or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › Apple now worth more than Google and Microsoft combined [u]
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple now worth more than Google and Microsoft combined [u] - Page 4

post #121 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

You are ignoring that Apple is spending their cash, they are just making more than they are spending. There a numerous reports of Apple investing billions in lump sum investments to other companies. This is not a bad thing for investors and you can look at today's stock price to see that Apple's actions have increased share holder value since they went from red to black.

I'd also add, this comment Millmoss made "the money might as well be on the moon, as far as investors are concerned." is far from correct. I think any investor doing due diligence would see exactly what you pointed out and that cash and how they have used it thus far it gives a massive sense of well being about Apple.
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #122 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

WP7 is innovative but being innovative doesn't make a product popular. Even being better tech doesn't mean a product wins over inferior tech as there are many other aspects to be considered. I think MS's biggest problem with WP7 is that they decided to keep the Windows name. If they had only rebranded it they could have shed a lot of what people dislike about MS. I also think they could have taken a solid hold of the tablet industry had they focused on that with the WP7 UI instead of focusing on a phone that they clearly are very late to market. Does that really make an Apple hater?




You mean something like Zunephone?
post #123 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by lantzn View Post

You mean something like Zunephone?

If Microsoft had listened to Steve Jobs the zune may have been the Xplayer or something and then the phone simply the X or Xphone or something. He suggested they stick to the nomenclature of their successful Xbox.

Instead we get a Zune. Wtf
post #124 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

If Microsoft had listened to Steve Jobs the zune may have been the Xplayer or something and then the phone simply the X or Xphone or something. He suggested they stick to the nomenclature of their successful Xbox.

Instead we get a Zune. Wtf

I think XPlayer sounds pretty good. Despite the problems with the Xbox it doesn't have a negative aura around it like Windows.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #125 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

And IMHO you just summed up the iPad market dominance too. Even if they ever make a wonderful tablet the opposition is too late.

If they can get the Retina Display on all models at the same price points they are today it'll be this kind of victory for the iPad.

Basically the iPod but at a much faster rate. By comparison this was the iPod game compared to the iPad.

I also predict the iPad arm will be more profitable than the iPhone arm in 2 years after that happens.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #126 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Well said. My wife, on my suggestion, moved about half of hers to AAPL, her broker screamed blue murder and made her sign a paper to say she acknowledged he disagreed. His investments are still down several years later and last summer she moved half of those. He didn't say as much that time. His expert investments which are mostly in 'safe' funds are still down. Some times you have to take a risk but after tracking Apple closely for over thirty years I think it wasn't much of a risk this last decade and I am still confident, although there will be ups and downs, the slope continues upward.

I stopped seriously listening to financial "experts" many years ago shortly after I was talked into selling a pile of Apple stock by one these so called "financial professionals". Within 30 days of selling, the stock had gained about 10% overall. It's now a couple of hundred dollars up since then! Yeesh!

My cost basis is under $10 a share and 'yes' I understand that holding on to something like Apple goes against every accepted financial guideline. Everyone's position is unique. For me, it works..

I stopped my financial adviser from ever bring up the subject again by telling them that when their over all portfolio starts to out perform my Apple stock, I'll consider entertaining their suggestions. You might want to ask your financial 'expert' to sign a letter stating that his services are free until he can provide you with better performance than Apple. My guess is that you will hear crickets chirping just like I did when I dropped that bomb on my 'expert'.

I wish I had a job that would allow me to be wrong most of the time.
post #127 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

If they can get the Retina Display on all models at the same price points they are today it'll be this kind of victory for the iPad.

Basically the iPod but at a much faster rate. By comparison this was the iPod game compared to the iPad.

I also predict the iPad arm will be more profitable than the iPhone arm in 2 years after that happens.

You will be proven correct in a few weeks I hope.
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #128 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarfungo View Post

I stopped seriously listening to financial "experts" many years ago shortly after I was talked into selling a pile of Apple stock by one these so called "financial professionals". Within 30 days of selling, the stock had gained about 10% overall. It's now a couple of hundred dollars up since then! Yeesh!

