Money

Dividend stocks are everywhere, but many just downright stink. In some cases, the business model is in serious jeopardy, or the dividend itself isn't sustainable. In others, the dividend is so low, it's not even worth the paper your dividend check is printed on. A solid dividend strikes the right balance of growth, value, and sustainability. Today, and one day each week for the rest of the year, we're going to look at one dividend-paying company that you can put in your portfolio for the long term without too much concern. This isn't to say that these stocks don't share the same macro risks that other companies have, but they are a step above your common grade of dividend stock. Check out last week's selection. This week, I'll point out a "purrrrfectly" positioned company in the pet sector, Zoetis , and highlight why it could be paying hefty dividends for decades. Can competition slow down Zoetis? There isn't much standing in the way of Zoetis' success, other than a rash of growing competitors and the fact that its parent company, Pfizer , still exerts quite a bit of control over the company's growth prospects with 80% ownership in the recently spun off company. The pet medication space is quite the crowded field. Zoetis certainly leads the pack with $4.3 billion in annual sales, but with a $22 billion pie from animal health revenue alone, Merck's animal health division, Sanofi's Merial, and Eli Lilly's Elanco, all take a greater than $2 billion annual bite as well. Sanofi's Merial was the only animal products maker of the four to see sales decrease in its latest quarter, as unfavorable weather conditions and increased competition to Frontline hurt its results.  The Zoetis advantage There's a reason I dubbed Zoetis as the most exciting IPO of the year back in January -- it has a slew of competitive advantages that will keep its growth and cash flow strong for years to come. The most interesting aspect that differentiates animal pharmaceuticals from human pharmaceuticals is that while competition exists, personalized competition for common ailments like obesity and diabetes really doesn't exist on the animal side of the business. Sure, there may be branded drug competition for things like flea medication (see Merial's Frontline issues again), but the general trend in the sector is that Big Pharma has better things to do than spend millions researching biosilimars of existing drugs -- at least for pets. This means that Zoetis' anti-obesity pill for dogs, Slentrol, should be well protected when it comes off patent, and the same could be said for much of its pipeline, as well as that of Merck, Sanofi, and Eli Lilly's animal health divisions. Another factor that's undeniable is that we as pet owners will do whatever's necessary to ensure the health of their pets. Don't get me wrong: The Association for Pet Obesity Prevention says that more than half of all pets are currently considered overweight or obese, so not all owners are doing what's in the best interest of their pets. But the general trend is that our pets have become ever-more engrained into the American household as a family member. Source: U.S. Marine Corps, commons.wikimedia.org.  This is an important point, as few owners choose to provide health insurance for their pet. Most drugs are thus paid for right out of consumers' pockets, providing unparalleled margins that you just won't find in many, if any, human pharmaceutical drugmakers. It'd be foolish of me not to mention the simple fact that as a spun off entity, Zoetis is the most transparent pharmaceutical company of its peers. Merck, Sanofi, and Eli Lilly's animal health units are all incorporated into their results, making it tougher to see where the strengths and weaknesses of their animal health businesses lie. This spinoff certainly unlocked value for shareholders and made researching Zoetis' pipeline considerably easier than it had previously been. Bring on the payouts Most of you are going to look at Zoeti

A hallmark disease of an overweight, desk bound nation, diabetes instigates a staggering economic burden on our healthcare system where total costs, including hospital inpatient care, doctor visits, medication, and reduced or lost productivity have been estimated at $245 billion in 2012, a 41% increase in the last five years. Further, diabetes costs the average sufferer $13,700 per year in tending to the disease to maintain a certain quality of life and avoid death.Keeping in step with the climb of obesity in the U.S., diabetes is big business with pharmaceutical firms committing large portions of their R&D budgets to new and better ways to get insulin into and throughout the body. Most have failed, but the brass ring remains an oral version -- a pill, taken discretely every day just like vitamins or aspirin. Now it appears a small, Israeli biotechnology firm, laboring almost anonymously in early phase

While the DJIA and S&P500 are hitting new highs on a daily basis, it is worth noting that the broad energy sector, as measured by the Spider Energy ETF (XLE), has severely underperformed the overall market. The energy sector has lagged the broad market (DJIA) by some 25 percentage points over the past 5 years. And this in spite of the outperforming refining and MLP sectors within the energy space.What if energy stocks joined this rally? I think they will. And I think the DJIA and S&P500 could easily move up another 2-3% on the back of an energy sector rally. Here's why.DIA data by YChartsAccording to Standard & Poors, the energy sector now composes only 10% of the S&P500. According to Bespoke Investment, this is down from 15.3% in 2008. There have been a number of reasons for the energy sector's contraction

WHEN Shinzo Abe resigned after just a year as prime minister, in September 2007, he was derided by voters, broken by chronic illness, and dogged by the ineptitude that has been the bane of so many recent Japanese leaders. Today, not yet five months into his second term, Mr Abe seems to be a new man. He has put Japan on a regime of “Abenomics”, a mix of reflation, government spending and a growth strategy designed to jolt the economy out of the suspended animation that has gripped it for more than two decades. He has supercharged Japan’s once-fearsome bureaucracy to make government vigorous again. And, with his own health revived, he has sketched out a programme of geopolitical rebranding and constitutional change that is meant to return Japan to what Mr Abe thinks is its rightful place as a world power. Mr Abe is electrifying a nation that had lost faith in its political class. Since he was elected, the stockmarket has risen by 55%. Consumer spending pushed up growth in the first quarter to an annualised 3.5%. Mr Abe has an approval rating of over 70% (compared with around 30% at the end of his first term). His Liberal Democratic Party is poised to triumph in elections for the upper house of the Diet in July. With a majority in both chambers he should be able to pass legislation freely. Pulling Japan out of its slump is a huge task. After two lost decades, the country’s nominal GDP is the same as in 1991, while the Nikkei, even after the recent surge, is at barely a third of its peak. Japan’s shrinking workforce is burdened by the cost of a growing number of the elderly. Its society has turned inwards and its companies have lost their innovative edge. Mr Abe is not the first politician to promise to revitalise his country—the land of the rising sun has seen more than its share of false dawns—and the new-model Abe still has everything to prove. Yet if his plans are even half successful, he will surely be counted as a great prime minister. The man in Japan with a plan The reason for thinking this time might be different is China. Economic decline took on a new reality in Japan when China elbowed Japan aside in 2010 to become the world’s second-largest economy. As China has gained confidence, it has begun to throw its weight around in its coastal waters and with Japan directly over the disputed Senkaku/Diaoyu islands. Earlier this month China’s official People’s Daily even questioned Japanese sovereignty over Okinawa. Mr Abe believes that meeting China’s challenge means shaking off the apathy and passivity that have held Japan in thrall for so long. To explain the sheer ambition of his design, his people invoke the Meiji slogan fukoku kyohei: “enrich the country, strengthen the army”. Only a wealthy Japan can afford to defend itself. Only if it can defend itself will it be able to stand up to China—and, equally, avoid becoming a vassal of its chief ally, the United States. Abenomics, with its fiscal stimulus and monetary easing, sounds as if it is an economic doctrine; in reality it is at least as much about national security. Perhaps that is why Mr Abe has governed with such urgency. Within his first weeks he had announced extra government spending worth ¥10.3 trillion (about $100 billion). He has appointed a new governor of the Bank of Japan who has vowed to pump ever more money into the financial system. In so far as this leads to a weaker yen, it will boost exports. If it banishes the spectre of deflation, it may also boost consumption. But printing money can achieve only so much and, with a gross debt of 240% of GDP, there is a limit to how much new government spending Japan can afford. To change the economy’s long-run potential, therefore, Mr Abe must carry through the third, structural, part of his plan. So far, he has set up five committees charged with instigating deep supply-side reforms. In February he surprised even his suppo

