Free Newsletter
Surprise: Pfizer dividend flat, but Lilly's up
Call it a tale of two dividends. For the first time in 42 years, Pfizer is not hiking its quarterly dividend. Hardly shocking in today's economy and today's pharma industry, especially as the company is prepping for the loss of Lipitor. Given all that, spokeswoman Joan Campion told Forbes that it's "most prudent" to continue the dividend at its current level.
And what level would that be? Thirty-two cents a share during each quarter of 2009. That's still a 7.6 percent payout over that 12 months, still among the highest in pharma, and still a powerful reason for shareholders to hang tight. At least one investor, however, wasn't impressed. Hedge funder Michael Krensavage wondered why Pfizer couldn't dig into its cash-filled pockets to boost the dividend by "a penny or two." But as the WSJ Health Blog notes, Pfizer may be keeping its powder dry for any buyout bargains that emerge.
Meanwhile, Eli Lilly took the opposite approach, raising its payout by 2 cents per share to 49 cents. It's the company's 42nd annual increase, according to Dow Jones, and it puts the annual rate at $1.96 per share. In increasing its dividend, Lilly is defying a downward trend across many industries; companies have been cutting their payouts to conserve capital, Dow Jones notes. Financial services firms, of course, have cut or eliminated their dividends altogether, but so have companies in many other sectors.
- read Lilly's release
- check out the story from Dow Jones
- see the Health Blog's take
- get the news from Forbes
Related Articles:
Report: GSK to beat Pfizer by 2012
Dividend puts strain on Pfizer
Woe is Pfizer, analysts say
Lilly: Cut costs without 'sweeping layoffs'
Lilly CEO: It's my job to take risks
Comments
Could the analysts possibly be factoring in the legal problems of Pfizer's current drugs--Celebrex, Bextra, Trovan, Neurontin, Chantix and the ongoing congressional investigations into the drug companies failure to disclose less than favorable (to marketing) studies including the ongoing questions of the safety of their veterinary drugs --- particularly rimadyl---which they "settled" a multimillion suit (piggybacked with the Vioxx) in 2004 and were required to add "postmarketing experience" to their adverse drug reactions? Maybe the ethics and integrity of the company's management in handling these situations rather than dealing with them honestly makes Pfizer a poor investment risk.
Post new comment
Paid Research Reports
- The Specialty Pharma Market Outlook: Key players, new company growth models and emerging opportunities
- Investigating Clinical Trial Costs: Comparative analysis of trial cost components in key geographies
- Clinical Trial Recruitment Strategies: Optimizing patient recruitment and retention in late stage clinical trials
- Pipeline Insight: Therapeutic Cancer Vaccines - Prospect of first approval set to reinvigorate interest from major companies
- Stakeholder Opinions: Vaccines in Emerging Markets (Asia) - Opportunities in China, India, South Korea and Taiwan
- Big Pharma Performance Before, During and Beyond the Global Recession






SHARE
WITH: