text:
Cool old ship. It's old ship, so the rooms are a bit old and not exactly sparkling clean. But the real issue is the Dark Harbor, haunted house event that goes on in October. We were not informed till arriving that are room would be adjacent to this raucous event. From 7pm until 1 am in the morning, extremely loud music, screaming, grass breaking and roaring gas flame would shoot off. It's criminal that the Queen Mary would rent rooms next to this mess. Oh but the front desk gives out cheap ear plugs, so that makes it all better.... not. We were on our one year anniversary and needless to say, were extremely disappointed and frustrated,
Great historical environment and setting. Short-tempered, abrasive, and frankly disengaged staff. Shame they set the environment poorly.
Such a cool experience! We were upgraded from a standard (no window) room to one with a porthole, which was fabulous. Our room was no frills, but clean, and was quiet even though we were very near the renovation area. We ate and had a drink in the observation bar, which was very cool, and were able to explore many parts of the ship, even though we got in late, probably around 8 pm. Would definitely go back! The tours and museum type areas do close pretty early, so we were unable to access these as we got in later and had to take off in the morning. No breakfast, but we did eat at the expensive Starbucks on board.
I love the concept of The Old Ship and the stateroomsecond as well as it being right on the water. The front desk staff was really rude. He just had an attitude the whole time and didn't want to accommodate us. We thought that we booked a room with two queens but it only had two twins and he was just very snobby about it. The rooms were very hot the air conditioner barely worked. I feel for the price it is not worth it. If they are charging over $200 a night, that's including tax, there needs to be a lot more luxury to the hotel. The toilet did not flush very well in the bathtub was uneven. It really needs a facelift.
Room Gift so not open early enough. Princess Diana enemy closed on a Friday until 3pm. Why not babe it open all day especially on a Friday
What I like is the history about the Ship and the Location. I understand that there is an investment proyevt to improve the condition of the ship, incluían Public Areas and Rooms. Great view from the Decks. A lot of Potential to be a nice lace that was before. Get the Ship back in good shape and not just take advantage of the name! (This is for the Operators) My room was M216 I did not like the conditions of the room. It was not clean! No mentioned in the reservation that will be inside room! Big difference! Items were really old and rusty mainly in the Bathroom! Shawrr door, one light bulb missing, the chain of the lock at entrance door broken, I went to get ice and the bucket had brown water with a plastic bag!! And the door of the Air Conditioning, which was above the bed was showing further prints All over in a white door! The hotel should not rent this rooms anymore!
Staying on a piece of history, traveling back in time, something new around every corner. Ran out of hot water taking a quick shower.
The ship was a grand experience! Love the history lots of things to explore. The beds were comfortable! I liked the original fixtures in the room. I can only image the people long ago entering the rooms and using the ship! Food was good! We ate in The Chelsea Chowder House and Bar. Slightly priced but the food was excellent and service was outstanding!!! Paying for the use of the WIFI And parking that seems odd to me because back east those items are free?! Other thing drove nuts--the walls seemed to be paper thin the 3-women in the cabin next to us were so loud!! It was a joy when they left the room or went to sleep!!!! However I understand that would not be an issue when the engines would be humming at sea!!
I loved the historical value of staying on the ship. The housekeeper had not made up my room by 3pm. I called guest services to ask if the housekeeper was going to clean my room. She came right away. However, she was rude when I opened the door stating "did you want me to clean your room or not?" I told her I wouldn't have called had I not wanted my room cleaned. She was just nasty so I did not leave her a tip.
I loved the feel of the golden age of ocean liners onboard. My girlfriend and I decided to stay the night before our cruise on Carnival the next day, which is conveniently located next to the ship. I wish more areas were open to guests such as the 1st class pool and grand ballroom.
I absolutely loved exploring! After being out Kate and freezing, it was so nice to come back to a warm and toasty room. Wished I was able to stay longer. My suitcase was super heavy and I got a small blister from carrying it; I kept Hopi g that there would be someone with a cart around to help. It's ok though. A tour guide going through the hallway woke us up in the morning.
Unique and different. Good food although pricey as well. Lot's of things to do and see. Lot's of channels in room. Bed a bit small... We went during a special event and spent extra for the winter "chill" event. avoid at all costs. totally overpriced for what you get. Most disappointing part of our trip.
Everything was nice, nice staff and very convenient to everything. The bathrooms were dirty and the shower absolutely was the worst one I've ever encountered.
one of the most amazing experience to stay at the host hotel for the long beach marathon. the hotel made sure that the guests who stayed at the hotel who participated in the events will receive a mini brown bag w/ goodies for the race. room did not come w/ a mini refrig nor any mini bar
Very convenient stay while attending the ISSE at the convention center. Very professional & attentive staff throughout my stay. No doubt under great management!
The view Rooms were to small
Got a great last minute deal on this hotel, worked out great. Perfect location near restaurants and shopping on the shore.
The "Check In" staff was wonderful, helpful, and made me feel welcome. The rooms were comfortable and I will mostly likely stay here again when I visit Long Beach, CA. The hotel is in a great location prior to cruising and/or enjoying the beach. Even though my parking fee was waived, I hope free parking becomes a standard practice.
The view from the room was great & staff was great!
$26 parking for hotel guests. Receptionist just said "yeah, this is Long Beach"
Location was perfect. Room was nice. Room i was confir.ed with kayak was not available. Required a double and she kept insisting i take a king. Showed her my email.. the she found a room on the underground floor.. that had double veds.. after much hassle. Then after we checked out.. we went bac 2 hrs later to retreive a forgotton jacket and it was missing. Cleaning staff didnt find it.. it was specifically lEft in the clost. Only way it could have dissappeares was if someone took it .
The staff was fantastic and the room was very clean Our only complaint was the poor quality mattress and the thin walls.
Great Location to the Queen Mary and restaurants. Issues with wifi.
Being local to the beach and many restraraunts. The room smelled horrible and the view I paid for was blocked by a tree.
overnight parking was too expensive!
Liked the service of the staff; Liked the comfortable bed; Liked the cleanliness of the bathroom
The location is nice. The view was good. Fast service. They need to be green. The doors made a lot of noise when they closed. No low flow toilets. The shower handle was lose.They should have chargers for Mac products.
comfort, location, and view the people
The room was spacious, clean and had a nice view. The pool was small and needed an update
Went through Kayak to purchase this room. Kayak seemed to think it was a 4 star. It is it not a four star, 2.5 to 3. Took 25 minutes to check in with only one person in line ahead of me, mold in the shower, shower was over all dirty and old, room was stuffy the whole time I was there, parking was 26.00, which is NOT advertised, found out when I got there, Internet was 14.95, which I was advised of that when I arrived although my receipt showed a king size room - Internet. My fault for assuming that if was included. won't stay here again, especially for the rate that I was charged. Hmmmm... Large bath towels
clean rooms, luxury, close to restaurants, beach and boutiques.
Location - so much is walkable Gift shop prices were crazy - bottle of sofa was $3.49
I loved the location and the architecture...The staff and food were excellent.. That I had to pay for wi-fi
Friendly staff from top to bottom. Clean rooms and prompt service. Parking structure was a little confusing with elevator locations and signage directing to main lobby from parking structure.
Friendly And efficient staff Quick and accommodating check in Small pool with no bar also the sun is blocked by the hotel itself.
very clean, spacious room, great bet and pillows. Dated in its amenities. For example, checking in late evening, only limited room service is available, and no wine or beer offered. Internet service is not free. Exercise room was limiter. Least favorite thing was the view of the office building next door.
Elevator music vapid & hilariously loud Wi Fi not free @ these prices? Told suite would have welcome basket w champagne--got nothing No newspaper weekends @ these prices?
The hotel itself was beautiful, and edgy. Everything was an additional charge and expensive. I've stayed in NY and never thought i'd see pancakes sold at $15. I also would expect a hotel to include wi-fi. Water for $5???
Breakfast was very expensive, but also very good. No fridge, no ice machine on my floor, very dirty bath tub, uncomfortable bed, no outlets by mirror, outlets by bed did not work,
Quiet Food
The staff was very helpful and nice. The price was high for what you get at the hotel. I have stayed in very nice hotels that offer a more luxurious feel. Also, there were protesters there outside the main entrance almost every morning around 0700. You could easily hear them and it was quite obnoxious.
Booked online for a room with a double bed. Reservation confirmation after booking the reservation snuck in "double or king." When we arrived at the hotel, there were no rooms with double beds and not even any rollaway beds. So I canceled the reservation. Kayak may not be the responsible provider, but when the website option selected is room with double beds and that's the primary reason for my selection of the particular hotel, they better have that kind of room available to backstop my booking. Otherwise, it's false advertising. I will think twice before using Kayak again to book a hotel room.
Comfortable room. Nice bathroom. Price was too much.
Modern feel, staff friendly Parking 16$ extra per night! (Hidden cost) pool not heated and small. Did not like outlet mall being attached to hotel.
Very comfortable. Nice stay. Staff were friendly. Iron didn't work. Vanity mirror didn't work. One request from staff wasn't filled. No microwave.
And prRoom was nice. But the staff was very helpful
J'aime boucoup le location. J'aime pas de petit roms et parking.
Everything was great No shuttle service
Super clean and nice. The bed was so comfortable I didn't want to leave it. Beautiful pool deck on the roof where you can eat and relax. The shower was amazing. Super large.
Clean. Upscale. Comfortable Cost per night
Good location. Near shopping and the beach. Construction made accessing/finding front of hotel difficult. Hotel had no signs indicating where entrance was located and no street level signage visible. Confirmation emails did not indicate hotel was under construction. Room service would not take our breakfast order, weird.
Nice waterfront location Hard to fine by drivers
I would recommend a water view. It was a great! Nothing
We (either spouse and/or kid) have stayed here at least once a year and have watched it undergo many improvements, it is a wonderful place to stay if you want to be close to the Queen Mary but would like to avoid the noise or prefer a larger room and a pool. Since it is set up like a motel, you have to walk over between buildings and to the pool. The Sunday brunch is fantastic, there is a cute sand area for the kids, decor is cute and the facility always appears clean. I have not used any of the service options (in room or pool side) due to some really bad experiences prior to the change of ownership. During the last stay there was a music festival at the Queen Mary which is to say that it was difficult to get to the hotel and once there, parking was difficult and people were pre-partying around the hotel. We had dinner reservations on the QM and the woman at the front desk offered a golf cart shuttle to the ship. On our way to the room we watched concert goers jockey for a space on the golf cart and then proceed to sit on one another's lap to fit. When we later approached the golf cart pick up area we were relieved to find it empty. A person identifying himself as a manager informed me "this cart isn't working, the battery is out" and then he clarified that it was the only one they had. Lame. In the end we were able to get to dinner in 10 minutes via sturdy Louboutins and the walk path but I would have liked a more professional handling of the situation.
Beautiful view and location, and very nice room. The staff was very nice to deal with. The price was a little high, and the rug in the room should be replaced.
The views, particularly at night. It was undergoing renovation of one of the towers. Some noise etc. associated with that although it stopped by 5 pm. The staff at the restaurant was really terrible when I had a late lunch. I have stayed there before and enjoyed good service, but it was quite bad on this trip. I waited for at least ten minutes while waiters walked by me and waited on tables seated after I was. There were only 6 or so tables total as it was late afternoon. At one point my waiter talked to the table next to me about personal matters for about ten minutes and then walked off without coming by my table or refilling my water. My experience with all other staff was excellent. The restaurant staff is entirely responsible for the Okay rating.
We especially liked the location and the service by the front desk. Fuego is a great place to dine. Unfortunately, we were placed next to a family that were loud and disrespectful until late night. The hotel staff tried to quiet them; however, it took many attempts. It was not the real fault of the hotel; but it did make our stay unpleasant.
The atmosphere, view and vibe was relaxing and incredible !! the guy at the front desk was really respectfull and helpfull and even gave us free fresh baked choclate cookies at check in and compt our parking for our visit , think his name was Noor ... Highly recomend and will definitley be coming back soon ! Thumbs upppp
Room was crisp and clean. Property and view was pretty. Special event affected the noise during our stay. Circular courtyard provided lots of noise from other guests.
Easy access to bus line ( bus line is Clean an convenient) takes you to downtown long beach. Free shuttle to cruise ship terminal. Great pool and pool bar staff. Cool/funky mayan theme throughout.
The staff was very courteous from the moment we arrived and very helpful the entire time. We would recommend this hotel to anyone visiting the Long Beach area in the future.
Pillows and beds are perfect.
The staff had no idea how to handle booking.com customers and treaded us like second class customers. The breakfast buffet is weird, it's one buffet for continental and american breakfast. As booking.com customer, you are not allowed to touch the american breakfast items.
Are room was right next to the service elevators which kept us up all night long. Only thing the staff would do was discount the valet parking charges. Won't stay there again!
It was clean. And staff was very kind . I paid in advance online for 2 Queen beds, and checking in at 5:30 we were told they only had a king! Then we go to park our cars and the spaces are like for Barbie's car !wayyyy to narrow spaces & posts that many cars have played tag with! The location is just ok...tO far from Pine Ave & 2nd Street where all the restaurants & shops are ! And they charge $15 per car per day to park in that horrible parking structure! They had NO shuttle for around town locally. The walls are thin, we had neighbors on both sides of us keeping us awake all night, laughing & partying!
Rooms were lovely and reception staff were very friendly
rely was normal hotel,nothing is spacial
The staff was rude and even lied about the rooms I booked. I had booked a room with double beds only and they gave us a king. I told them I had comfermation that it was double beds and they said it I could not find them and print it out, it was just too bad for me. Luckily, I did find it....it said double beds only....so they finally gave us the room. The staff person to.d me I booked a king...I I to.d him he was wrong and he hung up. It was a bad experience. I had to speak to the manager and the home office and print out the paper that promised me a double bed room before anything was done. Never had such a bad e perience.
Excellent facilities. Very efficient service. Only one restaurant/ bar open in the evenings. No restaurants/ bar nearby. Consequently, service was slow.
The on site restaurant was very good. The wooden floors were not desirable because we could hear footsteps above us. One sliding glass door really didn't let in enough daylight.
When I went to check into my hotel they told me that they are full and don't have my room. I have already paid for the hotel yet they told me they don't have a room with two beds anymore and they only have one king bed room left. This left me speechless because how is it possible to sleep on a king bed with three guests. When I asked the front desk person to let me speak to the manager she tells me, i have to wait 30 minutes and she said that instead i could just take the king bed and be fine with it. Also, another thing she suggested was to get a refund if i don't wanna take the king size bedroom. It was HORRIBLE experience because they over book the revenue of the hotel and people like us gets left with no room.
I had a roof over my head "Harbor view" was probably 20% of viewable area from room window. Other 80% was a corporate building about 40 feet away from the Courtyard hotel. Construction noise on the floor above mine sounded like a drumset above my room. Parking is $19. Only one room key worked. No room pictures on the website (as of 10/18/2015), so it's a roll of the dice on what you're getting since they are "renovating" rooms. Expensive, even for the basic room. Entire hotel smelled like they had experienced flooding/water damage. Very strong musty aroma.
In the middle of Long Beach downtown. You could walk to local restaurant. Free breakfast was good. Nothing I didn't like
Location was great. 15 minute walk to the Pike and waterfront location. Close to restaurants, and shopping. The room was clean and comfortable. Staff was very friendly and plenty of parking. The pool was a little small.
Convenient drive from there to the funeral I was attending the next morning. Easy check out Parking fee and got the very last parking spot at night
It was clean and comfortable . I liked that it had things you might forget like a razor , sewing kit, toothbrush , ect. Not enough seating area at breakfast.
The hotel is clean and the rooms look modern and up to date. The location in downtown Long Beach is pretty central if you want to be in Long Beach. Two double beds instead of two queens, lots of sound traveling between rooms, not a very good shower, room was on the smaller side, check-in issues were an annoyance and were due to staff's actions. Price quite high for what we got.
clean & great location THe undisclosed fee to park at hotel. $10 a night which was never disclosed on either website, NOT RIGHT!!!!
Staff friendly Parking could have been better, no big deal, we arrived late!
It was so close to shoreline and pine avenue You could hear through the rooms
The rooms were spacious and very clean. No complaints.
Great Location for the Convention Center, lots of restaurant's in the area, and the comp. breakfast was good The comp. breakfast should be extended to 10:30AM , Refrigerator in rooms would be good improvement. The coffee pot and ice bucket should not be kept in the bathroom, its unsanitary
Location if hotel And cleanliness. the pool looked deceptivly large on the website. It was basically a giant hot tub. The staff was not accommodating. I wanted an earlier check in @ 2:15, I had three small children and apparently no rooms were clean. The breakfast was shady at best and not much room. I had to take the food into my room. This is the last Best Weatern I stay in.
Cleanliness and friendly AM staff No room service
Rooms are generous measured, kitchen with some utensils available. Hotel is close to Queen Mary, free shuttle bus to the beach. The jacuzzi was in my opinion a liite bit to dirty, the furnishing partially battered. Breakfast was nothing extraordinary.
The staff were very friendly. The rooms were very nice including Kitchen. I liked that they had a free happy hour/buffet on some nights and a food truck on others. It was great.
Friendliness and genuine help of staff. They have everything to help the stay. loved everything except the smell on stairs
Friendly cosy hotel in the center of Long Beach. Very friendly staff Had a room w/o own bathroom, sharing a bathroom was not really comfortable.
The staff were very friendly and helpful! The location was great also. My only complaint would be that the room had a strange, mildew-like smell, . It wasn't much of a bother overall, but was definitely noticeable upon walking in the room.
It is very closed to downtown Long Beach, you can walk to anyway or take the passport free bus. Room was very clean, comfortable bed and the employees were great!!I really recommend you if you are looking for an European Hostel ;) The lemon muffins run out very fast!!! Delocious!!
location - 5 blocks from convention center. I booked a room with a shared bath. Nothing wrong with it, just not for me. Never had to wait. seemed clean, but it was a little dark and cramped, so who knows for sure. Price was right.
hospitality, conform , staff i think is one of the best hotel i stay for long time ago. problaly i will come back again and i recommend you to my friends. no complaints
The staff (and owners) were great, and there are bikes available for use by guests (for free!). We enjoyed the room, which had all the amenities we might need for a quick weekend (fridge, microwave, dishes, coffee, etc.). My only negative would be the continental breakfast. The coffee was pretty decent, and there was yogurt available, but the pastries were just not good. We only had breakfast there once, and decided it was worth it to go out on the other mornings.
It was boutique-ish but, across between a bed&breakfast and a singles apartment. While the rooms are small it was just enough room for 1-2people; they offered breakfast snacks and best part was the offer bikes to guest to ride for no fee. Yes, but not major but the tile of tub was clean but, is pink and could be updated.
Very cool people running the thing - accommodating and friendly. The place has a bit of a commune feel to it with a shared kitchen and orange juice in the fridge if your thirsty. Room was efficient, if very small - not even room for a desk, which I needed. And although there is a sink in every room, and a fridge and coffepot w/ prem. coffee, there is no toilet/bath in many (any?) rooms. The 2nd floor all share one (nice) bathroom.
This guest did not leave comments about this hotel.
Ambiance and location. I guess the musty smell comes from being an older building.
The staff was very helpful and kind. They have free bicycles to use. Long Beach has an excellent public transportation system. The city and the weather were fantastic...so much to enjoy.
Hotellet er meget brugt, badeværelset trænger virkelig til en istandsættelse. Gamle rør stikker ud af væggen. Rust rundt om alle afløb. Ved ankomst får man udleveret en bog over området med en masse forslag til hvad der sker og rabatkuponer. Dette hæfte var udløbet 1 måned tidligere, hotellet var ikke i besiddelse af nogle nye. Vidste ikke hvor man kunne få nogle. Turistkontoret var lukket.
Great place to stay when you don't want to spend a lot of money for the hotel. The stuff is extremly friendly and helpful, the pool is clean and refreshing. The location is also good and close to the beach. We felt very comfortable there. The room smelled a little bit strange.
Nothing The room stank
Good location to convention center, a 12 minute brisk walk. Good restaurants and close to museums. Room had a particular oder, not smoking which was over powering. Luckily the climate was good to have the window and balcony door open. Could have only been this room but not pleasant.
Clean room No parking
* Close to convention center and beach * Spacious room * Courteous and helpful front desk clerks * Long Beach is a very nice town, feels more quaint than you would think it would * Cleanliness was definitely an issue. I wouldn't call it horrible, as some others described, but it was sub-par. * Holes in comforter * Room could use some maintenance and deep cleaning * Noise from streets surrounding the hotel came into the room easily, recommend earplugs if you're a light sleeper!
I was expecting far less than we got with this hotel, given the price. First, there was a room with THREE double beds- which was amazing for our group of five students. The beds were comfortable, and the towels provided were actually soft and absorbent (which is unexpected and the reason why I usually pack my own). Five women easily had enough room to get ready each morning in the bathroom/ using a nearby full length mirrored closet. The walk to the Convention center took less than ten minutes, and included a nice stroll through a small arts/shopping district (where local buses and shuttles pick-up). There is also a Vons grocery with a Starbucks within a 3 minute walk as well. The staff was helpful when we did need them to reset keys and clear trash/restock. The town itself wakes early, and we did hear the occasional incoherent ranting from locals, but never felt unsafe. Our room was adjacent to an alley where trucks unloaded before 5am each morning (being stuck on Eastern Standard Time, this was not an issue for me). The hallway leading off of the elevator has an Alfred Hitchcock feel to it, but it's misleading. Overall, a great value- and I'd stay there with my children if I ever visited for pleasure.
Decent priced, walk I g distance to convention center, friendly staff
Close to Convention Center Hotel room was dirty. Carpet was old and hadn't been cleaned in some time - socks were black on bottom after walking around. Walls were dirty with what looked like something had dripped down them. Bathroom door jambs, walls and baseboards were filthy. Our blow dryer didn't work and we called to get replacement they had no one to help at this time so we were given key to another unit to go blow dry our hair. Ice buckets were placed underneath the air conditioning unit outside each unit to catch condensation which then overflowed over hallway and down to level below. Because there was a convention in town the cost was over $150 per night for this mess
The only good part about our stay at this hotel was that the guy working the front desk when we checked in was very nice and tried to accommodate us as much as he could but he didn't have the authority to refund our money. Dirty... Actually, nasty! Doors and doorknobs weren't working. The wifi worked very little if at all (wouldn't connect 90 percent of the time). Couldn't get refund for such a nasty I cleaned room with non working amenities that are listed in the description. It's basically a trap. A people trap.
There were no positive experiences associated with this Hotel Customer service was a nightmare. Was made to wait over an hour upon arrival despite arriving late in the afternoon well and truly after the 3pm check in. The room was many things clean unfortunately was not one. Was woken to I kid you not a severe fight inside the hotel that required the police to be involved (people involved were not guests) Staff offered no apologies for the 3 hour early morning disturbance. Non smoking room that regularly would reek of tobacco or cannabis. Incredibly disappointing.
Very close to the convention center...parking sucked because of the restaurant but it was clean and did the job. Parking.
The location was great It was over priced and was an uncomfortable environment.
Location to Downtown Long Beach and very clean bathroom and the bed itself was very clean Filthy carpet,filth chairs, floor was uneven,mirror had names scrated in it, driveway blocked due to abanodoned vehicle per staff. Staff had on dirty clothes at reception desk..OMG...unfortunately only spent a few hours and didn't enjoy this facility at all
Litterally nothing When we informed them that we were bringing our service dog they magically didnt have any rooms left even though we had prebooked. I told them that they couldnt turn us away for having a service dog and they just kept saying no pets allowed, he is not a pet he is a medically prescribed service dog. It is illegal for them to do this and I have reported them to the bbb.
I liked the statue of an elephant laying down outside by the parking spaces, but that's about it. Everything else but the elephant. We were greeted at the office with a bunch of paper signs on the window saying "no" to this and that, and everything. Unfortunately, we didn't take this as a warning NOT to stay here. When we got into the room, it was plain -- a couple of chairs, a desk with cigarette burns, a king-sized bed (with 3 standard sized pillows) that was dipping in the middle, TV hanging with questionable wiring, bathroom that constantly smelled like pee. It was terrible. I was afraid to turn the light off when going to bed, but it flickered off on its own while I was trying to sleep. I didn't even want to turn the bathroom light off at night so I didn't step on the nasty carpet, however this light would also flicker on and off periodically throughout the night and into the early morning. The air conditioner sounded like it wanted to die because it wanted to get out of this place. We walked down the street to get some drinking water, and on our way back, right outside the motel there was a bum in her wheelchair with her sidekick, puking. I guess you get what you pay for in the LBC.
As I pulled in I had the feeling of 'oh boy' this looks....nice....oh boy. However, i was pleasantly surprised. Ink n iron weekend decided to find a room last minute. This place was came through for us. A bit sleazy. But if you don't mind that. The rooms are large, and everything worked well.
Having a refrigerator and microwave oven in the room is often helpful, and the location was pretty central. Yeah, it is not the best area, but that is what it is, and I would never fault the motel owners. There is a great variety of food around! There is a small area where children could play, and it features an Indian Royal Enfield DIESEL motorcycle trike, which I recognized immediately, being a motorcycle enthusiast myself. Thank you for a trouble-free stay! The U.S.S. Iowa and antiques swap-meet were great! David from Ventura
The price was decent for a last minute reservation. Well, there was no blanket, the towels were cheap and the pillows were very thin. The people close to our room smoked marijuana and location was a bit sketchy.
That my car did not get broken into. Initially, I was given a key to a room that already had someone in it. The employee/owner was wearing pajamas. After getting a key to a vacant room, upon walking in it wreaked of mildew. The sheets were wrinkled. After spending less then 5 minutes in the room I had already decided I will not stay here and essentially used the location as an $80 parking spot while I was at an event at the Queen Mary. Yelp reviews had stated this motel will not refund for cancellation so I didn't even bother. When returning to the room after the event attended, the bedding (Sheets/Blankets) were completely removed from the bed and laying on the floor. Leading me to believe someone had come in the room through the window and used the room for whatever... Needless to say, my girlfriend and I did not stay the night as it was unsanitary and personally, unsafe. This place should be removed from any hotel booking site and left for the vermin that inhabit it locally.
The room was so dirty that there were cockroaches crawling on the pillow and some unknown woman's hair on the bed sheet....It might not be the worst hotel for that price I paid, but it is definitely the dirtiest hotel I have ever seen in this country!


text:
Aug. 9, 2013
RENO, Nev. – The University of Nevada football team will open its doors to the public with an open practice Saturday afternoon at Mackay Stadium.
Nevada opened training camp on Monday with the first of its 29 practices before the Aug. 31 opener at UCLA. Friday was the first day of full pads for the Pack.
"We'll be doing a lot of our base stuff and we're looking to see some physicality," first-year coach Brian Polian said.
Parking will be free at the West Stadium Parking Complex (west of Mackay Stadium) and the main gates of the stadium at the southeast entrance will be open. The practice is open to the public and there is no cost to attend.
The team will begin practice at 4:30 p.m. and will practice for approximately two hours. It will be the second of two practices on Saturday – the morning practice is closed to the public.
"I'm pleased with what we have seen so far," Polian said. "They know what we are looking for. They know how to practice the right way. They've got a good idea of things.
2013 Nevada football season tickets are now on sale and start at just $90 for adults and $35 for youth (8th grade and younger). Secure your season tickets today by calling (775) 348-PACK or by visiting NevadaWolfPack.com. Single-game tickets for Nevada's games against UC Davis, Hawai`i, Air Force and San Jose State are also on sale and start at just $21, with discounts available for seniors and children. Single-game tickets for the Pack's games against UNLV and BYU will go on sale Aug. 15.

subset: commoncrawl


text: EOG Resources Company Profile (NYSE:EOG) Company Profile Analyst Ratings Earnings History Earnings Estimates Dividend History Insider Trade Headlines Social Media Chart About EOG Resources (NYSE:EOG) EOG Resources, Inc. explores for, develops, produces and markets crude oil and natural gas in major producing basins in the United States, The Republic of Trinidad and Tobago, the United Kingdom, The People's Republic of China, Canada and, from time to time, select other international areas. Its operations are all crude oil and natural gas exploration and production related. As of December 31, 2016, its total estimated net proved reserves were over 2,147 million barrels of oil equivalent (MMBoe), of which over 1178 million barrels (MMBbl) were crude oil and condensate reserves, over 416 MMBbl were natural gas liquids reserves and over 3318 billion cubic feet, or 553 MMBoe, were natural gas reserves. Its operations are focused in the productive basins in the United States with a focus on crude oil and, to a lesser extent, liquids-rich natural gas plays. It has operations offshore Trinidad, in the United Kingdom East Irish Sea, in the China Sichuan Basin and in Canada. Industry, Sector and Symbol: Sector: Oils/Energy Industry: Oil & Gas Exploration and Production - NEC Sub-Industry: Oil & Gas Exploration & Production Symbol: NYSE:EOG CUSIP: 26875P10 Web: www.eogresources.com Capitalization:Market Cap: $54.69619 billionOutstanding Shares: 577,268,000Average Prices:50 Day Moving Avg: $90.18200 Day Moving Avg: $95.1452 Week Range: $78.26 - $109.37 P/E:Trailing P/E Ratio: N/AForeward P/E Ratio: 63.14P/E Growth: 0.56Sales & Book Value:Annual Revenue: $8.77 billionPrice / Sales: 6.32Book Value: $24.13 per sharePrice / Book: 3.98Dividend:Annual Dividend: $0.67Dividend Yield: 0.7% Profitability:EBIDTA: $3.46 billionNet Margins: -6.70%Return on Equity: -2.69%Return on Assets: -1.26%Debt:Debt-to-Equity Ratio: 0.50%Current Ratio: 1.67%Quick Ratio: 1.52%Misc:Average Volume: 3.36 million shs.Beta: 0.92Short Ratio: 2.35 Frequently Asked Questions for EOG Resources (NYSE:EOG) What is EOG Resources' stock symbol? EOG Resources trades on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) under the ticker symbol "EOG." How often does EOG Resources pay dividends? What is the dividend yield for EOG Resources? EOG Resources declared a quarterly dividend on Thursday, April 27th. Investors of record on Monday, July 17th will be paid a dividend of $0.1675 per share on Monday, July 31st. This represents a $0.67 annualized dividend and a yield of 0.70%. The ex-dividend date is Thursday, July 13th. View EOG Resources' Dividend History. When did EOG Resources' stock split? How did EOG Resources' stock split work? Shares of EOG Resources split before market open on Tuesday, April 1st 2014. The 2-1 split was announced on Monday, February 24th 2014. The newly created shares were distributed to shareholders after the market closes on Monday, March 31st 2014. An investor that had 100 shares of EOG Resources stock prior to the split would have 200 shares after the split. How were EOG Resources' earnings last quarter? EOG Resources, Inc. (NYSE:EOG) announced its earnings results on Monday, May, 8th. The company reported $0.15 earnings per share for the quarter, hitting analysts' consensus estimates of $0.15. The company had revenue of $2.61 billion for the quarter, compared to analyst estimates of $2.19 billion. EOG Resources had a negative net margin of 6.70% and a negative return on equity of 2.69%. The business's quarterly revenue was up 92.8% compared to the same quarter last year. During the same quarter in the previous year, the business earned ($0.83) earnings per share. View EOG Resources' Earnings History. When will EOG Resources make its next earnings announcement? EOG Resources is scheduled to release their next quarterly earnings announcement on Tuesday, August, 1st 2017. View Earnings Estimates for EOG Resources. Where is EOG Resources' stock going? Where will EOG Resources' stock price be in 2017? 28 analysts have issued 12-month price targets for EOG Resources' shares. Their predictions range from $95.00 to $128.00. On average, they expect EOG Resources' stock price to reach $110.26 in the next year. View Analyst Ratings for EOG Resources. Who are some of EOG Resources' key competitors? Some companies that are related to EOG Resources include ConocoPhillips (COP), CNOOC Limited (CEO), Occidental Petroleum Corporation (OXY), Williams Partners LP (WPZ), Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNQ), Pioneer Natural Resources Company (PXD), Anadarko Petroleum Corporation (APC), Concho Resources (CXO), Apache Corporation (APA), Devon Energy Corporation (DVN), Continental Resources (CLR), Noble Energy (NBL), Cabot Oil & Gas Corporation (COG), EQT Corporation (EQT), Marathon Oil Corporation (MRO), Encana Corporation (ECA), Diamondback Energy (FANG) and Cimarex Energy Co (XEC). Who are EOG Resources' key executives? EOG Resources' management team includes the folowing people: William R. Thomas, Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive OfficerGary L. Thomas, President, Chief Operating OfficerTimothy K. Driggers, Chief Financial Officer, Executive Vice PresidentMichael P. Donaldson, Executive Vice President, General Counsel, Corporate SecretaryLloyd W. Helms Jr., Executive Vice President - Exploration and ProductionDavid W. Trice, Executive Vice President - Exploration and ProductionCharles R. Crisp, Presiding Independent DirectorJanet F. Clark, Independent DirectorRobert P. Daniels, Independent DirectorJames C. Day, Independent Director Who owns EOG Resources stock? EOG Resources' stock is owned by a number of of retail and institutional investors. Top institutional investors include Russell Investments Group Ltd. (0.23%), KAMES CAPITAL plc (0.19%), Harbour Capital Advisors LLC (0.16%), Public Employees Retirement Association of Colorado (0.15%), Jarislowsky Fraser Ltd (0.15%) and Chevy Chase Trust Holdings Inc. (0.14%). Company insiders that own EOG Resources stock include Ann D Janssen, Charles R Crisp, David W Trice, Donald F Textor, Frank G Wisner, Gary L Thomas, Lloyd W Helms Jr, Michael P Donaldson, Timothy K Driggers and William R Thomas. View Institutional Ownership Trends for EOG Resources. Who sold EOG Resources stock? Who is selling EOG Resources stock? EOG Resources' stock was sold by a variety of institutional investors in the last quarter, including Bank of Montreal Can, Great West Life Assurance Co. Can, Stock Yards Bank & Trust Co., Chevy Chase Trust Holdings Inc., Oakbrook Investments LLC, Inverness Counsel LLC NY, Exxonmobil Investment Management Inc. TX and FineMark National Bank & Trust. Company insiders that have sold EOG Resources stock in the last year include Ann D Janssen, Charles R Crisp, David W Trice, Donald F Textor, Frank G Wisner, Gary L Thomas, Lloyd W Helms Jr, Michael P Donaldson, Timothy K Driggers and William R Thomas. View Insider Buying and Selling for EOG Resources. Who bought EOG Resources stock? Who is buying EOG Resources stock? EOG Resources' stock was acquired by a variety of institutional investors in the last quarter, including Harbour Capital Advisors LLC, KAMES CAPITAL plc, Vigilant Capital Management LLC, Mn Services Vermogensbeheer B.V., Marathon Asset Management LLP, Russell Investments Group Ltd., Viking Fund Management LLC and National Pension Service. View Insider Buying and Selling for EOG Resources. How do I buy EOG Resources stock? Shares of EOG Resources can be purchased through any online brokerage account. Popular online brokerages include Vanguard Brokerage Services, TD Ameritrade, E*TRADE, Scottrade, Fidelity and Charles Schwab. What is EOG Resources' stock price today? One share of EOG Resources stock can currently be purchased for approximately $95.98. MarketBeat Community Rating for EOG Resources (NYSE EOG)Community Ranking: 3.1 out of 5 ( )Outperform Votes: 882 (Vote Outperform)Underperform Votes: 526 (Vote Underperform)Total Votes: 1,408MarketBeat's community ratings are surveys of what our community members think about EOG Resources and other stocks. Vote "Outperform" if you believe the stock will outperform the S&P 500 over the long term. Vote "Underperform" if you believe the stock will underperform the S&P 500 over the long term. You may vote once every thirty days. Analyst Ratings Consensus Ratings for EOG Resources (NYSE:EOG) (How are Consensus Ratings Calculated?) MarketBeat calculates consensus ratings using the most recent rating from each brokerage that has rated a stock within the last twelve months. Since brokers often use different ratings systems, each rating is normalized to a standardized rating score of 1 (sell), 2 (hold), 3 (buy) or 4 (strong buy). Consensus ratings scores are calculated using the mean average of the number of normalized sell, hold, buy and strong buy ratings. Each stock's consensus rating is derived from its calculated consensus ratings score (0-1.5 = Sell, 1.5-2.5 = Hold, 2.5-3.5 = Buy, >3.5 = Strong Buy). MarketBeat's consensus price targets are a mean average of the most recent available price targets set by each analyst that has set a price target for the stock in the last twelve months.MarketBeat will no longer include ratings and price target data in its consensus calculation if a broker drops coverage and MarketBeat has received a report that coverage was dropped. Ratings from certain research firms that issue ratings using purely quantitative methods (such as Zacks, Vetr and ValuEngine) are not included in consensus calculations. MarketBeat's consensus ratings and consensus price targets may differ from those calculated by other firms due to differences in methodology and available data.Ratings Breakdown: 7 Hold Ratings, 21 Buy RatingsConsensus Rating:Buy (Score: 2.75)Consensus Price Target: $110.26 (14.88% upside) Analysts' Ratings History for EOG Resources (NYSE:EOG) Show: Only the Most Recent Rating From Each Brokerage All Ratings For This Stock DateFirmActionRatingPrice TargetImpact on Share PriceDetails7/21/2017Citigroup Inc.DowngradeBuy -> Neutral$112.00 -> $98.00Low7/16/2017Royal Bank Of CanadaSet Price TargetHold$115.00Low7/14/2017Stifel NicolausReiterated RatingBuy$111.00Low7/7/2017Sanford C. BernsteinReiterated RatingOutperformLow7/1/2017ScotiabankSet Price TargetHold$100.00Medium6/27/2017Atlantic SecuritiesUpgradeNeutral -> Overweight$98.00 -> $100.00Low6/26/2017FBR & CoLower Price TargetOutperform$122.00 -> $108.00Low6/2/2017Credit Suisse GroupSet Price TargetHold$108.00Low5/31/2017Piper Jaffray CompaniesReiterated RatingOverweight -> Overweight$114.00Medium5/17/2017Jefferies Group LLCReiterated RatingHold$95.00Low5/11/2017Bank of America CorporationReiterated RatingNeutral$125.00 -> $115.00Low5/11/2017William BlairReiterated RatingOutperform$125.00 -> $115.00Low5/10/2017Barclays PLCBoost Price TargetOverweight$111.00 -> $113.00Low5/10/2017Raymond James Financial, Inc.UpgradeMarket Perform -> Outperform$110.00High5/10/2017Wells Fargo & CompanyUpgradeMarket Perform -> Outperform$110.00High5/9/2017BMO Capital MarketsReiterated RatingBuyLow4/3/2017Iberia CapitalBoost Price TargetOutperform$109.00 -> $119.00Low3/6/2017Tudor PickeringUpgradeHold -> BuyN/A3/1/2017KLR GroupReiterated RatingBuy$128.00N/A12/27/2016ArgusBoost Price TargetBuy$105.00 -> $119.00N/A11/15/2016CLSAUpgradeUnderperform -> OutperformN/A11/22/2016Robert W. BairdBoost Price TargetOutperform$100.00 -> $108.00N/A11/16/2016Capital One Financial CorporationUpgradeEqual Weight -> OverweightN/A11/11/2016GuggenheimUpgradeNeutral -> Buy$113.00N/A10/7/2016WunderlichBoost Price TargetBuy$104.00 -> $110.00N/A10/3/2016Societe GeneraleDowngradeBuy -> HoldN/A9/9/2016SimmonsReiterated RatingOverweight$103.00 -> $109.00N/A9/7/2016Deutsche Bank AGReiterated RatingBuy$105.00 -> $108.00N/A6/8/2016Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (The)Reiterated RatingConviction-BuyN/A5/19/2016Johnson RiceDowngradeAccumulate -> HoldN/A5/14/2016StephensReiterated RatingHoldN/A5/11/2016Susquehanna Bancshares IncDowngradePositive -> NeutralN/A5/9/2016Canaccord GenuityUpgradeHold -> BuyN/A3/30/2016Cowen and CompanyInitiated CoverageMarket Perform$74.00N/A2/3/2016GMP SecuritiesInitiated CoverageBuy$83.00N/A2/2/2016J P Morgan Chase & CoLower Price TargetNeutral$79.00 -> $69.00N/A1/21/2016NomuraLower Price TargetBuy$93.00 -> $80.00N/A8/10/2015S&P Equity ResearchReiterated RatingBuy$96.00N/A8/10/2015Oppenheimer Holdings, Inc.DowngradeOutperform -> Market Perform$32.00 -> $105.00N/A(Data available from 7/28/2015 forward) Earnings Earnings History for EOG Resources (NYSE:EOG)Earnings History by Quarter for EOG Resources (NYSE EOG)DateQuarterConsensus EstimateActual EPSRevenue EstimateActual RevenueRelease LinkConference CallDetails8/1/2017$0.13N/A5/8/2017Q1 2017$0.15$0.15$2.19 billion$2.61 billionViewListen2/27/2017Q416($0.18)($0.01)$2.19 billion$2.40 billionViewN/A11/3/2016Q316($0.31)($0.40)$1.93 billion$2.12 billionViewN/A8/4/2016Q216($0.48)($0.38)$1.57 billion$1.78 billionViewN/A5/5/2016Q116($0.84)($0.83)$1.70 billion$1.35 billionViewN/A2/25/2016Q415($0.31)($0.27)$2.31 billion$1.80 billionViewListen11/5/2015Q315($0.30)$0.02$2.56 billion$2.17 billionViewN/A8/6/2015Q215$0.10$0.28$2.57 billion$2.47 billionViewN/A5/4/2015Q115$0.01$0.03$2.71 billion$2.32 billionViewN/A2/18/2015Q414$0.99$0.79$4.36 billion$4.65 billionViewN/A11/4/2014Q314$1.28$1.31$4.33 billion$5.12 billionViewN/A8/5/2014Q214$1.36$1.45$4.19 billion$4.19 billionViewN/A5/5/2014Q114$1.20$1.40$3.78 billion$4.08 billionViewListen2/24/2014Q413$1.94$2.00$3.63 billionViewListen11/7/2013Q313$1.92$2.32$3.71 billion$3.54 billionViewN/A8/6/2013Q2 2013$1.64$2.10$3.52 billion$3.84 billionViewN/A5/6/2013Q1 2013$1.18$1.17$3.04 billion$3.36 billionViewN/A2/14/2013Q4 2012$1.37$1.61$3.04 billion$3.01 billionViewListen11/5/2012Q312$1.12$1.31$2.76 billion$2.95 billionViewN/A8/2/2012$0.93$1.11ViewN/A5/8/2012$1.14$1.17ViewN/A2/16/2012$0.87$1.15ViewN/A11/1/2011$0.76$0.83ViewN/A8/4/2011$0.79$1.11ViewN/A5/5/2011$0.54$0.52ViewN/A2/17/2011$0.26$0.36ViewN/A(Data available from 1/1/2011 forward) Estimates Earnings Estimates for EOG Resources (NYSE:EOG)2017 EPS Consensus Estimate: $0.712018 EPS Consensus Estimate: $1.37QuarterNumber of EstimatesLow EstimateHigh EstimateAverage EstimateQ1 20173$0.00$0.19$0.10Q2 20174$0.03$0.33$0.13Q3 20174$0.06$0.37$0.22Q4 20174$0.10$0.43$0.27Q1 20182$0.17$0.32$0.25Q2 20182$0.17$0.44$0.31Q3 20182$0.21$0.54$0.38Q4 20182$0.24$0.64$0.44(Data provided by Zacks Investment Research) Dividends Current Dividend Information for EOG Resources (NYSE:EOG)Next Dividend:7/31/2017Annual Dividend:$0.67Dividend Yield:0.70%Dividend Growth:22.30% (3 Year Average)Payout Ratio:-62.04% (Trailing 12 Months of Earnings) 95.71% (Based on This Year's Estimates)44.08% (Based on Next Year's Estimates)Dividend History by Quarter for EOG Resources (NYSE EOG)AnnouncedPeriodAmountYieldEx-Dividend DateRecord DatePayable Date4/27/2017quarterly$0.170.72%7/13/20177/17/20177/31/20172/27/2017quarterly$0.170.69%4/11/20174/13/20174/28/201712/14/2016quarterly$0.170.64%1/12/20171/17/20171/31/20179/28/2016quarterly$0.170.7%10/13/201610/17/201610/31/20164/27/2016quarterly$0.170.82%7/13/20167/15/20167/29/20162/25/2016quarterly$0.170.99%4/13/20164/15/20164/29/201612/2/2015quarterly$0.170.83%1/13/20161/15/20161/29/20169/22/2015quarterly$0.170.92%10/14/201510/16/201510/30/20155/1/2015quarterly$0.170.67%7/15/20157/17/20157/31/20152/18/2015quarterly$0.170.71%4/14/20154/16/20154/30/201512/16/2014quarterly$0.170.74%1/14/20151/16/20151/30/20158/5/2014quarterly$0.170.63%10/15/201410/17/201410/31/20145/2/2014quarterly$0.130.5%7/15/20147/17/20147/31/20142/24/2014quarterly$0.130.27%4/14/20144/16/20144/30/201412/11/2013quarterly$0.190.47%1/15/20141/17/20141/31/20149/5/2013quarterly$0.190.46%10/15/201310/17/201310/31/20135/3/2013quarterly$0.190.6%7/15/20137/17/20137/31/20132/13/2013quarterly$0.190.56%4/12/20134/16/20134/30/201312/11/2012quarterly$0.170.56%1/15/20131/17/20131/31/2013(Data available from 1/1/2013 forward) Insider Trades Insider Trading and Institutional Ownership History for EOG Resources (NYSE:EOG)Insider Ownership Percentage: 0.53%Institutional Ownership Percentage: 84.91%Insider Trades by Quarter for EOG Resources (NYSE:EOG)Transaction DateInsider NameTitleBuy/SellNumber of SharesAverage Share PriceTotal TransactionDetails3/27/2017Frank G WisnerDirectorSell28,000$93.35$2,613,800.00 3/7/2017Charles R CrispDirectorSell2,593$100.02$259,351.86 1/27/2017Frank G WisnerDirectorSell1,000$102.94$102,940.00 1/5/2017Frank G WisnerDirectorSell1,250$104.55$130,687.50 12/16/2016Donald F TextorDirectorSell6,402$103.40$661,966.80 12/1/2016Michael P DonaldsonEVPSell2,931$106.54$312,268.74 11/30/2016Ann D JanssenVPSell10,970$101.55$1,114,003.50 11/30/2016Gary L ThomasInsiderSell60,000$101.73$6,103,800.00 11/30/2016Lloyd W Helms JrEVPSell5,000$102.94$514,700.00 11/30/2016Timothy K DriggersCFOSell10,000$102.08$1,020,800.00 11/14/2016Charles R CrispDirectorSell14,000$92.69$1,297,660.00 11/7/2016Michael P DonaldsonEVPSell4,464$93.00$415,152.00 9/30/2016Ann D JanssenVPSell1,064$96.73$102,920.72 9/30/2016David W TriceEVPSell4,600$97.08$446,568.00 9/22/2016Ann D JanssenVPSell1,310$94.13$123,310.30 9/22/2016William R ThomasCEOSell16,581$92.86$1,539,711.66 9/21/2016Timothy K DriggersCFOSell8,763$93.44$818,814.72 9/20/2016Michael P DonaldsonEVPSell8,473$91.00$771,043.00 9/12/2016Frank G WisnerDirectorSell2,026$92.65$187,708.90 7/8/2016Lloyd W Helms JrEVPSell4,875$81.82$398,872.50 6/9/2016Ann D JanssenVPSell831$84.95$70,593.45 6/8/2016Lloyd W Helms JrEVPSell4,875$85.91$418,811.25 6/7/2016Frank G WisnerDirectorSell3,108$84.15$261,538.20 6/6/2016Ann D JanssenVPSell2,819$80.85$227,916.15 4/8/2016Frank G WisnerDirectorSell4,914$73.27$360,048.78 3/29/2016Frank G WisnerDirectorSell1,868$75.44$140,921.92 3/7/2016Charles R CrispDirectorSell14,000$75.08$1,051,120.00 3/7/2016David W TriceEVPSell2,309$75.37$174,029.33 3/4/2016Frank G WisnerDirectorSell14,601$70.88$1,034,918.88 9/1/2015Charles R. CrispDirectorSell2,638$76.24$201,121.12 6/26/2015Gary L ThomasCOOSell8,655$88.28$764,063.40 6/9/2015Lloyd W Helms JrEVPSell5,000$89.55$447,750.00 5/26/2015Charles R CrispDirectorSell2,978$89.09$265,310.02 5/21/2015David W TriceEVPSell1,335$91.12$121,645.20 5/21/2015Michael P DonaldsonVPSell1,027$91.11$93,569.97 5/19/2015Lloyd W Helms JrEVPSell8,000$91.00$728,000.00 5/18/2015David W TriceEVPSell2,506$91.51$229,324.06 4/1/2015Frank G WisnerDirectorSell7,392$92.00$680,064.00 12/19/2014Donald F TextorDirectorBuy3,000$92.86$278,580.00 11/21/2014Timothy K DriggersCFOSell11,979$102.46$1,227,368.34 9/19/2014David W TriceEVPSell2,099$104.70$219,765.30 7/2/2014Charles R CrispDirectorSell2,498$116.52$291,066.96 6/24/2014Gary L ThomasCOOSell9,880$115.68$1,142,918.40 6/20/2014Ann D JanssenVPSell1,812$118.04$213,888.48 5/23/2014Michael P DonaldsonVPSell2,856$105.06$300,051.36 5/14/2014Lloyd Helms, Jr.EVPSell10,124$104.05$1,053,402.20 4/3/2014Michael DonaldsonVPSell3,000$101.00$303,000.00 4/3/2014Timothy DriggersCFOSell4,131$100.49$415,124.19 12/20/2013Donald TextorDirectorBuy6,000$168.61$1,011,660.00 11/20/2013Donald TextorDirectorBuy3,000$167.77$503,310.00 9/25/2013Lloyd Helms, Jr.EVPSell1,258$171.26$215,445.08 9/12/2013Timothy DriggersCFOSell2,042$168.47$344,015.74 9/6/2013Gary L ThomasCOOSell12,000$163.85$1,966,200.00 8/23/2013William ThomasCEOSell9,994$153.91$1,538,176.54 8/22/2013Frank WisnerDirectorSell14,000$155.00$2,170,000.00 8/19/2013Mark PapaChairmanSell17,467$153.05$2,673,324.35 8/14/2013Mark PapaChairmanSell17,783$157.48$2,800,466.84 8/12/2013Gary ThomasCOOSell12,000$159.50$1,914,000.00 8/12/2013Mark PapaChairmanSell50,000$159.57$7,978,500.00 8/12/2013Michael DonaldsonVPSell1,065$160.05$170,453.25 7/8/2013H Leighton StewardDirectorSell14,000$141.98$1,987,720.00 6/28/2013Ann D JanssenVPSell1,963$132.73$260,548.99 5/17/2013Mark G PapaCEOSell50,000$134.61$6,730,500.00 4/10/2013George A AlcornDirectorSell4,191$128.74$539,549.34 2/25/2013Mark G PapaCEOSell50,000$126.02$6,301,000.00 (Data available from 1/1/2013 forward) Headlines Headline Trends for EOG Resources (NYSE:EOG) Latest Headlines for EOG Resources (NYSE:EOG) Source: All Sources Trusted Sources MarketBeat.com Bloomberg MarketWatch Motley Fool NASDAQ Reuters Seeking Alpha The Street The Wall Street Journal Yahoo Finance DateHeadlineNatural Gas Price Rise Slightly on Small Inventory Build247wallst.com - July 27 at 11:55 PMBrokers Issue Forecasts for EOG Resources, Inc.'s Q3 2017 Earnings (NYSE:EOG)www.americanbankingnews.com - July 27 at 9:14 AMPuzo Michael J Buys JM Smucker Co, Analog Devices Inc, EOG Resources Inc, Sells NXP ... - Nasdaqwww.nasdaq.com - July 26 at 6:55 PMEOG Resources, Inc. (NYSE:EOG) to Post Q2 2017 Earnings of $0.07 Per Share, US Capital Advisors Forecastswww.americanbankingnews.com - July 26 at 9:04 AMEOG Resources, Inc. (NYSE:EOG) Scheduled to Post Quarterly Earnings on Tuesdaywww.americanbankingnews.com - July 25 at 8:04 AMForm 4 EOG RESOURCES INC For: Jul 21www.streetinsider.com - July 25 at 12:24 AMDrilling Permit Roundup: Lewis Energy ramps up while others ratchet downwww.bizjournals.com - July 24 at 7:21 PMETFs with exposure to EOG Resources, Inc. : July 24, 2017finance.yahoo.com - July 24 at 7:21 PMEOG Resources, Inc. (EOG) Receives Average Rating of "Buy" from Brokerageswww.americanbankingnews.com - July 22 at 12:29 AMTop Stock Reports for Alphabet, GlaxoSmithKline & T-Mobilefinance.yahoo.com - July 21 at 8:16 PMZacks Investment Research Lowers EOG Resources, Inc. (EOG) to Sellwww.americanbankingnews.com - July 21 at 10:06 AMBrokers Issue Forecasts for EOG Resources, Inc.'s Q2 2017 Earnings (EOG)www.americanbankingnews.com - July 21 at 8:44 AMEOG Resources, Inc. (NYSE:EOG) Stock Rating Lowered by Citigroup Inc.www.americanbankingnews.com - July 21 at 7:52 AMNatural Gas Price Ticks Down Following Storage Reportfinance.yahoo.com - July 20 at 3:43 PMQ3 2017 Earnings Estimate for EOG Resources, Inc. Issued By Jefferies Group (EOG)www.americanbankingnews.com - July 20 at 8:59 AMBRIEF-EOG expects Q2 non-cash net gain of $9.4 mln on mark-to-market of its financial commodity derivative contractswww.reuters.com - July 19 at 9:46 PMPermian Oil Reserves Are Grossly Exaggeratedfinance.yahoo.com - July 19 at 9:46 PMPre-Market Technical Pulse on Independent Oil & Gas Stocks -- EOG Resources, Enterprise Products Partners, EP Energy, and National Fuel Gaswww.bizjournals.com - July 19 at 4:44 PMEOG Resources, Inc. (NYSE:EOG) Expected to Announce Quarterly Sales of $2.48 Billionwww.americanbankingnews.com - July 19 at 1:06 PMRoyal Bank Of Canada Reiterates "$115.00" Price Target for EOG Resources, Inc. (NYSE:EOG)www.americanbankingnews.com - July 18 at 12:56 AMNever Will I Ever Buy a Commodity Stock That's Not a Low Cost Producerfinance.yahoo.com - July 17 at 7:17 PM Brokerages Anticipate EOG Resources, Inc. (EOG) to Announce $0.16 Earnings Per Sharewww.americanbankingnews.com - July 17 at 4:25 PM3 Top Commodities Stocks for Julyfinance.yahoo.com - July 16 at 10:37 PMEOG Resources, Inc. (NYSE:EOG) Earns Buy Rating from Stifel Nicolauswww.americanbankingnews.com - July 15 at 11:50 AMETFs with exposure to EOG Resources, Inc. : July 14, 2017finance.yahoo.com - July 14 at 4:11 PMFirst Tech, Now Financing: US Shale Firms Get Creative to Pump More Oil - New York Timeswww.nytimes.com - July 13 at 7:39 PMEnergy Earnings: What To Expect For E&P Stocks This Quarterfinance.yahoo.com - July 13 at 5:01 AMEOG Resources, Inc. (EOG) Ex-Dividend Date Scheduled for July 13, 2017 - Nasdaqwww.nasdaq.com - July 12 at 6:59 PMForm 4 EOG RESOURCES INC For: Jul 07 Filed by: THOMAS GARY L - StreetInsider.comwww.streetinsider.com - July 11 at 7:32 PMEOG Ex-Dividend Reminder - 7/13/17 - Nasdaqwww.nasdaq.com - July 11 at 7:32 PMForm 4 EOG RESOURCES INC For: Jul 07 Filed by: THOMAS GARY Lwww.streetinsider.com - July 10 at 11:13 PMThis Is Why Natural Gas Prices Drive Southwestern Energy Stockfinance.yahoo.com - July 10 at 6:12 PMEOG Resources, Inc. (NYSE:EOG) Receives "Outperform" Rating from Sanford C. Bernsteinwww.americanbankingnews.com - July 7 at 8:14 AMEOG Resources Target of Unusually High Options Trading (NYSE:EOG)www.americanbankingnews.com - July 7 at 7:08 AMEOG Resources, Inc. – Value Analysis (NYSE:EOG) : July 5, 2017finance.yahoo.com - July 5 at 6:59 PMEOG Resources, Inc. breached its 50 day moving average in a Bullish Manner : EOG-US : July 4, 2017finance.yahoo.com - July 5 at 1:58 AMEOG Resources, Inc. (EOG) PT Set at $100.00 by Scotiabankwww.americanbankingnews.com - July 2 at 11:50 PMTidal Petroleum makes first Austin Chalk play with Kotara leasefinance.yahoo.com - June 30 at 11:43 PMEOG Resources, Inc. (EOG) Raised to Sell at BidaskClubwww.americanbankingnews.com - June 30 at 11:32 PMMartin Whitman Buys Avnet Inc, EOG Resources Inc, Ralph Lauren Corp, Sells Apache Corp, CBS ... - Nasdaqwww.nasdaq.com - June 30 at 6:38 PMEOG Resources (EOG) Presents At J.P. Morgan Energy Equity Investor Conference - Slideshowseekingalpha.com - June 30 at 12:52 AMCommunity Health, US Steel, EOG, Energy ETF: Fast Money Picks For June 28 - Benzingawww.benzinga.com - June 28 at 5:59 PMEOG Resources named top energy play at Atlantic Equities - Seeking Alphaseekingalpha.com - June 28 at 5:59 PMYour first trade for Wednesday, June 28finance.yahoo.com - June 28 at 5:59 PMEOG Resources The Favorite Energy Play At Atlantic Equitiesfinance.yahoo.com - June 27 at 5:16 PMEOG Resources, Inc. (EOG) Rating Increased to Overweight at Atlantic Securitieswww.americanbankingnews.com - June 27 at 12:58 PMEOG Resources, Inc. (EOG) Receives Consensus Rating of "Buy" from Analystswww.americanbankingnews.com - June 27 at 12:56 AMFBR & Co Trims EOG Resources, Inc. (EOG) Target Price to $108.00www.americanbankingnews.com - June 26 at 7:56 AMEOG Resources: Profitability Will Take A Hit In The Short-Term ... - Seeking Alphaseekingalpha.com - June 24 at 5:18 PMShale Legend Who Helped Build the Fourth-Biggest U.S.Driller Bets on a New $3.6 Billion Venturewww.bloomberg.com - June 23 at 5:38 PM Social Chart EOG Resources (EOG) Chart for Friday, July, 28, 2017 This page was last updated on 7/28/2017 by MarketBeat.com Staff


text:
NADA 140-338 NAXCEL® Sterile Powder -supplemental approval (August 4, 1992)
The Upjohn Company
7000 Portage Road
Kalamazoo, Michigan 49001
Generic Name:
ceftiofur sodium sterile powder
Trade Name:
NAXCEL® Sterile Powder
Marketing Status:
Effect of Supplement:
This supplement provides for an additional species, swine, to be added to the previously approved product, NAXCEL®
NAXCEL® Sterile Powder is indicated for the treatment/control of swine bacterial respiratory disease (bacterial pneumonia) associated with Actinobacillus ( Haemophilus ) pleuropneumoniae , Pasteurella multocida , Salmonella choleraesuis and/or Streptococcus suis , Type 2.
A. Dosage Form
NAXCEL® Sterile Powder is available in two package sizes: 1 gram and 4 gram vials.
Reconstituted product should be used within 12 hours if stored at controlled room temperature 15° to 30° C (59° to 86° F) or within 7 days if stored in a refrigerator 2° to 8° C (36° to 46° F).
1 gram vial
Reconstitute with 20 mL Sterile water for injection or with bacteriostatic water for injection. Each mL of the resulting solution contains ceftiofur sodium equivalent to 50 mg ceftiofur.
4 gram vial
Reconstitute with 80 mL sterile water for injection or with bacteriostatic water for injection. Each mL of the resulting solution contains ceftiofur sodium equivalent to 50 mg ceftiofur.
B. Route of Administration:
Intramuscular injection
C. Recommended Dosage
NAXCEL® Sterile Solution should be administered to swine at a dosage of 1.36 to 2.27 mg ceftiofur per pound of body weight (3.0 mg to 5 mg ceftiofur per kilogram of body weight). This translates to 1 mL reconstituted sterile solution per 37 to 22 pounds of body weight (17 to 10 kilograms of body weight).
A. Pivotal Studies
(1) Dose-Finding Study
(a) Type of Study - Experimental Challenge:
This study is described as a dose-finding study to provide efficacy data at various doses of ceftiofur compared with that of the nontreated groups. Growing pigs were challenged intranasally with A. pleuropneumoniae organisms and were treated with either no drug or ceftiofur at 1, 3, or 5 mg per kilogram of body weight (.45, 1.36, or 2.27 mg/pound) as their rectal temperature reached 1.04°F after challenge. Drug and placebo treatments were administered at 24 hr intervals for 3 consecutive days.
(b) Investigator:
E. K. Uhlenhopp, D.V.M., M.S.
Section Head, Veterinary Field Services
Iowa State University
Ames, Iowa 50011
(c) General Design: The purpose of this study was to provide information about the effectiveness of ceftiofur at various doses in an attempt to describe an optimal dose for bacterial swine pneumonia.
(d) Animals:
- 30 to 60 pound feeder pigs
- free of H.pp antibodies
- crossbred barrows and gilts
- 30 pigs in each of 4 treatment groups for a total of 120 animals
(e) Control:
The control or placebo was sterile saline which was injected intramuscularly at 1 mL per 5 kg of body weight (1 mL/11 pounds of body weight) as pigs' temperature reached 104°F and at 24 hour intervals until 3 doses were given.
(f) Diagnosis:
After intranasal challenge with a serotype 5 strain of A. pleuropneumoniae , the pigs were observed for signs of pneumonia and their rectal temperatures were checked at 3-hour intervals. A sudden rise in body temperature was determined to be a good indication of the peracute nature of the disease. As the temperature of each pig reached 1.04°F after challenge, the first treatment was administered.
(g) Dosage Form:
The dosage form of ceftiofur was a sterile powder reconstituted with sterile water for injection. This dosage is the marketed form of NAXCEL® Sterile Powder.
(h) Route of Administration:
Route of administration was intramuscular injection into the neck region of each pig.
(i) Dosages:
Dosages used were placebo (0), 1, 3 or 5 mg of ceftiofur equivalents per kilogram of body weight (0, .45, 1.36 or 2.27 mg per pound of body weight).
(j) Test Duration:
The drug treatments and placebo were administered for 3 consecutive days. Fourteen days after challenge lung lesion scores and mortality were calculated.
(k) Parameters of Measure:
- mortality
- lung lesion scores
- live pig days
- clinical signs of pneumonia
(l) Results:
Compared with the negative controls, mortality was significantly reduced as a result of the 3 and the 5 mg ceftiofur (1.36 and the 2.27 mg/pound) dose but not the 1 mg (.45 mg/pound) dose. All three ceftiofur treatments significantly reduced lung lesion scores when compared with the scores of the nontreated pigs. Live pig days and clinical signs of pneumonia improved in a linear relationship with dose, but differences between doses of ceftiofur were not significant.
(Eds. note: The following table consists of 4 columns.)
Table 1. Treatment Means for Pigs Treated with Ceftiofur
|Dose mg/kg
Lesion Scores
Pig Days
|0 (0.00)
|1 (0.45)
|3 (1.36)
|5 (2.27)
a,b Non-zero doses with different superscripts from control in the same column are significantly different at P<.05.
m) Statistical Analysis:
This study is described as a randomized complete block design with six blocks of four treatments with five pigs per pen. The following analysis of variance procedure was performed for all parameters of measure.
(Eds. note: The following table consists of 4 columns.)
Table 2. Analysis of Variance Table
|Test Term
(a) This design has a power of 80% to detect a 25% difference in mortality between any two dose groups at the .05 level of significance.
(b) Significance at .05 without significance in Quadratic or REST will indicate the optimal is outside the dose range.
(c) Significance at .05 without significance in REST will indicate the optimal is within the dose range.
(n) Conclusions:
Based on the analysis of the data from the primary measures (mortality, lung lesion scores, and live pig days) there is a linear relationship with dose and effectiveness of the drug. The optimal effective dose of ceftiofur for the treatment of experimentally induced bacterial pneumonia caused by A. pleuropneumoniae was nearly reached at the 5 mg/kg dose administered daily for 3 consecutive days (2.27 mg/pound dose administered daily for 3 days).
(o) Adverse Reactions:
Some animals showed signs of local transient pain as a result of the intramuscular injection, but no evidence of any adverse effects of ceftiofur was noted.
(2) Clinical or Field Study
(a) Type of Study - Natural Outbreaks:
This field study was an 11-location (10 in the USA and one in Canada) clinical trial in which pigs with natural occurrences of bacterial pneumonia were the subjects of treatment.
(b) Names and Addresses of Investigators:
Dr. Al E. Beyer
West Branch Animal Clinic
North 4th Street
West Branch, IA 52358
Trial No. 796-9690-0-JHL-89-001
Sutton Veterinary Clinic
Dr. Ken C. Lorenzen
West Highway 6
Sutton, NB 68989
Trial No. 796-9690-O-JHL-89-002
Dr. Paul E. Yeske
Nicollet-New Ulm Vet Clinic
1020 3rd Street
P. O. Box 167
Nicollet, MN 56074
Trial No. 796-9690-O-JHL-89-003
Ghrist Vet Clinic
Dr. Pat L. Graham
RR#3, Box 22
111 E. Washington
Pittsfield, IL 62363
Trial No. 796-9690-O-JHL-89-005
Dr. Randy W. Larsen, PC
Box 478
Highway 150, South
Alpha, IL 61413
Trial No. 796-9690-O-JHL-89-006
Swine Health Center, Inc.
Dr. Nathan Winkelman
621 Pacific Avenue
Morris, MN 56267
Trial No. 796-9690-O-JHL-89-008
Ensley Veterinary Clinic
Dr. Leroy E. Ensley
Second and Prospect
Onaga, KS 66521
Trial No. 796-9690-O-JHL-89-009
Cottonwood Veterinary Clinic
Dr. Ron Kuecker
Route 2, Box 61B
Windom, MN 56101
Trial No. 796-9690-O-JHL-89-011
Sutton Veterinary Clinic
Dr. John Waddell
West Highway 6
Sutton, NB 68979
Trial No. 796-9690-O-JHL-89-012
Dr. Paul E. Yeske
Nicollet-New Ulm Vet Clinic
1020 3rd Street
P. O. Box 167
Nicollet, MN 56074
Trial No. 796-9690-O-JHL-89-013
Dr. Rene Lallier
652 Route Principale
St. Hugues, JOH 1N0
Trial No. 796-9690-O-JHL-89-014
(c) General Design of the Investigation:
This study was a randomized complete block design at each location.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of 3 mg and 5 mg ceftiofur equivalents per kg of body weight (1.36 mg and 2.27 mg/pound) when administered intramuscularly for three consecutive days to pigs experiencing natural occurrences of bacterial respiratory disease (bacterial pneumonia).
(d) Animals:
A total of 1,762 feeder pigs were used in this clinical trial. Most of the pigs were crossbreds and ranged in weight from 32 pounds to 148 pounds at the time of the first treatment. Within a location, pigs were of similar age and weight.
(e) Control:
The control of placebo was sterile saline for injection and was administered to the control pigs at the same volume as the NAXCEL® was administered. At each location separate controls within each pen were used for comparison to the 3 mg and 5 mg ceftiofur treated groups.
(f) Diagnosis:
The investigator at each location (a veterinarian) made a clinical diagnosis prior to treatment. After treatment was initiated, the diagnosis was confirmed by laboratory diagnostic identification of the causative agent(s) recovered from lung tissue and adjacent lymph nodes from necropsied pigs.
(g) Dosage Form:
The dosage form of ceftiofur was a sterile powder reconstituted with sterile water for injection. This dosage is the marketed form of NAXCEL® Sterile Powder.
(h) Route of Administration:
Route of administration was intramuscular injection into the neck region of each pig.
(i) Dosage:
Dosages tested were 3 mg and 5 mg ceftiofur equivalents per kg of body weight administered for 3 days. This equals 1.36 mg and 2.27 mg of ceftiofur equivalents per pound of body weight for 3 days.
(j) Test Duration:
The drug treatments and placebo were administered for 3 consecutive days. On day 7 after first treatment two randomly selected pigs from each treatment group at each location were necropsied to evaluate lung lesions. On day 14 after first treatment the trials ended and all survivors were weighed to determine the number of pigs that had gained weight. An additional 14 day non-experimental observation period followed the 14 days of the trial.
(k) Parameters of Measure:
- mortality
- lung lesion scores
- gainers' (pigs that survived and gained 5 pounds in 14 days)
(l) Results:
Based on the above parameters, both the 1.36 mg and the 2.27 mg ceftiofur per pound of body weight doses (3 and 5 mg/kg of body weight) were determined to be effective. The 1.36 mg/pound dose (3 mg/kg) significantly reduced mortality, lung lesion scores and improved gainers when compared with the pigs that received the placebo. The 2.27 mg/pound dose (5 mg/kg) produced non-significant reductions in mortality and lesion scores and significant improvement in gainers when compared with the non-antibiotic treated pigs.
(Eds. note: The following table consists of 7 columns.)
Table 3. Least Square Means and Least Significant Difference (LSD, 1-sided, .05) for Parameters of Interest for Pneumonic Pigs Treated with Various Levels of Ceftiofur Free Acid Equivalents for 3 Days
|Dose mg/kg
|No. of
|Lung Lesion
|0 (0 mg)
|3 (1.36 mg)
|0 (0 mg)
|5 (2.27 mg)
(0 vs 3, .05)
(0 vs 1.36)
(0 vs 5, .05)
(0 vs 2.27)
(3 vs 5, .05)
(1.36 vs 2.27)
- 1 Each pen had from 18 to 33 pigs.
- 2 Lesion score expressed on scale 0 = no lesion, 10 = 100%.
- 3 Gainers = pigs that survived for 14 days and gained > 5 pounds.
- 4 Degrees (mortality/gainers) = transformed data to normalize percent mortality and percent gainers.
(m) Statistical Analysis:
This study was a randomized complete block design at each location. The following analysis of variance was performed for all parameters of interest for both the 1.36 mg ceftiofur/pound dose (3.0 mg/kg) and the 2.27 mg ceftiofur/pound dose (5.0 mg/kg).
(Eds. note: The following table consists of 5 columns.)
Table 4. Analysis
|Test Term
|Pen (L)
|Control vs Treatment
|3 day, treatment regime is efficacious*
* Significance was tested at P =.05 (one-sided). This test has more than an 80% chance of detecting a 10% increase in efficacy. This test was performed for both levels of ceftiofur (3 mg and 5 mg/kg of body weight).
(n) Conclusions:
Based on the analysis of the data from this 11 location field trial, it was concluded that ceftiofur administered as ceftiofur sodium (NAXCEL®) is an effective treatment for bacterial pneumonia of swine. Both the 1.36 mg/pound (3.0 mg/kg) and the 2.27 mg/pound (5.0 mg/kg) doses of ceftiofur were determined to be effective.
(o) Incidence of Pathogens Cultured at the 11 Field Trial Locations:
(Eds. note: The following table consists of 2 columns.)
|Number of Isolates
|Pasteurella multocida
|Actinobacillus pleuropneumonia
|Salmonella cholerasuis
|Streptococcus suis Type 2
Pigs which died on days one through seven were necropsied and lungs, tracheae and adjacent lymph nodes were cultured. Recovered pathogens were classified by genus and species. As listed above all four bacterial agents commonly associated with swine respiratory disease were isolated in a well controlled laboratory identification procedure. The pathogens were isolated in swine known to be infected in various stages and etiologies of the disease. The data illustrates that a well designed and controlled study verified the incidence and presence of bacterial swine respiratory disease in all the herds and locations tested.
(p) Mean Inhibitory Concentration (MIC) Data
MIC data was collected from pathogens isolated from the lungs of control group pigs in the 11 location natural field infection trial. These pigs were sacrificed on day seven of the clinical field trial. Ceftiofur and twelve other antimicrobial compounds were tested against 31 clinical isolates, representing three genera and six species. Ceftiofur sodium was equally or more active than some of the other compounds tested against the common pathogens found to cause swine bacterial respiratory disease. This study provided well controlled in vitro information about the effectiveness of NAXCEL® for the treatment and control of swine bacterial respiratory caused by Actinobacillus pleuropneumonia, Salmonella cholerasuis and Streptococcus suis Type 2.
(3) Drug Efficacy Summary:
Throughout the dose determination and field confirmation trials, all the pathogens claimed by labeling were evaluated at various stages of swine respiratory disease.
Pasteurella multocida was the most common opportunistic pathogen encountered in these trials and caused atrophic rhinitis and pneumonia Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae (artificial and natural infections) and Salmonella chloeraesuis were recognized as causing acute epizootic and chronic pneumonia. Streptococcus suis Type 2 was isolated from the respiratory tracts of pigs infected with the peracute and acute forms of the disease.
Investigators encountered the diseases in various stages of morbidity and mortality. Different rates of the spread of the disease was observed under standard swine management practices. Rapidly progressing, more advanced cases were treated successfully with the highest recommended dose of 5 mg/kg body weight repeated three times while cases detected early were treated successfully with the lower dose of 3 mg/kg body weight.
Pigs with chronic respiratory disease were also evaluated in these studies. Although mortality due to chronic pneumonia was usually low in the trials. It was considered important to evaluate the dose range in the presence of high herd morbidity. Control of the spread of the disease in all field trial herds was accomplished by the prophylactic treatment of all the swine in the infected pen with either the 3 or 5 mg/kg body weight repeated three times, depending on the severity and etiology and clinical presentation of the disease.
To conclude, the three major swine respiratory syndromes with specific bacterial etiologies were evaluated by their response to Cefitofur in a dose determination and a confirmation trial. These syndromes (athopic rhinitis, enzootic pneumonia, and pleuropneumonia) were treated and controlled successfully with a 3 to 5 mg/kg body weight repeated three times. Because of these well designed trials, the dose in the field use will be determined by an accurate clinical diagnosis of swine respiratory disease in the affected herd. Severity of the disease syndrome was documented by voluminous clinical observations and necropsies.
From this adequate and well controlled drug efficacy study it can be concluded Ceftiofur Sodium is indicated for the treatment and control of swine bacterial respiratory disease (swine bacterial pneumonia) associated with Actinobacillus ( Haemophilus ) pleuropneumoniae , Pasteurella multocida, Salmonella choleraesuis and Streptococcus suis, Type 2.
Two studies were designed and conducted to specifically address target animal safety when ceftiofur was administered intramuscularly to swine. These included a tolerance study in which exaggerated doses of ceftiofur were administered to swine, and a safety/toxicity study in which multiples of the anticipated labeled use dose and regimen were administered. Additionally, an 11 location field trial was conducted in which 881 swine were administered ceftiofur at either 3 or 5 mg per kg of body weight (1.36 or 2.27 mg/pound of body weight) for three consecutive days.
Based on the results of these studies, it is concluded that ceftiofur has a wide margin of safety when administered intramuscularly to swine at doses up to 5 mg per kg of body weight (2.27 mg/pound) for three consecutive days. Local pain reactions were the observed effect, and this was transient and deemed not detrimental to the safety of the sick animals to which the drug was administered in the field trials.
(1) Pivotal Study #1 (acute toxicity study)
(a) Purpose:
The purpose of this study was to determine the tolerance of feeder pigs for intramuscular ceftiofur sodium at an exaggerated dose.
(b) Study Director and Pathologist:
G.A. Elliott, DVM Senior Veterinary Pathologist/Toxicologist
Unit 7220-209-2
The Upjohn Company
Kalamazoo, MI 49001
(c) General Design of the Study:
(i) Test Animals:
Four crossbred swine (2 barrows and 2 gilts) served as treated animals and four crossbred swine (2 barrows and 2 gilts) served as controls (received sterile water for injection). The pig weights ranged from 28.5 kg (62.7 pounds) to 53 kg (116.6 pounds). These pigs were about 4 months of age.
(ii) Dosage Form and Route of Administration
NAXCEL® Sterile Powder for injection following reconstitution, the same product that will be marketed for this claim was administered intramuscularly.
(iii) Dosage:
The dosage was 125 mg ceftiofur equivalents/kg of body weight (56.8 mg ceftiofur equivalents/pound of body weight) for 5 consecutive days. This dose is greater than 25 times the highest recommended use level.
(iv) Test Duration:
The pigs were treated with either NAXCEL® or sterile water for injection for 5 consecutive days. All pigs were necropsied and gross evaluations made 24 hours post last injection.
(v) Pertinent Parameters Measured:
Measures used to identify target organ and tissue toxicity were: clinical observations, blood and clinical chemistry parameters, body weights, weights of selected organs and gross and microscopic pathology observations of selected tissues.
(vi) Results:
Clinical observations: No overt clinical signs of toxicity were noted. Lameness and limping were noted in two pigs on Days 3 and 4 of treatment, but were no longer evident by the end of the study. Bleeding from the injection site occurred in two pigs on Day 3 of the study but did not cause complications.
Hematology and clinical chemistry values were obtained pretrial and on Day 6 of the study. One drug treated pig developed a marked anemia as shown by a 3-fold decrease in terminal red blood cell count, hemoglobin and hematocrit values in comparison to the other animals. This pig also had the lowest terminal leukocyte and platelet counts and, when calculated on an absolute basis, had the lowest neutrophil count of all of the pigs in the study. A control pig exhibited markedly elevated terminal leukocyte and neutrophil counts compared to the other nontreated pigs. The clinical chemistry and hematology values of the other three ceftiofur treated animals were within ranges considered to be normal.
Organ weights: There were no appreciable differences in organ weights from the treated versus nontreated pigs.
Gross and microscopic observations: The only gross changes were coloration changes and some hemorrhage at the injection site. Microscopically, the drug-treated animals exhibited more severe areas of muscle necrosis at the injection site than did the control animals (see Table 5). Under the conditions of this exaggerated dosage of ceftiofur and/or placebo, both groups showed evidence of resolution and muscle regeneration at the earlier injection sites when necropsied 24 hours after the last 5 daily injections. No other organs were affected as a result of the elevated dose of ceftiofur tested in this study.
(Eds. note: The following table consists of 3 columns.)
Table 5. Numbers of Pigs per Treatment Group with Microscopic Observations in Skeletal Muscle
|Ceftiofur Treatment
|Tissue and Microscopic Observations
|0 mg/kg
|124 mg/kg
(56.8 mg/lb)
|Fibroblastic activity with some necrosis present
|Hemorrhage at injection site
|Amorphous, eosinophilic, anuclear muscle cells present
|Undergoing cellular repair at earlier injection sites
(ix) Statistical Analysis: Does not apply.
(x) Conclusions:
Results of this study indicate that the administration of ceftiofur sodium at exaggerated doses produced no overt clinical signs of toxicity. All animals gained weight from five days pre-trial through six of the study. the results of this study indicate that swine are very tolerant of intramuscular injections of ceftiofur sodium.
(2) Pivotal Study #2 (safety/toxicity study)
(a) Purpose of Study
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the toxic potential of NAXCEL® Sterile Powder (ceftiofur sodium) when administered intramuscularly to feeder pigs at multiples of the clinical use level.
(b) Name and Address of Investigator:
Study Director and Pathologist:
G.A. Elliott, DVM, Senior Veterinary Pathologist/Toxicologist
Unit 7220-209-2
The Upjohn Company
Kalamazoo, MI 49001
(c) General Design of the Study:
(i) Test Animals:
Five barrows and five female pigs were tested in each treatment group. All pigs were crossbreds of Yorkshire, Hampshire and Duroc. The males weighed in a range of from 49.5 pounds (22.5 kg) to 104.5 pounds (47.5 kg) and the females ranged from 42.9 pounds (19.5 kg) to 92.4 pounds (42.0 kg).
(ii) Dosage From and Route of Administration:
NAXCEL® Sterile Powder for injection following reconstitution, the same product that will be marketed for this claim was administered intramuscularly.
(iii) Dosage:
Three dosages of ceftiofur sodium; 5, 15 and 25 mg free acid equivalents per kilogram of body weight (2.27, 6.82 and 11.36 mg/pound of body weight) were compared to a placebo (sterile water for injection) treated group.
(iv) Route of Administration:
Intramuscular injections.
(v) Test Duration:
Treatments were administered once daily for 15 consecutive days. All pigs were necropsied and evaluations made 24 hours after the last injection.
(vi) Pertinent Parameters Measured:
Clinical observations, body weight changes, blood and clinical chemistry, weights of selected organs, gross and microscopic observations of selected issues.
(vii) Results:
Throughout the course of this study, all pigs survived and gained weight. There were no systemic effects attributable to formulated ceftiofur sodium based on the parameters measured.
Gross necropsy examination revealed only incidental changes in most tissues with some red to reddish-tan streaks at the injection site in all groups including the controls. The more prominent streaks were noted in the group of animals that received the two higher doses.
Microscopic evaluations of the injection sites revealed some degree of necrosis with frequently accompanying hemorrhages. This observation was made in some animals in all treated groups as well as the placebo treated controls. There was also evidence that tissue regeneration was taking place in animals from all groups which had experienced injections at 24 hours and longer prior to necropsy.
(Eds. note: The following table consists of 5 columns.)
Table 6. Number of Pigs per Treatment Group with Histopathologic or Gross Pathologic Observations
|Treatments (mg ceftiofur/kg
of body wt/day for 3 days
(2.27 mg/lb)
(6.82 mg/lb)
(11.36 mg/lb)
|Microscopic Observations
Transient necrosis with or without hemorrhage along needle marks at most recent injection sites (24 to 96 hours post injection
|Gross Observations
Red coloration along needle marks at injection site
|Reddish-brown to reddish-tan coloration along needle marks at injection sites
(ix) Statistical Method:
A two-way analysis of variance was used to test treatment, sex, treatment by sex interaction and effects for sexes combined. In the case of a significant treatment effect, the Least Significant Difference Method was used to make comparisons of the treated group with the control group. In the case of significant interaction, treatment to control comparisons were performed for each sex separately. Tests of statistical significance were made at the 0.05 level of probability.
(x) Conclusions:
Formulated ceftiofur sodium (NAXCEL®) is safe when injected intramuscularly into swine. This formulation is deemed to be a slight muscle irritant.
A. Toxicity Tests
All issues concerning toxicity testing of ceftiofur are addressed in the previous Freedom of Information Summary for New Animal Drug Application 140-338, the approval notice for which appeared in the FEDERAL REGISTER Vol. 55, No. 71, 12 April 1990, page 13768: Freedom of Information Summary for NAXCEL® Sterile Powder (ceftiofur sodium) for Bovine Respiratory Disease. This Summary was updated in June 1992.
B. Safe Concentration of Total Residues
(1) No Observed Effect Level (NOEL)
As referenced in the above-mentioned FOI Summary for NADA 140-338, the lowest no observed effect level from the 90-day oral feeding studies in both dogs and rats is 30 mg/kg of body weight.
(2) Safe Concentrations (SC) Calculations
SC in Muscle = ADI X Human Weight / Daily Consumption of Meat
Allowable Daily Intake (ADI) = Lowest NOEL / Safety Factor
- a safety factor (SF) of 1000 is used because the ADI is based on 90-day feeding study data.
- Daily Consumption of Meat is approximated as 500 g.
- Average Human Weight is approximated as 60 kg.
The lowest NOEL is 30 mg/kg, so
ADI = 30 mg/kg /1000 = 0.03 mg/kg;
SC in Muscle = 0.03 mg/kg x 60 kg / 0.5 kg = 3.6 mg/kg or 3.6 ppm
Present FDA policy limits the safe concentration in muscle to no more than 3.0 ppm unless chronic toxicity data were used for the SC calculations.
Using the consumption factors listed below and a SC of 3.0 ppm in muscle, the permitted safe concentrations for total residues in other edible tissues are as follows:
(Eds. note: The following table consists of 3 columns.)
|Consumption Factor
|Safe Concentration
|9 ppm
|12 ppm
|12 ppm
(3) Threshold Assessment
This compound is a Category A compound as derived from the Threshold Assessment considerations. Based on a Structural Activity Assessment it was assigned to Category C (non-carcinogen). Subsequent to this the 90-day feeding studies allowed it to be classified as Category A. Because the drug is intended for therapeutic use on specific animals it is considered a Low Use Drug. Accordingly, chronic studies were not required and, based on 90-day studies, a Safety Factor of 1000 is used in the Safe Concentration Calculations.
C. Total Residue Depletion and Metabolism Study
Investigator: F.S. Yein, Ph.D., Upjohn Residue Scientist and Study Director.
Test Animals: twelve (12) Yorkshire x Hampshire crossbred swine (6 male, 6 female), 34-47 kg, 3 to 4 months of age.
Treatment Regimen: intramuscular injection of 5 mg ceftiofur free acid equivalent per kg of body weight (2.27 mg ceftiofur free acid equivalents per pound of body weight), once daily for three consecutive days.
Radioisotope used: 14-C ceftiofur sodium labeled in the 2 position of the thiazole ring.
Withdrawal Schedule: all 12 animals were sacrificed 12 hours after the last dose ("zero-day withdrawal").
Blood samples were taken periodically throughout the dosing period and up to the time of slaughter. Blood and plasma levels of 14-C were found consistently to be highest at two hours after injection in all 12 pigs. The mean values for blood levels at two hours after each daily injection indicate that the drug does not accumulate in the pigs' system. Blood levels of 14-C 2 hours after Day 1, 2 and 3 injections were 11.9 ppm, 14.5 ppm and 15.4 ppm, respectively. Plasma levels of 14-C two hours after day 1, 2 and 3 injections were 19.2 ppm, 23.4 ppm and 23.1 ppm, respectively.
Total 14-C residues excreted in the urine and feces of all 12 animals ranged from 65.8% to 90.8% of the doses administered. The mean value for urine for all 12 pigs was 61.8% while feces mean value was 10.75%. Therefore about 73% of the total 14-C-labeled ceftiofur dose was excreted by 12 hours after the last injection.
Samples of muscle, liver, kidney and fat from each animal were radioassayed by combustion of the sample, trapping the resulting 14-CO2, and liquid scintillation counting. Mean residues from the 12 animals are shown in the table on the following page. Kidney is the tissue with the highest concentration of total residues followed by the injection site, liver, fat and non-injection site muscle.
(Eds. note: The following table consists of 5 columns.)
Table 7. Total Radioactivity in Edible Tissues of Swine Given Intramuscular Injections of 14-C Ceftiofur at 5 mg/kg of Bodyweight Once Daily for Three Days (all values are in ppm)
|Safe Concentration
|Mean Observed Concentration1
|Highest Observed Observed Concentration2
|Standard Deviation
|Injection Site
1 Mean values from 12 swine each measured at 12 hours after the last injection.
2 Highest observed concentration from the 12 swine used in the study. Swine kidneys from the above described residue study were subjected to wet chemistry procedures to establish the profile of 14-C-ceftiofur metabolites. The approach involved protein precipitation and solvent extractions, followed high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) of the free metabolites.
About 65% of the residue in kidney was bound to macrmolecules (protein) and about 35% was freely extractable. The extraction and fractionism of kidney tissue demonstrated that there were four primary components of the residue. Desfuroylceftiofur cysteine disulfide (DCD) was the major metabolite, comprising approximately 12% of the total residue. An unidentified polar metabolite C, representing 11.3% of the total residue, was also found in the kidney extract. Two other unknown polar metabolites, A and B, were also present in amounts of less than 10% of the total residue.
D. Comparative Metabolism Study
The metabolic profiles of ceftiofur in the urine and kidney extracts of rats treated orally with high doses of (about 700 mg/kg body weight) 14-C labeled ceftiofur were compared to the urine and kidney extracts of pigs dosed intramuscularly for 3 days with 5 mg/kg body weight 14-C ceftiofur (2.27 mg/pound). This rat dose approximates the highest NOEL (1000 mg/kg) observed in any of the oral rat feeding studies. Kidney is the limiting tissue because observed concentrations of total residues are highest in the tissue relative to the calculated safe concentration.
Kidney Metabolites: The bound and free metabolite profiles in the rat were compared to those found in the total residue study described in Part C. About 65% of the residue was bound and 35% was free in the kidneys of both species. Of the free residues, all four metabolites found in swine were also found in the rat kidney extracts, as shown in the table on the following page.
(Eds. note: The following table consists of 7 columns.)
Table 8. Percentages (PPM 14-C-Ceftiofur Free Acid Equivalents) of Metabolites Found in the Kidneys of Rats from Multiple High Oral Doses Versus in Kidneys of Pigs from Intramuscular Doses
|Pigs (12 hours)
|Metabolite Name
(R.T. in minutes)
|8 Hours
|24 Hours
|Males and Females
|Polar A (4)
|17.5 (2.0)
|12.3 (3.1)
|27.5 (1.4)
|27.1 (1.3)
|7.6 ± 2.3 (0.3 ± 0.1)
|Polar B (5)
|0.9 (0.1)
|0 (0)
|0.9 (0)
|0.7 (0)
|4.3 ± 3.1 (0.2 ± 0.1)
|Polar C (6)
|2.2 (0.3)
|2.2 (0.6)
|1.2 (0.1)
|1.9 (0.1)
|11.3 ± 2.9 (0.5 ± 0.2)
|8.1 (0.9)
|15.5 (3.9)
|0.7 (0)
|0 (0)
|12.3 ± 4.1 (0.6 ± 0.2)
Urinary Metabolites: The metabolite profiles in the urine of rats and pigs showed unmetabolized ceftiofur, 3,3'-desfuroylceftiofur disulfide and unknown Polar A as significant metabolites. Desfuroylceftiofur cysteine disulfide (DCD), small amounts of unknown Polar B, and desfuroyl ceftiofur were present in both rats and pigs. Ceftiofur sulfoxide cysteine thioester was the major metabolite in urine from rats but only minor in urine from pigs. There is a very close qualitative match (89%) in urinary metabolite profiles of rats and pigs.
These data support the contention that the rat was autoexposed to metabolites to which humans would be exposed as a result of eating pork from ceftiofur treated pigs. Therefore, the toxicology studies in the rat accurately reflect the toxicity of the metabolites to which man would be exposed.
E. Withdrawal Time
The total residue data showed that the mean concentrations of total ceftiofur residues at 12 hours after the last injection ("zero-day withdrawal") were well below the permitted safe concentration in the edible tissues of swine treated with the maximum dose (intramuscular injection of 5 mg/kg of body weight once daily for three days). Therefore, a withdrawal period will not be required for this use of the drug in swine, and a target tissue, marker residue and tolerance have not been assigned.
F. Regulatory Method
An official regulatory method is not required, because the residue and toxicology data support a zero-day withdrawal. The analytical method used by Upjohn to analyze for non-radiolabeled ceftiofur residues in their drug development work is described in Upjohn Technical Report 788-9760-88-010, titled "HPLC Method for the Analysis of Bound Desfuroylceftiofur Residues in Bovine Kidney Using Precolumn Derivatization and UV Detection," 1988. Upjohn used the same method for analysis of bovine and porcine kidney.
The data in support of this NADA satisfy the requirements of Section 512 of the Food Drug and Cosmetic Act and 21 CFR Part 514 of the implementing regulations. The data demonstrate that ceftiofur sodium (NAXCEL®), when administered to swine by a single intramuscular injection at a dose range of 3 to 5 mg/kg is safe and effective for the treatment of swine respiratory disease associated with the major porcine pathogens.
Total residues in the edible tissues at 12 hours post-treatment (0 day withdrawal), were less than half of the permitted safe concentration in each tissue. Therefore neither a marker compound nor a tolerance for a marker compound is required.
Labeling restricts this drug to use by or on the order of a licensed veterinarian. This decision was based on the following factors: (a) adequate directions can not be written to enable laypersons to appropriately diagnose and subsequently use this product to treat swine respiratory disease caused by a variety of porcine pathogens, and (b) a dose range is indicated and therefore requires a veterinary clinician to calculate a proper dose depending on the etiology of the disease.
Under section 512(c)(2)(F)(iii) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 360b(c)(2)(F)(iii), this approval qualifies for 3 years of marketing exclusivity because it contains reports of new clinical or field investigations and human food safety studies, other than bioequivalence or residue studies, essential to the approval and conducted or sponsored by the applicant. NAXCEL® is under patent number U.S.446437 expiring August 7, 2001.
- Naxel® 4 gram product label
- Naxel® package insert
Copies of these labels may be obtained by writing to the:
Freedom of Information Office
Center for Veterinary Medicine, FDA
7500 Standish Place
Rockville, MD 20855


text:
Attini, Formicidae, Hymenoptera, Insecta, Arthropoda, Animalia
Guatemala (type locality), Costa Rica. Costa Rica: Atlantic slope to 1100m elevation.
Mandibles with 5 teeth; preocular carina curving mesad toward frontal carina; antennal scrobe poorly defined; lateral vertex margins forming acute teeth that project posteriorly; propodeum lacking spines.
Natural History
This species occurs in wet forest. It appears to be a specialist inhabitant of mature forest canopy. Almost all of my collections have been from nests beneath epiphyte mats or strays in recent treefalls. This behavior extends to Venezuela, where I also collected it beneath epiphytes in a treefall. I have never collected it in Winkler samples or other sampling methods that focus on the ground fauna.
In Costa Rica, C. major has an allopatric or parapatric distribution with C. dixus, a Pacific slope species with similar morphology and nesting habits.
Literature Cited
Page author:
John T. Longino, The Evergreen State College, Olympia WA 98505 firstname.lastname@example.com
Go to Ants of Costa Rica Homepage