or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Russell

 Giving 2 hours of your time hardly impressive. Employees do it all the time. Now matching the bid would be.
At $592 a share, a $3.29 dividend is slightly more than 1/2% (0.5557%).  Whether it's 1 day or 1 week before becoming "shareholder of record", why risk your money for measly returns like that.There are thousand of stocks that can make you more money during intraday fluctuations.A stock with just 2% gains is 4x better than buying AAPL for it's dividends. 
 I agree with you drblank, it is unusual what Apple is doing. They are desperately trying to get the stock price up. They were hoping dividends and buybacks would be enough, but it wasn't. Apple is now hoping that splitting the stock will reduce the price enough so "new" investors will be interested in owning AAPL. If you recall, March 2012 Apple announced dividends of $2.65 per share and allocated $10 billion for buybacks to be executed over 3 years. At that time AAPL was...
On March 19, 2012 AAPL closed at $601. Later that day Apple first announced they were going to initiate dividends and buybacks. Like clockwork, naive fanbois convinced each other it was a great idea because fewer shares on the market will make the stock price go up. It didn't happen. Just 2 years later, April 23, 2014, AAPL closed at $524. Down 14%. During the same time, AMZN went from $185 to $324. Up 75%. Now Apple is multiplying available shares. Why the complete...
On March 19, 2012 AAPL closed at $601. Later that day Apple first announced they were going to initiate dividends and buybacks. Like clockwork, naive fanbois convinced each other it was a great idea because fewer shares on the market will make the stock price go up. It didn't happen. Just 2 years later, April 23, 2014, AAPL closed at $524. Down 14%. During the same time, AMZN went from $185 to $324. Up 75%. Now Apple is multiplying available shares. Why the complete...
The world's biggest tech companies are currently dealing with a class-action lawsuit that accuses them of colluding to keep employees' wages down.    The companies — Apple, Google, Adobe, etc. — were accused of having no-poaching agreements so they wouldn't hire each others' employees. The case could be settled for anywhere between $3 billion and $9 billion this week. When the case is finalized, employees of companies could be rewarded with thousands of dollars in...
 By DAVID STREITFELD APRIL 20, 2014   SAN FRANCISCO — After years of legal skirmishes, four leading Silicon Valley companies are scheduled to go on trial next month on claims of conspiring to keep their employees down.   A 43-year-old programmer who helped set in motion a class-action lawsuit against the companies and became one of its five class representatives will not be present in the San Jose courtroom. He was shot and killed by the police last December.   The...
If the mentioned celebrities had signed contracts to use Samsung products and then didn't, they should be sued for breach of contract.
"The brief clarified that the district court's decision "did not find that 'Apple itself desired higher e-book prices than those offered at Amazon." (emphasis in original) Instead, the court found the iPad to have "encouraged innovation and competition." Oh really? Trying to rewrite history are we? "...records of Apple saying it "cannot tolerate a market where the product is sold significantly more cheaply elsewhere." And some of the most damning statements, Cote said,...
New Posts  All Forums: