Here's something you might be interested in.
Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed
Big Screen — Movie commentary
Blurt — Music's inside track
Booze News — San Diego spirits
Classical Music — Immortal beauty
Classifieds — Free and easy
Cover Stories — Front-page features
Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes
Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts
Feast! — Food & drink reviews
Feature Stories — Local news & stories
Fishing Report — What’s getting hooked from ship and shore
From the Archives — Spotlight on the past
Golden Dreams — Talk of the town
The Gonzo Report — Making the musical scene, or at least reporting from it
Letters — Our inbox
Movies@Home — Local movie buffs share favorites
Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans
Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists
Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news
News Ticker — News & politics
Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated
Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna
Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated
Poetry — The old and the new
Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers
Reading — The hunt for intellectuals
Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails
San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds
SD on the QT — Almost factual news
Sheep and Goats — Places of worship
Special Issues — The best of
Street Style — San Diego streets have style
Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves
Theater — On stage in San Diego this week
Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative
Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work
Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego
Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads
Your Week — Daily event picks
San Diego Tech Stocks Give You Butterflies
It’s neither sexy nor tech, but it’s steady.
"Risk” is not a naughty four-letter word. At least, that’s what our central bank, the Federal Reserve, keeps telling us. The Fed is openly stating that it is flooding the nation with liquidity so people will take more risks — that is, buy stocks.
In all this fluid floating about, the big money has gone gaga for tech stocks, which can be the gamiest of all. Some investors hit it big, others strike out. Sexy techs like LinkedIn and Skype may offer their shares to a panting public. In a deal looking increasingly malodorous, Wall Street’s Goldman Sachs led a $2 billion investment in Facebook. That suggests the privately held company is worth an amazing $50 billion; it will be hard to resist going public in the future.
However, a look at the history of San Diego tech and biotech stocks should make people hesitant to follow the Fed blindly. Because the federal government and Federal Reserve are both putting guns to our heads and demanding that we buy stocks, I am doing so, but cautiously. And I am not buying these hot techs. They’re for gamblers, not investors, in my hidebound judgment.
First, try to recall (if you can stand to do so) the dot-com bubble of the late 1990s that burst so ignominiously in the year 2000. San Diego’s MP3.com went public July 21, 1999, at $28. The first trade was at $92, and the stock zoomed on to $105 on that opening day, before coming to rest at $63. At the time, it was the largest tech initial public offering ever. In May of 2001, the company was sold for $5 a share.
Wireless Facilities went public November 5, 1999, at $15. The first trade was at $37, and the stock closed the first day at $62. Soon, the stock was down 80 percent. Three years ago, it dropped the wireless business and changed its name to Kratos, greatly concentrating on defense. On Friday Kratos closed at $13.70.
Another darling was Diversa, developer of enzymes, which went public February 14, 2000, at $24 and jumped the same day to $75. After suffering problems, the company wound up part of Massachusetts biotech Verenium, whose stock closed Friday at $3.12.
Websense, whose software allows companies to learn if their employees are looking at porn or playing fantasy football during the workday, went public March 28, 2000. It zoomed from $18 to almost $48 the first day. But its growth has slowed down as competition has intensified. Standard & Poor’s suggests selling the stock. It closed Friday at $19.98.
SureBeam, which made systems to irradiate foods, was spun out of the then–Titan Corporation in 2001. Suddenly came 9/11. It appeared that SureBeam’s system would zap anthrax. SureBeam stock quickly doubled to almost $17. Titan’s almost doubled to $29 as hyperbole rolled from the companies’ publicity machines. Then the technology sputtered. So did the companies’ stocks. SureBeam went into Chapter 7 liquidation bankruptcy early in 2004. Titan got in trouble for illegally greasing the palm of a Benin politician. Titan was sold in 2005.
Biotech Sequenom has been on a roller coaster too. On September 24, 2008, the stock zoomed 35 percent to a six-year high when the company reported positive results for a test for Down syndrome. A year later, Sequenom said that it could no longer rely on the positive data. The stock plunged 40 percent and at that point was down 80 percent for the year. Later, Elizabeth Dragon, the former senior vice president of research and development, admitted that she had lied when she said that the Down test was 100 percent accurate. But now, MotleyFool.com says Sequenom may be the perfect stock: revenue is rising sharply. A major reason: the possibility that the Down syndrome test will be successful.
Another biotech that has given investors butterflies but is doing well now is Illumina, which develops genetic research tools. It went public July 28, 2000, at $16 and closed that day at $39. A year later, the stock was down more than 70 percent and two years later hit $1. Now it’s back to $69.05. Standard & Poor’s notes that an investor who put $10,000 in the stock five years ago now has $89,844. The company just signed a $335 million lease for a large campus in University City.
Then there is Carlsbad’s Genoptix, which provides diagnostic services to hematologists and oncologists. It is headed by Tina Nova. On March 1, 2007, the Reader reported how she had a quickie wedding in Las Vegas but upon discovering that she was still technically married to her fourth husband, and thus was a bigamist, had the marriage annulled. In 2007, the company went public at $17 and for a while was San Diego’s hottest stock, shooting to $39. Friday it was back to $20.32, and a Pennsylvania law firm is suing, claiming that management made exaggerated claims about the company’s future success while concealing negative facts.
Bank of America/Merrill Lynch analyst Robert Willoughby is not happy that top Genoptix managers gave themselves fat bonuses last year after the stock dropped 43 percent from the beginning of the year until December 16, when the allocations were determined. “We see little evidence that the company’s board is remotely engaged in any organic effort designed to create shareholder value,” says Willoughby. Media have reported that Genoptix has retained investment bankers to assess strategic alternatives; that often means a company is trying to sell itself.
Biotech Neurocrine Biosciences, which is developing medications for neurological disorders, went public May 23, 1996, at $10.50. By early 2006 it was above $65. Then it went south and Friday closed at $7.55. Standard & Poor’s thinks the stock is worth $10. But someone who invested $10,000 in Neurocrine five years ago only has $1218.
Investors in Ardea Biosciences, which is working on drugs for gout and cancer, have had quite a ride. The stock went public in 2000 at $320.24, adjusted for a reverse split. It dropped below $2 in 2003 but by Friday had climbed back to $27.85.
Biotech Amylin Pharmaceuticals has had wild ups and downs. It is now working on drugs for diabetes and obesity. On Friday, the stock closed at $14.60. But in 1998, investors feared Amylin was headed for the ash can. The stock got below 50 cents. By 2007 it was above $53 — only to fall back again.
Some local tech stocks have good but not great records. Stock of semiconductor-equipment maker Cymer has moved up fairly well since its 1996 public offering. Medical-device maker DexCom has moved up modestly since its $10 offering in 2005.
Some techs and biotechs have done very well. Carlsbad’s Life Technologies, a maker of biotech tools, was created out of a merger in late 2008 and was trading then at $22. Friday it closed at $55.25. ResMed, maker of sleep apnea equipment, rose from 75 cents in 1995 to Friday’s $32.99. Wireless and satellite communications systems maker ViaSat rose from $4.50 in 1996 to $42.70 Friday.
Qualcomm, San Diego’s largest company, has rewarded shareholders well. The company recently made an acquisition broadening its telecom reach. “The most exciting new opportunity for Qualcomm may come from new inroads into the personal computer and tablet markets,” says Brian Colello of Morningstar. Then there’s WD-40, which for four decades sold only its ubiquitous lubricant and later branched out to a few related products. Its price has slowly doubled in the past seven years. For ethical reasons, I can’t buy San Diego stocks. But if I could, I would buy WD-40, which closed Friday at $37.80. I don’t like these wild ups and downs of the techs and biotechs. And WD-40 is not a tech. ■
Here's something you might be interested in.
San Diego Tech Stocks Give You Butterflies
San Diego Tech Stocks Give You Butterflies
It’s neither sexy nor tech, but it’s steady.
"Risk” is not a naughty four-letter word. At least, that’s what our central bank, the Federal Reserve, keeps telling us. The Fed is openly stating that it is flooding the nation with liquidity so people will take more risks — that is, buy stocks.
In all this fluid floating about, the big money has gone gaga for tech stocks, which can be the gamiest of all. Some investors hit it big, others strike out. Sexy techs like LinkedIn and Skype may offer their shares to a panting public. In a deal looking increasingly malodorous, Wall Street’s Goldman Sachs led a $2 billion investment in Facebook. That suggests the privately held company is worth an amazing $50 billion; it will be hard to resist going public in the future.
However, a look at the history of San Diego tech and biotech stocks should make people hesitant to follow the Fed blindly. Because the federal government and Federal Reserve are both putting guns to our heads and demanding that we buy stocks, I am doing so, but cautiously. And I am not buying these hot techs. They’re for gamblers, not investors, in my hidebound judgment.
First, try to recall (if you can stand to do so) the dot-com bubble of the late 1990s that burst so ignominiously in the year 2000. San Diego’s MP3.com went public July 21, 1999, at $28. The first trade was at $92, and the stock zoomed on to $105 on that opening day, before coming to rest at $63. At the time, it was the largest tech initial public offering ever. In May of 2001, the company was sold for $5 a share.
Wireless Facilities went public November 5, 1999, at $15. The first trade was at $37, and the stock closed the first day at $62. Soon, the stock was down 80 percent. Three years ago, it dropped the wireless business and changed its name to Kratos, greatly concentrating on defense. On Friday Kratos closed at $13.70.
Another darling was Diversa, developer of enzymes, which went public February 14, 2000, at $24 and jumped the same day to $75. After suffering problems, the company wound up part of Massachusetts biotech Verenium, whose stock closed Friday at $3.12.
Websense, whose software allows companies to learn if their employees are looking at porn or playing fantasy football during the workday, went public March 28, 2000. It zoomed from $18 to almost $48 the first day. But its growth has slowed down as competition has intensified. Standard & Poor’s suggests selling the stock. It closed Friday at $19.98.
SureBeam, which made systems to irradiate foods, was spun out of the then–Titan Corporation in 2001. Suddenly came 9/11. It appeared that SureBeam’s system would zap anthrax. SureBeam stock quickly doubled to almost $17. Titan’s almost doubled to $29 as hyperbole rolled from the companies’ publicity machines. Then the technology sputtered. So did the companies’ stocks. SureBeam went into Chapter 7 liquidation bankruptcy early in 2004. Titan got in trouble for illegally greasing the palm of a Benin politician. Titan was sold in 2005.
Biotech Sequenom has been on a roller coaster too. On September 24, 2008, the stock zoomed 35 percent to a six-year high when the company reported positive results for a test for Down syndrome. A year later, Sequenom said that it could no longer rely on the positive data. The stock plunged 40 percent and at that point was down 80 percent for the year. Later, Elizabeth Dragon, the former senior vice president of research and development, admitted that she had lied when she said that the Down test was 100 percent accurate. But now, MotleyFool.com says Sequenom may be the perfect stock: revenue is rising sharply. A major reason: the possibility that the Down syndrome test will be successful.
Another biotech that has given investors butterflies but is doing well now is Illumina, which develops genetic research tools. It went public July 28, 2000, at $16 and closed that day at $39. A year later, the stock was down more than 70 percent and two years later hit $1. Now it’s back to $69.05. Standard & Poor’s notes that an investor who put $10,000 in the stock five years ago now has $89,844. The company just signed a $335 million lease for a large campus in University City.
Then there is Carlsbad’s Genoptix, which provides diagnostic services to hematologists and oncologists. It is headed by Tina Nova. On March 1, 2007, the Reader reported how she had a quickie wedding in Las Vegas but upon discovering that she was still technically married to her fourth husband, and thus was a bigamist, had the marriage annulled. In 2007, the company went public at $17 and for a while was San Diego’s hottest stock, shooting to $39. Friday it was back to $20.32, and a Pennsylvania law firm is suing, claiming that management made exaggerated claims about the company’s future success while concealing negative facts.
Bank of America/Merrill Lynch analyst Robert Willoughby is not happy that top Genoptix managers gave themselves fat bonuses last year after the stock dropped 43 percent from the beginning of the year until December 16, when the allocations were determined. “We see little evidence that the company’s board is remotely engaged in any organic effort designed to create shareholder value,” says Willoughby. Media have reported that Genoptix has retained investment bankers to assess strategic alternatives; that often means a company is trying to sell itself.
Biotech Neurocrine Biosciences, which is developing medications for neurological disorders, went public May 23, 1996, at $10.50. By early 2006 it was above $65. Then it went south and Friday closed at $7.55. Standard & Poor’s thinks the stock is worth $10. But someone who invested $10,000 in Neurocrine five years ago only has $1218.
Investors in Ardea Biosciences, which is working on drugs for gout and cancer, have had quite a ride. The stock went public in 2000 at $320.24, adjusted for a reverse split. It dropped below $2 in 2003 but by Friday had climbed back to $27.85.
Biotech Amylin Pharmaceuticals has had wild ups and downs. It is now working on drugs for diabetes and obesity. On Friday, the stock closed at $14.60. But in 1998, investors feared Amylin was headed for the ash can. The stock got below 50 cents. By 2007 it was above $53 — only to fall back again.
Some local tech stocks have good but not great records. Stock of semiconductor-equipment maker Cymer has moved up fairly well since its 1996 public offering. Medical-device maker DexCom has moved up modestly since its $10 offering in 2005.
Some techs and biotechs have done very well. Carlsbad’s Life Technologies, a maker of biotech tools, was created out of a merger in late 2008 and was trading then at $22. Friday it closed at $55.25. ResMed, maker of sleep apnea equipment, rose from 75 cents in 1995 to Friday’s $32.99. Wireless and satellite communications systems maker ViaSat rose from $4.50 in 1996 to $42.70 Friday.
Qualcomm, San Diego’s largest company, has rewarded shareholders well. The company recently made an acquisition broadening its telecom reach. “The most exciting new opportunity for Qualcomm may come from new inroads into the personal computer and tablet markets,” says Brian Colello of Morningstar. Then there’s WD-40, which for four decades sold only its ubiquitous lubricant and later branched out to a few related products. Its price has slowly doubled in the past seven years. For ethical reasons, I can’t buy San Diego stocks. But if I could, I would buy WD-40, which closed Friday at $37.80. I don’t like these wild ups and downs of the techs and biotechs. And WD-40 is not a tech. ■
Comments