or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple stock projected to hit $300 on strength of iPhone, Mac sales
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple stock projected to hit $300 on strength of iPhone, Mac sales - Page 2

post #41 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by rickag View Post

I bought 400 shares back in about '97. With spits I had 1600 shares. Idiot financial advisor talked me into selling a bulk of my position since it grew to over 30 or 40% of my IRA - moron that I am I sold much of my stock

Since then I've bought back in @ about 78, 79, 80, 120, 140 and 170. It will be a much tougher sell by a financial analyst to get me to sell my AAPL next time. idiots

I've long since learned not to trust the advice of a financial advisor or stock broker. There is ultimately one person responsible for the success or failure of your investments, and it ain't them.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #42 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

Sure, but that goes into book value, and investors hardly care about book value. Investors care about revenues and EPS growth. I'm not saying that building the data center is not a good investment for Apple, but that investors aren't going to get excited when they "find out" about it (if only because this has been known for something close to a year now). What will excite investors is Apple showing that whatever the data center does is something that drives profits. We don't even know what the data center is for yet.

I subsequently edited my original response. Investment is not accounted for in the income statement, but rather in cash flows and the balance sheet. However, I agree with you that Apple has not specifically announced what traffic it will handle through its data center, but in light of recent announcements it's logical to expect that iAd, iBooks and expanded iTunes with video streaming will be part of the picture. One more thing - wouldn't it blow the lid off things if Apple came out with its own search engine? Heartburn for Google, Yahoo, Bing, etc.

I admit to being a Fanatical Moderate. I Disdain the Inane. Vyizderzominymororzizazizdenderizorziz?

Reply

I admit to being a Fanatical Moderate. I Disdain the Inane. Vyizderzominymororzizazizdenderizorziz?

Reply
post #43 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

This conclusion is incorrect, even by your own reasoning. The impact of "Aunt Millie" investors on the share price is substantially close to nil because "Aunt Millie" investors are an extremely small segment of the overall market. Anyone who believes that they getting more for their money buying twice the number of shares at half the price does not even qualify as an amateur investor, they are a witless investor.

Splits made sense when trading "odd lots" of shares (lots less than 100 or multiples of 100) was more costly. With the advent of electronic trading, this distinction has vanished, and so has the importance of stock splits. Even marginally informed investors know that they are meaningless.

Required reading.
post #44 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

How did that work? When you buy and sell stock it's a first-in, first-out calculation. So if you have been buying and selling AAPL after your original investment, you were actually selling the stock you originally bought at $4, not "newer" stock at a higher cost basis... unless I misunderstand your comment.

Not necessarily true. You can also sell specific shares. See the description of 'versus purchase' here: https://scs.fidelity.com/webxpress/h...nition_v.shtml or google the phrase.
post #45 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Required reading.

On target. Small odd-lot shareholders are a pain in the butt and costly expense for large public companies. The aggregate cost of printing and mailing required reports is exorbitant.

I admit to being a Fanatical Moderate. I Disdain the Inane. Vyizderzominymororzizazizdenderizorziz?

Reply

I admit to being a Fanatical Moderate. I Disdain the Inane. Vyizderzominymororzizazizdenderizorziz?

Reply
post #46 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

This conclusion is incorrect, even by your own reasoning. The impact of "Aunt Millie" investors on the share price is substantially close to nil because "Aunt Millie" investors are an extremely small segment of the overall market. Anyone who believes that they getting more for their money buying twice the number of shares at half the price does not even qualify as an amateur investor, they are a witless investor.

Retail investors still hold about 30% of AAPL. Stock splits often increase volume.

http://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/113.asp
post #47 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Not necessarily true. You can also sell specific shares. See the description of 'versus purchase' here: https://scs.fidelity.com/webxpress/h...nition_v.shtml or google the phrase.

My accountant never informed me of this, however, it looks like it only works when the original order is placed (one must specify that the shares will be "tax lot shares") otherwise the FIFO, or first-in, first-out accounting method applies.

If Dr Milmoss knew about this way back at $4, then I salute him.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #48 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

How did that work? When you buy and sell stock it's a first-in, first-out calculation. So if you have been buying and selling AAPL after your original investment, you were actually selling the stock you originally bought at $4, not "newer" stock at a higher cost basis... unless I misunderstand your comment.

At any rate, $4 was an amazing time to get in... congratulations!

You don't have to sell first in. You can sell any shares you bought at any time using the cost basis of the shares you are selling, or at least so I have been advised by my CPA. Most people probably do sell their oldest shares first, if only because they might not qualify for long term capital gains rates if they don't -- but if it's long term gains either way, it really doesn't matter. The IRS collects the tax eventually (unless you donate the shares to a charity).

EDIT: Should have read forward, question already answered.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #49 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post

Retail investors still hold about 30% of AAPL. Stock splits often increase volume.

http://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/113.asp

But empirical evidence does not show a positive link between volume and price. The only impact of volume on price will be via lowering the cost of capital for firms, by lowering the transaction costs on stocks. But for stocks such as Apple, the volume is already so high that a split is unlikely to affect bid-ask spreads.

Studies do show a strong positive association between volume and volatility, though. The reason for that is unclear.
post #50 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post

Retail investors still hold about 30% of AAPL. Stock splits often increase volume.

Of course splits increase volume, since they increase the float proportionally to the split. What's so good about volume anyway?

The problem I have with your argument is the apparent assumption that the 30% of AAPL which is held outside of institutions is owned in any significant fraction by "Aunt Millie" investors who don't know that 10*5=5*10.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #51 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

Of course splits increase volume, since they increase the float proportionally to the split. What's so good about volume anyway?

The problem I have with your argument is the apparent assumption that the 30% of AAPL which is held outside of institutions is owned in any significant fraction by "Aunt Millie" investors who don't know that 10*5=5*10.

I'm not discounting the arithmetic ability of the "Aunt Millie" investors. Still, there is evidence that emotions sway some investors, probably even the folks who run some institutions. Not everything is traded by a computer algorithm.

Increased volumes will drive up awareness. Some institutional buyers and mutual funds are compelled to add more of a heavily traded stock.

If Buffett can split BRK-B, then Jobs can split AAPL.

post #52 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

My accountant never informed me of this, however, it looks like it only works when the original order is placed (one must specify that the shares will be "tax lot shares") otherwise the FIFO, or first-in, first-out accounting method applies.

If Dr Milmoss knew about this way back at $4, then I salute him.

As far as I know, you just have to inform your broker at the time of sale about the specific lot that you'd like to sell, and that's it. I am not sure of any other restriction.

The data should then get entered as 'SVP' data in your tax-related documents, and you can self-report.
post #53 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

As far as I know, you just have to inform your broker at the time of sale about the specific lot that you'd like to sell, and that's it. I am not sure of any other restriction.

The data should then get entered as 'SVP' data in your tax-related documents, and you can self-report.

Let's say you originally bought 1000 shares at $10 basis cost, then you later sold 200 shares at $220, and other amounts at other times, and all the while buying different amounts at different times. I mean, it would be a devil of a tracking problem, but it could be done.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #54 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Let's say you originally bought 1000 shares at $10 basis cost, then you later sold 200 shares at $220, and other amounts at other times, and all the while buying different amounts at different times. I mean, it would be a devil of a tracking problem, but it could be done.

Yes, I agree, esp. with shares purchased a while ago. But if you used a brokerage, they should have the info?

But with the electronic trading accounts now, it has become so much easier.
post #55 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post

I'm not discounting the arithmetic ability of the "Aunt Millie" investors. Still, there is evidence that emotions sway some investors, probably even the folks who run some institutions. Not everything is traded by a computer algorithm.

Increased volumes will drive up awareness. Some institutional buyers and mutual funds are compelled to add more of a heavily traded stock.

If Buffett can split BRK-B, then Jobs can split AAPL.


BRK is not exactly a great example, since BRK-A is selling for over $120,000 a share now, and has never been split. Buffet created BRK-B for people who can't afford to buy one share of BRK-A.

If you want to get down to the fundamentals, the markets move entirely on emotions -- the classic greed-fear continuum. What this has to do specifically with splits though, I don't know. I suspect not very much, and not especially over the longer haul.

Yes, AAPL "could be" split. The question is why they should bother.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #56 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post


If Buffett can split BRK-B, then Jobs can split AAPL.


That, I agree with! No harm done in splitting.

Heck, at the margin, it might even fool a couple of people.....
post #57 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Yes, I agree, esp. with shares purchased a while ago. But if you used a brokerage, they should have the info?

But with the electronic trading accounts now, it has become so much easier.

I don't use a human, I just use the online trading with a major stockbroker. I place trades whenever I want, it's cheaper and I don't have to rely on a sometimes unreliable broker with my pitifully small trades which often get short shrift.

Incidentally, those of you who do your own trading and have to keep track of all this information... do you know of a comprehensive Numbers template or Excel doc that is suited for this? Something you actually use would be more helpful than something you just Googled.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #58 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Incidentally, those of you who do your own trading and have to keep track of all this information... do you know of a comprehensive Numbers template or Excel doc that is suited for this? Something you actually use would be more helpful than something you just Googled.

Yahoo finance allows you to track cost basis. But really, your online brokerage should do this too. They will have a history of all your trades.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #59 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

BRK is not exactly a great example, since BRK-A is selling for over $120,000 a share now, and has never been split. Buffet created BRK-B for people who can't afford to buy one share of BRK-A.

If you want to get down to the fundamentals, the markets move entirely on emotions -- the classic greed-fear continuum. What this has to do specifically with splits though, I don't know. I suspect not very much, and not especially over the longer haul.

Yes, AAPL "could be" split. The question is why they should bother.

There were some studies done on stock split announcements and those did increase the prices, at least for the short term.

Concerning Berkshire Hathaway, yes, I realize that Buffett created BRK-B (1/30 the share value) as a way for more people to invest in the company. The 50-to-1 split of BRK-B (now trading around $80) was to allow shareholders of Burlington Northern to have a piece of the action as well, but had the additional aftereffect of getting Berkshire Hathaway on the S&P 500 and may pave the way for them getting on the Dow 30.

Regardless of the split situation, it is a good day for AAPL shareholders.
post #60 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

Yahoo finance allows you to track cost basis. But really, your online brokerage should do this too. They will have a history of all your trades.

I agree. For instance, I use Schwab's online services, and everything is fairly comprehensive and automatic. (Note: This is not meant to be an endorsement of Schwab).
post #61 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Incidentally, those of you who do your own trading and have to keep track of all this information... do you know of a comprehensive Numbers template or Excel doc that is suited for this? Something you actually use would be more helpful than something you just Googled.

My brokerage likewise reports cost basis in my monthly statements.

Quicken tracks this too, as well as ROI, dividend yield, etc.
post #62 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

I agree. For instance, I use Schwab's online services, and everything is fairly comprehensive and automatic. (Note: This is not meant to be an endorsement of Schwab).

A good number of my trades happened before the online brokers were recording trade information over a long period (this was in the '90s), so I have to rely on my paper trail for accuracy until I can put everything into a tracking form. Also, Schwab is OK. I didn't like e-Trade and I've heard about problems with ScottTrade also.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #63 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post

My brokerage likewise reports cost basis in my monthly statements.

Quicken tracks this too, as well as ROI, dividend yield, etc.

Does Quicken integrate with your brokerage account? How do you do the data entry?

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #64 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Does Quicken integrate with your brokerage account? How do you do the data entry?

It is integrated with Schwab, fwiw: http://www.schwab.com/public/schwab/...ount_downloads
post #65 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Does Quicken integrate with your brokerage account? How do you do the data entry?

I believe my brokerage offers an option to download transaction data into Quicken for Mac, but I don't use it. Updating stock prices in Quicken is as simple as clicking a button; this is very handy.

Personally, I deliberately enter all brokerage transactions manually. Yes, this takes more time than downloading transactions, but I do this so that I can think about my investments. What did I just buy? How much commission did I pay? Is my investment mix right? OK, I got a dividend -- what's the yield? What is the ROI of this investment? Stuff like that.

I'm not a day trader, so it's not like I have hundreds and hundreds of transactions a month.

Manual entry forces me to think more carefully about what I'm doing. It's a bit like switching your SLR to manual focus, manual exposure on a tripod.

For something like my investments, it's worth putting in a little extra attention. But that's just me.
post #66 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster View Post

I told my dad to buy Apple stock when the first ipods came out lol. I always remind him of that.

Anyone here buy in at that point? I bet you're fat and happy now

I can answer your question and say yes. I got in at 32.31 dollars a share and am glad I did back then. I am only hoping that the stock splits soon...
post #67 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post

There were some studies done on stock split announcements and those did increase the prices, at least for the short term.

Concerning Berkshire Hathaway, yes, I realize that Buffett created BRK-B (1/30 the share value) as a way for more people to invest in the company. The 50-to-1 split of BRK-B (now trading around $80) was to allow shareholders of Burlington Northern to have a piece of the action as well, but had the additional aftereffect of getting Berkshire Hathaway on the S&P 500 and may pave the way for them getting on the Dow 30.

Regardless of the split situation, it is a good day for AAPL shareholders.

Right, a company can generate a bit of short-term excitement by announcing a split, but it doesn't last. It's really just a gimmick, unless and until the price of a single share goes so high (BRK) that an ordinary investor could not buy a single one. Of course if AAPL had not split twice over the last 13 years, the share price would be pushing $1,000 now -- which probably would be in that territory. But GOOG doesn't seem troubled by theirs reaching $600.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #68 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

Right, a company can generate a bit of short-term excitement by announcing a split, but it doesn't last. It's really just a gimmick, unless and until the price of a single share goes so high (BRK) that an ordinary investor could not buy a single one. Of course if AAPL had not split twice over the last 13 years, the share price would be pushing $1,000 now -- which probably would be in that territory. But GOOG doesn't seem troubled by theirs reaching $600.

If I recall correctly, Eric Schmidt has been quoted that he admired Buffett's policy of no-dividends/no-splits. Of course, this was before Buffett split BRK-B 50-for-1, so who knows what Eric thinks now.

Buffett has been known to change his tune from time to time if a situation arises that benefits the shareholder. I don't foresee Buffett splitting BRK-A (which has proportionally more voting rights than BRK-B) in the future though.
post #69 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post

I believe my brokerage offers an option to download transaction data into Quicken for Mac, but I don't use it. Updating stock prices in Quicken is as simple as clicking a button; this is very handy.

Personally, I deliberately enter all brokerage transactions manually. Yes, this takes more time than downloading transactions, but I do this so that I can think about my investments. What did I just buy? How much commission did I pay? Is my investment mix right? OK, I got a dividend -- what's the yield? What is the ROI of this investment? Stuff like that.

I'm not a day trader, so it's not like I have hundreds and hundreds of transactions a month.

Manual entry forces me to think more carefully about what I'm doing. It's a bit like switching your SLR to manual focus, manual exposure on a tripod.

For something like my investments, it's worth putting in a little extra attention. But that's just me.

I enter trans manually also. I have had a few errors on my Schwab statements over the years, and I only found them by reconciling the trans I entered against the statements. If one downloads transactions from Schwab, the reconciling step is redundant. Regarding tax accounting, I have found Quicken to be very inaccurate in computing cost bases, when positions were legged in and out. I have just been using Apple Works and now Numbers spreadsheets, so I am also interested in hearing if anyone has found a good trading accounting package for Mac. Regarding splitting the stock, Dr Millmoss touched on the only reason I can think of in his last post. Sometimes parents and grandparents like to get children started in investing by buying them a single share of stock. They would be more likely to do this for $60 than $240.
post #70 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

But did you hold, or did you ever sell?

Still holding! It's all paper gain at the moment.
post #71 of 71
Apple Stock: 248.92
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple stock projected to hit $300 on strength of iPhone, Mac sales