Apple's Mac sales up 50 percent in April

[AppleInsider]

The blistering success of Apple's personal computer business continues to turn heads, with Mac unit sales growing 50 percent year-over-year for the month of April compared to just 17 percent growth by the broader market.

Mac revenues were also up sharply at 46 percent, according to the most recent data from market firm NPD Group, as cited Monday by Lehman Brothers analyst Ben Reitzes in a noted distributed privately to clients.

The rapid growth in April suggests the Cupertino-based company is in good position to report upside to Reitzes' current estimate of 37 percent Mac growth for the three-month period ending June.

Meanwhile, a similar set of data from NPD covering iPods reveals that sales of the media players were up 15 percent in units and 10 percent in dollar sales during April, compared to a rise of 12 percent in units and 4 percent in revenues for the overall market.

"We continue to believe our estimate of a 2 percent year-over-year unit decline in iPods could prove conservative; although year-over-year weekly growth rates have decelerated in May," Reitzes said.

In his note to clients, the Lehman analyst also reiterated his belief that Apple will introduce an updated line of Mac notebooks in time for the back-school season that heats up in the July time frame, which will include redesigned MacBooks, MacBook Pros and more MacBook Airs.

"Checks are indicating that the attractive look of the Air may make its way into other models in terms of slimmer, metallic designs," he said. "We believe these notebooks will be popular for the back-to-school and holiday shopping seasons."

Apple remains the analyst's "top pick" in the IT hardware space. He rates the company's shares as "Overweight," or outperforming those of its similarly situated peers over the next 12 months, with a price target of $202.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[solipsism]

Wow! An estimate it will go up 8.5% in the next 12 months.

[cameronj]

Originally Posted by solipsism

Wow! An estimate it will go up 8.5% in the next 12 months.

You can get pretty rich making 9% a year. Eventually Apple will be too big (market cap) to continue growing quickly, and I don't plan on being the last one out of the stock.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by cameronj

You can get pretty rich making 9% a year. Eventually Apple will be too big (market cap) to continue growing quickly, and I don't plan on being the last one out of the stock.

I know, but I expect it to reach 200 before this 3rd fiscal quarter ends in June. Apple's growth on the Mac front and the launch of the 3G iPhone around the world should help it increase several fold over teh next several years. If we were just atalkng about iPods then I have have sold my stock awhile ago.

Personally, I don't invest in any company that i don't expect to double my investment at least every 12 months.

[DGNR8]

If you want to build a business this is how you do it.
You have to start slow, steady and focused on the end game.
Start with one amazing product and design it with everything you got (iMac) over and over till it is a truly amazing product.
Then when it is a success build upon that with other innovative products.
Don't over extend yourself and don't cave to pressures for thousands more products to milk the market.
Build what you believe is the best products for you companies long term viability.
Stay innovative and creative so remain the industry leader.

Apple died (Before Jobs return it did truly die) because it was easier to follow than lead.

With the return of Jobs he injected the company with this philosophy and look at Apple now.

[Flat Stanley]

Very cool. The rebirth of Apple has been a joy to watch. Jobs has returned Apple to its roots. Love it.

[cameronj]

Originally Posted by solipsism

I know, but I expect it to reach 200 before this 3rd fiscal quarter ends in June. Apple's growth on the Mac front and the launch of the 3G iPhone around the world should help it increase several fold over teh next several years. If we were just atalkng about iPods then I have have sold my stock awhile ago.

Personally, I don't invest in any company that i don't expect to double my investment at least every 12 months.

Ah, do tell! Lets hear 5-6 of those, I'm very curious. Can't be too many $170billion companies in that list!

[Bageljoey]

Originally Posted by solipsism

Personally, I don't invest in any company that i don't expect to double my investment at least every 12 months.

Originally Posted by cameronj

Ah, do tell! Lets hear 5-6 of those, I'm very curious. Can't be too many $170billion companies in that list!

Hey, I could give you twenty. He didn't say that the stock price would double, just that he expects them to double.

May as well aim high!

Personally, I expect the next president to end global warming and solve the worlds hunger problems...

[fraklinc]

If you look at Amazon.com, Under Pcs & desktop the best sellers is occupied by nothing but Macs, in the Laptop section they're doing really good also

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by cameronj

Ah, do tell! Lets hear 5-6 of those, I'm very curious. Can't be too many $170billion companies in that list!

I don't look for the companies that are worth the most, I look for the ones that are most likely to grow. AAPL, AMZN, MA, MON, GOOG, NTDOY, & RIMM are the best gainers that I have or have had.

I also have plenty of slower, more stable stocks, like MCD (even though it doubled in the past 2 years), that I never look at. I jumped into Visa when it became public a fews months back. I expect that one to do 3-4x growth in the next 12 months.

I often consider drug companies but that industry scares the crap out of me. If an FDA doesn't approve a product or some bad side effect s found the stock can plummet over night. But it can also be a faster gainer. I just don't have the patience or skill to research those companies. Tech companies are much easy to understand, IMO.

[Rot'nApple]

Originally Posted by Bageljoey

Personally, I expect the next president to end global warming and solve the worlds hunger problems...

Not with the current lot that's currently running, be it Republican, Democratic, Libertarian, Green, Constitution Party, and let's not forget the other "parties" that may or may not have had their candidate in the presidential race over the past few years, such as the Reform Party, the Centrist Party, Independence Party of America, Moderate Party, Party for Socialism and Liberation, even the Marijuana Party, etc...

[hypermark]

It is a wonder to watch how Apple has built its current halo effect by integrating media and mobile device level goodness with PC level synchronicity and then absolutely nailed the services layer across these domains.

In the history of computing, only a handful of companies have proven adept at building platform based businesses that simultaneously win the hearts and minds of developers, enterprises and ordinary consumers so this is no small feat.

Thinking forward, one wonders if the iPhone SDK is a trojan horse to re-shape the software applications business in total by collapsing the logistics of app creation for multiple device form factors, the tools that enable same, distribution, purchasing and marketplace functions into one sandbox. Maybe that is too much to hope for. Maybe not.

I have blogged on topic in a post called:

Holy Sh-t! Apple's Halo Effect
http://thenetworkgarden.com/weblog/2...hit-apple.html

Check it out if interested.

Mark

[melgross]

Originally Posted by solipsism

I know, but I expect it to reach 200 before this 3rd fiscal quarter ends in June. Apple's growth on the Mac front and the launch of the 3G iPhone around the world should help it increase several fold over teh next several years. If we were just atalkng about iPods then I have have sold my stock awhile ago.

Personally, I don't invest in any company that i don't expect to double my investment at least every 12 months.

The overall economy is holding it back. Despite Apple's tremendous Mac growth, investors still seem to be restrained by the overall market.

Remember that Apple's price dropped much more than the overall computers stocks on the way down, and outpeformed on the way up. But right now, there seems to be a ceiling at around 190.

Possibly, an announcement of the new iPhone and expanded markets by Apple in early June will allow it to break through, though I don't think anyone really knows how much of that is already in the stock price right now.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by melgross

Possibly, an announcement of the new iPhone and expanded markets by Apple in early June will allow it to break through, though I don't think anyone really knows how much of that is already in the stock price right now.

That is what I'm expecting to happen. The stock when up about 20 points over the 3 weeks since the iPhone release, then it dropped, then it went up pretty steadily after that. If a 15 point gain isn't had within the first month of its release I'll be surprised.

Of course, my assumption also needs the stock to stay relatively steady for the next month.

[PG4G]

Yes, Mark,

I wonder about Apple's goals with iTunes and complete integration of this form. I find it fascinating. Apple appears to be changing distribution completely, in each market. Music. Movies. Software.

I noticed at Mac World this year that the one thing they missed in the Air was a digital solution to software loading. A Super-Drive, or even Remote Disk, appears a little clunky to me. Its hardware-based, no matter how you get around it, and that doesn't integrate with Apple's "media online, to the iPod, and wireless backup."

Apple hates hardware. Non-Apple hardware looks horrible. Apple wants a solution: keep it all away wirelessly.

Its not rocket-science that iTunes is a digital hub, not just a media hub.

App Store is not, in my mind, only for the iPhone OS. Its the start of complete conversion to online integrated marketplace...

And I don't mind the convenience of that.

[monstrosity]

It would appear that if Apple invented the elixir of life, hover boards, and the ever lasting gob stopper, there would be no reflection in AAPL stock price.
AAPL is pinned to GOOG and the rest of the tech industry recently. The usual predictable patterns are not as apparent as pre the credit bust.

I still cant get over RIMM, how this company can justify a value half of AAPL I have no idea.
A one trick pony vs a 10 trick stallion.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by monstrosity

I still cant get over RIMM, how this company can justify a value half of AAPL I have no idea.

They have a great enterprise product. Their Enterprise servers and monthly charge for each user is their bread and buter, not the handset sales. I will probably be completely pulling out of RIMM within this calendar year if the iPhone does what I think it will do. My warning sign will not be RiM releasing new products that better compete with the iPhone, but lowering their prices of their enterprise products and services to better compete with Apple. However, I believe they are opening up in China this year so that will weigh in once I see the sales projections.

[David Stevenson]

Originally Posted by monstrosity

I still cant get over RIMM, how this company can justify a value half of AAPL I have no idea.
A one trick pony vs a 10 trick stallion.

Originally Posted by solipsism

They have a great enterprise product.

And they also have the keyboard (the KISS factor: Keyboard Is So Sexy [tactile]).

[melgross]

Originally Posted by monstrosity

It would appear that if Apple invented the elixir of life, hover boards, and the ever lasting gob stopper, there would be no reflection in AAPL stock price.
AAPL is pinned to GOOG and the rest of the tech industry recently. The usual predictable patterns are not as apparent as pre the credit bust.

I still cant get over RIMM, how this company can justify a value half of AAPL I have no idea.
A one trick pony vs a 10 trick stallion.

The market is looking for RIM to grow faster in its one market than Apple will in all of its markets together. They are also assuming that RIM will tie up the enterprise business for itself.

Stats are showing that 38% of iPhone users have a second phone, and that most always that phone is a—Blackberry!

[cameronj]

Originally Posted by solipsism

I don't look for the companies that are worth the most, I look for the ones that are most likely to grow. AAPL, AMZN, MA, MON, GOOG, NTDOY, & RIMM are the best gainers that I have or have had.

I also have plenty of slower, more stable stocks, like MCD (even though it doubled in the past 2 years), that I never look at. I jumped into Visa when it became public a fews months back. I expect that one to do 3-4x growth in the next 12 months.

I often consider drug companies but that industry scares the crap out of me. If an FDA doesn't approve a product or some bad side effect s found the stock can plummet over night. But it can also be a faster gainer. I just don't have the patience or skill to research those companies. Tech companies are much easy to understand, IMO.

Yeah, I didn't mean to imply that you were looking for large companies, I was saying that a company as large as AAPL, or RIMM, or GOOG or AMZN can have a really tough time doubing because of the law of large numbers. At some point they cease to be a growth stock because their size mirrors the size of their market, and stocks don't double unless the market sees their earnings continuing to grow at high rates for eyars to come. Apple is very close to that level now - at some point the old argument becomes - is Apple worth more than MSFT, when MSFT sells X amount more software than Apple does?

So, while I think that that list of stocks is a fine one, I wouldn't count on getting the kind of returns you are hoping for. If it was as easy as looking at last year's returns and buying those stocks that did best, everyone would (and did) do that. I'm definitely not expecting another double out of Apple before 2010 or 2011, and that's if everything continues to go swimmingly. Now, if it drops back to 120, I'll be loading up on it again

[melgross]

Originally Posted by David Stevenson

And they also have the keyboard (the KISS factor: Keyboard Is So Sexy [tactile]).

Though their newest one, to be introduced in a month or two, doesn't.

[hypermark]

Thanks, PG4G. They certainly don't lack for ambition and the ability to execute. It is hard to believe that just a scant few years ago, the commoditization of everything in PC realm (i.e., The Dell Model) was accepted as gospel.

The whole commoditized and open versus proprietary and integrated is somewhat simplistically the Google versus Apple chess game that lies in the distance -- although it's not like either company is completely binary in how they are playing this one.

Still, one only has to look at iPhone SDK versus Google Android for guideposts.

mark

[macFanDave]

is the first thing that came to my mind when I heard of the Economic Stimulus Checks. I hope there are many other American patriots like me who will use it for its intended purpose: shopping.

Yes, I realize that the machines are assembled overseas, so I won't be able to help as many American workers as I would like, but the profit goes to Cupertino.

In bygone days, true patriots served their country with musket and bayonet, and later with M-16's. I'm proud to contribute to the well-being of our nation with my trusty Visa card!

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by macFanDave

is the first thing that came to my mind when I heard of the Economic Stimulus Checks. I hope there are many other American patriots like me who will use it for its intended purpose: shopping.

lol I've wondered how many are going to be used to buy 3G iPhones.

[Charko]

These April stats. confirm the March quarterly results that showed that Apple/AAPL is proving to be recession proof, and that's something that really impresses Wall St.
I think AAPL is going to soar for the rest of this year. I believe it will end up much higher than $250. by January 2009.

[SpamSandwich]

Originally Posted by solipsism

I don't look for the companies that are worth the most, I look for the ones that are most likely to grow. AAPL, AMZN, MA, MON, GOOG, NTDOY, & RIMM are the best gainers that I have or have had.

I also have plenty of slower, more stable stocks, like MCD (even though it doubled in the past 2 years), that I never look at. I jumped into Visa when it became public a fews months back. I expect that one to do 3-4x growth in the next 12 months.

I often consider drug companies but that industry scares the crap out of me. If an FDA doesn't approve a product or some bad side effect s found the stock can plummet over night. But it can also be a faster gainer. I just don't have the patience or skill to research those companies. Tech companies are much easy to understand, IMO.

Not only that, but technology (really including nearly any product that relies on integrated microelectronics) is the only sector where Moore's Law applies, ensuring a predictable curve of continuous improvement and price reduction through competition and innovation. Smart companies like Apple position themselves ahead of the marketplace and have wisely carved out an enviable position as a premium brand in the consumer products/computing niche, which has enabled them to avoid most of the fluctuations that have affected other commodities. Of course, if they time badly or misread the market, they can suffer the ill effects just like any other company, but right now they continue on an unprecedented path.

[SpamSandwich]

Originally Posted by cameronj

Yeah, I didn't mean to imply that you were looking for large companies, I was saying that a company as large as AAPL, or RIMM, or GOOG or AMZN can have a really tough time doubing because of the law of large numbers. At some point they cease to be a growth stock because their size mirrors the size of their market, and stocks don't double unless the market sees their earnings continuing to grow at high rates for eyars to come. Apple is very close to that level now - at some point the old argument becomes - is Apple worth more than MSFT, when MSFT sells X amount more software than Apple does?

So, while I think that that list of stocks is a fine one, I wouldn't count on getting the kind of returns you are hoping for. If it was as easy as looking at last year's returns and buying those stocks that did best, everyone would (and did) do that. I'm definitely not expecting another double out of Apple before 2010 or 2011, and that's if everything continues to go swimmingly. Now, if it drops back to 120, I'll be loading up on it again

If for some reason they fell precipitously to 90 again, I'd buy triple what I bought last time...

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by SpamSandwich

Smart companies like Apple position themselves ahead of the marketplace and have wisely carved out an enviable position as a premium brand in the consumer products/computing niche, which has enabled them to avoid most of the fluctuations that have affected other commodities.

I'm no expert, but I do try to follow that old Gretzky mantra of skating to where the puck is going. I even used to invest in MS, but back then it was skate to where the puke is going.



PS: I don't know about the rest of you but I seem to get asked about stocks every day by people that have all their money in saving accounts. The first thing I say is pick companies you love. If you love them then chances are others will too, but most importantly is that you're likely to want to put in the legwork of researching them. I'd like to know other's methods for picking stocks.

[SpamSandwich]

Originally Posted by macFanDave

is the first thing that came to my mind when I heard of the Economic Stimulus Checks. I hope there are many other American patriots like me who will use it for its intended purpose: shopping.

Yes, I realize that the machines are assembled overseas, so I won't be able to help as many American workers as I would like, but the profit goes to Cupertino.

In bygone days, true patriots served their country with musket and bayonet, and later with M-16's. I'm proud to contribute to the well-being of our nation with my trusty Visa card!

The first thing I thought when I heard about the "Economic Stimulus Checks"... what a fraud.

[melgross]

Originally Posted by solipsism

I'm no expert, but I do try to follow that old Gretzky mantra of skating to where the puck is going. I even used to invest in MS, but back then it was skate to where the puke is going.



PS: I don't know about the rest of you but I seem to get asked about stocks every day by people that have all their money in saving accounts. The first thing I say is pick companies you love. If you love them then chances are others will too, but most importantly is that you're likely to want to put in the legwork of researching them. I'd like to know other's methods for picking stocks.

Know the industry well, and don't try to be expert in everything. I know little about drug companies, and even though I sometimes think that one or the other would be good to buy, I don't.

I stick to computers and other electronic technology companies.

Though I've spent a lot time investigating alternative energy industries, and may buy into something there.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by melgross

Know the industry well, and don't try to be expert in everything. I know little about drug companies, and even though I sometimes think that one or the other would be good to buy, I don't.

I stick to computers and other electronic technology companies.

I hear you!

[zinfella]

Originally Posted by melgross

Know the industry well, and don't try to be expert in everything. I know little about drug companies, and even though I sometimes think that one or the other would be good to buy, I don't.

I stick to computers and other electronic technology companies.

Though I've spent a lot time investigating alternative energy industries, and may buy into something there.

I'm still waiting for an alternative source that is available 24/7 without respect to the weather, and rivals traditional sources for cost. Thus far, the best bet is hydrogen, IF an efficient way to produce is discovered. But, as long as it takes more energy to produce it than you get when you burn it, it's going to be a loser. I'd be happy with some new traditional sources, like nuclear.

[melgross]

Originally Posted by zinfella

I'm still waiting for an alternative source that is available 24/7 without respect to the weather, and rivals traditional sources for cost. Thus far, the best bet is hydrogen, IF an efficient way to produce is discovered. But, as long as it takes more energy to produce it than you get when you burn it, it's going to be a loser. I'd be happy with some new traditional sources, like nuclear.

The weather will be a factor in many of these. As far as cost goes, it's not likely that we will see oil and gas prices do anthing other than continue a rise, though it may be interrupted from time to time.

This brings alternative energy pricing in line with conventional prices, even without governmental tax breaks.

We are seeing ever larger wind plants coming in line, and will see that continue. New developments in solar cell technology are bringing the cost of that down quickly as well.

Even semi-conventional energy sources such as shale oil extraction is looking good at these prices. While I don't like it, coal-oil extraction research is also accelerating, with better sulfur removal.

I've always been a fan of nuclear power. My belief there, is that the danger from long term waste disposal is much less than from the continued use of heavy carbon producing fuels. These fuels also produce other noxious residue that is poisonous.

While the US nuclear industry has produced no problems other than the meltdown as Three Mile Island, which resulted in an amount of radiation release of no more than a few chest x-rays equivalent, people are fearful. The government has given into that fear over the years, instead of helping to get them beyond it.

New, far safer reactors have been designed over the years, and hopefully, fairly soon, we will see some of them built.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by melgross

New, far safer reactors have been designed over the years, and hopefully, fairly soon, we will see some of them built.

Ironically or sadly (your choose), the US government is helping other countries establish nuclear power plants but we are still on hold using less efficient systems because of this irrational fear.

[melgross]

Originally Posted by solipsism

Ironically or sadly (your choose), the US government is helping other countries establish nuclear power plants but we are still on hold using less efficient systems because of this irrational fear.

Many of those other countries have to import an even geater percentage of their energy than we do, so they're less likely to be put off by nuclear. We can look to France and Japan as examples. But, even energy producing countries are turning to nuclear for their own use.

[zinfella]

Originally Posted by melgross

The weather will be a factor in many of these. As far as cost goes, it's not likely that we will see oil and gas prices do anthing other than continue a rise, though it may be interrupted from time to time.

This brings alternative energy pricing in line with conventional prices, even without governmental tax breaks.

We are seeing ever larger wind plants coming in line, and will see that continue. New developments in solar cell technology are bringing the cost of that down quickly as well.

Even semi-conventional energy sources such as shale oil extraction is looking good at these prices. While I don't like it, coal-oil extraction research is also accelerating, with better sulfur removal.

I've always been a fan of nuclear power. My belief there, is that the danger from long term waste disposal is much less than from the continued use of heavy carbon producing fuels. These fuels also produce other noxious residue that is poisonous.

While the US nuclear industry has produced no problems other than the meltdown as Three Mile Island, which resulted in an amount of radiation release of no more than a few chest x-rays equivalent, people are fearful. The government has given into that fear over the years, instead of helping to get them beyond it.

New, far safer reactors have been designed over the years, and hopefully, fairly soon, we will see some of them built.

It doesn't matter how much sulfur is removed from coal, it still puts 2000 tons of radioactive uranium and thorium into our atmosphere every year. That the dirty little secret about coal.

Wind farms have been around for close to 50 years, and the power from them is still very expensive, and they only work when the wind blows.

