- Farrell: What's Different On This Black Friday
- Crescenzi: Claims Level Suggests End to Job Losses
- Schork Oil Outlook: Gas Bulls Pinning Hopes on Mother Nature
- Busch: The Debt-Interest Rate Paradox
- Busch: Markets Smell a Country Rat
- Schork Oil Outlook: Mission Impossible For The Bears?
- Losey: Asset Allocation At Retirement
- Farrell: Obama Hectored, Ignored and Restricted?
- Don't Dwell on Investment Mistakes; Move on, Like Buffett
- Hirschhorn: Greed...or Fear
- U.S. Stocks Fall on Dubai Worries
- Black Friday at Best Buy
- Strategists on Dubai: Avoid 'Rash Moves' Now
- Longer Lines, Fuller Carts This Black Friday
- Dubai Stock Market Fear Has 'Legs': Dennis Gartman
- Obama's Emission Reduction Pledge Paints Future for Autos
- Is Super Bowl Halftime Act Too Old?
- Surprising Options Trades in TiVo Shares
- EA Sports Hopes to Pump Up Sales Through Pop-Up Locations
- UAE Markets Seen Limit Down on Monday Open
- Dubai's Debt Woes Signal New Era for Creditors
- US Treasury Wants Banks to Do More to Ease Mortgages
- Fed Audit Would Hurt Economic Prospects: Bernanke
- Next Week: Cash In Now Or Wait For A Santa Rally?
- Dubai Stock Selloff May Bring Buying Opportunity
- Tiger Woods Accepts Full Blame for Car Crash
- Longer Lines, Fuller Carts This Black Friday
- Big US Banks May Be Forced to Raise Capital: Bove
RSS FEED
CNBC Guest Blog
Text Size 
I had a visit on "Power Lunch" today and we talked about the effect on the health care stocks depending on who wins the White House. In general, pharmaceutical companies do well when they have a new product pipeline of innovative products that allow them to command high prices. That is not the case now with the traditional health care equities so the direction of the political scene is even more important. Innovative products are coming from the biotech industry and that would be a fertile ground to investigate.
Expect significant pricing pressure on the health care industry if the Democrats control the office. More mandated enrollment in Medicare type programs will give the government additional levers to extract lower prices. That might be good and necessary, but it will hurt profit margins and returns on equity on the companies. Humana [HUM
Loading...
()
] might have a tough time with a large exposure in this area, and a United Healthcare [UAHC
Loading...
()
] might fare somewhat better with a more diversified business.
The issue of drug reimportation will probably arise and that won't be good for the basic pharma companies. Along with tougher negotiations on drug costs, the pharma companies might be unattractive for a while. At some price, all potential negatives will be discounted, but when now Senator Clinton launched a health care initiative during her husband's first term, this group traded to a significant discount to the market as the fear of pricing pressure drove investors away.
A traditional response to a Republican in the White House would be much the opposite of the above. There would be less pricing pressure and many of the stocks would prove to be at attractive levels now.
I'm not willing to go too far out on a limb with this industry with the election still months away. At Scotsman Capital, we have concentrated our holdings to a few names. JNJ [JNJ
Loading...
()
] is a world class company with a diverse business. It's trading at 14x the consensus estimate for this year and that is at the very low end of its historical valuation range, and slightly below a market multiple. Becton Dickinson in the instrumentation area is our other choice. It's at 17x this years estimate, which is not cheap, but we think represents very sound value relative to its growth prospects. I own both names personally. _______________________________________
Vincent Farrell, Jr. is a Principal of Scotsman Capital Management and a regular contributor CNBC. 
Data is a real-time snapshot *Data is delayed at least 15 minutes