Some people want to know which stocks are doing well or not so well today. They look at companies that make things or help with money stuff. The article talks about four companies: Abbott Laboratories, U.S. Bancorp, and two others. People expect Abbott Laboratories to make a lot of money from selling their products, but they already made some money after the market closed yesterday. U.S. Bancorp might also make a lot of money, but their shares lost a little value in after-hours trading. The article also mentions that Intra-Cellular Therapies wants to raise more money by selling more of their stocks, and that another company had bad financial results. Read from source...

1. The article does not provide any clear reason or evidence for why these stocks are worth watching on Wednesday, other than mentioning some earnings expectations and after-hours trading movements. This is a weak attempt to attract attention and does not offer any valuable insight for investors.
2. The article focuses too much on the negative aspects of one company (Intra-Cellular Therapies) that reported a proposed public offering, while ignoring the positive implications of this event for the company's growth potential and future revenue streams. This shows a biased and unfair treatment of the company and its shareholders.
3. The article uses vague terms like "Wall Street expects" without specifying any sources or credible data to support these expectations. This creates confusion and uncertainty among readers who might wonder how reliable this information is and what factors influence it.
4. The article does not provide any context or background for the stocks mentioned, such as their performance over time, their industry trends, their competitive advantages, or their recent news and events. This makes it hard for readers to understand why these stocks are relevant or interesting in the current market environment.
5. The article ends with a link to the premarket coverage, which seems out of place and irrelevant, since it does not relate to the main topic of the article or provide any additional value for the reader. This might indicate that the author was trying to fill up space or attract more clicks without offering any meaningful content.
6. The tone of the article is too formal and impersonal, which makes it boring and unengaging for readers who are looking for more dynamic and lively stories about stocks and markets. The article lacks any personal touches, anecdotes, opinions, or insights that could make it more appealing and memorable.