@unseenvalue Here you

My 15 small and mid sized pharma for 15Y

\u26a0\ufe0f~5 can go bust (0)

No trading. No questions. Your money. Your conviction. Your due diligence!

Albert David
DCAL
FDC
Indoco
JB Pharma
Jubilant Life
Laurus
Natco
Neuland
RPG Life
SeQuent
SMS Pharma
Solara
Strides
Syngene

| Pharma \U0001f489\U0001f48a
— Sajal Kapoor (@unseenvalue) December 20, 2019

More from Uvlearnings

Sajal Kapoor
@unseenvalue

Avoid low quality assets in a sector where price discovery has been relentless over many years. Stay with tier 1 players. Margin of safety is in business first and not the entry price. This is not valid for short term positional trades. Those are managed via strict stop losses.

Speciality vs Commodity Chemicals

Speciality - typically bespoke solutions as per customer's requirements. High complexity. This makes continous R&D and product innovation a key success factor!

Go to 2 hr 21 mins for my views on #Chemicals sector \U0001f447https://t.co/Zzx6AwHZLH
— Sajal Kapoor (@unseenvalue) June 15, 2020

Sajal Kapoor
@unseenvalue

Only one Indian company is making the country pound in the US when it comes to Biologics #Biocon @Bioconlimited 👏👏

Company floated and nurtured by a women despite all the gender biases. How can the gents be beaten by a lady?

Sajal Kapoor
@unseenvalue

If cash flow is not growing / compounding - why do you expect the share price to make newer ATHs ?

Ultimately, the stock price is a function of underlying business and the quality of cash flows

"Quality vs Quantity" of cash matters. Small and Mid Pharma have outperformed Large!

Conviction | Patience
@unseenvalue

You offer me 80% cost arbitrage (discount relative to Japan/EU/US) along with low confidence / assurance on Critical Success Factors and I won't give you a single NCE/NBE to discover, develop or manufacture. Capex/opex arbitrage is too low in the disruptive-science-pecking-order! https://t.co/O2l8dK4BUv

@unseenvalue Given high capex/opex cost structures of US/Japan/EU, how will they be able to compete with Indian API companies? https://t.co/OYhC2PUZpL
— Hiren (@hiren_investing) August 11, 2021

$Tar \u26a1$

Tar ⚡
@itsTarH

Promised to share my portfolio, so here it is.

None of this is investment advice, please do your own research. I may choose to exit, reduce or add anytime to these.

On the occasion of youtube 20k and Twitter 70k members

A small tribute/gift to members

Screeners

technical screeners - intraday and positional both

before proceeding - i have helped you , can i ask you so that it can help someone else too

thank you

positional one

run - find #stock - draw chart - find levels

1- Stocks closing daily 2% up from 5 days
https://t.co/gTZrYY3Nht

2- Weekly breakout
https://t.co/1f4ahEolYB

3- Breakouts in short term
https://t.co/BI4h0CdgO2

4- Bullish from last 5

intraday screeners

5- 15 minute Stock Breakouts
https://t.co/9eAo82iuNv

6- Intraday Buying seen in the past 15 minutes
https://t.co/XqAJKhLB5G

7- Stocks trading near day's high on 5 min chart with volume BO intraday
https://t.co/flHmm6QXmo

Thank you

Simon DeDeo
@SimonDeDeo

This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".

Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018

The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.

Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)

There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.

At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?