Through my posts on Brand Manager 2.0, I have written quite a bit about how technology is changing the job of a marketer today.  Of course, that means I was quite a fan of this infographic from Pardot which talks about a Modern Marketer being part artists and part scientist.  In their words, a modern marketer must master: Written Content Visual Assets Social Media Email Marketing Performance Tracking Budgeting and Operations Analytics Campaign Performance Courtesy of Pardot, an Exact Target Company

Bob Woodward of the Washington Post took to task some in the Obama administration today, saying they’re not telling the truth about the Benghazi attacks. From his appearance on Meet the Press: “…On the whole Benghazi thing, you look at those talking points, and the initial draft by the CIA very explicitly said we know that activists who have ties to al-Qaeda were involved in the attack. And then you see what comes out a couple of days later and there is no reference to this. This is a business where you have to tell the truth, and that did not happen here.” The legendary Watergate reporter was responding to a question from host David Gregory on the scandals hitting the Obama camp in general and how he thinks they’re handling them. Woodward, while acknowledging that the scandals are “not Watergate,” said that “some people in the administration…have acted as if they want to be Nixonian, and that’s a very big problem. I think…” What do you think? Featured image credit: AP (H/T: Gateway Pundit) Please follow Politics on Twitter and Facebook.Join the conversation about this story »

I wish I had easy answers but I sure don't. Just look at our Big Chart – we flipped it bullish and put up new level targets just two weeks ago and already the Russell is up 5% to test 1,000.  All 3 lines over 1,000 and we're back to being bullish until 3 of 5 fail to hold our "Must Hold" lines.   We should be celebrating this but we played too cautiously as what we thought was a top and I never officially put "5 Inflation Fighters Set to Fly" or our "5 Trade Ideas that Make (made) 500% in an up Market" into our portfolios and I only said: So lots of fun ways to participate in the next mega-rally.  We don't need S&P 1,900 – just holding 1,600 would do us quite well and I cannot emphasize enough that these are HEDGES to our current BEARISH stance – just in case we're wrong and a correction never comes and the markets go up and up forever and all of our bearish positions expire worthless.  In reviewing those posts, I realize I went heavily into detail about my thoughts of the current market environment and we decided we'd better go with the flow until the flow changes and, frankly, I don't have a lot to add to that.  A week ago we reviewed our "5 Trade Ideas" that made ridiculous amounts of money in a very short time but, as I have been reminded this weekend – unless I specifally state something should be included in one of our virtual portfolios – it doesn't occur to people that they should add it to theirs so we have been out of balance bearish in our portfolios and have gotten hit pretty hard in this relentlessly climbing market.   That's my fault then and my solution is to make things less confusing and go back to my favorite system for managing trades and that's to have a portfolio for short-term trading and one for long-term trading (the Income Portfolio is a separate strategy and won't be affected) and we'll be instituting that beginning next week.  The idea is to practice the basics – position sizing, scaling in, scaling out, using stops, reacting to news, diversifying positions, etc.  The Long-Term Portfolio is generally for short-term positions that don't work but that we would like to stick…

Below are companies that have recently had large insider buying in excess of $200,000 worth of stock. As a caveat, please only consider this as a starting point in your investment research as these are only the opinions of this blogger:Walter Energy (WLT) is predominately focused on producing and exporting coal for the steel industry. The stock's performance has not been pretty the past year where it currently sits just above its $16.08 52-week low and far from its $58.06 52-week high. Nevertheless, board director Joseph Leonard sees the stock moving higher ,purchasing a sizeable 16,700 shares on May 6. This equates to $475,000 worth of stock. The stock has become more of a value stock as it now trades at just .5x price to sales and 1.2x price to book value. Moreover, it did smash consensus estimates in its most recent quarter, while analysts are expecting

An upcoming update will bring a web browser, email and update store app to Barnes & Noble’s super affordable Nook Simple Touch line of eReaders, which will begin rolling out June 1 according to a source close to the matter who wishes to remain anonymous. The 1.5.0 update was created in response to the positive critical and customer response to the recent Nook tablet update that brought Google Play to B&N’s Android-powered devices. The Nook Simple Touch and Simple Touch with Glowlight will be receiving the over-the-air update starting next month, and this marks the first time that Nook’s entry-level readers get official access to web browsing capabilities. Amazon’s competing Kindle devices have shipped with an “experimental” web browser since the Kindle 2, but have not offered an email client on anything except for the Kindle Fire tablets. Making Nook hardware a little more flexible for users is a good way for Barnes & Noble to help counter flagging sales of dedicated Nook hardware, which were shown to be weak in recent quarterly results. Nook weakness probably ended up prompting the bookseller to offer promotional giveaways with on-hand inventory. When B&N announced that Google Play would be coming to Nook tablets, I praised the decision as a key step in helping the company position them as affordable, fully-featured Android tablets, as opposed to just glorified eReaders that could do a bit more than most. The Nook Simple Touch is still pretty focused on eBooks, but as an email triage device and basic browser, especially for text heavy content, it probably becomes a lot more attractive to an audience that mostly wants books but would like a little more general use value as well. Especially for older buyers, I imagine a simplified device with a cheap price tag has the potential to carry appeal over a much more expensive full-fledged tablet. Will a browser and email client be enough to right the Nook ship? Probably not on their own, but B&N is at least expending effort in the right direction to combat flagging consumer interest in dedicated eReader devices.

One of my favorite places to visit is Prairie Lights Bookstore in Iowa City, Iowa. It’s an independent bookstore with a wonderful atmosphere and I truly love the opportunities I get to browse through the books there. The problem is that when I go into a retailer without a specific purchase in mind but with an intent to buy something, I’ll usually end up buying something on the spur of the moment – or two or three things. The last time I was in that store, for example, I wound up buying three books. When I walked in there, I didn’t actually have a title in mind that I wanted to buy. Instead, I was influenced by the store itself when I made those purchases. (Thankfully, I had budgeted for this. I was anticipating some “spontaneous buying” on that day, so I budgeted that much cash in my wallet for just that purpose.) Shopping costs you money. Shopping without a very specific purpose really costs you money. If you want to save money on every single situation where you’re opening your wallet for an item, there’s a very simple rule to follow. Make your buying decision before you ever enter the store. If you’re buying food, make a grocery list with as much detail as possible before you go there. Use the store flyer to make your grocery list so that it accounts for the sales. That way, you’re making as few decisions as possible when you’re actually in the store. If you’re buying a car, do your homework on car models before you ever go on the lot. Know what features you want. Use websites to figure out what cars they have on the lot and research those models. Again, that way, you’re not making decisions while on the lot. If you’re buying a book at Amazon.com, know what book you’re shopping for before you ever go on the site. Don’t use a shopping site as a recommendation tool – instead, only go there when the only decision left to make is whether to click the “Add to cart” button. Why should you do things this way? Whenever you allow yourself to make decisions on the retailer’s home turf, you’re allowing that retailer to add extra information to your decision-making process. That information that they give you is going to be engineered almost entirely to convince you to buy the item that the retailer wants you to buy, which is usually the one that makes them the most money. For example, if you go to an electronics store with the vague notion that you want to buy a camera, you’re going to be inundated with options. You’ll be facing a ton of information without context and, to some extent, without reliability. Are these features you really care about? Are you able to actually evaluate things like image quality or battery life or reliability? Unfortunately, no, you’re not. Instead, you’re going to get information about the features that the store wants you to know about. A salesman will probably “help” you, in that the “help” mostly involves convincing you to buy now rather than later. Walking into a retailer or visiting a retail website without your decision already made means that you are going to be basing your decision on a set of information that the retailer gives to you. This is usually not the same set of information that will help you actually make the best purchase. If you base the decision-making process on the information provided by the retailer, you’re using a subset of information that’s not going to push you toward the best option for you. I use one of two options whenever I visit a store of any kind. One, I have a very specific item or list of items that I want and have already decided on. I’ve already researched the items in advance and made up my mind what I want to buy before I ever set foot in the store. That way, when I’m in the store, I am not making decisions, thus the decision-making process isn&