Monsanto Company (MON)

goldminingXpert (99.90) Submitted: 3/24/08 2:58 PM

Recs: 0 | Rec This

investing is about the money, not the morals. This stock is going down because the business isn't as good as the stock price would indicate...not becuase MON is unethical.

Report this Post Reply

mingusdew (99.58) Submitted: 3/26/08 12:58 PM

Recs: 2 | Rec This

"investing is about the money, not the morals. "

Anyone who actually believes in this is a part of the many problems we're facing. It's not impossible to make money in the market without buying into (and subsequently supporting) companies which contribute to the outright ruin of our society and civilization, in order to ensure their profits be maximized. There are plenty of better investments out there, which don't carry the outrageous amounts of emotional baggage one SHOULD feel while watching their MON shares go up.

Look at what this company is responsible for, and then consider the implications of how those actions could shape the global food supply. Anyone willing to accept the future MON is attempting to build for itself, provided they make some gains along the way, is no more or less disgraceful than the MON lawyers who sue our farmers into compliance with patents that shouldn't exist.

MON is one of the single most sinister corporations on earth, and their success is genuinely detrimental to virtually every living being. People need to start getting angry with some of the things they've done, and the FDA needs to start doing its job by putting a stop to it. At least in the European Union people still care about their own personal (and societal) health and security, more so than they care about maximizing their ROIs.

All you need to do is read the Wikipedia article on this company, and if you don't immediately hate everything about them I would be willing to recommend professional therapy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto

Report this Post Reply

StartOfLine (69.22) Submitted: 4/09/08 12:56 AM

Recs: 1 | Rec This

Umm... first and formost, it's the SUN and WATER that drives cloud formation. Everything else is a distant third place.

Report this Post Reply

TheLongView (98.51) Submitted: 4/13/08 7:21 PM

Recs: 2 | Rec This

Not to be rude, but morality doesn't have a home here...or rather in an investment decision/conversation...only a consumption decision. If by "support[ing]" a company you mean owning stock; you are incorrect regarding what it means to support. Also, if you are trying to make a statement by going thumbs down or shorting MON, you are naive about your impact on the markets. Let me explain....

If MON is good at making money, SOMEONE will profit. If you do NOT believe in the goals of that company...it is all the better that YOU profit. You can then use their hard earned money against them later. In theory (though unlikely because of its size), you could buy shares to eventually direct, buy or shutter that company.

"Support[ing]" a company consists of consuming their products...keeping the market for their products alive. If you could convince the population, the consumers, that your moral rationale is correct (which it probably is), then yes, MON would also be a bad business/ investment decision. However, incremental is the nature of change...and a virtual/real shorting of MON will get you and your cause no where. Even if you consider buying stock loaning them the money, someone is going to loan it...again, it should be YOU that can use that profit to further your cause rather than an ally of theirs furthering their cause.

Think about it. It seems jacked, but I own XOM and ride a bike to work everyday. Logically I am in no way a hypocrite. I am profiting off something the world cannot instantly quit consuming while simultaneously 'voting with my money" against that very market. If the world ever decides to vote with me and ride their bikes, I will sell XOM. :)

Best of Luck.

Report this Post Reply

AnomaLee (99.84) Submitted: 4/19/08 9:23 AM

Recs: 5 | Rec This

Monsanto: (1) Effectively evil (2) named one of the top five companies to impact the everyday life of human society

They effectively control politicians with their lobbying power for the past 100 years. I knew they created Agent Orange, and today they are effectively covering up the negative effects of Aspartame where one of the key ingredients is irregularly high levels of Methanol which is converted by the human body into Formaldehyde.

I find no problem with Exxon. We remain dependent on hydrocarbon/fossil fuels and XOM helps to provide that essential need to society. Oil exploration & drilling is very invasive and these large companies do so respectfully and thoroughly to minimize environmental impact. It is the goal for every business to earn a profit and as they do so they are one of the single largest contributors to tax revenue.

With that... F*** Monsanto. The problem is you can chose to reduce the petroleum-based products you use by 90% in your life. However, if you chose to reduce the amount of food you eat by 90% in your life you'll surely die. The prize is Monsanto's toxic products that they are able to sell cheaper and make it more affordable to buy. Consequentially in agriculture that actually causes the price of alternatives to rise and makes them less affordable. Not many companies have the pricing power to make their products less expensive and their competitors more expensive while forcing you to become dependent on their products.

Exxon isn't even a bleep on a map when faced with the impact Monsanto has had on human society. If Exxon happens to cause an incident that creates a harmful impact to the environment they are sued and they pay it. When Monsanto happens to cause an incident that creates a harmful impact to the environment they sue and then we pay for it.

How the hell do you have a limitless time-frame on genes(DNA) and sue people for its use because its an invasive species and is inhabiting other areas?

"Monsanto should not have to vouchsafe the safety of biotech food. Our interest is in selling as much of it as possible. Assuring its safety is FDA's job.[13]" - Phil Angell, Monsanto's director of corporate communications (1998)

I'm not blind enough to know they're a fast growth profitable corporation or the fact that they're corporate greed is going to cripple the agricultural industry.

As far as: "it's the SUN and WATER that drives cloud formation. Everything else is a distant third place." I was just wondering if you gained your environmental knowledge by watching captain planet.

Comet's in space have both forms of sunlight and water. There are moons that have both forms of sunlight and water, but that doesn't mean that they have clouds. We know the "seemingly small changes" in the planets ecosystem are influenced mostly by living organisms. Phytoplankton are microscopic organisms and they are the largest producers of fresh oxygen on the planet by more than half of the fresh oxygen produced by all plant life.

"F*** Monsanto"

Report this Post Reply

Soapbox101 (67.98) Submitted: 4/21/08 10:13 PM

Recs: 0 | Rec This

I don't see anything that says it lives in high altitudes. It lives in the phyllosphere which is the area just above-ground level. If you can show a link to an article supporting this theory, please add it.

Report this Post Reply

stevebk01 (97.88) Submitted: 4/23/08 11:49 AM

Recs: 0 | Rec This

On Monsanto (MON):

Well said, minus the explicative, AnomaLee. The efficient allocation of capital in our capitalist society should be regulated, either on the consumer side by the FDA or in the back end by regulating what companies are allowed to be publicly traded. I am a proponent of free markets and acknowledge TheLongView's point that if I don't invest in the company, someone else will, but if the wiki article is 1/10th true- on a macro level MON is doing a lot of long-term damage for minimal short-term gain. It's almost a catch22 for farmers, they want to protect their crops from being devastated by frost for one season, but at the same time they have to spend more on 'terminator' seeds. Yes, as economist I realize the system should work itself out with regards to pricing, etc, but from the investing sense - it is people who are looking to make a quick buck, like TheLongView, that allow companies to do horrible things to our earth. I don't mean to mix philosophy with economic theory too much, but in the long run the entropy created by this company (every system creates entropy) will far out weigh any potential good. Fear and greed cause people to lose money in the markets, and here is an example of how one earnings announcement at a time, people's greed (you can see it in TheLongView's post, the blind-eye-it-is-someone-else's-problem view) is leading to our destruction. Think toxic dumping to save in disposal costs, but it saves in CoGS which is passed along to the consumer in a reduction of price! YEAH, OK... Think of the example in Fight Club (I hate quoting movies for examples but I KNOW this happens in real life and it is the easiest way of explaining) where the car company misrepresents its safety standards but does not fix them because it is cheaper to just have the insurance company pay the claims. A few years down the road we might be saying: think Splenda... Far fetched? Coke (drug) used to be in Coca Cola.

My point is that it is possible to make a profit, typically in the U.S. this is through innovation, without doing long-term detrimental harm in order for one company to maximize its ROI. Example: I can't build a solar panel to harness energy if it will block out all of the sun in North America. Extreme example? Yes, but it still fits.

disclaimer: I am a STAUNCH Republican. I have been accused of being called the most 'frugal person' many people know and believe as long as lobbyists exist (they are on both sides of every equation!) think social awareness groups value is little more than a subway rant. As a person I believe in life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness (though it should not come for free, but with work), as an economist I believe in free markets and as a father some day, I believe in protecting or improving on the status quo in the hope that my children will have the opportunity to live life to its fullest.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto

Report this Post Reply

SRLBamBam (< 20) Submitted: 5/03/08 8:03 PM

Recs: 3 | Rec This

Please, if your going to do so much complaining then at least get your facts straight.



I'm going to share a little background information so everyone can correctly comprehend my position.
My grandfather owns a small (about 50 acres) Berry / Corn / Agritourism farm. Over the past year or two I've watched the prices of everything increase, and most have probably doubled or more and I strongly suspect that without the agritourism we would have had to close our gates long ago.



And, In time for my sophomore year my high school school made a Biotechnology One course available which I am now about halfway through.



In the last growing season we grew a GMO sweetcorn alongside a buffer crop of unmodified sweetcorn to prevent random mutations of the corn borers that would allow them resistance to the gene added to control them. To control the corn borers in the buffer crop we spray every week with pesticides (that have probably tripled in price); if we miss a spraying (sometimes even by only a few days) much of the crop can be ruined, and no one wants corn with worms in it. Which does leave the possibility although unlikely for traces of pesticide.



The GMO corn is never exposed to any pesticides which in my opinion means it is just as safe or safer the the non - GMO corn variant. Any farmer can tell you that it is easier to grow which transfers to cost savings for the consumer as the farmer doesn't have to jack up the prices as much because everything he needs to grow crops is rising so much.



Selective Breeding has been around for ages and is also bioengineering. Native Americans used this practice to increase the size of corn ears from something you might see on your plate in an American Chinese restaurant to the eight inch ear we have today.



That statement by someone that Europe isn't involved in biotech isn't entirely truthful. Most of Europe just doesn't want an American companies involved or leading it.
http://www.europabio.org/



***************************


As for the frost-resistant strawberries there is no obscure bacteria strain involved in growth.
The biotech scientists ADD genes to the DNA of the organism , which last time I checked are NOT bacteria.



Pseudomonas Syringae strain ESC10 is probably what 'daisychain144' is talking about and is found in a product called BioSave. Its used as a post harvest rot control.



- Bryan

Report this Post Reply

DNAdivaSTL (61.73) Submitted: 5/06/08 4:03 PM

Recs: 0 | Rec This

The BT gene has been the biggest GMO product in addition to the Yield and Water Utilization projects. The genes have been improved with a TripleStack and now will be improved further with the Super Stack Gene that includes an RNAi segment as well. As evil as you may think this is to the environment, global warming is a bigger threat to us by increasing the insect population that threatens a (media pump) dwindling food supply...

Report this Post Reply

FourthAxis (89.36) Submitted: 5/09/08 9:53 AM

Recs: 0 | Rec This

"buying into (and subsequently supporting)" - naive and incorrect.

If a company is profitable, someone somewhere will profit....it may as well be you, especially if you do not support that company's values. Profiting from that company will allow you to use their profits against them in another manner. If you think by not buying their stock your are having an impact on the market or the company or the world, YOU ARE NAIVE regarding your impact on financial markets. It's not like your funding a startup....THEY'RE ALREADY IN BUSINESS AND SUCCESSFUL. So you've already failed to a degree.

IF YOU DO NOT SUPPORT A COMPANY - BOYCOTT THEIR PRODUCTS. Make your impact by not creating a market for their wares. PERIOD. If you are successful at that....the stock will suffer and the market will divest naturally. DUH! Plus...If you're a shareholder...you have some say over the direction of that company. Again....DUH. DON'T BE NAIVE!

Report this Post Reply

rabidtigerfan (28.54) Submitted: 5/12/08 12:19 AM

Recs: 0 | Rec This

Ethics, morals,personal beliefs, pet peeves, etc, have little to do with the markets and investing. I invest purely for profit, not to "support these monsters." Profit should be the goal of investing. I don't invest in any company simply to show support for it, I invest to make profit.

Report this Post Reply

rabidtigerfan (28.54) Submitted: 5/12/08 12:22 AM

Recs: 0 | Rec This

well written response. 1

Report this Post Reply

dannp (93.42) Submitted: 5/16/08 4:22 PM

Recs: 0 | Rec This

Just a quick thought.... Farmers are not the ones that set any prices... they get paid what the market tells them they are going to get paid for their crop and they have to pay whatever the different businesses charge for their seed, chemicals and fertilizers. Because it is now illegal to even grow their own seed for the next years planting. Not to mention the fact that they must have crop insurance to cover any losses and to qualify for any programs offered, whether they participate in them or not.

Keep in mind that a farmer is lucky to earn .10 (ten cents) of every dollar that you are paying for your meat products. They earn even less for any foods made with grain. Another thought is that they also have to contend with groups and indiviuals making policy decisions that effect their livelyhoods even when those making policy have no idea what it takes to raise a crop or grow any kind of animals for consumption.

Ok I'll get off my soapbox now, but keep these thoughts in mind the next time you think the farmer is where the money is going. These guys farm because it is what they love to do not what will make them rich.

Report this Post Reply

dannp (93.42) Submitted: 5/16/08 4:25 PM

Recs: 0 | Rec This

Are you ready to stop eating to back up this kind of thinking?

Report this Post Reply

SmValueBoy (90.92) Submitted: 5/27/08 7:06 PM

Recs: 0 | Rec This

well said. This CAPS Monsanto controversy is strange. This is supposed to be a forum about investing, and i hate to become even a tiny part of this. However, there is a broader underlying trend among the population in general that confuses me... this stupid anti-corporation crap. the people complaining usually complain when someone else is getting rich. ie if they believe monsanto is "evil", and they buy with the intention of using gains from their stock for some "greater good," these do gooders wind up fearing (and usually rightly so) that they would rather keep the gains for themselves... therefore, the only thing they can do when big corporations like monsanto, exxon, and halliburton (to name a couple others that people love to hate) start rolling up the cash is complain. And as for this specific case, maybe past products have brought about adverse consequences, but enhancing food production in a time when the world is rioting for food doesn't seem so evil. Think of how much more cancer research might have been funded if cancer research foundations owned large positions in Altria...

Report this Post Reply

Investorlion (< 20) Submitted: 5/29/08 6:10 PM

Recs: 0 | Rec This

When you don't know ANYTHING about "nucleation" in droplet formation physics, you should not be showing off your ignorance blatantly.

Report this Post Reply

AnomaLee (99.84) Submitted: 6/03/08 5:33 AM

Recs: 1 | Rec This

There's nothing wrong with large corporations.

I have no problem with Monsanto's right to exist, and I support GM foods. I don't like the corporate practices of Monsanto. They have created numerous harmful products, but historically they have denied any wrong doing. For years Monsanto denied and fought against the hazardous effects of Agent Orange with others and then fought against labeling hazardous warnings on their RoundUp herbicide products.

Knowing their past I just find it scary that they put so much effort to lobby against consumer labeling. If you don't like a certain music genre you can walk into a music store and easily avoid buying any music from that genre. But what do you do if all the music was unlabeled? Unlike, CD's most of us would starve to death trying to figure what we're eating. I'm young, but if you're older then you should remember the health risks of leaded gasoline and paint and other harmful products. Look how many decades it took before tobacco was classified to be harmful.

I believe in consumer information, and I don't mind eating GM foods because I think they're safe but I'm pretty sure all food contents are not safe. I think I should have a right to know what it is I'm buying. Especially, if you're feeding your kids. I remember the old Hollywood sci-fi dreams that we'd get all our daily needs through a pill, so I'm sure someday GM foods will dramatically improve agriculture in dry regions around the world. I'm positive Monsanto will be a great investment, but when I watched the movie Michael Clayton I thought --- Monsanto

If you've seen that movie then you may know what I'm talking about...

Report this Post Reply

cubanstockpicker (75.85) Submitted: 6/03/08 2:04 PM

Recs: 1 | Rec This

Has anyone wondered why the dying off of bees coincides with the growth GM foods? DO you find it ridiculous to patent a seed that then cross pollinates with another seed getting obviously a hybrid?

I thought we studied genetics in school, didn't know we were going to get into patenting it.

If there are only a few types of seeds planted, as bug resistant as they may be, the bugs will eventually win out see how antibiotics are having less and less effect on super bacteria and viruses that now only have any response to the strongest of them.

If you allow for a couple of strains, then you are selecting an evolutionary trend forward which an create problems. The reason for hybridization is disease resistance.

Making single strains of anything is stupid and wrong and time will tell when we will see a bacteria that will sweep across and kill all the crops, because there was only one kind.

Yes everyone here wants to seem like a capitalist and free market will decide, but we don't see how these very large corporations pay top dollar to prevent us from knowing, and by the time we cross that bridge we find that the only crop we do have are GMO's.

We are man and we need to change our surrounding environment, so much that by putting progress before even the smallest caution we have created problems like global warming, resistant TB, etc...

Common sense must be used before we create a famine, its us against nature and evolution with GMO's and over time, I don't like our chances.

Report this Post Reply

pcmpcm (< 20) Submitted: 6/06/08 2:55 PM

Recs: 0 | Rec This

I just want to say thank you for the perspective. I do hope that people will use it and consider it when choosing where to invest. Monsanto was one of the first stocks that I purchased. In purchasing it, I researched the general viability of what they do under current market conditions, market analysts' opinions on profitability, various charts and P/E ratios. I did not take the time to research the morality/ethics of the company. As a result, it has been one of several monetarily profitable companies I've invested in, and the one company that gives me a twinge of guilt to see in my portfolio. I tell others the short story of me investing in Monsanto as a lesson of where you can end up if you don't take the moment to become aware of your associations. People tacitly comply with terrible things because they're simply not interested in opposing them, or even being aware of them unless they are personally injured by them. It's wrong. An investment portfolio should make me money, but it should also make me proud to look at and show to others. I should consider myself a tiny part of each company in that portfolio. And by that reasoning, I am this tiny part of Monsanto.

Report this Post Reply

YoungInvestor99 (< 20) Submitted: 6/13/08 12:03 AM

Recs: 0 | Rec This

I am not going to click "underperform" on Monsanto because I don't think it will underperform the S&P 500. What it will do and what it should do are two different things obviously.

Monsanto is probably one of the least ethical corporations around today, right up there with factory farms, tobbacco, and gambling. I agree that not consuming their products (round up anyone?) is the best way to not support their business.

Owning their stock IS in fact supporting their business practices though. See David Gardners Motley Fool profile interviews.

I agree profiting in investing is goal number one, and you do have to set aside some values and realize the world is not perfect to become involved. A purely socially responsible portfolio would be boring. But you have to draw the line somewhere, to me, Monsanto is definitley off limits. Likewise with Altria and other similar stocks.

Report this Post Reply

jbwest (99.17) Submitted: 6/17/08 8:06 AM

Recs: 0 | Rec This

It's true, if we made sure every company we invested in was "clean" and didn't hurt anybody, anywhere, there would be no investing, period. Not to mention the amount of time it would take to do all the research. Heck, I never heard of a mutant pseudomama syringea before!

On the other hand, if the planet we are presently meandering through space on is rendered a charred hunk of slag, there won't be much investing going on either.

Report this Post Reply

TheParadox (80.11) Submitted: 6/18/08 8:19 PM

Recs: 0 | Rec This

...yea i agree with the "take the profit from the company approach". I drive a prius (yeah, i know, but it really is awesome) yet i own stock in XOM... it makes more sense to "take other peoples money" to pay for my gas. I know I'm in the green, and I'm acting in the right for the environment. It was my choice.

While i just realized the extent of MON as truly an evil company, after looking at the Wikipedia, I'm not changing my green thumb. It really strikes me how someone could accept business with these guys. It so shocking, I've considered to research the milk we buy... honestly, ask my wife.

But I'll tell you what, I'll earn those profits, I'll try to buy unmodified food to a reasonable extent, and I'll tell everyone to do so as well. I don't support this company, but i deserve to make money on either 2 ground: a long or a short.

It makes more sense to accumulate as much money as possible, and use it to support your own cause... if that cause is filing your gas tank, than that's it... if its buy food for the poor, then you can buy the unmodified food, and tell those hobo's "that100% unmodified beef your eating, you better like it."

For crying out loud

THIS IS HOW CLOUDS ARE MADE:
http://www.weatherwizkids.com/cloud.htm

Report this Post Reply