Solar requires a huge up front cost, and doesn't produce night when power is still needed. One can store the power in lead acid batteries, but that's a can of worms few want to open. The batteries are an environmental hazard that can be costly to clean up.

We have oil, and we can find more, but it'll be real tough if we aren't allowed to drill for it. We haven't built a new refinery in 30 years, and our population hasn't stopped growing.

We are letting whackos control our lives.

[David Stevenson]

Originally Posted by melgross

Though their newest one, to be introduced in a month or two, doesn't.

For a BlackEye, that will be a KISS of death.

[SpamSandwich]

Originally Posted by solipsism

PS: I don't know about the rest of you but I seem to get asked about stocks every day by people that have all their money in saving accounts. The first thing I say is pick companies you love. If you love them then chances are others will too, but most importantly is that you're likely to want to put in the legwork of researching them. I'd like to know other's methods for picking stocks.

I generally follow Buffet's suggestion of following companies that one understands or whose products one uses, with just a few exceptions... such as MSFT (which has been an under-performer for lo these many years). This strategy doesn't necessarily apply to mutual funds or the like, but it's a good starting point. The important thing is to get started early and be a regular investor. The ups and downs of the market are a good teacher also.

Are there any stock/investing sites you gravitate toward? I sometimes follow Motley Fool, but I'm not a day trader and can't afford to risk huge chunks of my investments on high-risk stocks.

[David Stevenson]

Originally Posted by solipsism

PS: I don't know about the rest of you but I seem to get asked about stocks every day by people that have all their money in saving accounts. The first thing I say is pick companies you love. If you love them then chances are others will too, but most importantly is that you're likely to want to put in the legwork of researching them. I'd like to know other's methods for picking stocks.

My first stock purchase, back in the 1970s, was Floating Point Systems (a computer add on manufacturing company for minicomputers specializing in, I don't remember what). I loved the company, knew what they did, knew their market, etc. etc. A little later, they sought me out to offer me a job (not because I had bought the stock [I assume] but because I knew what they did, knew their market, was a respected expert in their field, etc. I turned down the job offer. A few years later they were bankrupt and I lost my entire investment (not because I turned down the job, I am reasonably sure). Maybe I should have sold the stock when I "sold" the company, but I was young, and a young investor. Right now, my main STOCK, as opposed to MUTUAL FUND, holdings, are in APPL and HPQ, both companies I worked for, and both stocks I purchased through the employee stock purchase plans. I'd say this is the best method of researching a firm: if you are willing to work for them, invest in them.

[melgross]

Originally Posted by zinfella

It doesn't matter how much sulfur is removed from coal, it still puts 2000 tons of radioactive uranium and thorium into our atmosphere every year. That the dirty little secret about coal.

So does oil.

Wind farms have been around for close to 50 years, and the power from them is still very expensive, and they only work when the wind blows.

The new equipment is nothing like what was used ten years ago, much less 50. New equipment works in lower wind speeds than did older designs. this has led to a resurgence in wind power. The areas that are usable are far larger than with older equipment. The newest plant will be about 300 MW in size.

Solar requires a huge up front cost, and doesn't produce night when power is still needed. One can store the power in lead acid batteries, but that's a can of worms few want to open. The batteries are an environmental hazard that can be costly to clean up.

Again, you are looking at older equipment. New equipment costs much less, is more efficient, is smaller, simpler, doesn't use lead cells, etc.

We have oil, and we can find more, but it'll be real tough if we aren't allowed to drill for it. We haven't built a new refinery in 30 years, and our population hasn't stopped growing.

We are letting whackos control our lives.

It's pretty much agreed, even in the the energy industry, that most of the oil out there has been found. Even with modern sideways drilling technology, whatever oil there is to be found won't cover the vast needs of China, and India. Countries such as Vietnam (with 100 million people) will also have to be met. it used to be that only the principal industrial countries used oil ad gas in large quantities, but that club has been vastly expanded. Energy prices will continue to go up.

That makes alternative energy viable.

The small amounts of oil it is thought we have in Alaska, off the Florida cost, and in other areas isn't all that much. It's a small percentage of what we use each day. We imported an average of 20.7 million barrels of oil each day last year. Increased domestic supplies couldn't cover more than a small fraction of that, and it would take a decade, even if we started today, for those fields to be fully productive, and then, a couple of years later, their output would start a rapid decline.

It's no panacea.

New refineries are needed, but at what expense? Besides, while they can increase the flow of fuel, they can't add to it.