My cost basis is under $10 a share and 'yes' I understand that holding on to something like Apple goes against every accepted financial guideline. Everyone's position is unique. For me, it works..

I stopped my financial adviser from ever bring up the subject again by telling them that when their over all portfolio starts to out perform my Apple stock, I'll consider entertaining their suggestions. You might want to ask your financial 'expert' to sign a letter stating that his services are free until he can provide you with better performance than Apple. My guess is that you will hear crickets chirping just like I did when I dropped that bomb on my 'expert'.

I wish I had a job that would allow me to be wrong most of the time.

I said the same, exact things ...

Plus in this town quite a few of these experts are being indicted in connection with various scams ranging from ponzi schemes to real estate fraud. Even at the high end toxic assets get AAA and the US gets a down grade by the same folks? Sheesh..
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #129 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

I am saying that carrying large amounts of cash on a balance sheet is not relevant to investors, because investors never see a single penny of it unless the company either pays some of it out as a dividend or buys back shares. The money might as well be on the moon, as far as investors are concerned.

I disagree. I have the ability to see more then a single penny of Apple's cash even if they don't issue dividends or buy back shares. I'll get to see the cash when I decide to cash in on my AAPL holdings.
post #130 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

I appreciate the detailed post but I can't say I understand it. In fact I'm quite confused on how debt looks like an asset and having cash on hand looks like a liability.

I don't know if an alternate example will help or hurt, but I find the standard car analogy makes it clear in my head:

Suppose you were looking at buying a used car and you found two cars to consider, both costing $10,000. However, the person selling Car A still owes $2,000 to the bank that you would also have to pick up (debt) in addition to the $10,000 sale price.
On the other hand, Car B has no debt, and in fact is being sold with $2,000 in gold in the glove compartment.

Both cars have the same selling price, but Car A would have to be about $4,000 more valuable than Car B if you back out the debt or equity situation of each vehicle.

Imagine a 2005 BMW that isn't paid off Vs. a 2005 Haundi with gold in the glove compartment. The gold doesn't make the Haundi less valuable (just the opposite) but if you exclude it to figure out how much the car itself is worth, the value of the car would go down.

Apple, then is something like a car loaded with gold. Sure, it is a nice car--one of the best. But it's market valuation isn't all about it's vehicular properties--a chunck of it's market cap could be attributed to the $100 billion in the glove compartment...
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
post #131 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bageljoey View Post

I don't know if an alternate example will help or hurt, but I find the standard car analogy makes it clear in my head:

Suppose you were looking at buying a used car and you found two cars to consider, both costing $10,000. However, the person selling Car A still owes $2,000 to the bank that you would also have to pick up (debt) in addition to the $10,000 sale price.
On the other hand, Car B has no debt, and in fact is being sold with $2,000 in gold in the glove compartment.

Both cars have the same selling price, but Car A would have to be about $4,000 more valuable than Car B if you back out the debt or equity situation of each vehicle.

Imagine a 2005 BMW that isn't paid off Vs. a 2005 Haundi with gold in the glove compartment. The gold doesn't make the Haundi less valuable (just the opposite) but if you exclude it to figure out how much the car itself is worth, the value of the car would go down.

Apple, then is something like a car loaded with gold. Sure, it is a nice car--one of the best. But it's market valuation isn't all about it's vehicular properties--a chunck of it's market cap could be attributed to the $100 billion in the glove compartment...

My head hurts...
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #132 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bageljoey View Post

I don't know if an alternate example will help or hurt, but I find the standard car analogy makes it clear in my head:

Suppose you were looking at buying a used car and you found two cars to consider, both costing $10,000. However, the person selling Car A still owes $2,000 to the bank that you would also have to pick up (debt) in addition to the $10,000 sale price.
On the other hand, Car B has no debt, and in fact is being sold with $2,000 in gold in the glove compartment.

Both cars have the same selling price, but Car A would have to be about $4,000 more valuable than Car B if you back out the debt or equity situation of each vehicle.

