or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by backtomac

They'd just be pissing away money on a dying company. AMD don't fabricate chips any more. Global Foundry does this for them. AMD designs generally have been a poor match for the computers Apple make. LLano may be an exception, we don't really now. But the fabrication deficiencies, poor yields and lagging Intel as far as shrinking the process, that have plagued AMD would still continue even if Apple bought them.
No. And I'm not opposed to a buy back which you have said that you prefer to dividends.But this is why you invest in a growth stock like Apple. It has reached the pinnacle. It is fast growing company that can easily afford to pay dividends. Its reached a point where it can be a growth and income stock. If it doesn't pay dividends (or buy back shares) now when should it? They have 100 billion in cash and no debt. How much 'better' does Apple's balance sheet have to get...
I don't know the legal obligations but I would argue that there is definitely an ethical obligation to reward shareholders. If not, why would any rational person invest in stocks? I like Apple computers but I'm invested in the stock because I think it can make me money. Because its a profitable company. Apple knew well the implications of becoming a publicly listed company when it did so. You invite the public to be owners of the business. To pretend otherwise would be...
This is why investors want a dividend. So Apple doesn't pull a Microft and invest billions of dollars in businesses that loose money for years. Does x-box and bing ring a bell?
They have MORE than enough for this. Apples server farm in North Carolina cost 1-2 billion IIRC. The new 22 nm chip fab facility Intel is built to make Ivy Bridge chips cost 5 billion. Apple bought Chomp for 50 million (already paid for in the time you took to read this) Anobit reportedly cost 500 million. Apple have 100 billion in cash and raised 13 billion in profits in the last quarter.
To reward shareholders. They are owners of the business and should get a share of the profits. That's why people invest in businesses and own stocks. I think that the reason that Apple is 'under owned' and undervalued by some metrics is two fold. One, some institutional investors can only hold dividend paying stocks. I don't think this is a large number but some certainly are. Secondly, I think some may be avoiding Apple because they have not shown that they shareholder...
Apple can pay a dividend and not touch their enormous cash horde. Apple is easily throwing off 2-4 billion of profits per quarter. That could pay a $2 per share quarterly dividend and still add 1-2 billion of profits to their coffers.And with 100 billion of cash they have more than enough to fund any purchases they might want to make.
Are you really going to argue that banking is their core competency? If so please put forth some reasoning. I'd like to hear it.
Exactly. Its a ridiculous amount of profit that Apple is generating. They can build a server farm out of 2 weeks worth of Q4 profits. Any business or company that Apple might want to acquire that would need 100 billion in order to be bought, Intel (135 bil market cap) or Comcast (65 bil market cap), probably would be blocked by regulators.
All companies that buy back stock believe its undervalued. No company would buy back stock that they feel is fairly or overly valued.But even if you are buying a growth stock eventually you hope to share in its profits, no? That's the raison d'ĂȘtre of owning a business, either directly or through holding the stock. Apple have nearly 100 billion in cash and its equivalents. The only reason NOT to pay a dividend is if you think they are immediately going to start loosing...
New Posts  All Forums: