Thursday, August 11, 2005

Disingenuous but not false and misleading!!!!

(Below is my letter to Proctor & Gamble approving their proposed reply to my shareholder holder proposal which you'll find below. Also see August 6 posting. )

"Disingenuous but not false and misleading as per my understanding of SEC 14a-8. Hence I shall not object to it appearing on the proxy."

If you want to know why I think I've got a chance to win the presidency, check out this story http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/07/nyregion/thecity/07mimi.html and the woman's blog http://miminewyork.blogspot.com/. Betting Americans are fed up with media celebration of the darkest side of the human experience as the cultural ideal for women.

This is also why we're in a clash of civilizations with the Islamic world. The Arab-Israeli conflict is a red herring. Islam's upset because we're trying to shove feminism down their throats. They look at the catastrophe 30-40 years political and economic feminism has created and resist even if means war.

The safety of adolescent girls and young women were foremost on my mind when I went to the wall with PG over Intrinsa. Takes my breath away how socially irresponsible PG's leadership is. PG should fire the head of its pharmaceutical division, and EVERY employee who testified at the FDA hearing. Sat in utter shock at the hearing as they attempted to bamboozle the advisory panel with half truths and evasions.
_____

The shareholders recommend Proctor & Gamble hire an investment bank to explore the sale of the company.

In my opinion the GOLD STANDARD test of investment return is PURCHASING POWER with respect to the most sought after consumer goods and services, e.g. housing and education. In recent years Gillette share values failed that test because of largely unappreciated, negative economic trends combined with effects of the maturity of PG‘s product line.

Since 1999, the nominal share price increased about 19% as of December 7, 2004 when this proposal was completed.

Purchasing power-wise PG shares declined significantly over the same period with respect to homeownership. The national median home price rose 37%, and in very desirable cities like San Diego over 100%.

In my opinion the principle driving force for such severely escalating prices is feminist careerism which vastly expanded the fulltime workforce without an increase in REAL WAGES. The BUYING POWER of earnings halved since the 1970s because most families today need two incomes to almost equal the buying power one had 30 years ago. Put another way most women working fulltime essentially work for nothing.

Busy, overworked parents have little time to nurture and protect their marriages. Hence more competition for scarce housing from today’s 50% divorce rate, and from young adults now so skeptical of the durability of a loving commitment they marry late, or not at all.

Just Economics 101 supply and demand theory: Too much consumer demand chasing scarce commodities like private undergraduate education and homeownership.

In my opinion further worsening PG’s dismal share performance since 1999 is the maturity of its current business operations. Desperate to achieve breakout earnings reignite the share price PG developed Instrinsa, a testosterone often mischaracterized as the female “Viagra”. As a physician, I warned PG about toxicity issues several months before the FDA’s refused to license Instrinsa. Testosterone is a very toxic drug with few legitimate uses.

I also questioned PG’s breathtaking lack of understanding of the psychodynamics of female sexuality. Pretty safe to make implicit beauty promises for shampoos and bath soaps. “…(but) moonlight courtship promises to enhance women’s libidinal lives will likely result in giving new meaning to the shareholders’ detriment of the Bard’s ‘Hell hath no fury…’.” (5/15/04 letter to board member Robert Story) From my 12/2/04 FDA testimony in opposition to licensing Instrinsa. “…As an investor, and trustee for family accounts, I will sell our Procter & Gamble should Instrinsa be approved. The potential litigation risks for the company are so great in my opinion holding Procter and Gamble violates the prudent investor rule.
…I believe Instrinsa is the most hazardous non-narcotic drug ever presented for FDA approval. I urge it be rejected for any use…”

Given economic trends undermining the shares’ BUYING POWER and product line maturity PG should be sold to realize maximum shareholder value.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Google