or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Sacto Joe

Defining relative market cap is relevant to the individual shareholder as an indication of equivalency when large numbers of shares are being bought back. Saying AAPL hit "a new all-time high" without clarifying what you're talking about is disingenuous at best.That said, I agree that market cap is a worthless indicator of value. That doesn't stop people from using it to attack the stock, though - "Law of Large Numbers" and all that rot.
This isn't rocket science. Market capitalization has nothing to do with dividends. The previous high AAPL market cap was about $650 billion. Someone else posted that the stock count is now down to 5.9 billion. To hit the same market cap with 5.9 billion shares, the stock would have to be (650/5.9=) ~$110.17 share.Where dividends come in is in estimating what the stock was "worth" to an individual long term holder. Since mid-2012, Apple has issued $3.84 worth of dividends...
Market capitalization is found by multiplying total shares times share price. It very much IS "affected by how many shares are available". The shares need to be "normalized", but  that's just a matter of dividing by 7. The shares have been reduced by around 10%. That's just a fact. If the (normalized) price per share is the same, and the share count is lower, then by definition the market cap is lower.
That doesn't make sense. Apple has about 10% less (equivalent) shares than it did when it hit its previous ATH. It's got about 6 billion shares now, so figure about 6.5 billion. at $100/share, that would make its market cap then $650 billion or thereabouts. Of course, we aren't taking inflation into account....
And 100% of them are different. That's really all that should matter.
If the clean energy source were built in China by Apple and owned by Apple, I'd go along. Buying power is onoe thing. Financing the generation is a whole different issue. The first simply supports clean energy projects. The second actually creates them in the first place.
My concern is more with how is the energy generated that powers the data center? China is a notorious user of coal as a power source. Does Apple have a deal that these servers are powered by clean energy? If not, then they need to rethink this.
The one thing that's fact is that Apple is buying a sh*tload of sapphire. Now, maybe it needs that much sapphire just to put TouchID on every new Apple device, or maybe it needs it to do an "iWatch", or maybe it's making enough to put it on some iPhones. But guess what: The important thing to know is that they're using a lot of it, and are likely to be using a lot more in the future. For the rest, pretend it's like three weeks before Xmas, and there's something big under...
Regarding P/E, it's usefulness is as a tool to understand relative valuations, nothing more. Are you saying that knowing relative valuations is unimportant in buying and selling stock?Regarding PEG,!t's a similar tool though used for examining relative earnings growth. As for the rest, that's what the internet is for. I'm not here to educate you, only to suggest that there's something going on that people interested in AAPL should know about.
Maybe the title is a bit misleading, although it was clear to me that he was speaking about equivalency.But the rest is far from "irrelevant" if you are an investor in AAPL. OTOH, you can't make someone hear who doesn't have ears, so have a nice day.
New Posts  All Forums: