or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by DavidW

 http://www.statista.com/statistics/266282/annual-net-revenue-of-amazoncom/ Amazon has shown that they can increase revenue by a decent percentage year after year. So long as they can do this, their stock will always command a high PE because investors are hoping that Amazon will eventually solve their razor thin profit margin problem. (They've  been patiently waiting for quite awhile now.) Right now, if Amazon can eliminate free shipping without reducing revenue, their...
 What would have been better is if Amazon came out with a cheap ($100 or free) phone that can use the Amazon bonus bucks, that one gets for using their Amazon CC, to pay for the monthly service. Nothing fancy, just voice and data for a browser would do. (And maybe free movie and music streaming through Amazon Prime as a bonus.)  As it stands now, I already have and accumulate every month, way more bonus dollars than I can spend shopping on Amazon .com. I know I can get...
That's just it, back in 1995, customers just couldn't leave. What other viable choice did the consumers have back then? Apple? Linux?One can argue today that customers can leave and use Apple with OSX and Linux as both have come a long way since 1995. Today, one can leave and even use Android and iOS on a tablet. But in 1995, MS did not have to be responsive to customers because they had a monopoly and knew the customers had no where to go if they left.
 But Apple OSX and iOS are not monopolies. Apple can't be abusing something they don't have. http://www.cluteinstitute.com/ojs/index.php/JBER/article/viewFile/2508/2554 It wasn't so much the bundling of IE with Windows that got them in trouble as it was all the other stuff they did >>>To summarize, Microsoft’s predatory conduct and exclusionary behavior were not appropriate or even legal methods of conducting business. The main areas of fault are as follows:     The...
The people in charge of naming products at Swatch needs a lesson in product naming. I would think that the first thing you don't want to do is name your product in such a way that it reminds consumers of your competitors.  It's one thing for Swatch to name a product line "One more thing", if the first thing consumers think of is Peter Falk as Columbo. But it's another when the consumers first think of Steve Jobs and Apple. 
 I tend to believe, though there's no proof otherwise, that Apple chose Apple TV because there was already a well known product trademarked as "Eye TV".  
 Seems you're right. RSU's are not treated the same as ordinary restricted stocks. It has something to do with the fact that with RSU's, there's a chance that you receive nothing if you don't meet the criteria set. While with ordinary restricted stocks, you actually receive the stocks (at a certain price), but just can't sell it until it's vested. Therefore, you can elect to pay the tax on the market value of the ordinary restricted stocks when you received the restricted...
 Right now these vested shares are taxed as though it's earned wages for the year. For him, that's a rate of almost 40% just for Federal.  However, if he doesn't sell any of these shares and hold off selling for a year, it will be taxed as long term capital gains. Which now maxes out at 20%, but that may change in the future. However, CA do not have any long term capital gain rate and all capital gains is taxed as income for the year. I'm sure he has 10's of millions of...
 I believe CNBC bars Jim Cramer (along with the rest of the business newscast staff and family members) from owning any individual stock. They can not personally trade in stocks but can invest in mutual and index funds. This way the watchers can be assure that the business newscast aren't getting an unfair advantage when presenting the news because they quite often get to see the stock news before they make it public. Therefore, Jim Cramer can not use the info he got from...
 But I'm willing to bet that most music listeners don't care to listen to 99% of the new music they have available for streaming and they will actually spend just as much time, or more, listening to the 10% of the music they bought than the 1% of new music they stream. For me, 10% of the music I bought in the last 20 years is still a lot and lot of music. Music that I don't mind listening to over and over again. Music that would still take me weeks to listen to, 24/7, just...
New Posts  All Forums: