

I agree with you guys but having little growth next year will tend to stop buyers. 

If the $A falls this company will have to stay at least the same price in trade weighted dollars, and the growth is still occurring.

I sold some at $38 earlier and tend to buy them back below $30 if possible.


----------



## McCoy Pauley (20 January 2011)

I wonder if Mr Market is being a little irrational over CSL right now.  The company has broken out of its trading range a few months ago and has pushed through a new 52 week high this morning on no news and a strengthening Australian dollar against the US and Euro (which ought to hurt CSL's earnings in Australian dollar terms).  There doesn't seem to be any news to support the increasing price.

As a holder, I'm happy to see green on the company's share price this morning but it has me somewhat perplexed.


----------



## robusta (10 July 2011)

The latest Comsec Market Bulletin has a sell on CSL. I forget the details all I read was blah, blah, blah, short term crap.

I am dreaming of the sp falling 20% so I can get a piece of this wonderful company.


----------



## pixel (10 July 2011)

robusta said:


> The latest Comsec Market Bulletin has a sell on CSL. I forget the details all I read was blah, blah, blah, short term crap.
> 
> I am dreaming of the sp falling 20% so I can get a piece of this wonderful company.



 ahh - so that's why it fell so much after June Option Expiry. Someone is / has been accumulating. 
I bought the rebound, currently holding at $32.36, and intend to add if $33.45 resistance is broken.
Stop = Close Below $31.80.


----------



## tinhat (11 July 2011)

robusta said:


> The latest Comsec Market Bulletin has a sell on CSL. I forget the details all I read was blah, blah, blah, short term crap.
> 
> I am dreaming of the sp falling 20% so I can get a piece of this wonderful company.




Gee you're a stingy buyer. Of course there is nothing to say that the price won't drop further but I happily bought in recently at $32.59.

Currency headwinds are the main medium term challenge that I can see.


----------



## kat (2 August 2011)

How low the SP can go?


----------



## VSntchr (2 August 2011)

kat said:


> How low the SP can go?




If Jim Rogers is even remotely correct in his predictions of the dollar nearing 1.40....then the answer to your question is much lower...

Despite the falling SP, CSL is by no means cheap in my opininon would consider it trading close to value.


----------



## McCoy Pauley (3 August 2011)

VSntchr said:


> If Jim Rogers is even remotely correct in his predictions of the dollar nearing 1.40....then the answer to your question is much lower...
> 
> Despite the falling SP, CSL is by no means cheap in my opininon would consider it trading close to value.




Agreed.  As the Australian dollar climbs against the US dollar, CSL's revenue falls. I wonder if CSL will report their results and try to set out what they might have been but for the increasing strength of the Australian dollars.

Buying the likes of CSL and Cochlear is buying a bet that the US economy will recover and the US dollar will strengthen against the Australian dollar.  So far, that bet looks to be a losing one.


----------



## robusta (5 August 2011)

robusta said:


> The latest Comsec Market Bulletin has a sell on CSL. I forget the details all I read was blah, blah, blah, short term crap.
> 
> I am dreaming of the sp falling 20% so I can get a piece of this wonderful company.




Not there yet...


----------



## kat (18 August 2011)

robusta said:


> Not there yet...



 Now the Franc is going down a bit.


----------



## kat (18 August 2011)

Knobby22 said:


> I agree with you guys but having little growth next year will tend to stop buyers.
> 
> If the $A falls this company will have to stay at least the same price in trade weighted dollars, and the growth is still occurring.
> 
> I sold some at $38 earlier and tend to buy them back below $30 if possible.




How do you see this one now?


----------



## billv (18 August 2011)

VSntchr said:


> Despite the falling SP, CSL is by no means cheap in my opininon would consider it trading close to value.




Do you think CSL shares can rely on value alone?
IMO considering the current low growth environment and the crappy unfranked dividend the share price could fall below $18


----------



## Knobby22 (19 August 2011)

kat said:


> How do you see this one now?




Yes, the Swiss Franc and $A have been worse than I thought. This will be a great currency trade one day. I am getting keener as this company is a great cash spinner in a good industry. Looking to buy on a spike down later in the year.


----------



## Knobby22 (20 August 2011)

Very funny article in todays Age.

The CEO of CSL brought senior Chinese officials out  this week to see the Broadmeadows plant - where they are planning to  build the new plant and where the exisiting facility is to make blood factors. You can imagine the blood flows and such.

As he is talking one of the Chinese puts his hands up says "Penguins"?

Brian McNamee is bemused. Then someone realises they have extra Chinese and have somehow picked up a couple who thought they were going to the penguin parade. 

If you hear rumours about CSL being cruel to penguins from China you will know where they started!!


----------



## Tysonboss1 (2 September 2011)

billv said:


> Do you think CSL shares can rely on value alone?
> IMO considering the current low growth environment and the crappy unfranked dividend the share price could fall below $18




Well it is not cheap, thats for sure.

The current share price of circa $27.50 pershare, compared to real assets per share of circa $8.50, means $27.50 is on the high side.

If nothing were to change at this company eg, no growth and no change in the exchange rate etc. I guess it would only be worth say $18.

So at the moment it's selling 50% higher than this. Whether that price is justified comes back to what happens to the exchange rate and how well CSL can deploy the retained earnings to grow the businesses.

Csl is currently earning 25% on their equity, and they are retaining nearly $1 of earnings per year, which in theory should add about an extra 25c in earnings.

However, CSL is also conducting share buybacks, I feel if the retained earnings are being used to buy back over priced stock instead of being reinvested in asserts generating high return on equity, the growth in earnings per share will not be high enough to justify the current premium over book value.

The jury is out on this one, I love the assets I just don't want to pay to much for them.


----------



## RandR (14 September 2011)

Have been keeping a very close eye on CSL in the last week, if anyone else has been following the Swiss Franc to US Dollar, the news of the swiss pegging there currency to the euro brought the US dollar to surge against the Franc.

This is a key exchange rate for this stock, and the rate is now above the level indicated in the last report to be positive for earnings. IF the franc remains weak against the US dollar in the future, I might seriously start to think about taking a plunge on CSL.

That and the stock is now trading at a PE of 15x, when historically about 20x.

Keeping an eye on this daily, it looks to me to be technically finding a little support at this point on the chart aswell.


----------



## Tysonboss1 (14 September 2011)

RandR said:


> That and the stock is now trading at a PE of 15x, when historically about 20x.
> 
> .




Many stocks that were traditionally 20x are now at 10x.

either way though I really like their assets, and I do feel they are recession proof, But they are currently to expensive, atleast in my veiw.

It's a tuff one to justify, especially because they are putting lots of the cash they are generating back into a share buy back at this high price, which means the return on equity on that cash will be low.

Maybe I will take a little bite and just see how they go, but I will leave room to take more incase there is a rerating lower.


----------



## robusta (14 September 2011)

robusta said:


> The latest Comsec Market Bulletin has a sell on CSL. I forget the details all I read was blah, blah, blah, short term crap.
> 
> I am dreaming of the sp falling 20% so I can get a piece of this wonderful company.






tinhat said:


> Gee you're a stingy buyer. Of course there is nothing to say that the price won't drop further but I happily bought in recently at $32.59.
> 
> Currency headwinds are the main medium term challenge that I can see.






Tysonboss1 said:


> Many stocks that were traditionally 20x are now at 10x.
> 
> either way though I really like their assets, and I do feel they are recession proof, But they are currently to expensive, atleast in my veiw.
> 
> ...




I agree with you Tysonboss, not quite there yet IMO for CSL.


----------



## RandR (16 September 2011)

If one does read through CSL last report you'll discover they actually accepted Greek bonds as payment for outstanding payments. They already wrote off 25million into the last financial period on greek bonds. I havnt been able to determine if CSL is holding anymore european bonds, something I would dearly love to know. One has to wonder if there is a skeleton hiding in the closet ?


----------



## Tysonboss1 (16 September 2011)

RandR said:


> If one does read through CSL last report you'll discover they actually accepted Greek bonds as payment for outstanding payments. They already wrote off 25million into the last financial period on greek bonds. I havnt been able to determine if CSL is holding anymore european bonds, something I would dearly love to know. One has to wonder if there is a skeleton hiding in the closet ?




Have they sold the bonds and written of a $25M loss or are they holding and have impaired their holding value


----------



## craft (16 September 2011)

RandR said:


> If one does read through CSL last report you'll discover they actually accepted Greek bonds as payment for outstanding payments. They already wrote off 25million into the last financial period on greek bonds. I havnt been able to determine if CSL is holding anymore european bonds, something I would dearly love to know. One has to wonder if there is a skeleton hiding in the closet ?




Another 15.248 Million on the 30 June balance sheet as ‘available for sale assets’ Thats probably all smoke by now.

Government trade and other receivables have jumped from 52.652 million in 2010 to 121.483 million in 2011.  No idea how much of this is owed by Greece and the amounts are listed as neither past due nor impaired.  Time will tell.

CSL total days receivables are at 60.5 days and they have 87.553 Million past 90 days with 22.891 of that provisioned for as doubtful. Not particularly tidy really.


----------



## skc (16 September 2011)

RandR said:


> If one does read through CSL last report you'll discover they actually accepted Greek bonds as payment for outstanding payments. They already wrote off 25million into the last financial period on greek bonds. I havnt been able to determine if CSL is holding anymore european bonds, something I would dearly love to know. One has to wonder if there is a skeleton hiding in the closet ?




All the European banks don't have to write it down...it's all good.

You can't see me if I close my eyes...


----------



## Tysonboss1 (18 September 2011)

What are peoples thoughts on CSL's recent and planned buybacks, It seems to me that alot of book value has been destroyed by the recent share buyback, and if the company starts another round of share buybacks it is going to see further reduction in the book value pershare.

The problem I have is that csl's assets are great and do produce a high return on capital employed, But their current share price is only justified if the cash generated by the existing businesses can be put to work generating furthre high returns.

If they pay out all their earnings as a dividend their existing businesses are only worth about $18.

The problem I see is the are currently much higher than $18, this could only be justified if as I said their retained earnings are being invested at rates above 25% and their for building book value and earnings atr a high rate.

However, Large amounts of those earnings are going to be used in future buybacks ($900M per year), which will be buying back shares at about 4 times book value.

What are peoples thoughts.


----------



## Knobby22 (18 September 2011)

Buybacks don't destroy value, they increase earnings per share.  As most of the earnings are foreign owned this is better than receiving returns in non franked dividends.

In my experience takeovers for takeover sakes tend to destroy earnings.  

Secondly, they are spinning off a lot of money and a big proportion is going into research over long time frames, secondly they are building at Broadmeadows anther world plant which will increase profits.

They tried a takeover but the USA protection police didn't like a foreign stakeholder dominating the industry. I am sure  McNamee is looking for bargains.  

Waiting to pounce.


----------



## Tysonboss1 (18 September 2011)

Buy backs do destroy value if the shares are bought back at a price that is to high.

The most recent share buy back actually reduced their book value pershare.


----------



## Knobby22 (18 September 2011)

Tysonboss1 said:


> Buy backs do destroy value if the shares are bought back at a price that is to high.
> 
> The most recent share buy back actually reduced their book value pershare.




Good point, the next one will be better. EPS went up though.


----------



## Tysonboss1 (18 September 2011)

Knobby22 said:


> Good point, the next one will be better. EPS went up though.




The earnings per share would have risen more if they just put the $900M in a term deposit, 

By my calcs the price they pay / share would have to be around $18, for it to be in share holders favour.


----------



## craft (18 September 2011)

Tysonboss1 said:


> What are peoples thoughts on CSL's recent and planned buybacks, It seems to me that alot of book value has been destroyed by the recent share buyback, and if the company starts another round of share buybacks it is going to see further reduction in the book value pershare.
> 
> The problem I have is that csl's assets are great and do produce a high return on capital employed, But their current share price is only justified if the cash generated by the existing businesses can be put to work generating furthre high returns.
> 
> ...




Share buybacks don’t create or destroy wealth but they do redistribute it. If a share buyback is done at a price below the fair value of the business wealth is transferred from those who sell to shareholders who continue to hold. If the buyback price is above fair value the wealth is transferred from continuing shareholders to those selling.  

When calculating the growth portion of fair value you should be looking at return on incremental capital. As you are alluding to CSL are utilising a lot of their incremental capital at a very low return by buying back their shares at current prices. If you are not recognising this in your valuation calculation because you do something oversimplified like assuming growth = retained earnings and valuing it on a multiple of historical ROE then you will get a higher valuation then is appropriate.

I think CSL fair value is lower than current market value so sellers got the best deal at the expense of continuing holders from the last buyback and it will probably be the same for the next.  This has an iterative impact of lowering the fair value even further.

If you wouldn't buy at a given price - you certainly don't want a company you hold buying either - Its economic impact is really no different, somebody else gains because you pay too much or somebody pays too much on your behalf.


----------



## Tysonboss1 (18 September 2011)

craft said:


> I think CSL fair value is lower than current market value so sellers got the best deal at the expense of continuing holders from the last buyback and it will probably be the same for the next.  This has an iterative impact of lowering the fair value even further.
> 
> If you wouldn't buy at a given price - you certainly don't want a company you hold buying either - Its economic impact is really no different, somebody else gains because you pay too much or somebody pays too much on your behalf.




Do you think $18 / share is to conservative?


----------



## craft (19 September 2011)

Tysonboss1 said:


> Do you think $18 / share is to conservative?




Yes. But then I haven’t factored in anywhere near the annual rate of 900m per year buybacks. Have I missed some announcement?



Tysonboss1 said:


> However, Large amounts of those earnings are going to be used in future buybacks ($900M per year), which will be buying back shares at about 4 times book value.




This seams high to me. They couldn’t maintain and grow their business according to my estimates as well as maintain this level of capital return. If the 900M per year ongoing is right then my assumptions are wrong and so to will be my valuation.

I thought the last buyback of 900m was to return the money (capital management) not used but raised in preparation for the failed takeover of Talacris. They bought back those shares at an average of $34.50 which I thought was a bit rich but then again they raised at $36.75 which was even richer – so some latitude should be given for returning the funds through a buyback on that occasion. But the principal remains – It’s a bad move to buy back shares above fair value.


----------



## Tysonboss1 (19 September 2011)

craft said:


> Yes. But then I haven’t factored in anywhere near the annual rate of 900m per year buybacks. Have I missed some announcement?
> 
> 
> 
> .




Thats I figure I heard from a commentator on TV. He said that the board would consider buy backs up to that level on a regular basis going forward, Maybe he is wrong, I will try and dig a bit deeper.

what price do you have in mind, PM me if you don't want to announce on the thread.


----------



## RandR (19 September 2011)

Tysonboss1 said:


> Thats I figure I heard from a commentator on TV. He said that the board would consider buy backs up to that level on a regular basis going forward, Maybe he is wrong, I will try and dig a bit deeper.
> 
> what price do you have in mind, PM me if you don't want to announce on the thread.




On page 135 of there full year results dated 17/8/11. It stated during 2012 they are planning on raising $1 billion of debt, which will be used to pay down $385 million of maturing debt, the rest may/may not be used for a further $900million share buy back to be undertaken in the 1st half of 2012.

The next two pages following that, pg 136 + 137 are also most interesting, because they provide the guidance for the effect of Forex movements for the company, something that will be key for this company over the next 12 months.


----------



## craft (19 September 2011)

RandR said:


> On page 135 of there full year results dated 17/8/11. It stated during 2012 they are planning on raising $1 billion of debt, which will be used to pay down $385 million of maturing debt, the rest may/may not be used for a further $900million share buy back to be undertaken in the 1st half of 2012.
> 
> The next two pages following that, pg 136 + 137 are also most interesting, because they provide the guidance for the effect of Forex movements for the company, something that will be key for this company over the next 12 months.




Thanks for the source R&R. Appears a one off not ongoing. Seems a strange time to be increasing debt – you have to wonder if they are looking to support the share price or buyback because they feel the stock is undervalued?



Tysonboss1 said:


> what price do you have in mind, PM me if you don't want to announce on the thread.



  Hope you understand - DYOR. The most you will get from me is a disclosure that I don't own any CSL shares at the moment.


----------



## Knobby22 (20 September 2011)

So the A$ is dropping and CSL will now be making more profits.

Is it time to buy yet?  I don't think so.

In my view, interest rates are not going to drop and when they don't the Aussie will rise again. I want a real good price so I am going to be patient.  

That price will be above the dream $18 price Tyson wants though. If it actually got to that price I would probably borrow on the house, but if it did happen we would probably be in a depression.


----------



## Tysonboss1 (20 September 2011)

Knobby22 said:


> That price will be above the dream $18 price Tyson wants though. If it actually got to that price I would probably borrow on the house, but if it did happen we would probably be in a depression.




It's not a dream price, Thats what it would be worth if it paid out all it's earnings as a dividend or worse as over paid buy backs, and reinvested little to grow earnings per share.

As I said earlier, it only has $8.96 of equity per share and that equity earned $1.73 which is about 20%. If your happy with a 10% return you can double the price you pay for  that equity to $17.92.

But they don't Pay out all earnings they retain some which increases equity pershare and earnings, So if you believe those earnings that are retained will be invested and earn high returns say above 20% you can pay more than $18.

But thats why I was questioning what the were doing with the retained earnings, if they end up buying back shares at a high price it will not grow earnings at a high rate and will decrease equity.


----------



## Knobby22 (23 September 2011)

Tysonboss1 said:


> It's not a dream price, Thats what it would be worth if it paid out all it's earnings as a dividend or worse as over paid buy backs, and reinvested little to grow earnings per share.
> 
> As I said earlier, it only has $8.96 of equity per share and that equity earned $1.73 which is about 20%. If your happy with a 10% return you can double the price you pay for  that equity to $17.92.
> 
> ...




Thanks for your reasoning.
The interesting thing is as the $A drops and foreigners try to pull the money out of this country, CSL sp should drop further even as the profits rise due to the $A falling. I would love it if we did get to your price.


----------



## Tysonboss1 (23 September 2011)

Knobby22 said:


> The interesting thing is as the $A drops and foreigners try to pull the money out of this country, CSL sp should drop further even as the profits rise due to the $A falling. I would love it if we did get to your price.




Yes, If they did get to $18 I would be buying some, But remember I only said that was their value if they were not significantly growing earnings, But they probably will, and as you have pointed out their may be some artificial earnings growth from the lower australian dollar if we do indeed weaken, I am no currency expert though so I have no idea on that other than to say their will probably be both good and bad currency movements in the future, So I will not put to much weight on that in my valuation.


----------



## Knobby22 (23 September 2011)

...and the price goes up (shrug)


----------



## Tysonboss1 (23 September 2011)

Knobby22 said:


> ...and the price goes up (shrug)




During the GFC CSL showed alot of strength, atleast compared to other stocks as if it was seen as a safe haven,

But, when their was a broad based recovery csl started to show weakness and hit lows as people left the safe haven for the other assets, It may be what is happening now.


----------



## Not Rene (20 October 2011)

A new share buy back announcement. Will it have the same effect as the last one? None whatsoever!


----------



## Tysonboss1 (20 October 2011)

Not Rene said:


> A new share buy back announcement. Will it have the same effect as the last one? None whatsoever!




If they insist on paying 4 times Book value again, then yes it will have the same results, ie, the share price will go down once the buying stops and the beans are counted.


----------



## Not Rene (15 March 2012)

I was looking at the Course of Sales for CSL today 15/03/12 and there were 2 pre market /overseas purchases worth a total of $649 000.00 with a cost of $36 and $36.50 a share! This is $3 more per share than what they were currently trading.
Is this a normal practice for OS buyers to pay more? Or has someone been duped


----------



## skc (15 March 2012)

Not Rene said:


> I was looking at the Course of Sales for CSL today 15/03/12 and there were 2 pre market /overseas purchases worth a total of $649 000.00 with a cost of $36 and $36.50 a share! This is $3 more per share than what they were currently trading.
> Is this a normal practice for OS buyers to pay more? Or has someone been duped




SPI Futures expiry today so all sorts of large orders going through on all the big stocks.

And these buyers are not paying a premium... they just get matched at the opening price.

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11619


----------



## skyQuake (15 March 2012)

Not Rene said:


> I was looking at the Course of Sales for CSL today 15/03/12 and there were 2 pre market /overseas purchases worth a total of $649 000.00 with a cost of $36 and $36.50 a share! This is $3 more per share than what they were currently trading.
> Is this a normal practice for OS buyers to pay more? Or has someone been duped




The 2 orders you speak of were exercise Puts @ 36 and 36.50
The overseas crossing orders was for only $5k worth of shares at 33.40


----------



## Not Rene (16 March 2012)

Thanks for explanations! I am still learning new things


----------



## Not Rene (29 March 2012)

hmm $36.28 already, maybe something is happening finally! My dream of $42 may yet become a reality


----------



## kermit345 (26 April 2012)

Anyone else following the trend of CSL? It's getting very close to the $38.00 mark where there could be some reasonable resistance. I think CSL is somewhat overvalued at this mark and i'm looking to exit but not going to do so until I see the current trend cooling off or broken.

Interested in the thoughts of others, trend started around 16th of Feb and has gone pretty strong to now. If it breaks through $38 could get interesting otherwise if trend falters at $38 will be a nice exit for me .


----------



## tinhat (26 April 2012)

kermit345 said:


> Anyone else following the trend of CSL? It's getting very close to the $38.00 mark where there could be some reasonable resistance. I think CSL is somewhat overvalued at this mark and i'm looking to exit but not going to do so until I see the current trend cooling off or broken.
> 
> Interested in the thoughts of others, trend started around 16th of Feb and has gone pretty strong to now. If it breaks through $38 could get interesting otherwise if trend falters at $38 will be a nice exit for me .




Yeah, on a great run and the retreating AUD will help. I sold a couple of weeks ago as I needed the money for something so got out early.


----------



## Superb Parrot (29 June 2012)

tinhat said:


> Yeah, on a great run and the retreating AUD will help. I sold a couple of weeks ago as I needed the money for something so got out early.




The run continues, $39.63, must be a 'safe - haven' and could be benefiting from 'Obamacare' passing the Supreme Court. A rise of 16c on the last trading day of the Financial year.
 One stock I own that lets me sleep at night.


----------



## Not Rene (19 July 2012)

Not Rene said:


> hmm $36.28 already, maybe something is happening finally! My dream of $42 may yet become a reality




Well $41 today! The dream is becoming a reality, but now I think I will hold til $45


----------



## Judd (22 August 2012)

CSL keeps on doing what it does.  Large expenditure on research.  Unfranked dividend of 47 c


----------



## notting (18 October 2012)

It announced a Billion dollar buy back on OCt 11 when the share price was about $30.
This was after collecting 2B for a US takeover through a capital raisings and so forth in AU, after that deal fell through and the AU doubled against the US it shifts the money back to AUs to do a buy back.  
Since then it's share price has gone to 47.  Now it announces another Billion $  buy back at these rediculous levels.  
Money well spent?


----------



## Superb Parrot (18 October 2012)

I remember about 6 weeks ago a broker recommendation to sell. Price still reflects a flight to safety. If it keeps going like this there may be another price split.


----------



## Not Rene (20 October 2012)

i sold some at $40 seeing as they hadn't been that high for years, the some more at $45.55. 
If they reach $50 I am selling the lot, but I already regret selling at $40 :-( 
Will I regret selling at $50?


----------



## Knobby22 (20 October 2012)

Not Rene said:


> i sold some at $40 seeing as they hadn't been that high for years, the some more at $45.55.
> If they reach $50 I am selling the lot, but I already regret selling at $40 :-(
> Will I regret selling at $50?




If you are a long term investor then I predict you will.
CSL has good growth, honest management and profits will increase if the $A falls.
THe only fly in the ointment that I can see is that now McNamee has retired the new CEO will be looking for some writeoffs in his first year.


----------



## pixel (27 November 2012)

CSL lifts profit giudance:
http://www.asx.com.au/asx/statistics/displayAnnouncement.do?display=pdf&idsId=01360424

... and the Market jumps


----------



## McLovin (27 November 2012)

I love these guys. My oldest holding. I got them on the float.

I should add, they were actually given to me as a b'day present by my grandfather so I can't take any credit for it.


----------



## Knobby22 (27 November 2012)

McLovin said:


> I love these guys. My oldest holding. I got them on the float.
> 
> I should add, they were actually given to me as a b'day present by my grandfather so I can't take any credit for it.




I bought 1200 on the float. My 4th ever owned shares. The others were CBA (float), Westpac (long sold), WPL.  I sold over half of them to pay my house off - should have bought more.


----------



## McLovin (27 November 2012)

Knobby22 said:


> I bought 1200 on the float. My 4th ever owned shares. The others were CBA (float), Westpac (long sold), WPL.  I sold over half of them to pay my house off - should have bought more.




The problem is we both know that it's unlikely we will find another CSL in Australia.

The float was really scaled back, I think $10,000 was the maximum (it may have been lower). What was the float price? I have it in my system as $0.77, but that could be wrong. Either way, I know I'm up!


----------



## kid hustlr (27 November 2012)

just an incredible holding.

A guy i know got in for a whole bunch of these on the ground floor. doesnt want to sell yet for tax reasons so instead is writing calls on them looking for a 'passive income' lololol


----------



## Knobby22 (27 November 2012)

I think the float price was more like $2.40. But as it has been split into 3 this works out at a present price of 80c approx.  Having an honest and smart CEO like McNamee was a good factor also. I'd love to find another one but as you say where?


----------



## McLovin (27 November 2012)

Knobby22 said:


> I think the float price was more like $2.40. But as it has been split into 3 this works out at a present price of 80c approx.  Having an honest and smart CEO like McNamee was a good factor also. I'd love to find another one but as you say where?




Yeah, 80c seems about right, I knew about the splits which is why 77c seemed a bit strange. Ahh well what's 3c on a $50 stock!

Agree on McNamee, he was actually a pretty directionless 34 year old when he was made CEO but he's arguably Australia's greatest CEO.


----------



## McLovin (27 November 2012)

Slightly off topic, but a good reason to take a swipe at the myopia that affects both sides of politics. CSL came out of a well funded government department. COH came out of a university. They are two of Australia's most successful global companies. And year after year the government takes money away. It's an interesting observation that much of America's dominance in technology was actually borne out of the huge funding increases for research during the Space Race. Bah, let's just dig another hole.


----------



## Knobby22 (27 November 2012)

True. I was upset when the Libs cut funding but Labor are proving even worse.
CFU was an Australian invention but when they presented it to the Parlimentary party they couldn't understand the potential or even really understand how it worked.  The minutes of the meeting would make you cry. We need men like Monash in parliment. Too many lawyers.


----------



## McLovin (27 November 2012)

Knobby22 said:


> True. I was upset when the Libs cut funding but Labor are proving even worse.
> CFU was an Australian invention but when they presented it to the Parlimentary party they couldn't understand the potential or even really understand how it worked.  The minutes of the meeting would make you cry. We need men like Monash in parliment. Too many lawyers.




Do you have the minutes to the meeting by any chance?

Those government organisations need a team of commercialisation specialists, ditto the universities. Researchers and politicians aren't going to take your product to market.


----------



## Knobby22 (27 November 2012)

Used top be on the CFU website but that was 4 years ago.


----------



## kid hustlr (12 December 2012)

Still she runs


----------



## McCoy Pauley (19 December 2012)

McLovin said:


> Do you have the minutes to the meeting by any chance?
> 
> Those government organisations need a team of commercialisation specialists, ditto the universities. Researchers and politicians aren't going to take your product to market.




Universities and the CSIRO do have teams of people trying to commercialize their inventions, but that takes resources which they do not have in the present environment.


----------



## Judd (13 February 2013)

Usual stuff so far from CSL.  Profit up by 24%, R&D $US190m up 14%, Dividend $US50c ($AU48.66c unfranked) up 33%.


----------



## notting (13 February 2013)

Judd said:


> Usual stuff so far from CSL.  Profit up by 24%, R&D $US190m up 14%, Dividend $US50c ($AU48.66c unfranked) up 33%.




Looks like people took the dividend on the fake out!
Wish I had been watching, would have gone short at 2% rise on that dinosaur news.
When do they stop that aggressive buying of their own shares anyway?
Looking for another opportunity.


----------



## McCoy Pauley (16 October 2013)

notting said:


> Looks like people took the dividend on the fake out!
> Wish I had been watching, would have gone short at 2% rise on that dinosaur news.
> *When do they stop that aggressive buying of their own shares anyway?*
> Looking for another opportunity.




Not any time soon, it appears.  Another $950 million buyback announced at the AGM this morning.

http://www.skynews.com.au/businessnews/article.aspx?id=915530&vId=


----------



## Gringotts Bank (31 October 2013)

Anyone for a cup of CSL?


----------



## pixel (31 October 2013)

Gringotts Bank said:


> Anyone for a cup of CSL?




Wowee! It's even got a handle


----------



## Valued (17 January 2014)

This stock hit a new high today. The call options looked like a steal too. 80:1 leverage is always cool. It will be good to watch this one to see what happens.


----------



## piggybank (6 April 2014)

Not Rene said:


> i sold some at $40 seeing as they hadn't been that high for years, the some more at $45.55. If they reach $50 I am selling the lot, but I already regret selling at $40 :-( Will I regret selling at $50?




Hi Not Rene,

Did you regret selling "what you had left" at $50?

Cheers
PB


----------



## McCoy Pauley (13 August 2014)

Full year results out this morning.

7% rise in NPAT compared to the previous financial year, which translates to a 10% rise in EPS after the effect of the buyback, which also helped the return on equity to lift from 40.5% to 41.3%.  The dividend lifts from US$0.52/share this time last year to US$0.60/share this year, unfranked.

But I noticed with interest that the debt to equity ratio lifted from 55% to almost 60% in the last 12 months.  There's no disclosure in the full year results for the purposes of the debt raised during the financial year.

I'm somewhat nonplussed by the results announced to the market this morning.  Although gross revenue lifted 8.6% in constant currency terms, it seems like the results have been massaged through financial engineering through the buyback and the use of debt.


----------



## Knobby22 (13 August 2014)

Growth does appear to be slowing.
I need to look at the results more closely.


----------



## Knobby22 (14 August 2014)

It appears that the rise is due to the flat performance of CSL's peers that the analysts expected a similar occurance but the results show that CSL has held margins and probably stolen market share.

 The CEO's positive comments about China also helped. The dividend improved more than I thought would occur and there is yet another buyback. 

I can't see the CSL price falling substantially over the next six months.


----------



## McCoy Pauley (14 August 2014)

Indeed.

From UBS via FN Arena:



> UBS rates CSL as Buy (1) - CSL's result exceeded consensus and guidance, which the broker's suggests is quite an achievement for a first-year CEO. Highlights included 17% second half gains for IVIG with no price rises and the pre-sale of all of CSL's FY15 flu vaccine production. The broker suggests volume-driven gains represent market share gains and that momentum will continue into FY15.
> 
> The broker has not increased forecasts, other than to account for a new buyback, but has increased its PE assumption in raising its target to $85 from $80. Buy retained.
> 
> ...




I looked closely at adding to my position when CSL's share price went as low as $64/share but then was distracted by work-a-day pressures and missed the boat. It's shot up to almost $69/share this morning.


----------



## Superb Parrot (14 August 2014)

McCoy Pauley said:


> Indeed.
> 
> From UBS via FN Arena:
> 
> ...




It will, with its US earnings, also benefit from the predicted drop in the Aussie dollar as US interest rates pick up, suggested to be sometime in 2015.


----------



## Superb Parrot (18 October 2014)

Superb Parrot said:


> It will, with its US earnings, also benefit from the predicted drop in the Aussie dollar as US interest rates pick up, suggested to be sometime in 2015.




Interesting, as Bill Gates requested CSL (among others I imagine)to investigate Tx for Ebola. The lift may be short term http://hfgapps.hubb.com/asxtools/Charts.aspx?asxCode=CSL&chartType=3&volumeInd=9&TimeFrame=D6


----------



## financialreports (3 January 2015)

The price of CSL has risen substantially over the last few months as the company continued it's cash injections in the form of share buybacks.

At these price levels, CSL may wish to reduce their buyback program and increase their investment in research, development and acquisitions.


----------



## leyy (29 January 2015)

Any thoughts on CSL?

Bought a parcel of shares in CSL.

Strong uptrend 5 year chart.

Very strong fundamentals.

circa 70% income in USD, with a low AUD/USD this should come out nicely.

Interim report out on 11 Feb 2015, should show some positive results.


----------



## Triathlete (30 January 2015)

leyy said:


> Any thoughts on CSL?
> 
> Bought a parcel of shares in CSL.
> 
> ...





My technical view is that I expect to see a pullback from these levels as their is a strong resistance level at the $90 area. If we get this than I would feel more confident of the stock continuing higher from here. I have attached my own Monthly analysis chart on the stock.


----------



## PinguPingu (11 February 2015)

Glug glu glug, CHF having an impact!


----------



## McCoy Pauley (11 February 2015)

Been too busy with my day job to pore through CSL's numbers, but it seems like the fact that CSL reduced guidance for its full year NPAT growth from 12% down to 10%, as well as a set of figures in the first half that didn't shoot the lights out has contributed to the share price tumbling today.


----------



## Value Collector (11 February 2015)

McCoy Pauley said:


> Been too busy with my day job to pore through CSL's numbers, but it seems like the fact that CSL reduced guidance for its full year NPAT growth from 12% down to 10%, as well as a set of figures in the first half that didn't shoot the lights out has contributed to the share price tumbling today.




They trade on a very high Pe, so I guess any sign of weakness (not that it was that weak), can see some of the froth blown off.

I don't hold Csl, but I think it's a great company, if the share price did drop back a bit, I would happily take a position,


----------



## Knobby22 (12 February 2015)

Going back up today.
My largest shareholding. I predict it will be over $100 a share within a year.
It really is the only decent growth company in the top twenty.


----------



## Value Collector (12 February 2015)

Knobby22 said:


> Going back up today.
> My largest shareholding. I predict it will be over $100 a share within a year.
> It really is the only decent growth company in the top twenty.




No doubt that if they continue their buy back at the current rate it will eventually get there, whether that's this year or not who knows.

What sort of earnings multiple do you personally think is fair for this company? I would be happy to pay a more than average simply because of their position in the industry and recession proof businesses, but $100 on current earnings seems fairly frothy, just wondering how you personally value it.


----------



## Julia (12 February 2015)

Knobby22 said:


> Going back up today.
> My largest shareholding. I predict it will be over $100 a share within a year.
> It really is the only decent growth company in the top twenty.



What about MQG?  They seem to be back on track to repeat their performance pre GFC


----------



## Knobby22 (13 February 2015)

Julia said:


> What about MQG?  They seem to be back on track to repeat their performance pre GFC




Well maybe. But it is more a company based on world wealth which deems to be stalling at the moment and you can't compare the track record (or the amount management takes from shareholders).

CSL is now number two in blood products, number 3 (after the latest takeover) in Flu serums, is not tied to the Aussie market which is important in this market. It has even greater blue sky in the experimental works it undertakes ( a huge percentage of the profits goes to research). In capitalisation it has passed many major companies, Woolworths is the next one in line. 

A sign of a good company is one that many say is overpriced but then regrets they didn't buy. instead they but a cheap company and wonder why returns are poor long term.

When valuing you need to take into account the continuing fall of the $A so you should add a 20% premium. You should in my view calculate the growth at about 15% a year though the CEO has temporarily lowered it at present to keep market share. The other downer is the plant in Bern which has been hit by the appreciating currency. So maybe the price is about right at the moment but if it drops to below $80 it is a definite buy.


----------



## Knobby22 (23 February 2015)

Just like to point out CSL is now above $90. The very short dip was a buying opportunity.


----------



## Superb Parrot (23 February 2015)

Knobby22 said:


> Just like to point out CSL is now above $90. The very short dip was a buying opportunity.



 They already have had a three for one split. Wonder if another is in the wings as $100ish may be off-putting for some.


----------



## Knobby22 (23 February 2015)

Superb Parrot said:


> They already have had a three for one split. Wonder if another is in the wings as $100ish may be off-putting for some.




I'd be all for it. Logically it doesn't make a difference but human psychology is not that logical.


----------



## Knobby22 (4 August 2015)

Over $100! As expected.


----------



## skc (23 August 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> Over $100! As expected.




Found a good summary on CSL by UBS.



> At the stock level, CSL is a prime example of this willingness to pay massive premiums for traditional growth stocks, whether they deliver the growth or not. At the full-year result this week, CSL achieved their guidance of about $1,470m and just 5% growth by excluding the losses from their flu business. This number also includes a foreign exchange gain of about $115m. The normalized number is over 25% lower than where expectations were one year ago. This performance is clearly not the kind of quality growth expected from a company trading on over 30 times.
> 
> The company then guided to 11% growth for 2017. However, the starting point for this growth includes the flu loss and excludes the foreign exchange gains for a base of just $1,152m and a 2017 earnings target of $1,278m. Therefore to report a number showing some growth, various one-offs were included, but to ensure growth for the following year these same one-offs were removed from the base. That is the company is asking the market to accept $1,470m as the measure of the performance in 2016, and $1,278m (-13% lower) as the target in 2017, and arguing this still represents growth. In fact, earnings have grown by less than 2% p.a. since 2010. It would be understandable for the market to have hammered the stock over this period. Instead, CSL has been consistently re-rated from an average in the high teens before 2013 to about 30 times now. CSL is one example of many of this trend.




https://www.livewiremarkets.com/wires/32800


----------



## tinhat (24 August 2016)

skc said:


> At the stock level, CSL is a prime example of this willingness to pay massive premiums for traditional growth stocks, whether they deliver the growth or not.




I would add that CSL is also an example of willingness to pay massive premium for defensive stocks, which is what these sort of "blue-chip" health industry stocks are perceived to represent (resilient to economic cycle).

I sold out at $36 because I couldn't see the share price going anywhere. Since then (2012) EPS has risen >40% but the price has tripled.


----------



## Knobby22 (13 October 2016)

Now Paul McNamee has retired we have a standard CEO.

Didn't take long for him to put his hand in the cookie jar. 

•CSL chairman John Shine and chief executive Paul Perreault argued their case for more generous executive pay after shareholders made a protest vote against the company’s remuneration model. More than one in four shareholders voted against the company’s move from an Australian model to an international model of executive pay, which could see the chief executive earn up to $14.1m. Shine said the executive pay model was appropriate seeing as though the company operates in 30 countries, and 90% of profits are sourced outside the country.


----------



## Value Collector (18 November 2016)

I found this video on the companies history, thought I would share it.


----------



## Value Collector (18 November 2016)

Value Collector said:


> They trade on a very high Pe, so I guess any sign of weakness (not that it was that weak), can see some of the froth blown off.
> 
> I don't hold Csl, but I think it's a great company, if the share price did drop back a bit, I would happily take a position,






Knobby22 said:


> Over $100! As expected.




Back down to circa $100, I have taken a position at $80 by selling a put, I would be happy to own at that level.

It's a weird one to value, it definitely has a solid position and deserves a highish PE, but with the Buyback operating at levels being funded by debt it's hard to know how beneficial this will ultimately be, but I am comfortable with $80, I will probably just keep an out of the money put option position rolling until I can some stock via it being exercised, until then I can earn more in put premiums than I can by the CSL dividend.


----------



## Knobby22 (18 November 2016)

Value Collector said:


> Back down to circa $100, I have taken a position at $80 by selling a put, I would be happy to own at that level.
> 
> It's a weird one to value, it definitely has a solid position and deserves a highish PE, but with the Buyback operating at levels being funded by debt it's hard to know how beneficial this will ultimately be, but I am comfortable with $80, I will probably just keep an out of the money put option position rolling until I can some stock via it being exercised, until then I can earn more in put premiums than I can by the CSL dividend.




It all depends on how well they bed down the flu acquisition. The initial report wasn't too flash and they said they would need a year, I think they will end up needing 18 months. If next report is similar CSL could easily go to $80.

I am only owning my long term shares in the company that I got when it floated. I would like to buy back in with my shorter term holding but am being patient. I reckon they are a bargain at $90.


----------



## OmegaTrader (31 December 2016)

Interesting chart.

My gamble is down.







DYOR not advice...

Probably regret making a call and it will keep going !!!

ahah


----------



## rcm617 (10 June 2017)

Up nearly 50% from the lows at the time of the last post on this, pretty good for a $60 billion company. Question is can it keep going up from here. Underlying NPAT grew 36% last half, with FY profit expected to rise by 18-20%. Will that be enough to keep it at $135 per share.


----------



## Tightwad (10 June 2017)

UBS had a target of $145 a couple of days ago


----------



## Quant (11 June 2017)

CSL is one of those companies I never get right , amazing growth profile . at $145 would be trading at 30 times 2018 . One day the growth runs out and the 30% gap down comes , timing that the hard part . Given it earns a lot of USD a stronger AUD would be a negative  . " If" I held id book at 145 and never look back .   Got to say it does look extended right here though , technically and fundamentally . Its a massive part of indexation so its one of these auto buys atm though , I'm not game to short it  ... YET  . $145 maybe for the bump and run


----------



## sptrawler (12 June 2017)

Don't beat yourself up, I bought 2,000 of them 5 or 6 years ago for $27, then sold them for $30 when I was made redundant. lol

Funnily enough at that time, we were debating on the forum, how the baby boomers had it so good.
If those same posters had bought my shares, they would have creamed it.


----------



## luutzu (12 June 2017)

sptrawler said:


> Don't beat yourself up, I bought 2,000 of them 5 or 6 years ago for $27, then sold them for $30 when I was made redundant. lol
> 
> Funnily enough at that time, we were debating on the forum, how the baby boomers had it so good.
> If those same posters had bought my shares, they would have creamed it.




Has Marge beaten you up over it? 

I'm in a similar boat with CSL too. Bought for $30s, sold at $42 I think. Could be $37, memories want it to be the $40s.


----------



## sptrawler (12 June 2017)

We just have to hope, history repeats, in our time frame.
Then we have to hope, we are sensible enough to recognize the opportunity, and act upon it.
By the way Marge is always a winner, never made a decision, never been wrong. LOL


----------



## Quant (12 July 2017)

Got that text book Bump & run look now , never expect precision but take it when it comes .


----------



## McCoy Pauley (3 August 2017)

CSL completes the acquisition of 80% stake in Chinese plasmas-derived therapies manufacturer Wuhan Zhong Yuan Rui De Biological Products Co. Ltd, paying US$352 million to Humanwell Healthcare Group Co. Ltd.

The transaction was announced in early June 2017.

Fairly small transaction compared to previous transactions CSL contemplated. Given the company makes about $US30 million a year, one would think that CSL isn't buying it for the profits at this stage, but more for access to the Chinese market and potentially the IP held by the company.

I hold.


----------



## peter2 (27 April 2018)

If you haven't already guessed then I'll mention that I'm going through my ASX200 watch list. 

Here's one I've missed. 
1. Strong weekly trend UP.
2. Pull-back with market dip, but price doesn't go back to prior BO level or the fib buy zone I've placed on the chart (box). What does this indicate?  Few sellers, keen buyers. 
3. BO-NH and it's off to new all time highs.


----------



## Sharkman (27 April 2018)

this stock is a significant % of my portfolio so obviously i'm stoked with the recent price action, but there doesn't seem to have been any sort of news/announcement/catalyst here. i'm wondering whether this is at least partially due to a large amount of funds rotating out of the banks in a knee jerk reaction to the UBS research note, looking for a high quality stock to be re-allocated to and finding their way here?


----------



## peter2 (27 April 2018)

@Sharkman  That's a reasonable idea. I've posted bullish sentiment on both CSL and COH. RMD is going higher and other healthcare providers HSO (Takeover offer), PRY and RHC are bouncing off support.

Some utilities are attracting buyers also. AGL, ORI and APA are three I've noticed tonight.
Even the REITs are attracting buyers this week. Nulla Nulla will be beside himself.


----------



## HelloU (30 April 2018)

Yup, jump from big safe things to other big safe things I suppose - not easy for the big money. This is a train for reasons that I do not really totally get. Overlay a 5yr of this and IVC for a lesson in 'shares being shares' - lol.  It has been so good to me for so long that I think I will be really slow to recognise when to jump off (as I now give it such a long leash). And if I was asked if I would take a pilot now then I really do not know if I would - and this adds to my total dumbness on it. 
Reason for post though was about ur utilities/health comment (ur still a little nugget dropper) as much to see there imo as rates rise in future years - and noting they stand up to govt now much more than previously - which means either butt out govt or throw lots of money at me to help me listen. Interesting. @peter2


----------



## McCoy Pauley (4 June 2018)

Long article in the SMH about the future plans for CSL.

https://www.smh.com.au/business/mar...e-a-global-success-story-20180601-p4zis1.html


----------



## Knobby22 (4 June 2018)

McCoy Pauley said:


> Long article in the SMH about the future plans for CSL.
> 
> https://www.smh.com.au/business/mar...e-a-global-success-story-20180601-p4zis1.html



Yea, read it in Saturdays Age.


----------



## Knobby22 (15 August 2018)

Slightly beat profit guidance. That's the way to do it.
Dividend is nice this year due to drop in Aussie$.


----------



## Belli (15 August 2018)

Knobby22 said:


> Slightly beat profit guidance. That's the way to do it.
> *Dividend is nice this year due to drop in Aussie$.*




A little bit more to it than simply that I feel.  Last year the corresponding dividend was $US 0.72 while this year it's $US 0.93.  The exchange rate does help though for sure.


----------



## Porper (15 August 2018)

Knobby22 said:


> Slightly beat profit guidance. That's the way to do it.
> Dividend is nice this year due to drop in Aussie$.




Never a bad idea to have exceptionally strong trending stocks like this in your portfolio. Seeing a trend like this puts people off, thinking they have missed the boat. Who knows it could go to $300 next year. Simple analysis, a wave count and channels. Price today pushed up through a potential reversal zone (let's see the close). Needs to close above $206.00.

Disclosure: I hold


----------



## Ann (28 October 2018)

CSL has really pulled back hard with this current correction. Is it now a buying oportunity or will it still see further falls?  Perhaps its run was a bit too fast over the last year and the reason for such a massive correction was all the new people in at the top were the first out? Don't know, just saying.

Anyway, here is a chart. I can see support at around the $168-$170 level, if this fails then perhaps the next support may be $150. Any lower than this would have to be a fire sale.


----------



## Knobby22 (28 October 2018)

I agreeAnn. It did run too hard. 
The extra growth recently was caused by the flu pandemic that meant CSL was able to turn around the flu business they bought quicker than planned however the downside is that there will now be less growth this year.
 Could easily get to $150 but doubt it will go any lower. If it did I would be backing up the truck.


----------



## Zaxon (13 February 2019)

The latest dividend


----------



## Ann (20 March 2019)

CSL listed on Wednesday June 8th 1994 and the initial price was 0.76c it closed today at $194.44


----------



## Zaxon (20 March 2019)

Ann said:


> CSL listed on Wednesday June 8th 1994 and the initial price was 0.76c it closed today at $194.44



It's currently my longest held stock. That graph is an excellent illustration of why.


----------



## Smurf1976 (21 March 2019)

Ann said:


> CSL listed on Wednesday June 8th 1994 and the initial price was 0.76c it closed today at $194.44



If only you could have told me this in 1994.


----------



## peter2 (2 April 2019)

An outstanding break-out opportunity. It deserves to be posted here.


----------



## Zaxon (2 April 2019)

peter2 said:


> An outstanding break-out opportunity. It deserves to be posted here.



Well, that's bloody good news...pun intended.

If we look at the 1 year chart, we see it peaked September last year, and has been flat now for a while.  In needs to get some growth happening.


----------



## Knobby22 (18 August 2019)

The latest results were good, so many different profit centres but all getting good growth. The movement into China looks to very profitable but not without risk due to their way of stealing.

The most exciting element for me is the stage 3 drug treating heart disease. If this works, the upside could be fantastic.

My biggest holding by far.
CCP is next.


----------



## kenny (18 August 2019)

How much of the current gains are due to the timely favourable currency movements?


----------



## Knobby22 (18 August 2019)

kenny said:


> How much of the current gains are due to the timely favourable currency movements?



Very little, much of the business takes place internationally, they work out profit in $US these days. 
Helps the dividend though, but no franking.


----------



## rcm617 (6 November 2019)

Keeps on powering on. Apparently there is a severe shortage of immunoglobulins which are being used more frequently and  which is presumably pushing up prices. CSL is second worldwide by number of collection centres and growing faster than any other company with another 30 opened this year and 40 planned for FY20.


----------



## Knobby22 (30 December 2019)

Read in the Age today that the heart attack therapy presently recruiting for phase 3 could be expected to provide revenues by 50% which is massive.

I note it is Dutchies pick for the yearly comp. I doubt though we will see the results of the trial till 2021.


----------



## dutchie (30 December 2019)

Knobby22 said:


> Read in the Age today that the heart attack therapy presently recruiting for phase 3 could be expected to provide revenues by 50% which is massive.
> 
> I note it is Dutchies pick for the yearly comp. I doubt though we will see the results of the trial till 2021.



A great Australian success story. CSL is not afraid to borrow money (current low interest rates help) to grow the company. It has great revenue sources which will only grow. Its ROE is excellent (40+%).


----------



## Dona Ferentes (30 December 2019)

dutchie said:


> A great Australian success story. CSL is not afraid to borrow money (current low interest rates help) to grow the company. It has great revenue sources which will only grow. Its ROE is excellent (40+%).



more than that; the company is not afraid to spend cash on research, rather than paying it as dividends. Of course, this has to go well, and the pathway to commercialisation is complex and lengthy:
_After more than 20 years in development, the moment of truth is fast approaching for CSL112. CSL revealed this month that 7,000 heart attack patients have now taken part out of a eventual pool of 17,000 subjects for its phase-three trial, which it launched in 2018 and estimates will cost up to $800 million._

https://www.smh.com.au/business/com...-800m-heart-attack-trial-20191210-p53iog.html


----------



## Dona Ferentes (30 December 2019)

CSL does not fit the mould of the typical company in the top 200 which pays out 60 to 70 per cent of earnings in dividends. CSL's dividend yield is about 1.5 per cent and its payout ratio is less than 50 per cent.

"We are not a high divvy stock not because we don't want to pay a high dividend," CEO Paul Perreault says. "We want to reward the shareholders, but we also want to balance that against the capital demands because we're a highly capital-intensive company.

"When you look at the size of our facilities and what we have to do, these are massive biologic manufacturing facilities with a lot of stainless steel and filtrators, lyophilisers, pasteurisers and other big, heavy equipment. "We also want to make sure that the R&D investment and the expansion of the translational medicine through our commercial activities is all being invested in."


----------



## Dona Ferentes (30 December 2019)

Ann said:


> CSL listed on Wednesday June 8th 1994 and the initial price was 0.76c .



ever the pedant, it listed for $2.30, and then had a 3 for 1 share split a dozen or so years later.

When it listed as a small-cap, it had revenue of $193m. It recorded revenue of $US8.5bn in 2019.
- now 90% of revenue generated offshore,
- more than 25,000 employees,
- sales in nearly 70 countries, 
- has returned $US7bn ($10.3bn) in cash to shareholders via share buybacks since listing. 
- R&D spend of $832mill in 2019.

and, now, nearly 2020, what do you get for $800mill being spent on the CSL112 trial?
_"The trial is underway in 46 countries at around 900 hospitals, including 25 in Australia, where test subjects are administered either CSL112 or a placebo via intravenous infusion within 48 hours of being admitted with a heart attack. They receive the infusion once a week for the next three weeks and are monitored for the next 90 days to compare the instances of secondary heart attacks.

There's a reason CSL is willing to spend close to a billion dollars on a project it might never bring to market: the potential rewards are enormous. CSL estimates that there around 1.2 million heart attack discharges every year across the US, France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK every year, meaning there is a potential pool of 200,000 to 270,000 patients annually for CSL112 in those markets alone."_


----------



## frugal.rock (13 January 2020)

Porper said:


> View attachment 88875
> 
> 
> Never a bad idea to have exceptionally strong trending stocks like this in your portfolio. Seeing a trend like this puts people off, thinking they have missed the boat. Who knows it could go to $300 next year.
> Disclosure: I hold



Recent high of $299.42 on Friday I believe, it's seemingly untouchable.
Up 50% since June or so...wow.
If it continues like this, $400 is on the card's before the end of the year... why do I find the proposition of buying this scary?
F.Rock


----------



## dutchie (14 January 2020)

CSL trying to crack $300 (299.90 so far).
Possible pullback before it has another crack.


----------



## Dona Ferentes (16 January 2020)

_*Three *_handle

_but maybe not for long!_


----------



## Dona Ferentes (12 February 2020)

CSL's core immunoglobulin portfolio has led the healthcare giant to another strong result, with profits jumping 7.5 per cent to $US1.25 billion ($1.86 billion) in the first half.

On a constant currency basis the company's net profit growth climbed into the double digits, hitting 11.3 per cent, while its revenue was also up 11 per cent on a constant currency (9 per cent in a statutory basis), reaching $US4.91 billion for the six months ended December 31 - ahead of consensus estimates.

Chief executive Paul Perreault said the immunoglobulin business had performed exceptionally well, underpinned by its Privgen and Hizentra therapies, in which sales were up 28 per cent and 37 per cent respectively.



> "Underpinning this growth has been continued strong patient demand together with an expanded label claim for both Privgen and Hizentra to now include CIDP (Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy, a debilitating neurological disorder," he said.
> 
> "Our results reflect the focused execution of our strategy, robust demand for our differentiated medicines and a deep, inherent passion for meeting the evolving needs of our patients."



And US95c dividend


----------



## galumay (12 February 2020)

Revenue growing at 9% and a p/e of 50. Fine, nothing to see here. Even the blue chips are stonks these days. Maths is dead. All aboard, the rocket departs shortly!!


----------



## Dona Ferentes (12 February 2020)

Had to look up "_stonks". 
https://melmagazine.com/en-us/story/stonks-meme-boglehead-investing_

Might work for some.


----------



## Knobby22 (12 February 2020)

galumay said:


> Revenue growing at 9% and a p/e of 50. Fine, nothing to see here. Even the blue chips are stonks these days. Maths is dead. All aboard, the rocket departs shortly!!




11% profit growth per half  in first half. Second half has been advised as being in the range of 8- 16% but knowing CSL will be closer to 16%.
Also phase 3 drug trial for a drug to stop recurring heart attacks is taking place with thousands of patients over many hospitals. Predicted revenue/profit increase to CSL if trial succeeds 45%. Nothing to sneeze at. I think this is the reason the PE has got a bit stretched.
Not unrealistic. When you value shares you have to factor in growth.

Dividends are in US$ so translating it to Australian currencies the dividend increase is actually greater than first appears.

From a fundamental investor viewpoint I am happy to hold. It is in my view one of Australia's only true blue chip companies. You look at the top 10 and they are all duds, Telstra, the Banks etc.

It would be difficult for me to sell anyway as it is a 300 bagger and I bought them in my name years ago when  I first stated investing (doing a course on corporate finance as an adjunct to my engineering degree where I valued CSL and decided to buy) and would have to pay too much tax.


----------



## Dona Ferentes (13 February 2020)

> “Some people might say we are a bit boring because we haven’t changed our strategy,” CEO Paul Perreault said. “Our is a focused strategy on execution to meet patients’ needs around the world for *these specialised medicines that are usually non-discretionary*.”




The medicines he is referring include immunoglobulin therapies, which are used to treat immunodeficiencies and have been the biggest driver of CSL’s growth. The company also produces treatments for blood-related disorders, such as haemophilia, and influenza vaccines. And there is more to come, with CSL spending about $1bn a year on drug trials to build its pipeline of future blockbusters.

_- my younger brother has received 55 IVIG* treatments in the last half-decade, one a month. The specialists are upping it from one a month to one a fortnight, three hours in the chair each time. $5,000 a pop of CSL's Privigen. (thanks taxpayers/ Medicare, btw)._

_This has come about as they have seen its the only thing that holds off his undiagnosed condition. Since recently identifying a genetic marker for MND, but also another as yet unascribed, the sophistication of the therapies increase as the understanding does.._

_*_intravenous immunoglobulin


----------



## Dona Ferentes (13 February 2020)

correction 







> _$5,000 a pop of CSL's Privigen_



he gets 40g/400ml each time = A$1800, on the National Product List of the National Blood Agreement, funded 63% by the Commonwealth and 37% by the states and territories.


----------



## Dona Ferentes (15 February 2020)

Knobby22 said:


> ....the reason the PE has got a bit stretched. Not unrealistic. When you value shares you have to factor in growth.
> 
> From a fundamental investor viewpoint I am happy to hold. It is in my view one of Australia's only true blue chip companies.



and then







> It would be difficult for me to sell anyway as ...I bought them in my name years ago.  .... [and] would have to pay too much tax.



 and an interesting bit of news last Wednesday







> On Wednesday, CBA held its dividend at $2, from interim earnings per share of $2.75, a payout ratio of 78.8 per cent and a yield of 4.9 per cent. On the same day, CSL announced exactly the same EPS, $2.75, and a dividend of 95c. Payout ratio 34 per cent, yield 0.9 per cent.





> CBA’s interim profit was $4.48bn and CSL’s was about a quarter of that at $1.2bn. Yet both companies are now worth about the same (the bank is still a few billion ahead), but CBA has a price-earnings multiple of 18 while CSL sells for 54 times earnings.



 from an Alan Kohler column.  Of course it's not binary; as #2 and 3 (dual listed BHP is Australia's biggest listed entity) you're allowed to own both. Blue chips are there because of their track records. Didn't fall from outer space.

And, good point about tax realities. It's not all about the *buy* side; reasons to *sell* are as complex and often not as discernable. Takes both sides to make a market.


----------



## Knobby22 (15 February 2020)

Yes, however, 

In 5 years time CSL will still be priced at 30 times earnings while CBA will still be at a much lower ratio probably 18.

The CSL capitilisation however will be double CBA. The power of compound growth is why investors are willing to pay more.

Sure we have BHP up there, A true blue chip though very cyclical. A survivor.

The banks, which are under subtle attack by companies like Apple and Google as well as the fintechs. 

Wesfarmers- a conglomerate, so will pass that as a blue chip.

Telstra, Woolworths. Nuff said.

We don't have much that is world competing, dynamic, growing strongly.
We need, as a nation, some world leaders.


----------



## Dona Ferentes (17 February 2020)

https://stockhead.com.au/health/dr-...poster-child-for-most-junior-drug-developers/


----------



## Dona Ferentes (20 February 2020)

CSL shares closed at $338.68, retreating from an intra-day high of $342.75  and, *at one point, 8.05 per cent of the benchmark index, unseating Commonwealth Bank at 8.03 per cent *and 5.9 per cent for BHP Billiton. The miner boasts the largest overall valuation of any listed Australian company, but its shares are dual listed on the London Stock Exchange.


----------



## sptrawler (20 February 2020)

Dona Ferentes said:


> CSL shares closed at $338.68, retreating from an intra-day high of $342.75  and, *at one point, 8.05 per cent of the benchmark index, unseating Commonwealth Bank at 8.03 per cent *and 5.9 per cent for BHP Billiton. The miner boasts the largest overall valuation of any listed Australian company, but its shares are dual listed on the London Stock Exchange.



Thanks for that Dona, I bought 2000 at $27, after the GFC, sold them at $30something, when I was made redundant. The story of my life.lol


----------



## Dona Ferentes (25 March 2020)

While CSL's Seqirus division manufactures flu vaccines, it has not been directly engaged in the search for a coronavirus vaccine and the conditions are quite different.

Instead, the company has donated some of its proprietary technology to the team at the University of Queensland working on a COVID-19 vaccine.


----------



## Tumbarumba (29 March 2020)

CSL is getting more involved now.Latest press release states,
Coronavirus is quite different to influenza virus so is not a core area of focus for CSL. On saying that, given the mounting public health issue this has become, we are investigating what adjacencies in expertise, technologies and facilities we might contribute as a collaborator to the global effort.
CSL already has 30% of the flu vaccine market. SP oversold during recent market panic.


----------



## Dona Ferentes (31 May 2020)

more than $1Billion pushed through on CSL on Friday

A large part of that was XT after closing, and at $276, the lowest for 2 months, the high volume lows of Corona-panic March.

End of Month? Book squaring?


----------



## Trav. (4 June 2020)

CSL is a funny one for me. I have never purchased it before and it has come up on my scan today ( actually top of the list ) but at $294.23 I find myself struggling to put a buy in. 

Sure you could buy tomorrow and if it retraced to April's high then that would see you up ~11% but $294.23.....should it matter ? 

For those interested to put it on a watchlist

- CAM Counter Trend detected
- but not for me, so I will come back in a week and check it out...will it be +310, +320, +330, who knows.


----------



## Dona Ferentes (25 June 2020)

CSL has agreed to acquire the exclusive global license rights to commercialise an adenoassociated virus (AAV) gene therapy program, AMT-061 (etranacogene dezaparvovec), for the treatment of haemophilia from Nasdaq-listed gene therapy company, uniQure .

According to the release, the AMT-061 program, which is currently in Phase 3 clinical trials, could be one of the first gene therapies to provide potentially long-term benefits to patients with haemophilia B.

Management explained that one dose of AMT-061 has shown to increase Factor IX (FIX) plasma levels to a degree that reduces or eliminates the tendency for bleeding for many years. FIX is the blood clotting protein lacking in people with haemophilia B.

This means that should AMT-061’s trials be successful, appropriate candidate haemophilia B patients will be able to have a one-time treatment to restore FIX activity to functional levels capable of eliminating the need for frequent and ongoing replacement therapies.

CSL’s CEO and Managing Director, Paul Perreault, commented:







> “Our vision for haemophilia B patients is to offer transformational treatment paradigms that help free them from the lifelong burden of this disease. With more than three decades of providing lifesaving innovations for the global bleeding disorders community, we are well positioned to maximise the potential benefit of this therapy.”




*What is CSL paying for AMT-061?*

Under the agreement with the gene therapy company, CSL will have the exclusive global right to commercialise AMT-061.

It will pay uniQure an upfront cash payment of US$450 million, followed by regulatory and commercial sales milestone payments and royalties.

In addition, uniQure will complete the Phase 3 trial and scale up manufacture for early commercial supply under an agreed plan with CSL. The transaction remains subject to customary regulatory clearances before closing.

Mr. Perreault concluded: 







> “Upon approval, we believe this next-generation therapy would be highly complementary to our existing haemophilia B product portfolio. We hope that it provides patients with an alternate best-in-class treatment option, building on our legacy of delivering lifesaving innovations in hematology."


----------



## Chronos-Plutus (25 June 2020)

Dona Ferentes said:


> CSL's core immunoglobulin portfolio has led the healthcare giant to another strong result, with profits jumping 7.5 per cent to $US1.25 billion ($1.86 billion) in the first half.
> 
> On a constant currency basis the company's net profit growth climbed into the double digits, hitting 11.3 per cent, while its revenue was also up 11 per cent on a constant currency (9 per cent in a statutory basis), reaching $US4.91 billion for the six months ended December 31 - ahead of consensus estimates.
> 
> ...




Ahh, CSL; I had to use this company for my optimal capital structure assignment at university when studying postgrad applied finance.


----------



## Dona Ferentes (25 July 2020)

Technicals don't like it:
..." _just look at this broad top formation that CSL has been forming for the past nine months. It appears poised to break lower under $278 and head down to $250/250._.. " - Greg Tolpigin
https://www.sharecafe.com.au/2020/07/24/cracks-appearing-diversify-with-silver/






and the fund managers are down on it:







> *Livewire Markets*: Okay. We've got a couple of stocks that you both like. Can you tell me something you don't like right now?
> *Blake Henricks (Firetrail)*: Well, I'd say we are funding some of these purchases through something like a CSL where great business, but there's probably not the tailwinds that it's had over the last few years in the next little while. So that's a good funder for us.





> *Livewire Markets: *Jun Bei, you got something that you are using to fund your Zip shares?
> *Jun Bei Liu (Tribeca)*: He took my stock! I was going to say CSL. We're not going significantly underweight, but CSL, it's done well and it's pretty expensive and its earnings are going to be downgraded. So that's a funder...


----------



## qldfrog (25 July 2020)

Dona Ferentes said:


> Technicals don't like it:
> ..." _just look at this broad top formation that CSL has been forming for the past nine months. It appears poised to break lower under $278 and head down to $250/250._.. " - Greg Tolpigin
> https://www.sharecafe.com.au/2020/07/24/cracks-appearing-diversify-with-silver/
> 
> ...



Definitively not a nice outlook chart wise but I am convince CSL will be the facade used in Australia to sell/manufacture the coming fake vaccine; 
so worth buying a bit and hold  for less than 12 months in my opinion, plus after the deaths figures from coming August/September here, it will be seen as the saviour and so given mass of money.
worst case scenariio: still a decent company so the advantages far outmatch the risks is the way I see it


----------



## Dona Ferentes (17 August 2020)

Talks with AstraZeneca include CSL potentially producing its vaccine under a licensing deal at its advanced manufacturing facility at Broadmeadows in the Melbourne northern suburb.







> "_Development of the UQ vaccine candidate remains CSL's priority",_ a company spokeswoman said.





> "_However, we are currently in discussions with AstraZeneca and the Australian Government to assess whether it is possible to provide local manufacturing support for the Oxford University/ AstraZeneca vaccine, should it prove successful, while protecting our commitment to the UQ vaccine."_



_



			"We are assessing the viability of options ranging from the fill and finish of bulk product imported to Australia through to manufacture of the vaccine candidate under licence"
		
Click to expand...


_


----------



## qldfrog (19 August 2020)

Here it comes and imagine the margin, if they stay on the safe site a saline solution with homeopathic dissolution and placebo effect will do the trick: saline solution is very cheap 
There was no need of any crystal ball here, just look where the propaganda leads


----------



## Knobby22 (19 August 2020)

qldfrog said:


> Here it comes and imagine the margin, if they stay on the safe site a saline solution with homeopathic dissolution and placebo effect will do the trick: saline solution is very cheap
> There was no need of any crystal ball here, just look where the propaganda leads




CSL and AstraZenica don't work like that.


----------



## qldfrog (19 August 2020)

Knobby22 said:


> CSL and AstraZenica don't work like that.



that's the problem and why I will avoid getting "immunized" as long as i can humanly do it;
they may even want to try to use something which is not a saline solution.
In Brisbane we are at risk of dengue fever and that (existing and working) vaccine would make more sense for me, if i was above 65 or sick, I might gamble and try being a covid guinea pig ;
but I prefer playing lotto in my current situation and this is a number game based on real info from France, not hysteria by news ltd or ABC


----------



## cutz (7 September 2020)

*Extract from today's market release.*

"Melbourne, 7 September 2020 – CSL Limited (ASX:CSL) today announces it has signed a Heads of Agreement (HoA) with the Australian Government for the supply of 51 million doses of the University of Queensland’s (UQ) COVID-19 vaccine candidate (V451), and a separate HoA with AstraZeneca to manufacture the Oxford University candidate (AZD1222), should clinical trials of both prove successful"


----------



## Dona Ferentes (14 October 2020)

CSL is up 0.8 per cent (and above $300 a share) after lifting the bottom end of its full year profit growth guidance.
Comments on the outlook for FY21:
_• We expect strong demand for our plasma and recombinant therapies to continue 
• Seqirus:  Is expected to continue to benefit from its differentiated products and strong demand for influenza vaccines, driven in part by Governments wanting to protect their populations from contracting two viruses – that is COVID and influenza.  
• Sales of Albumin expected to normalise following the successful transition to the new business model in China  
• In relation to plasma - COVID restrictions are expected to restrain our ability to collect plasma and add to the overall cost of collection. However, we do have multiple initiatives underway to mitigate the impact. 
• Our R&D response to COVID, as well as new R&D initiatives, will put upward pressure on R&D expense, but still within the 10-11% of revenue envelope as previously guided to. _

_In terms of guidance for FY21, we expect revenue growth in the range of 6 to 10% over fiscal 20. Net profit after tax is expected to be approximately $2.170 to $2.265 billion at constant currency, implying a growth of 3 to 8%, which is a slight tightening of the range advised at the Company’s results announcement in August – the low end was zero, which we’ve now raised to 3% _


----------



## Dona Ferentes (16 November 2020)

Seqirus, a wholly owned subsidiary of CSL, _plans to invest more than AUD$800 million in the construction of a new biotech manufacturing facility in Melbourne to supply influenza vaccines to Australia and the rest of the world.  _

_This investment decision follows the agreement with the Australian Government for the supply over 10 years of influenza pandemic protection for the Australian population, antivenoms for Australian snakes, spiders and marine creatures and Q-Fever vaccine._


----------



## Knobby22 (1 January 2021)

CSL is my pick for the month.
In a month in which I think there may be a correction CSL will rise as approval for the Astrozenica vaccine takes place.


----------



## Dona Ferentes (7 January 2021)

> Despite being Australia’s largest company and having delivered exceptional outperformance relative to the ASX200 over the last two decades, CSL is not very widely held among retail investors on _nabtrade_. Just 5.5% of investors hold the stock directly. Those who do hold CSL, however, own over $100,000 on average, over 4x the average stock holding, so it is a very high conviction investment.
> 
> The lack of allocation to CSL is usually a result of concerns about its relatively small dividend yield (1%), or valuation (CSL is currently trading on a forward PE of about 42x). The attraction for those who hold it is the extraordinary growth of earnings relative to other large companies.



- Gemma Dale, nabtrade








						24 hot stocks and funds for 2021
					

Many investors use the new year to review their portfolios, and in this free ebook, two dozen fund managers and product providers give their best ideas for 2021 - some stocks, some funds, some sectors.




					www.firstlinks.com.au
				




_.... and I'd add, reinvesting into R&D, not having need for capital raisings. And being long term. From November: _


> _Melbourne will see a new high-tech vaccine manufacturing plant in a billion-dollar deal to secure the nation’s long-term supply of critical health products including influenza vaccines and life-saving anti-venoms._
> _The complex at Tullamarine will be the largest influenza vaccine manufacturing facility in the southern hemisphere, allowing Australia to rapidly respond to flu outbreaks and pandemics. It will replace the existing CSL owned facility in inner-city Parkville._
> _The federal government will sign a $1 billion agreement with Seqirus, the influenza vaccines arm of CSL, to secure supply until 2036 of medical products that would otherwise need to be sourced from overseas....._


----------



## Dona Ferentes (7 January 2021)

Of course, the current strength of AUD , at over 78c to USD, would be weighing on CSL at present.


----------



## sptrawler (7 January 2021)

Dona Ferentes said:


> - Gemma Dale, nabtrade
> 
> 
> 
> ...



What fantastic news and another indicator of Australia going back to the future, as we have said before, this virus may well be a turning point in Australia's history. The dig and ship mentality, may well support, the build and invest mentality.
Here's hoping.


----------



## qldfrog (8 January 2021)

sptrawler said:


> What fantastic news and another indicator of Australia going back to the future, as we have said before, this virus may well be a turning point in Australia's history. The dig and ship mentality, may well support, the build and invest mentality.
> Here's hoping.



We are going to see a commodity boom in the next 5y,and australia will revert to its dig and ship, minus real employment due to mining robotisation.
with the Reset, we will see BHP becoming a PR house of so call employment equality: aka racism and discrimination, only positive for the few selected ones.
Rio will be in forever mea culpa after blowing up The Cave.
And a Labour win will ensure universal income of sort in place so the population will not lift a finger and just suck the mining royalties dry.
Not much to be optimistic in the australian miracle v3.0
But csl is a good company


----------



## mullokintyre (8 January 2021)

qldfrog said:


> We are going to see a commodity boom in the next 5y,and australia will revert to its dig and ship, minus real employment due to mining robotisation.



Australia will not be alone in that respect. Most countries will shift to more robotics. it will start to remove the advantage that poorer paid employees have in China, India, and other under developed countries. The one growth area is in electronics, but  we waste money on producing more lawyers than science grads.


----------



## qldfrog (8 January 2021)

mullokintyre said:


> Australia will not be alone in that respect. Most countries will shift to more robotics. it will start to remove the advantage that poorer paid employees have in China, India, and other under developed countries. The one growth area is in electronics, but  we waste money on producing more lawyers than science grads.



note you used "shift to" and you are right, so Chinese companies will shift to robots too.already well started process.dirt cheap labor will be Vietnam, Laos, Bangladesh, maybe one day Africa if they manage to ever sort their mess.
But it is a very different story to start from scratch and in term of number, manufacturing in Aus is really gone forever.Similar in most of the west.German and US will sort their way but otherwise....
And as you say, even if we had the $, existing knowledge and entrepreneurship here, we will not have the graduates brains.
But a few companies like CSl will keep their advantages, long term, they will carry on and may suck a bit of gov funding along the way.
So CSL future is bright in my opinion


----------



## Dona Ferentes (13 January 2021)

CSL hit a low at open of $268.99 before bouncing back. That drop was only  2 x 40,000 shares. ... wait a minute, that's $20mill








lowest point since late 2019 ....(is that a triple bottom, or a pennant forming?)


----------



## rnr (13 January 2021)

Dona Ferentes said:


> CSL hit a low at open of $268.99 before bouncing back. That drop was only  2 x 40,000 shares. ... wait a minute, that's $20mill
> 
> View attachment 118316
> 
> ...



Hi @Dona Ferentes,

So, without putting words into your mouth, you are suggesting that after a couple of bounces at around this level history should repeat itself and we should be looking for price to move higher.

Sounds like a good idea.....so a bounce upward in price from here!

And yes I'm with you in that the normal caveats would apply...do not treat this a recommendation to buy or sell.

Cheers, Rob


----------



## Dona Ferentes (13 January 2021)

rnr said:


> Hi @Dona Ferentes,
> 
> So, without putting words into your mouth, you are suggesting that after a couple of bounces at around this level history should repeat itself and we should be looking for price to move higher.
> 
> ...



Rob, Am in two minds, possibly more...
First, I think the run from 100 to 300 was wonderful; a realisation the Sequeris acquisition was the company maker. Took CSL a while to achieve this and the market even longer to realise.
We have essentially stalled since then, as new research-derived products are incremental, not transformational.
Covid has confused things. Ultimately the social license will mean there isn't too much in it for CSL. Please, a vaccine; please, a solution and a way out. But can't be seen as profiting excessively .... (Payoff will be in the 20 years the new plant will be at scale and state-of-the-art).
And Covid has meant repositioning and great change by other players that are competitors. Gloves will be off in a year or so.
Plus the plasma market is impacted.

I'm not sure where it's going; rallies get snuffed out and the forward PE is still high.

(Meanwhile, happy to hold; )


----------



## kenny (14 January 2021)

Rask Media's take on FY21 for CSL;

*What does FY21 look like?*
CSL is now expecting profit to grow in the range of 3% to 8% to US$2.17 billion to $2.265 billion. Profit growth was previously expected to be in a range of 0% to 8%. So whilst the top end of the profit guidance is still expected to be 8% growth, the company’s mid-point of guidance has increased.

The profit growth is going to be helped by revenue growth in the range of 6% to 10%.

CSL is expecting strong demand for its plasma and recombinant therapies over FY21. Seqirus is expected to continue to benefit from its differentiated products and strong demand for flu vaccines, driven by the government want to protect people from both COVID-19 and the flu. Sales of albumin are expected to normalise after the successful transition to the new business model in China.

Using CommSec projected profit numbers, CSL shares are priced at 34 times the estimated earnings for the 2023 financial year. That’s fairly pricey for a business with a market capitalisation well north of $100 billion. It’s not a clear buy for me, but I’d rather buy it than many other ASX 20 blue chips.

Plasma collection remains a challenge to growth for CSL.

https://www.cslbehring.com/vita/2020/how-the-pandemic-has-affected-plasma-donations

https://johnstonsunrise.net/stories...slanders-for-covid-19-plasma-donations,157696

https://wallethacks.com/how-to-donate-plasma/

Here's UBS's price target graph. They've retained a Buy rating with a $346 target.


----------



## UMike (14 January 2021)

Dona Ferentes said:


> CSL hit a low at open of $268.99 before bouncing back. That drop was only  2 x 40,000 shares. ... wait a minute, that's $20mill
> 
> lowest point since late 2019 ....(is that a triple bottom, or a pennant forming?)



Wasn't on the open as I bought in at $271.
Hoping this at support levels and the rebound is forthcoming.


----------



## Dona Ferentes (14 January 2021)

UMike said:


> Wasn't on the open as I bought in at $271.
> Hoping this at support levels and the rebound is forthcoming.



dropped in the minute or 2 after Open


----------



## UMike (16 January 2021)

Got my second parcel Friday. Seems Most CSL action happens on the close.


----------



## darien44 (6 February 2021)

How does one determine a fair price for CSL? I  have been hearing about CSL for a long time and realise what a high quality company it is, but every metric I've used points to it being overvalued by a wide margin.

I know people have been saying it looks expensive for years, but that does not necessarily mean it is not expensive now. So to all CSL holders, how would you determine if you are paying too much for this stock?


----------



## Dona Ferentes (7 February 2021)

darien44 said:


> How does one determine a fair price for CSL? I  have been hearing about CSL for a long time and realise what a high quality company it is, but every metric I've used points to it being overvalued by a wide margin.
> 
> I know people have been saying it looks expensive for years, but that does not necessarily mean it is not expensive now. So to all CSL holders, how would you determine if you are paying too much for this stock?



can't answer that..... however, I'm not buying (or selling).  However, and thanks to a Tim Boreham article somewhere in this thread, he articulates why CSL is worthy.   #s 3, 4 and 5 ring true. #2 is also


_CSL’s success can be boiled down to a number of factors – and well beyond the fact that four of the nine board members have Australia Day gongs._
_True, CSL is well managed and has had a notably stable executive team and board._
_The company has remained focused on its core areas of crucial life-saving plasma-derived products and flu vaccines. But it has also used its clinical starts to develop relevant adjacent products._
_CSL has not gone overboard on raising dilutive capital. After a spate of share buybacks there’s a modest 453 million shares on issue._
_The company is also willing to anticipate demand and spend on capacity ahead of time. It’s active in the lab and will spend well over $1bn on research and development this year._
_Finally, CSL has had a decent dose of luck, having long held an entrenched position and having benefited from weak competitors at times_.


----------



## mullokintyre (8 February 2021)

Dona Ferentes said:


> can't answer that..... however, I'm not buying (or selling).  However, and thanks to a Tim Boreham article somewhere in this thread, he articulates why CSL is worthy.   #s 3, 4 and 5 ring true. #2 is also
> 
> 
> _CSL’s success can be boiled down to a number of factors – and well beyond the fact that four of the nine board members have Australia Day gongs._
> ...



Well, I added some this morning. Come back to my original buy price. Was happy to buy at that price a few months ago, still happy to buy at that price.


----------



## galumay (8 February 2021)

darien44 said:


> I know people have been saying it looks expensive for years, but that does not necessarily mean it is not expensive now. So to all CSL holders, how would you determine if you are paying too much for this stock?




Its tough with a business as good as CSL, its going to spend long periods of its life trading at a significant premium to value. No doubt its a fairly expensive company at the current share price on any metric, and it will need faultless management execution and very strong long term growth to give you a superior return in the future it you buy at that price.

The counterpoint is that businesses as well run as CSL will probably only be trading at fair value a few times in an investor's lifetime, so if you want to own part of this great business you may just have to pay up. The outstanding metric for me is the ROIIC over the last 10 years, at over 17% thats a strong indicator of the strength of the business. The CAGR of the SP over that 10 years has been 25%+.  

My personal view is that anything under $250 & I would be getting interested in taking a position. Even at the current price I think there are a lot riskier investments that are priced higher relative to valuation.


----------



## Dona Ferentes (18 February 2021)

CSL delivered a strong first half result for 2021 with reported net profit after tax of $1,810 million, up 44% at CC2 reflecting:
o Solid growth in our core immunoglobulin portfolio led by HIZENTRA®
o Successful transition to own distribution model in China
o Strong growth in the leading HAE product HAEGARDA®
o Exceptionally strong performance by Seqirus
o CSL’s diversified portfolio and resilient business model in the midst of COVID-19 pandemic
o Full financial recognition of contracted income for UQ COVID-19 vaccine in first half, after program termination

• Earnings per share $3.98, up 44% at CC
• Interim dividend of US$1.04 per share, *up 9%  *... Converted to Australian currency, the interim dividend is approximately A$1.34 per share *down 9%*
• FY21 net profit after tax is anticipated to be in the range of approximately $2,170 million to $2,265 million at constant currency

(_win some lose some _*on the Dividend !*)


----------



## UMike (19 February 2021)

Yet after an initial rise has fallen over 5%.

Was feeling pretty smug early yesterday.


----------



## Knobby22 (19 February 2021)

UMike said:


> Yet after an initial rise has fallen over 5%.
> 
> Was feeling pretty smug early yesterday.



Yes, the CEO was cautious and everyone is used to CSL promising future profit upgrades which didn't occur this time..
He also stated collection of plasma has slowed due to Covid and they need this for the drugs. The next half will be constrained. 
Maybe growth will temporarily stall?


----------



## Dona Ferentes (19 February 2021)

> _“I am pleased to report a strong result during an unprecedented time of uncertainty during the most severe pandemic of our lifetime_,” chief executive Paul Perreault said in the statement.




For analysts the most important news in the statement was the comment from the CEO who revealed CSL’s “*plasma collections have been adversely affected during the pandemic.*”



> “_To combat this, we have implemented a number of initiatives to increase plasma collections and introduced a customer fulfilment process to ensure the equitable distribution of medicines to patients_.”



*That means extra costs*, a question analysts had been wondering about and one that will be a focus of interest from now on.


----------



## UMike (5 March 2021)

Gone down alot topped up a bit more.

Might be one of those companies that is too big for me to understand the mechanics of the peaks and troughs.


----------



## frugal.rock (5 March 2021)

I notice in the news that the  EU/ Italy have stopped Astra Zeneca delivering covid vaccine to Australia.

Politicians in the news here plugging that CSL is going to make 50 million doses right here in Australia on behalf of Astra Zeneca.

I would have expected this news to have some positive impact on CSL SP ?.

One could consider it oversold due to immediate current market conditions as well as the gap down yesterday morning from dividend scalpers.
All seems overdone on kneejerk reactions to me.
Just my 



UMike said:


> Gone down alot topped up a bit more.
> 
> Might be one of those companies that is too big for me to understand the mechanics of the peaks and troughs.



Logged in to say my bit, and there was CSL at the top of the recent list...
It's an omen...lol.

I don't hold. A good time to reconsider that though, I think....


----------



## Dona Ferentes (5 March 2021)

a convergence of influences is putting pressure on CSL ....
- the vaccine development costs are all up front, and i remember reading there would be skinny margins, anyhow. Community relations and political pressure would dictate this (imagine the commentariat _blowback _if the battlers were being ripped off)
- growth is slowing. it has been well telegraphed
- there is a widespread move out of 'growth' into 'value' stocks and CSL metrics were richly priced
- AUD is high, which would be an inducement for OS funds to lighten up.

_As a LT hold for me, it may even be an opportunity to embark in a bit of estate planning and do off-market transfers to the next generation, and enjoy the lower CG implications _

.... now below $250, first time since late 2019


----------



## Dona Ferentes (5 March 2021)

also went ex-dividend A$1.34 yesterday (currency meaning in AU terms it is lower than previous 2 years)


----------



## Dona Ferentes (15 June 2021)

CSL back above $300


----------



## UMike (24 June 2021)

And BOOM straight back to $290 and falling.

Before I could put in a sell order. (Stupid restaurant keeps me so busy)


----------



## Dona Ferentes (20 August 2021)

UMike said:


> And BOOM straight back to $290 and falling.



and BOOM  straight back (good posture!) to above $300 after results Ann.  ... now $306

_Revenue up 10% with net profit after tax up 10%_
and a nice lift ..... _final dividend of *$US1.18 per share (around $A1.61 *a share), bringing the full year dividend to $US2.22, up from $US2.02 previous year_

*CSL Behring*
• HIZENTRA® +15%
• HAEGARDA® +14%
• KCENTRA® +7%
• ALBUMIN +61%
• Digital transformation initiatives 

*Seqirus *
• Seasonal influenza vaccines +41%
• Record volume ~130 million doses distributed globally
• Next generation influenza vaccine manufacturing facility to be constructed

*Critical operations maintained during COVID19 pandemic demonstrating CSL resilience and agility

Outlook for FY22
CSL Behring *
• Underlying IG demand expected to remain strong 
• IG & albumin sales reliant on current plasma collections and cycle times 
• Plasma collections expected to improve with CSL plasma initiatives and COVID19 vaccine rollout
*Seqirus *
• Seqirus product differentiation and COVID19 expected to drive strong demand for influenza vaccines CSL Group Margin 
• Gross margin easing expected following increased plasma collection costs, partially offset by modest margin expansion arising from growth in differentiated influenza vaccines 

_...... __Revenue Growth c. 2 - 5% @CC 
.__.... NPAT c. $2,150 - $2,250m @CC_


----------



## UMike (20 August 2021)

Still Holding..... I mean what else is there to do with the $$$ ?


----------



## Dona Ferentes (20 August 2021)

The CSL business model depends to a certain extent on blood, and thus plasma, donor collections. There have been appeals for more volunteers to donate in Australia; the big market, the USA, pays each donor. The slides below spell out some of the challenges.


----------



## Greynomad99 (20 August 2021)

I hold CSL and to me it looks like a breakout above $308 would be a strong sign of higher prices. Price seems to have made a probable Wyckoff pattern which suggests higher weekly troughs and peaks going forward. No specific target yet but a break above $320 would be time to pop the champagne corks and based on Elliott Wave theory something above $345 is likely.


----------



## Dona Ferentes (12 October 2021)

CSL boss Paul Perreault has told its annual general meeting it still expects to post an FY 2022 profit between $US2.15 billion and $US2.25   billion. He also said CSL expects revenue growth on a constant currency basis to finish *between 2 per cent and 5 per cent.* 

Increased costs are expected to hurt the gross margins for its core plasma collection business, offset by some modest margin expansion  for its Seqirus flu vaccine business.

.... _low single digits. It wasn't worse, and I'm wondering if the flu vaccine biz will provide a bit of upside ... I've seen mention of Covid/flu jabs, one-stop shop in winter months. _


----------



## Greynomad99 (26 October 2021)

Could CSL make $400?
Almost certainly if you wait long enough, but here's a brief charting argument why it could be on the horizon.



			CSL - 24 June 2022 - Robert Norman Share Charting


----------



## Dona Ferentes (2 December 2021)

CSL is in talks to buy Swiss-based Vifor Pharma Group in its largest acquisition since it listed on the Australian Securities Exchange nearly three decades ago.

Bank of America Merrill Lynch is advising the $130 billion giant on how it can most effectively fund buying Vifor, which could include an equity raising of about $4 billion.

The $10 billion Vifor develops, manufactures and markets pharmaceutical products in iron deficiency, kidney-related and cardio-renal therapies. Vifor is headquartered in Switzerland and listed on the Swiss Stock Exchange, with sales of CHF1.77 billion ($2.7 billion).


----------



## Dona Ferentes (2 December 2021)

and just for the record, someone said no Aussie company does well with acquisitions. I replied ""CSL". The response was , but so long ago.

_1. In 2000, CSL bought Zentrallaboratorium (ZLB), the blood plasma division of the Swiss Red Cross, for CHF860 million after outbidding Novartis in an auction.
2. With that entry into the lucrative US plasma products market, in late 2003, it acquired Avetis Behring in 2003 for $965 million; this broadened its product range and was combined with ZLB Bioplasma. This is now known as global biotechnology leader *CSL Behring*.
3. Bought US plasma collector Nabi, which helped to form the world’s premier plasma collection company, *CSL Plasma*
4. It purchased the Novartis influenza vaccine business for US$275million in 2014;  now known as *Seqirus*, it is one of the largest influenza vaccine providers in the world._


----------



## Sean K (2 December 2021)

Dona Ferentes said:


> and just for the record, someone said no Aussie company does well with acquisitions. I replied ""CSL". The response was , but so long ago.
> 
> _1. In 2000, CSL bought Zentrallaboratorium (ZLB), the blood plasma division of the Swiss Red Cross, for CHF860 million after outbidding Novartis in an auction.
> 2. With that entry into the lucrative US plasma products market, in late 2003, it acquired Avetis Behring in 2003 for $965 million; this broadened its product range and was combined with ZLB Bioplasma. This is now known as global biotechnology leader *CSL Behring*.
> ...




CSL one of the great success stories, along with CBA and WES for long term hold propositions.


----------



## Dona Ferentes (14 December 2021)

> CSL provides the following information for the purposes of ASX Listing Rule 17.1:
> 
> (a) The trading halt is requested pending an announcement regarding a potential material acquisition and associated capital raising.


----------



## Dona Ferentes (14 December 2021)

and is it material?  $10bill is mentioned.  Yesterday


> _CSL confirm[ed] that it is in discussions with Vifor Pharma Ltd regarding a potential transaction, however at this time there remains no certainty that any transaction will result and, if a transaction does result, when such a transaction would occur,_ the company said in a statement.




CSL said it will keep the market informed in accordance with its continuous disclosure obligations, and otherwise does not intend to comment on such matters.

.... while the media is reporting; _As well as finishing due diligence on what looks increasingly likely to be the biggest acquisition to date, CSL and its bankers have been prepping for a major *$4 billion odd equity raising*._

_The raising makes timing the deal even more critical. It is next to impossible to get a rights issue completed over Christmas. Instead, the company is understood to be working on a placement, with a *share purchase plan for retail investors.*_


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (14 December 2021)

Dona Ferentes said:


> and is it material?  $10bill is mentioned.  Yesterday
> 
> 
> CSL said it will keep the market informed in accordance with its continuous disclosure obligations, and otherwise does not intend to comment on such matters.
> ...



This may be the Macquarie-isation of CSL.

A TO and a CR. Serious stuff.

Vifor îs in to renal, which I believe is kidney, and other boomer ailments which will be the life blood of Big Pharma for the next 20-30 years until that generation carks it. 

gg


----------



## qldfrog (14 December 2021)

And now in trading halt for the spp


----------



## Dona Ferentes (14 December 2021)

qldfrog said:


> And now in trading halt for the spp



Or the placement. Peons wait at the side door.

_CSL is required to have certainty of funds as part of its takeover under Swiss laws, hence the big and quick equity raising. A placement is the quickest and arguably easiest way for an Australian company to raise equity._

Though the talk is $3B from insto's and one billion from SPP. Juicy.


----------



## Dona Ferentes (14 December 2021)

CSL has made a $US179.25 per share bid for Switzerland’s Vifor Pharma.


----------



## Dona Ferentes (14 December 2021)

HIGHLIGHTS 

 Expands CSL’s leadership across an attractive portfolio focused on Renal Disease and Iron Deficiency
 Complements CSL’s existing therapeutic focus areas including Haematology, Thrombosis, Cardiovascular, and Transplant and high quality pipeline 
CSL’s global reach, R&D capabilities and resources augment the delivery of Vifor Pharma’s products to patients
All-cash public tender offer of US$179.25 per Vifor Pharma share, payable in U.S. dollars, representing an aggregate equity value for Vifor Pharma of US$11.7 billion / A$16.4 billion
Tender Offer is unanimously recommended for acceptance by Vifor Pharma’s Board of Directors
Patinex AG, Vifor Pharma's largest shareholder holding 23.2% of Vifor Pharma’s share capital, has agreed to tender its shares 
Expected to be low-to-mid teens NPATA per share accretive in the first full year of CSL ownership, including full run rate cost synergies
US$12.3 billion / A$17.2 billion all-cash acquisition consideration to be funded through a combination of US$4.5 billion / A$6.3 billion fully underwritten Placement, US$6.0 billion / A$8.4 billion new debt and existing cash / undrawn facilities 
CSL will also undertake a non-underwritten Share Purchase Plan  for eligible shareholders5 in Australia and New Zealand. The SPP is targeting to raise up to A$750 million (US$534 million)
CSL confirms FY22 NPAT guidance of c. US$2,150 million – US$2,250 million @ CC


----------



## Dona Ferentes (14 December 2021)

Dona Ferentes said:


> Though the talk is $3B from insto's and one billion from SPP. Juicy.



6.3B from placement, 750M from SPP.... more like it


----------



## Dona Ferentes (16 December 2021)

CSL said the _$6.3 billion placement received strong support from existing shareholders and new investors. Following a book build process, it was priced *at $273 *a share, representing an 8.2 per cent discount to CSL’s closing price of $297.27 on Monday. The company will issue about 23.1 million new shares under the placement.

Institutional shareholders who bid at the final placement price for an amount less than or equal to their pro rata share of placement shares were allocated their full bid._



> Sources suggested that fairness to all shareholders was important to the CSL board, led by Brian McNamee, and existing shareholders were prioritised in the allocations of the remaining shares under the placement.




A *share purchase plan *(SPP) for retail investors to raise up to $750 million will launch on December 21. The issue price of the new SPP shares will be whichever is lower: the $273 placement price or a 2 per cent discount to the five-day volume weighted average price of CSL shares up to closing of the SPP on 07 February.

_- well, the trading always bounces around whenever there is a placement and SPP. Some is because the S/P is adjusting to the new influx of shares, some due to holders selling at a higher price to buy in at the book build, and some in that 'natural buyers' are drinking from the Well of New Issuance. .... and,  plus, the cynic/ observer sees manipulation to some extent; keep the neophytes away.

So, for me, as a holder in my own name,  but broke,.... but cash in my SMSF, and with the idea that I'd like to partake in this opportunity; options were:
- pay me a pension and buy in my own name in the SPP ( ... BUT already above minimum withdrawal)
- hit up a friend for a loan (and pay back in July as next year's pension drawdown)_
- _and, the less travelled path, buy on market for the SMSF and don't bother participating in SPP

What are the risk/ reward trade-offs? Trading around $273, then there may (or may not be) a discount VWAP in the next 6 weeks. The market may be up or down, and so CSL may move with the tide. Is today's price action (I mean, really, it's only 5% extra capitalisation, the pro rata fall should not be to the lower limit) a reflection of market silly-buggers OR is the consensus that this is a bum deal (I tend towards the former) ? And, finally, with 300,000 shareholders, the vast majority retail and with historic participation rates of between 30% and 50% uptake for such SPPs, and up to $30,000 from each s/holder, then is there a high likelihood of a scaleback (despite Brian McNamee's kind words).

So, I bought on-market $15K at $372.55 in the SMSF and may wait for another nibble, later on. _
 ............................
and, by the by, _the offer opens in Switzerland in mid-January; CSL must receive support from 80 per cent or more of Vifor shareholders to seal the deal_.


----------



## Dona Ferentes (16 December 2021)

Dona Ferentes said:


> _So, I bought on-market $15K at $372.55 in the SMSF and may wait for another nibble, later on. _
> ............................



dyslexia rules, KO. That would be $272.55


----------



## peter2 (16 December 2021)

I'm also a little disappointed that the market price fell straight to the approx SPP price. This seems to be a normal occurrence in this market. 

I bought some *CSL* (Feb21) at $275 for a buy & hold portfolio. I was hoping that the $285 support would hold forever.


----------



## Dona Ferentes (16 December 2021)

peter2 said:


> I'm also a little disappointed that the market price fell straight to the approx SPP price. This seems to be a normal occurrence in this market.



Too true, Mr P. I think the algo boys are too clever by half, trying to front-run the weight of money. 

(_Short term - voting machine; long term - weighing machine_)


----------



## Knobby22 (16 December 2021)

I feel I am being diluted. 

CSL growth is slowing and this takeover is an attempt to keep it high.
I sincerely hope that they know what they are doing.

We must have faith. Mc Namee is still involved which gives me some positivity.


----------



## DrBourse (17 December 2021)

peter2 said:


> I'm also a little disappointed that the market price fell straight to the approx SPP price. This seems to be a normal occurrence in this market.
> 
> I bought some *CSL* (Feb21) at $275 for a buy & hold portfolio. I was hoping that the $285 support would hold forever.



Hi peter2,

Today is 17/12/21 8.20am.

May as well throw my TA into the CSL mix.

I do not follow CSL for various reasons.

The Chart below gave quite a few TA warning signs over the past 2 mths.

Somebody ‘in the know’ realised there were problems with the CSL SP from 24/11/21 up to yesterday 16/12/21 – between those dates there were 12 RED Candles & only 2 Green – a great candlestick warning signal.

The 1st recent warning of trouble was on 23 & 24/9/21 where CCI (P108-109), and MFI (page 95) both gave sell signals.

The 2nd recent warning was on 15/10/21, same scenario as the 1st signals.

The 3rd warning was on 2/11/21, Similar to points 1 & 2 above.

The 4th warning was the ‘Nail in the Coffin” on 24/11 & 25/11/21 with CCI & a Tweezer Top giving signals.

There was also a Tweezer Top Formations on 22 & 23/9/21.

Within that period of late Sept 21 to Yesterday 16/11/21 there was only ONE +ive TA signal, that was on 29/9/21, and it was a very weak signal anyway.

Today looks like being a +ive day for CSL, they should regain some of the recent loss in SP – BUT on the other hand I cannot pick many Support Levels below the current SP.











Noticed that the EXPERTS value CSL somewhere between $230 & $280, I will run my slide rule over CSL sometime today.
This was obviously my Personal Opinion - SO - DYOR.
Cheers,
DrB


----------



## DrBourse (17 December 2021)




----------



## peter2 (21 December 2021)

Pleased to see today's bullish(up) bar. Investors clearly needed the week-end to go through @DrBourse 's FA spreadsheets. The merger seems to be universally accepted as positive.


----------



## Dona Ferentes (21 December 2021)

peter2 said:


> Pleased to see today's bullish(up) bar.  The merger seems to be universally accepted as positive.



timely 5% lift today, closing close to days $288 high  (.... after trying same yesterday but spluttering back to below $275)

and the SPP documentation arrived in the inbox.


----------



## Dona Ferentes (27 January 2022)

With CSL trading around $248 a share, I wonder if retail will work out there is a possible discount benefit in play.



> CSL has asked retail investors to help fund its Vifor acquisition. It called for bids into the share purchase plan by close of business on 07 February.
> 
> The SPP offered retail investors up to $30,000 of new shares at $273 a share or a 2 per cent discount leading into the SPP’s close.




The issue price of the SPP Shares will be the lower of:

the Placement price, being A$273.00 per new share as announced on ASX on 16 December 2021; and
a 2.0% discount to the 5-day volume weighted average price of CSL shares up to and including the closing date of the SPP (expected to be 7 February 2022), rounded to the nearest cent.
.... _counting backwards, that 5 day (trading) period is starting on Tues 02 Feb_


----------



## sptrawler (27 January 2022)

Dona Ferentes said:


> With CSL trading around $248 a share, I wonder if retail will work out there is a possible discount benefit in play.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Interesting move, CSL seem to be in a bit of a free fall ATM, currently $250


----------



## Ferret (27 January 2022)

Yep.  Cheering on the price fall before sending off my money for the SPP.


----------



## Dona Ferentes (14 February 2022)

Ferret said:


> Yep.  Cheering on the price fall before sending off my money for the SPP.



_ and a cheer went up across the land? Actually trading below the amount, right now trading below $250_

 the issue price of new shares under the SPP is *A$253.57,* which represents a 2.0% discount to the 5-day volume weighted average price of CSL shares up to and including the closing date of the SPP (Monday, 7 February 2022).

The SPP received strong support from eligible shareholders with a total of 56,1803 individual holders participating. Valid applications totalled A$942,675,000.

As the total value of applications received under the SPP exceeded the SPP target size of A$750 million, CSL has undertaken a pro rata scale-back of applications consistent with the scale-back principles set out in the SPP booklet. These principles were structured with shareholder fairness in mind and designed to deliver as close to pro-rata outcome as possible.

The outcome is as follows:

Eligible shareholders who applied for A$2,500 of shares will not be subject to any scale-back and will receive the amount they applied for, rounded down to reflect a whole number of shares. Accordingly, those shareholders will receive 9 new shares (for a total issue price A$2,282.13), with their remaining application monies to be refunded.
Eligible shareholders who applied for more than A$2,500 of shares have been subject to the scale-back methodology having regard to their shareholding as at the record date for the SPP. The scale-back methodology ensures that, subject to the A$30,000 maximum application amount under the SPP, participating shareholders will receive an amount of new shares that:
at least maintains their percentage shareholding in CSL held prior to the announcement of the Placement and SPP (“Pro Rata Amount”), subject to a minimum allocation of 9 new shares; or
is equivalent to their application if that is lower than their Pro Rata Amount.
Approximately 94% of valid SPP applicants will receive at least their Pro Rata Amount


----------



## UMike (14 February 2022)

Didn't participates. Will probably buy a big parcel $10 or more cheaper.

Just doing my own research.


----------



## Knobby22 (14 February 2022)

UMike said:


> Didn't participates. Will probably buy a big parcel $10 or more cheaper.
> 
> Just doing my own research.



I didn't either. Get them cheaper on the market and I wonder if we are going to get bad news regarding takeover. They rarely go as smoothly as hoped. Also I own too many already. Could be a buying opportunity coming up.


----------



## InsvestoBoy (14 February 2022)

peter2 said:


> I'm also a little disappointed that the market price fell straight to the approx SPP price. This seems to be a normal occurrence in this market.
> 
> I bought some *CSL* (Feb21) at $275 for a buy & hold portfolio. I was hoping that the $285 support would hold forever.


----------



## divs4ever (16 February 2022)

CSL Delivers Half Year Result of $1.76 Billion1 Net Profit

CSL delivered a net profit after tax of $1.76 billion for the first half of financial year 2022,
down 5% at CC2 with revenue up 4% at CC2
.
o Performance in line with expectations
o Strong growth in market leading haemophilia B product IDELVION®
o Strong growth in specialty products KCENTRA® and HAEGARDA®
o Ig and albumin sales limited by constrained plasma collections in FY21
o HPV royalties rebounded strongly
o Strong performance by influenza vaccines business, Seqirus
 Earnings per share $3.77, down 5% at CC2
 Interim dividend3 of US$1.04 per share
o Converted to Australian currency, the interim dividend is approximately
A$1.46 per share, up 8%
 Agreement to acquire Vifor Pharma Ltd, a global specialty pharmaceutical
company with leadership in renal disease and iron deficiency
 Net profit after tax for FY22 is anticipated to be in the range of approximately $2.15
billion to $2.25 billion at constant currency
CSL Limited (ASX:CSL; USOTC:CSLLY) today announces a reported net profit after tax
of $1.76 billion for the 6 months ended 31 December 2021, down 3%, or 5% on a
constant currency basis.


=========================================================================================

DYOR

i do not hold this share ( but have exposure via various LICs and ETFs )


----------



## Dona Ferentes (16 February 2022)

CSL said the result was in line with expectations and it had experienced strong growth in a number of its product lines. Its Ig and albumin sales were constrained, however, because of lower plasma collections in the 2021 financial year. Its influenza vaccines business Seqirus performed well.



> “_CSL has delivered a result in line with our expectations in a challenging environment brought about by the ongoing impacts of the global COVID-19 pandemic,_” said Paul Perreault, CSL’s chief executive and managing director.





> _“Our core franchise, the immunoglobulin portfolio, has been impacted by the industrywide constraints on collecting plasma in FY21 during the course of the global pandemic. Our influenza vaccines business, Seqirus once again delivered a strong performance with revenue up 17 per cent at constant currency. This was achieved by significant growth in seasonal influenza vaccines driven by record demand and Seqirus’ differentiated and high value product portfolio_.




It said its net profit after tax for FY22 was anticipated to be in the range of about $US2.15 billion to $US2.25 billion at constant currency.


----------



## Ferret (16 February 2022)

SPP was heavily scaled back. I hadn't bothered trying to work out how many I'm going to get.
 I thought I could wait until the allocation is announced and then see if I wanted to buy the rest on market.
Might be too late for that plan following today's results.


----------



## Dona Ferentes (16 February 2022)

Ferret said:


> SPP was heavily scaled back. I hadn't bothered trying to work out how many I'm going to get.




Valid applications totalled A$942,675,000. ...exceeded the SPP target size of A$750 million

_Not a huge difference. You'll get most, I'd think._



Ferret said:


> Thought I could wait until the allocation is announced and then see if I wanted to buy the rest on market.
> Might be too late for that plan following today's results.



_That's always a problem.

(Just for record, I didn't partake.. I've got enough CSL and, besides, thought the macro environment wasn't conducive.)_


----------



## Dona Ferentes (26 March 2022)

Dona Ferentes said:


> The CSL business model depends to a certain extent on blood, and thus plasma, donor collections. There have been appeals for more volunteers to donate in Australia; the big market, the USA, pays each donor. The slides below spell out some of the challenges.
> 
> 
> View attachment 129254



A family member, with a neuropathic condition, has been on Privigen for a while. Getting his monthly IVIG transfusion recently, he was asked if would consider a substitute (likely a synthetic). It appears there is a supply issue here in Australia, with not enough blood donors.


----------



## Dona Ferentes (21 April 2022)

CSL has issued the longest-dated senior bond ever by an Australian or New Zealand corporate, financial or government borrower, as part of its $US4 billion ($5.4 billion) debt raise to help fund its $16.4 billion acquisition of Vifor Pharma

The company announced the pricing of the raise on Thursday morning, split into six $US500 million and $US1 billion chunks.

• US$500m 5-year at a fixed coupon of 3.85%
• US$500m 7-year at a fixed coupon of 4.05%
• US$1,000m 10-year at a fixed coupon of 4.25%
• US$500m 20-year at a fixed coupon of 4.625%
• US$1,000m 30-year at a fixed coupon of 4.75%
• US$500m 40-year at a fixed coupon of 4.95%

!_ will outlast me _!


----------



## Dona Ferentes (3 May 2022)

CSL’s first chief digital information officer, Mark Hill, has outlined his digital game plan; CSL is building the foundations for *decentralised trials *to be a core part of its research and development efforts within this decade, speeding up clinical development and opening up trials to more patients.

Mr Hill said the company’s “no-regret” mid-term investments were designed to support a future in which decentralised trials were the norm, including in areas such as bioinformatics (which is often seen as the future of biological research, combining all areas of biology, biochemistry and physiology, with computer science, data analysis and applied mathematics), real-world evidence and observational research.



> “_The first decentralised trial was done about 11 years ago by Pfizer ... when the smartphone was just coming of age. Now, we’re moving into this world where ... we can do clinical trials at home and potentially send you whatever you need, monitor you via cellphone and actually use Uber, or the mail, to take you your packets [of goods needed]._”




After being wooed by CSL chief executive Paul Perreault to join the company, he spent the first few months in the role getting to know its operations and strategies intimately, including going .. to plasma collection centres and seeing first-hand where processes and yield could be automated and improved through digitisation. The rollout of Terumo’s Rika plasma donation system in CSL centres is one such improvement, reducing the plasma collection time by almost 30 per cent to just 35 minutes on average.

Also in the short term, Mr Hill is creating a “digital twin” of CSL’s labs and equipment, so it can predict and prevent when components will fail, shoring up the stability of the company’s supply chain.


> "_It's creating a vertical replica of all the componentry – the robotics, the equipment that actually fills the bottles for drugs, and understanding the maintenance schedule, instead of relying on a logbook_,” he says.


----------



## Dona Ferentes (12 May 2022)

CSL has pushed out the timeline for its takeover of Swiss group Vifor Pharma, which it initially anticipated closing by June.

CSL said it “_now expects the regulatory approval process to take a few more months,_” although it did not disclose any potential impediments to the deal.


> “_CSL remains confident of completing its acquisition of Vifor Pharma AG and looks forward to expanding its presence in the rapidly growing nephrology market, as well as leveraging the companies’ combined expertise to continue to deliver innovative solutions to rare and serious illness_,” the company said.


----------



## Dona Ferentes (6 July 2022)

CSL has put on 10% in the last few weeks, and now above $285 a share. I guess we can attribute this to no negatives emerging for Vifor acquisition, a strong flu season and plasma market expansion .


----------



## bluekelah (25 July 2022)

Winter is coming for northern hemisphere, along with another covid epidemic and STAGFLATION. This will be my defensive recession proof pick for the month.


----------



## Dona Ferentes (17 August 2022)

results in.

 CSL delivered a net profit after tax of $2.255 billion for the 2022 financial year, down 6% at CC and at the top end of guidance, with revenue up 3% at CC
_• Performance as expected in a difficult global environment   
• Significant growth in Research & Development investment 
• Strong growth in market leading haemophilia B product IDELVION® and key specialty product KCENTRA®  
• Immunoglobulin sales limited by constrained plasma collections in FY21, improved second half performance reflects growth in plasma collected 
• Significant growth in plasma collections volume expected to underpin future Ig and albumin sales growth _
• _Exceptional performance by influenza vaccines business, CSL Seqirus _
• Garadacimab (HAE) positive top line data - Primary and secondary endpoints met
• Carbon emissions reduction targets set, sustainability roadmap in place 
• Acquisition of Vifor Pharma completed on 9 August 2022
• Earnings per share $4.81, down 8%
• *Final dividend of US$1.18 per share (approximately A$1.68, franked at 10%)*
• Total full year dividend steady at US$2.22 -  Converted to Australian currency, the total full year dividend is approximately A$3.11 per share, up 6%
• Net profit after tax for FY23 (excluding CSL Vifor) is anticipated to return to growth and be in the range of approximately $2.4 to $2.5 billion at CC2


----------



## Knobby22 (18 August 2022)

Dona Ferentes said:


> results in.
> 
> CSL delivered a net profit after tax of $2.255 billion for the 2022 financial year, down 6% at CC and at the top end of guidance, with revenue up 3% at CC
> _• Performance as expected in a difficult global environment
> ...



i hope they choose today to fix the Australian Dividend. 
Everything is going back to normal, the risk/upside is how well the Vifor Pharma acquisition goes. The CEO had experience with the Sequiras acquisition which was a success so I am reasonably positive. 
On the downside, some of the works to reduce their carbon footprint flagged will have a short term cost.


----------



## Dona Ferentes (18 August 2022)

Knobby22 said:


> Everything is going back to normal, the risk/upside is how well the Vifor Pharma acquisition goes. The CEO had experience with the Sequiras acquisition which was a success so I am reasonably positive. On the downside, some of the works to reduce their carbon footprint flagged will have a short term cost.



Not that it means anything, but CSL pushing through* $300 *a share today


----------



## UMike (18 August 2022)

Failed to hold at the close.......


----------



## rcw1 (18 August 2022)

Good evening,
An excellent CSL day, today.

Of interest toooooooooooo:
18/08/22 Course of sales:
4:43:16 PM 299.200  188,544  56,412,364.800   CXA  LT
4:39:11 PM  299.200 188,544  56,412,364.800   CXA

Not holding.  

Kind regards
rcw1


----------



## Dona Ferentes (31 August 2022)

CSL continues to pour hundreds of millions of dollars into R&D.

CSL boss Paul Perreault sums it up :


> “_If I was worried about fiscal year 2023 in terms of delivering on what we’re going to do, then I shouldn’t be sitting in this chair, to be honest. This is a long lead time business – I have to think about it 10 years from now because nobody else is_.”


----------



## InsvestoBoy (8 September 2022)

CSL fully participated in the since-June rally, then instead of falling away like many others in August it just coiled up.

Nice breakout of a tight pattern today...


----------



## Dona Ferentes (12 October 2022)

InsvestoBoy said:


> CSL fully participated in the since-June rally, then instead of falling away like many others in August it just coiled up.



_a bit further down the track and CSL holding up well (a bit hard comparing it to the index when it is quite a significant element of the composition)_

Today, CSL confirmed a forecast for *revenue *growth of 7 per cent to 11 per cent on top of last year’s top line, and retained its profit guidance for financial 2023

*Net profit after tax *will be between $US2.4 billion and $2.5 billion, for growth of 10 per cent to 14 per cent on a “like-for-like” basis.

Both forecasts are in constant currency terms but exclude the benefit of the Vifor acquisition and a contribution from non-recurring COVID-19 vaccines.

A market update on 17 Oct will provide reset guidance that includes the Vifor deal.


----------



## Dona Ferentes (17 October 2022)

CSL Vifor’s *iron deficiency *business is the “_jewel in the crown_ ” of the newly acquired company, according to CSL chief executive Paul Perreault, who dismissed market concerns about what would happen when patents protecting its flagship product expire in 2023 and 2028.

In the company’s first major briefing on its strategy for the Vifor business, Mr Perreault said he was always being asked about *“IP cliffs"* but he was bullish about the future of the iron business because of the complexity in manufacturing these products.

One of the biggest near-term opportunities for Vifor’s iron deficiency business is the potential expansion in the US of the indication for its flagship Ferinject drug, called Injectafer there, for heart failure. The drug is used widely for heart failure in Europe already.


> _"There is a lot more to this business than just viewing it as an earnings erosion story following loss of exclusivity_,” Perreult said. “_I thought plasma manufacturing was hard, iron is harder. In many ways it’s similar to plasma – it’s gunky, it’s unloved and has a complex manufacturing process which is very difficult to replicate. “There are enormous opportunities to grow the iron franchise – to drive new indications, expand into new geographies and improve access."_


----------



## Dona Ferentes (3 November 2022)

and there's a 97 page R & D Investor Briefing presentation out today

_CSL Highlights Progress Across Strong R&D Pipeline_

_Will use bits from the AFR summary, to highlight a few matters_

1.  CSL has a 91 per cent success rate of progressing its R&D projects to the next clinical stage - a remarkable statistic given the biotech company’s investment in early-stage research. ..... this figure would have been helped along by its less ambitious R&D strategy between the 1990s and 2010, but also the strength of the company’s core *immunoglobulin-based products *business.


> “_Now we’ve gotten into pathway medicine, it’s become tricker, but the fact we’ve maintained that [91 per cent] says that we’re choosing wisely, and we’re taking bets where it makes sense, and not for no reason at all. “But we’re 40 years into [plasma products] and we haven’t seen peak sales yet, which is remarkable. What that does for an organisation, this kind of predictable sales, is it allows us not to panic._





> _“I don’t care what news you read, Merck, J&J, they’re looking for ways to replace the lost revenue from some blockbuster product... they start to make bets that maybe they wouldn’t make [otherwise], and there’s a hidden impetus to overreach. The *plasma business keeps us from making panicked decisions.”*_




2.  Head of research and development Bill Mezzanotte said in its 10 potential “standard of care” treatments, there were three that could be blockbuster drugs, with either huge market sizes, or high price points.

3.   CSL 112, SNF472 and Kcentra for trauma  [are said to have] the biggest earning potential: “_The impact of this suite of products across this suite of diseases is in the millions of patients, and that will translate into [billions] of dollars_."

4.   EtranaDez looks poised to become the world’s first gene therapy for _haemophilia B_. CSL expects a decision from the US Food and Drug Administration in late November, with the therapy having been accepted for priority review. If it is approved, Dr Mezzanotte said it would hit the market in the first quarter of calendar year 2023. Analysts expect the therapy could sell for* $US2 million-plus for a single dose*.

5.  In the vaccines business, in which it is investing in cell-based influenza vaccines, but also establishing a next-generation self-amplifying mRNA capability.  Vaccines help protect against infectious diseases by giving instructions to cells in the body to make a protein, stimulating the immune response and leaving a blueprint to recognise and fight future infection. Self-amplifying mRNA also instructs the body to replicate mRNA, amplifying the amount of protein made. 
Despite starting behind the likes of Moderna and Pfizer, “_We believe the tech we have with Arcturus and CSL together will position us to be competitive with the guys who are way in front of us, and we’ll be able to show the advantages of the self-amplifying element, which means lower doses... [and] a single vaccine with genes for multiple variants_."


----------



## peter2 (21 November 2022)

It's been a long three years for *CSL* investors while price has traded in this large $100 range. 
In the medium term* CSL* looks likely to hit $300 again soon. Then it'll move slowly to new all time highs. Monthly chart posted.


----------



## rcw1 (21 November 2022)

peter2 said:


> It's been a long three years for *CSL* investors while price has traded in this large $100 range.
> In the medium term* CSL* looks likely to hit $300 again soon. Then it'll move slowly to new all time highs. Monthly chart posted.
> 
> View attachment 149556



Good evening peter2
rcw1 trades CSL, when SP hovers around that $240-$270 mark, so not often then 
Magnificent stock really.  Great Aussie story, smart people, smart company.
Have a very nice evening.

Not holding.

Kind regards
rcw1


----------



## Captain_Chaza (21 November 2022)

*We all Learn the Hard Way*

I once had a  few CSL @ ~$ 2.00ea   in the days when everyone always only had a "few "
My broker advised me to sell @ ~$6.00
He said
" You can't go broke taking  profits"

Well,  He was so very very  WRONG!!!

I ended up losing my first Ship




*That is what I call "Learning the Hard Way"*


----------



## rcw1 (21 November 2022)

Captain_Chaza said:


> *We all Learn the Hard Way*
> 
> I once had a  few CSL @ ~$ 2.00ea   in the days when we all always only had a "few "
> My broker advised me to sell @ ~$6.00
> ...



Hello Captain_Chaza
Yep rcw1 hearing ya...  In a similar boat ... circa maybe 94 ... it sunk ha ha ha ha

Kind regards
rcw1


----------



## mullokintyre (27 November 2022)

Might be time to put CSL on the buy list if this report is true.
From The Guardian


> US drug regulators have approved a one-off gene-therapy treatment for adults with the genetic blood disorder hemophilia B that frees patients from repeated treatments but costs $3.5m a dose, making it the most expensive medicine in the world.
> 
> The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved CSL Behring’s hemophilia B gene therapy Hemgenix on Tuesday. It cuts the number of bleeding events expected over the course of a year by over half, a study found, and frees 94% of patients from the need for regular infusions to control the condition.
> 
> ...



No further comment needed.
Mick


----------



## Dona Ferentes (27 November 2022)

Dona Ferentes said:


> EtranaDez looks poised to become the world’s first gene therapy for _haemophilia B_. CSL expects a decision from the US Food and Drug Administration in late November, with the therapy having been accepted for priority review. If it is approved, Dr Mezzanotte said it would hit the market in the first quarter of calendar year 2023. Analysts expect the therapy could sell for* $US2 million-plus for a single dose*.
> 
> 
> mullokintyre said:
> ...



I'll say no more


----------



## mullokintyre (27 November 2022)

Dona Ferentes said:


> I'll say no more



OOPS!


----------



## Dona Ferentes (27 November 2022)

mullokintyre said:


> OOPS!



All good, what I like is that they said it would happen, and it does. On time 

So, who's going to cough up $2+ mill for a single dose ... only a National Health scheme/ PBS? The maths must be that ongoing medical care must be more, for a subset of potential patients. I wonder who gets to play God?


----------



## rcm617 (27 November 2022)

Dona Ferentes said:


> All good, what I like is that they said it would happen, and it does. On time
> 
> So, who's going to cough up $2+ mill for a single dose ... only a National Health scheme/ PBS? The maths must be that ongoing medical care must be more, for a subset of potential patients. I wonder who gets to play God?











						The FDA Just Approved The Most Expensive Drug in The World
					

The United States Federal Drug Administration (FDA) has just approved a new treatment for a rare blood clotting disease, one with a hefty price tag.




					www.sciencealert.com
				





According to this article the lifetime cost of treating for moderate to severe hemophillia B is US21 to 23 million, so Hemgenix would make economic sense.


----------



## Dona Ferentes (13 December 2022)

_A relatively short time at CSL after coming across from Biogen. He must have made an impression._

CSL has appointed Dr Paul McKenzie as *Chief Executive Officer *and* Managing Director* of CSL from 06 March 2023.

Dr McKenzie will succeed Mr Paul Perreault, who has advised the Board of his intention to retire after serving 10 years in the role, and more than 25 years with the company. Dr McKenzie has been appointed following a thorough process conducted by the Board.

Currently serving as CSL’s Chief Operating Officer, Dr McKenzie, will immediately join the Board of Directors as an Executive Director and will become CEO and Managing Director on 06 March 2023. Mr Perreault will step down as CEO and from the CSL Board of Directors on 06 March 2023 and he will remain with the company as a strategic adviser to assist in an orderly transition until he retires on 06 September 2023.

Dr McKenzie has more than 30 years of leadership experience in the global biotechnology industry, including managing complex organisations through compelling growth and transformation. Since joining CSL as COO in 2019, Dr McKenzie has been accountable for optimising CSL’s operations as well as growing the CSL Seqirus, CSL Plasma, and CSL Vifor businesses. He transformed CSL’s global end-to-end operations, advanced CSL Seqirus’ differentiated portfolio strategy, and led CSL Plasma through COVID-19 challenges while surpassing plasma collection volumes beyond pre-pandemic levels.


----------



## Knobby22 (2 January 2023)

These guys long term tip for the year is CSL for $400. It's based on charting but the points appear relevant.








						CSL to levels over $400 - Fairmont Equities
					

CSL shares have the potential to hit over $400 in 2023. In this video, we look at the reasons why it can be a great risk/reward investment.



					fairmontequities.com


----------



## dyna (2 January 2023)

Mmmm. I've been watching and waiting for for this one to dip to my $ 280 order put on just before Xmas.
Almost got there but not quite.
Hopefully, the world's biggest sharemarket  takes a bit of a dive in the new year. I might get lucky.
Hardly anything else in OZ interests me, at the moment.
Thanks for the vid.


----------



## dyna (Friday at 10:56 AM)

Here we go. I must be the only d*ck on this forum to pay 300 bucks for a single share.
 Got 10 grand worth at $278 , bang on opening this morning.
As they say in the classics ... " It's a start "
Ain't got a clue where to enter for the next hit, though.
It's all in the charts, they say.
Can't see a damned thing.
Blind.....as......a......bat.


----------



## rcw1 (Friday at 11:11 AM)

dyna said:


> Here we go. I must be the only d*ck on this forum to pay 300 bucks for a single share.
> Got 10 grand worth at $278 , bang on opening this morning.
> As they say in the classics ... " It's a start "
> Ain't got a clue where to enter for the next hit, though.
> ...



good on ya dyna for having a chop.  Difficult to tame, CSL, most dynamic beast.  rcw1 likes to have a play anywhere btw $250 and $270.
Good fortune with it.

Kind regards
rcw1


----------



## UMike (Friday at 2:17 PM)

Got almost 1000 of these basterds. during last year and a bit.

Early on had a $320 target.
This Christmas would of been happy to offload 350 at around $310ish.

Still got ave buy in at $261.77. Only issue is that with a dividend yield of 1.1% there needs to be that capital gain to make it worth while.


----------



## rcw1 (Friday at 6:04 PM)

UMike said:


> Got almost 1000 of these basterds. during last year and a bit.
> 
> Early on had a $320 target.
> This Christmas would of been happy to offload 350 at around $310ish.
> ...



Good afternoon UMike,
Nice portfolio of CSL shares.  Good fortune.

CSL looking for leadership change. Perreault reign has come to an end.  Retired apparently.  

They blooded Dr Paul McKenzie as Chief Operating Officer in 2019 and have given him the CEO and Managing Director gig, which kicks in early March.  Interesting to see where the lad takes the company.  Pleasantly optimistic 

Have a very nice weekend.

Kind regards
rcw1


----------

