or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by thompr

The FAA is trying to regulate the activity because they don't want drones filling our skies.  Only a small fraction of people actually use them for "fun", but once a few good commercial uses are identified, it could get out of hand very quickly.   Picture the way the future might look instead of just thinking about your small part in it.
My understanding is that under the current situation, even if Homeland Security gets the evidence of unlawful activity - and subsequently a warrant - it is technically impossible to get access to the private data without the owner knowing about it (and giving you their passcodes).  So what happens when you have evidence against a person but you want to catch them in the planning act in order to broaden your understanding of the threat and the other participants?  You can't...
Different countries, different pipes, different networks, different paying advertisers, different laws, different exclusive arrangements, etc, etc, etc.The result is a large number of differences facing the user, one of which is content.Don't expect idealism when money is involved.
"Hitting Samsung where it hurts" is probably waaaaaay down the list of Apple's primary business goals.  I'm not saying that it's not on the list at all, and it certainly would be deserved and fun for us to watch... but my hunch is that Apple is concentrating on other goals ahead of this.
Apple has a business to run, and running it based on spite is not a good idea. Of course, if you can satisfy all other objectives (like, getting sufficient supply at a great rate from non-Samsung vendors) then spite can be a nice bonus.
Go look up how dividend payouts are implemented.  Then come back enlightened, and you will see my point.
You can't know that, because when they give out a dividend, they subtract the equivalent amount from the share price.  If the subsequent (negative) action on AAPL still took place, but starting from this lower value, you might be in the same boat as now, or even worse.
The repurchased shares can either be retired (cease to exist) or be kept as a treasury stock (for possible re-issuance later).  Either way, there are no more dividends paid on these shares (even if they are held as treasury) there are no voting rights, and nobody can just purchase them on the market.  For all intents and purposes, they have ceased to exist.
You don't know what the share price would have been today if AAPL had not done the buybacks.  That would be the right thing to compare to, but it is of course unavailable.  The bottom line is that you can't say with any certainty that the buybacks have not done any good, all else being equal.
The problem with your logic is the last 5 words.  How do you know this? On ex-div day, the share price is instantly lowered by the amount $16.67/share so that everyone who dove in for the dividend is at net zero at market open.  What makes you think AAPL would recover that huge amount?  How do you know this?  You know what the AAPL price is now compared to what it used to be (it was significantly higher before, for a while at least) and to what we all believe it should be...
New Posts  All Forums: