or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › Apple closes at new all-time high as world’s largest company
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple closes at new all-time high as world’s largest company

post #1 of 107
Thread Starter 
Shares of Apple rose nearly 3 percent Monday to close at a new all-time high of $411.63, padding the electronic giants lead over Exxon Mobile as the worlds most valuable company.

Apples previous high came on July 26 of this year when the stock hit $403.41 per share.

With Mondays $11.13 gain, the Cupertino, Calif., iPhone maker retains its title as the worlds largest company by market capitalization, outpacing the former crown holder Exxon Mobil Corporation by $23 billion.

Since Apple overtook the energy giant in August, its market cap has grown by more than $44 billion and now stands at $382.01 billion compared to Exxons $358.34 billion.

Though some had expected a sell-off after Apple co-founder Steve Jobs resigned as the company's CEO in late August, shares of the company have actually risen more than 10 percent since then. Wall Street analysts suggested that Jobs' resignation had already been priced into the stock. Investors have compared Jobs to business magnates Henry Ford and Walt Disney, whose companies successfully carried on their legacies long after they stepped down.

The rise also comes amid growing anticipation that the electronics maker is on the verge of introducing the iPhone 5, widely expected to hit the market around mid-October.

AAPL trading prices from Monday. Chart via Google.

Last quarter, Apple shipped a record 20.34 million iPhones, accounting for 46 percent of the companys revenue. One analyst recently told AppleInsider that Apple plans to build 30 million iPhone 5s in the fourth quarter of calendar 2011.

Apples growth comes as U.S. markets took a moderate downturn Monday, due to investors shedding risky assets while Greek officials held a conference call with foreign creditors over their looming debt crisis, according to The New York Times.

Meanwhile, the NASDAQ closed down .36 percent while the Dow Jones and S&P 500 both fell .94 and .98 percent respectively.
post #2 of 107
Well, you guys asked for this useless topic. Go nuts!!!!!
post #3 of 107
Please don't confuse these two ideas. By almost any standard - number of employees, number of products sold, square footage of land or buildings - there are companies "larger" than Apple.

But most valuable? Heck yeah.
post #4 of 107
Apple is doomed.
post #5 of 107
Mmmmm, AAPL, what a lovely alpha you have.
post #6 of 107
Sorry, when you measure company size (as in "largeness"), the accepted measurement is revenue, not market capitalization. The three largest companies in America today are Wal-mart, Exxon Mobil, and Chevron.

Someday, AI may actually properly report financial topics accurately.

But not today.
post #7 of 107
But yet they refuse to pay out a dividend...with almost a hundred billion dollars in the bank. Apple has realized they no longer need those who invest in them because of their cash stockpile. Very sad. Never forget those who helped fund you when things were just ok. If you're gonna hoard your money, at least give more back to the community. Do I dare mention Target gves more money back to the community and they are no where near Apple's worth? You're already number 1 in so many areas, try to be number 1 in areas that really matter.
post #8 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post

Sorry, when you measure company size (as in "largeness"), the accepted measurement is revenue, not market capitalization. The three largest companies in America today are Wal-mart, Exxon Mobil, and Chevron.

Someday, AI may actually properly report financial topics accurately.

But not today.

The "accepted measurement"? By whom, other than (the now-nearly-defunct) Fortune?

I think you're a bit off on your finance today....
post #9 of 107
Been saying for years - this company has unimaginable potential even for crazy fan boys like most of AI forum posters

It's like Cook & co says: even we are amazed.

Just brace yourselves - if there's no cataclysm, AAPL is going through the roof and I don't even have the guts to guess away where AAPL will be a year from now.

Challenge: any guesses? $600 anyone?
post #10 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by anfboymn View Post

But yet they refuse to pay out a dividend...with almost a hundred billion dollars in the bank. Apple has realized they no longer need those who invest in them because of their cash stockpile. Very sad. Never forget those who helped fund you when things were just ok. If you're gonna hoard your money, at least give more back to the community. Do I dare mention Target gves more money back to the community and they are no where near Apple's worth? You're already number 1 in so many areas, try to be number 1 in areas that really matter.

What is this "community" that you refer to?
post #11 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post

Sorry, when you measure company size (as in "largeness"), the accepted measurement is revenue, not market capitalization. The three largest companies in America today are Wal-mart, Exxon Mobil, and Chevron.

Someday, AI may actually properly report financial topics accurately.

But not today.

You may want to tell all of the financial outlets, because I don't think they got the memo. Forbes, MarketWatch, asymco, Yahoo Finance...... all have articles on "market cap". So, I guess market capitalization may be of some interest.
post #12 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

The "accepted measurement"? By whom, other than (the now-nearly-defunct) Fortune?

I think you're a bit off on your finance today....

Nah, not just Fortune.

Let's face it, the two most important statistics for the Street are revenue and EPS.

I realize that there are financial articles by a variety of sources about market cap (or any other financial barometer), but as long as CFOs still read Fortune, revenue is the benchmark. I never said that revenue was the only measurement of a company's fiscal health, just that is was equivalent to "large". And large doesn't necessarily mean good, healthy, efficient, etc.

If you want to assess a company's overall value, there are probably 20-30 financial statistics to consider, plus intangible/subjective ratings like what they do to combat climate change or how they treat employees.
post #13 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by anfboymn View Post

But yet they refuse to pay out a dividend...
Do I dare mention Target gves more money back to the community and they are no where near Apple's worth? You're already number 1 in so many areas, try to be number 1 in areas that really matter.

You're right, Apple is no where near Target's (who?) worth. Must be because they have a smart use for all that cash.

Which brings me to:

You're right, Apple is also number 1 in areas that really matter such as their cash management.
post #14 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

What is this "community" that you refer to?

Serious? The communities both you, I, and everyone else on this blog site belong to. Schools, rec centers, volunteer events, natural disaster reliefs, etc etc etc.
post #15 of 107
I'm sure that Apple will use these absurd profits and limitless equity to create jobs in America.

post #16 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post

Let's face it, the two most important statistics for the Street are revenue and EPS.

(Leaving aside the fact that that Operating Margin and Free Cash Flow might be at least equally important) Why do you suppose the Street cares about those two numbers?
post #17 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post

Sorry, when you measure company size (as in "largeness"), the accepted measurement is revenue, not market capitalization. The three largest companies in America today are Wal-mart, Exxon Mobil, and Chevron.

Someday, AI may actually properly report financial topics accurately.

But not today.

Yeah, like Nokia with their high and mighty revenue... but almost no profit?

Right...
post #18 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by XamaX View Post

You're right, Apple is no where near Target's (who?) worth. Must be because they have a smart use for all that cash.

Which brings me to:

You're right, Apple is also number 1 in areas that really matter such as their cash management.

Apple is acting like money is everything by not being a community leader; you can still be hugely successful while still being a major player in the philanthropy arena. And I promise you, Steve Jobs is now realizing money isn't everything.
post #19 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

(Leaving aside the fact that that Operating Margin and Free Cash Flow might be at least equally important) Why do you suppose the Street cares about those two numbers?

Oh, I never said that they don't.

But the first two numbers that the Street will report will be revenue and EPS.

Again, I'm not saying those are the exclusive two measurements of a company's fiscal value. I'm just saying that the Street starts with those two measurements.

Go ahead and look at any recap of a corporate earnings announcement. Revenue and EPS are always the first two stats mentioned.

Let's face it, it's a bit like baseball statistics. Batting average and hits are two most reported hitting statistics, even though there are many more measurements that might be more important (SLG, OBP, OPS, etc.).
post #20 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by anfboymn View Post

But yet they refuse to pay out a dividend...with almost a hundred billion dollars in the bank. Apple has realized they no longer need those who invest in them because of their cash stockpile. Very sad. Never forget those who helped fund you when things were just ok. If you're gonna hoard your money, at least give more back to the community. Do I dare mention Target gves more money back to the community and they are no where near Apple's worth? You're already number 1 in so many areas, try to be number 1 in areas that really matter.

LOL, this is a retarded argument, it's a growth stock on a massive scale, want a dividend? Sell a share, there's your dividend.

I have a quarter mil in Apple stock, and I don't give a damn about a dividend...
post #21 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by anfboymn View Post

Apple is acting like money is everything by not being a community leader; you can still be hugely successful while still being a major player in the philanthropy arena. And I promise you, Steve Jobs is now realizing money isn't everything.

cringe comment there about Steve.

Actually, I believe that money was at most a minor concern to Steve and to Apple leadership. They are/were so focused on creating great stuff they missed some other important things. Hopefully that will improve.

Macintosh 512Ke.......

Reply

Macintosh 512Ke.......

Reply
post #22 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by anfboymn View Post

Serious? The communities both you, I, and everyone else on this blog site belong to. Schools, rec centers, volunteer events, natural disaster reliefs, etc etc etc.

Yes, serious.

Public corporations in the US are set up for a primary purpose, and that is to create shareholder value. This notion is enshrined a famous (Michigan) Supreme court ruling in 1919 called Dodge v. Ford (you can Google it). It has become the law of the land.

We elect a government (and fund numerous non-profits, including religious institutions) whose role it is to address the welfare of other constituencies.

This is not to say that corporations should not spend their money on charitable contributions or other good works. But they have no right to do so at the expense of profit and shareholder value maximization. That is the law. We can try to change it if we don't like it, but until we do, Tim Cook's objective function is unambiguous.

Arguably, schools, rec centers, volunteer organizations etc have got great value out of Apple producing and selling products of high quality, and from the charitable contributions from shareholders who have more to give, thanks to the wealth created by companies such as Apple. (People like Bill Gates and Warren Buffett couldn't do all the wonderful things they do if it weren't for the wealth created by their companies).
post #23 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by anfboymn View Post

And I promise you, Steve Jobs is now realizing money isn't everything.

Unless that is a pathetically cheap shot, what is that supposed to mean?
post #24 of 107
omg, shiny beats oil.

well, next rumor of a rumor of a rumor of a gas leak from cheney's butt will raise Exxon above APPL.
:-D * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Reply
:-D * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Reply
post #25 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post

Sorry, when you measure company size (as in "largeness"), the accepted measurement is revenue, not market capitalization. The three largest companies in America today are Wal-mart, Exxon Mobil, and Chevron.

Someday, AI may actually properly report financial topics accurately.

But not today.

Title says it.
post #26 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by anfboymn View Post

But yet they refuse to pay out a dividend...with almost a hundred billion dollars in the bank. Apple has realized they no longer need those who invest in them because of their cash stockpile. Very sad. Never forget those who helped fund you when things were just ok. If you're gonna hoard your money, at least give more back to the community. Do I dare mention Target gves more money back to the community and they are no where near Apple's worth? You're already number 1 in so many areas, try to be number 1 in areas that really matter.

You don't know much about why companies pay dividends, do you?
Hint... It's because they're not increasing in share value.
I'll take my 300% gains over little dividend payoffs any day.
post #27 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandau View Post

omg, shiny beats oil.

well, next rumor of a rumor of a rumor of a gas leak from cheney's butt will raise Exxon above APPL.

That's very nice, but I doubt if Appell Petroleum Company (stock symbol APPL) has much input about the former vice president.
post #28 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Yes, serious.

This is not to say that corporations should not spend their money on charitable contributions or other good works. But they have no right to do so at the expense of profit and shareholder value maximization. That is the law. We can try to change it if we don't like it, but until we do, Tim Cook's objective function is unambiguous.

There are some very powerful reasons for corporation to give back to the community: their millions of customers. If customers care enough, and if the corporation does not respond, shareholders will be royally screwed. And some customers on this board clearly care, and that may be a sign of trouble in paradise.

Apple's is the most respected company in the world http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortu...011/full_list/. Apple's reputation is so valuable it cannot be priced, but it may be worth more that all that cash that they have in the bank. If many people begin to believe (with a basis in truth) that Apple is not a "good" corporate citizen, Apple will be badly hurt.

Macintosh 512Ke.......

Reply

Macintosh 512Ke.......

Reply
post #29 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by anfboymn View Post

Apple is acting like money is everything by not being a community leader; you can still be hugely successful while still being a major player in the philanthropy arena. And I promise you, Steve Jobs is now realizing money isn't everything.

And Bill Gates money is doing so much good. Maybe you should look at the performance of his charter schools. They are awful. Steve can do what he wants with his money. He earned it. Apple does some philanthropy they just don't brag about it.
post #30 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Yes, serious.

Public corporations in the US are set up for a primary purpose, and that is to create shareholder value. This notion is enshrined a famous (Michigan) Supreme court ruling in 1919 called Dodge v. Ford (you can Google it). It has become the law of the land.

We elect a government (and fund numerous non-profits, including religious institutions) whose role it is to address the welfare of other constituencies.

This is not to say that corporations should not spend their money on charitable contributions or other good works. But they have no right to do so at the expense of profit and shareholder value maximization. That is the law. We can try to change it if we don't like it, but until we do, Tim Cook's objective function is unambiguous.

Arguably, schools, rec centers, volunteer organizations etc have got great value out of Apple producing and selling products of high quality, and from the charitable contributions from shareholders who have more to give, thanks to the wealth created by companies such as Apple. (People like Bill Gates and Warren Buffett couldn't do all the wonderful things they do if it weren't for the wealth created by their companies).

Ok, so saying Apple giving back to the community by means of them selling their products to schools is philanthropy? Give me a break. They BUY them because they are good products. That's it. Also, look it up, Bill Gates and Warren Buffett donate billions while they are still alive to organizations they feel need them...and are donating a HUGE percentage of their wealth once they're dead. Apple is purely sub-mediocre, and that's being liberal. Corporations or invdividuals are not required to donate anything, obviously, but there's a point where you need to sit back and realize a hundred billion dollars in the bank is no different than that lady on that hoarders show who can't let anything go and has a panic attack when someone just talks about getting rid of some.
post #31 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post

Nah, not just Fortune.

Let's face it, the two most important statistics for the Street are revenue and EPS.

I realize that there are financial articles by a variety of sources about market cap (or any other financial barometer), but as long as CFOs still read Fortune, revenue is the benchmark. I never said that revenue was the only measurement of a company's fiscal health, just that is was equivalent to "large". And large doesn't necessarily mean good, healthy, efficient, etc.

If you want to assess a company's overall value, there are probably 20-30 financial statistics to consider, plus intangible/subjective ratings like what they do to combat climate change or how they treat employees.

Revenue is relative to Costs of Maintenance including Labor Costs, plus the outstanding Debt of the Company.

Apple has zero debt, extremely High Revenue to Costs and the largest market cap.
post #32 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by JONOROM View Post

And some customers on this board clearly care, and may be a sign of trouble in paradise.

People like you would surely wish that.
post #33 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by JONOROM View Post

Apple's is, I believe, the most respected company in the world. Apple's reputation is so valuable it cannot be priced, but it may be worth more that all that cash that they have in the bank. If many people begin to believe (with a basis in truth) that Apple is not a "good" corporate citizen, Apple will be badly hurt.

See above.
post #34 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by esummers View Post

And Bill Gates money is doing so much good. Maybe you should look at the performance of his charter schools. They are awful.

Big deal. It's his money, and he can do with it as he pleases.

Would you rather he burnt it to heat his home with it?
post #35 of 107
Funny how the haters always seem to move on to the next talking point. Market share, market capitalization, revenue, profit, margins, and now philanthropy. Nothing Apple does will ever satisfy them. Apple has surpassed every other tech company in most of those metrics so now we start hearing about the cash "hoard" and how stingy Apple and Jobs are. Will it ever end? Nope. There will always be the next talking point to bash with.
post #36 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by esummers View Post

And Bill Gates money is doing so much good. Maybe you should look at the performance of his charter schools. They are awful. Steve can do what he wants with his money. He earned it. Apple does some philanthropy they just don't brag about it.

I don't know what Bill Gates does with his charter schools, and frankly this is the first I've heard of this initiative of his, but at least he's trying to do good with his money. I'm no MS fan, but I'm sure there is more to the story as the educational system in this country is f&cked. And I gotta say, I LOL'd by your 'Apple does *some* philanthropy..." I'd love to see *some* quantified.
post #37 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by JONOROM View Post

There are some very powerful reasons for corporation to give back to the community: their millions of customers. If customers care enough, and if the corporation does not respond, shareholders will be royally screwed. And some customers on this board clearly care, and that may be a sign of trouble in paradise.

Apple's is, I believe, the most respected company in the world. Apple's reputation is so valuable it cannot be priced, but it may be worth more that all that cash that they have in the bank. If many people begin to believe (with a basis in truth) that Apple is not a "good" corporate citizen, Apple will be badly hurt.

If customers care enough, thats the point, Apple have done less in the contributions arena, really customers do not care because at end of the day, the customers are focused on great products. We can discuss this area at length, but proof is the profit being generated and little discussion occurring on Apple's giving to the community.
post #38 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by anfboymn View Post

Ok, so saying Apple giving back to the community by means of them selling their products to schools is philanthropy? Give me a break.

Who said anything about 'philanthropy'? You really need to grapple with the fact that corporations - and that includes MSFT and BRK - are not in the philanthropy business. They are in the shareholder value creation business. Your wishing for something else will not make that happen, and more importantly, it should not.

Gates and Buffett, otoh, can surely be in the philanthropy business (as a consequence of all the wealth that their respective corporations have created for them), just as Jobs could be/should be/perhaps is, in spades, and we don't know/perhaps will be after his death/etc/etc. That is their choosing.
post #39 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post

Funny how the haters always seem to move on to the next talking point. Market share, market capitalization, revenue, profit, margins, and now philanthropy. Nothing Apple does will ever satisfy them. Apple has surpassed every other tech company in most of those metrics so now we start hearing about the cash "hoard" and how stingy Apple and Jobs are. Will it ever end? Nope. There will always be the next talking point to bash with.

Actually, I think the haters are just people who are bitter that they didn't buy AAPL at $240 in August last year, or $90 back in 2009, or a split-adjusted $45 back in 2005, or...

post #40 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

People like you would surely wish that.

Well I think that successful corporations have a responsibility beyond just profits. Apple obviously believes that too (see their environmental policies). So you obviously disagree with Apple.

Does that make you feel silly or superior?

Macintosh 512Ke.......

Reply

Macintosh 512Ke.......

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AAPL Investors
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › Apple closes at new all-time high as world’s largest company