Imagine a 2005 BMW that isn't paid off Vs. a 2005 Haundi with gold in the glove compartment. The gold doesn't make the Haundi less valuable (just the opposite) but if you exclude it to figure out how much the car itself is worth, the value of the car would go down.

Apple, then is something like a car loaded with gold. Sure, it is a nice car--one of the best. But it's market valuation isn't all about it's vehicular properties--a chunck of it's market cap could be attributed to the $100 billion in the glove compartment...

I can see why so many accountants end up in jail. (just joshing ... I think). So I am crazy to prefer the car with no debt and a gold bar in it?


So you are saying Apple's market Cap is factoring in the near 100B cash. In which case Apple is even more under valued than I thought!
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #133 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bageljoey View Post

I don't know if an alternate example will help or hurt, but I find the standard car analogy makes it clear in my head:

Suppose you were looking at buying a used car and you found two cars to consider, both costing $10,000. However, the person selling Car A still owes $2,000 to the bank that you would also have to pick up (debt) in addition to the $10,000 sale price.
On the other hand, Car B has no debt, and in fact is being sold with $2,000 in gold in the glove compartment.

Both cars have the same selling price, but Car A would have to be about $4,000 more valuable than Car B if you back out the debt or equity situation of each vehicle.

Imagine a 2005 BMW that isn't paid off Vs. a 2005 Haundi with gold in the glove compartment. The gold doesn't make the Haundi less valuable (just the opposite) but if you exclude it to figure out how much the car itself is worth, the value of the car would go down.

Apple, then is something like a car loaded with gold. Sure, it is a nice car--one of the best. But it's market valuation isn't all about it's vehicular properties--a chunck of it's market cap could be attributed to the $100 billion in the glove compartment...

Finally! Someone gets it!
post #134 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

My head hurts...

Mine, too. I think that was a plot point in The Heist. Just kidding, Bageljoey. Thanks for the example but I can't say I will ever really "get it." From my PoV for the example to be relevant the gold would have to be in pure bars so they are transferable without any effort whatsoever just like cash, at which point I say give me the car at the discounted "value" that is loaded down with gold stolen from The Italian Job.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #135 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Mine, too. I think that was a plot point in The Heist. Just kidding, Bageljoey. Thanks for the example but I can't say I will ever really "get it." From my PoV for the example to be relevant the gold would have to be in pure bars so they are transferable without any effort whatsoever just like cash, at which point I say give me the car at the discounted "value" that is loaded down with gold stolen from The Italian Job.

Hey I think we should go into business selling cars to accountants!
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #136 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Hey I think we should go into business selling cars to accountants!

I'm in!

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #137 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Mine, too. I think that was a plot point in The Heist. Just kidding, Bageljoey. Thanks for the example but I can't say I will ever really "get it."

You're welcome.
I don't think it is really a big deal anyway. It is one technical trick some investors use to try to gain an insight, but there are zillions of those and everybody thinks their trick is the best.
Personally, I think the best investing strategy was to buy AAPL several years ago and sit on it. It may not sound fancy, but the results are outstanding!
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
post #138 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

I'd agree there, but don't fret, you can fix it .. you simply need to learn to respond without the snarky tone, which may not be intentional but is never the less, coming over that way time and time again.

It's a happy day, let's all sing Kumbaya and move on

Yeah, and maybe one of these days you'll read my posts for what I'm actually saying and not interpret every disagreement as an insult.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

You are ignoring that Apple is spending their cash, they are just making more than they are spending. There a numerous reports of Apple investing billions in lump sum investments to other companies. This is not a bad thing for investors and you can look at today's stock price to see that Apple's actions have increased share holder value since they went from red to black.

All you're really saying here is that Apple has a cost of doing business. Well, sure. But the free cash accumulation is happening after paying for operating costs, and after their various investments. So it's net, and the sum of the net continues to grow, and at an accelerating rate.

I am all for a company investing in growth. This is the purpose of capital. I've said this many, many times in these threads. But when it becomes very, very clear that a company can't come anywhere close to spending their free cash on growth, then question of what other thing(s) they should do with the money naturally arises.

As for operating in the red, Apple hasn't done that in a long time. You don't even want to think about what would happen if Apple reported a loss.

Just a scenario for you to consider: Apple's board decides to pay stockholders a very generous annual dividend of 2%, which I will round up to $10 a share. The total cost to Apple's cash flow would be $9.3b. That's only a bit more than half the amount of cash they added to the stockpile in just the last quarter alone. It could easily amount to not more than 20% of their annual free cash flow -- which means they could still stockpile 80%, or $50b more every year, even assuming that the accumulation rate doesn't increase.

So tell me again, how does this damage Apple's ability to do anything?
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #139 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

Yeah, and maybe one of these days you'll read my posts for what I'm actually saying and not interpret every disagreement as an insult.

It's water under the bridge. I should have ignored you, my bad.
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #140 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

Just a scenario for you to consider: Apple's board decides to pay stockholders a very generous annual dividend of 2%, which I will round up to $10 a share. The total cost to Apple's cash flow would be $9.3b. That's only a bit more than half the amount of cash they added to the stockpile in just the last quarter alone. It could easily amount to not more than 20% of their annual free cash flow -- which means they could still stockpile 80%, or $50b more every year, even assuming that the accumulation rate doesn't increase.

So tell me again, how does this damage Apple's ability to do anything?

Even if we consider the US investors and their US cash holdings that seems like it would still be doable and I have no problem with Apple doing whatever they want with their money so long as it doesn't negatively affect their business or their valuation.

My question is why must it be done for the company to be successful? Why do you require them to Dellify their cash by "giving the money back to the stockholders" instead of investing it? I certainly didn't buy AAPL because I expected quarterly dividends; I have other stocks for that.

Have you considered that Apple is saving up for something big? Maybe they want to eventually bring the production back to the US with robots that run off of iOS or buy the Cook Islands and relocate their HQ, or make their space ship campus into real spaceship.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #141 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Hey I think we should go into business selling cars to accountants!

Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

I'm in!

I just want to be the guy who details the cars before they are sold
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #142 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Even if we consider the US investors and their US cash holdings that seems like it would still be doable and I have no problem with Apple doing whatever they want with their money so long as it doesn't negatively affect their business or their valuation.

It's also possible that Apple is totally focused on their game plan, and the cash is just a byproduct. Sometimes where the horse is going is worth more than the horse, and vastly more than what the horse leaves behind.

I'm with you. If it distracts Apple from focusing on what's really important, then we shareholders need to STFU about what to do with the droppings that are mounting up behind them.
post #143 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

So you are saying Apple's market Cap is factoring in the near 100B cash. In which case Apple is even more under valued than I thought!

You got it. That just about captures it.

Now, don't overthink it.
post #144 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sacto Joe View Post

It's also possible that Apple is totally focused on their game plan, and the cash is just a byproduct. Sometimes where the horse is going is worth more than the horse, and vastly more than what the horse leaves behind.

I'm with you. If it distracts Apple from focusing on what's really important, then we shareholders need to STFU about what to do with the droppings that are mounting up behind them.

Road Apples?

Now, THAT (horseshit) I understand!

BTW,, AutoMisTypeAhead in Safari tried to change the above to "horses hit"... try it!
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #145 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

Yeah, and maybe one of these days you'll read my posts for what I'm actually saying and not interpret every disagreement as an insult.

Actually, it'd be great to see a post from you that agrees with what a - any - poster said!
post #146 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

I don't think they are crippled by Steve's passing although I truly hope he passed on to them a ton of innovative ideas for the future (and I bet he did). But that's one heck of a team he left running Apple.

Regarding growth, I really believe "we ain't seen nothing yet!"

Goes to show how Apple's "DNA seeds of technological excellence" that Steve Jobs laid for the company's benefit is now showing it's fruits--truly if you sow seeds of excellence, you will definitely reap excellent results--way to go, Apple!
Quote:
My job is NOT to be easy on people. My job is to take these great people we have and to push them and make them even BETTER.

--Steve Jobs on being a CEO
Reply
Quote:
My job is NOT to be easy on people. My job is to take these great people we have and to push them and make them even BETTER.

--Steve Jobs on being a CEO
Reply
post #147 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarfungo View Post

I stopped seriously listening to financial "experts" many years ago shortly after I was talked into selling a pile of Apple stock by one these so called "financial professionals". Within 30 days of selling, the stock had gained about 10% overall. It's now a couple of hundred dollars up since then! Yeesh!

My cost basis is under $10 a share and 'yes' I understand that holding on to something like Apple goes against every accepted financial guideline. Everyone's position is unique. For me, it works..

I stopped my financial adviser from ever bring up the subject again by telling them that when their over all portfolio starts to out perform my Apple stock, I'll consider entertaining their suggestions. You might want to ask your financial 'expert' to sign a letter stating that his services are free until he can provide you with better performance than Apple. My guess is that you will hear crickets chirping just like I did when I dropped that bomb on my 'expert'.

I wish I had a job that would allow me to be wrong most of the time.

That's a great post. Same thing happened to us. Can I use your quote next time I talk to my broker? I have to admit though, they haven't said one word about our AAPL holdings in quite some time. I managed to buy back half our position over time, but we would be a lot better off if we hadn't sold any in the first place. AAPL is a >MSFT for this era, and it hasn't ripened yet! It should be though. It should be at 1K a share at least

It's done what it has done in the worst economic environment since the thirties!

What a story! Now we have a new category killer iTV, a new iPad 3, new iPhone soon, and a stockholders meeting coming up with a lot of buzz surrounding it. Most valuable company in the world. Patents filing. Wow.

I knew they were going to make it big but this is more than I expected of them.

The poor analysts are lost on their raft in the ocean, they just crossed the bow of the queen Mary II. I think they've finally noticed how big Apple is.
What is really factored into the price is a kind of perpetual sense of disbelief that any company could be as good as Apple is. ~Retrogusto
Reply
What is really factored into the price is a kind of perpetual sense of disbelief that any company could be as good as Apple is. ~Retrogusto
Reply
post #148 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by brianloftus View Post

Please buy a put at 350 or so Jan 2013 expiration and pay 2% to protect your retirement from losing more than 1/3 of its value (or so).

Why would that be a good idea? AAPL would have to drop below that level to make it worthwhile for me to exercise a put option at that price. As I am long on Apple (and well ahead of even a $350 price) then there are only three reasonably identifiable risks. 1) Apple's value crashes and goes below whatever put option price I get. 2) Apple's value crashes and drops below a level that still gives me a reasonable return on my investment. 3) Apple goes out of business.

Notice I even included the last one in the "reasonable" list...when, of course, it's ludicrous. So you want me to pay 2% for essentially a scenario that is less likely than me winning the lottery. Hmmm. I wonder if you would like to be on the other side of the deal?
post #149 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psych_guy View Post

Microsoft is identified as the big behemoth that had to crap on people on its way to the top, and then just sat there, thinking they could continually come up with incremental progress with no real innovation, until it was too late.

I see it a differnet way. By barging its way to the top, microsoft has encumbered themselves with a lot of historical baggage - that try as they might, they cannot drop because their customer base relies on this baggage.

Apple had to make big sweeping changes, and with Steve's return he took that step away from a computer company to what is now a mobile gadget company, with a computer arm. That game changer saved the company, but also removed them from competing with microsoft directly.

Microsoft is attempting to change, however, they are not as agressive as they appear to neither have 1) the balls, or 2) the financial impetus to change.

Without the massive change that the company was put through post-97, rationalisation of SKU's and focus, apple would be floundering around or gone.

Microsoft needs to lose some money to get a rocket up their bum
Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
post #150 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarfungo View Post

I stopped seriously listening to financial "experts" many years ago shortly after I was talked into selling a pile of Apple stock by one these so called "financial professionals". Within 30 days of selling, the stock had gained about 10% overall. It's now a couple of hundred dollars up since then! Yeesh!

My cost basis is under $10 a share and 'yes' I understand that holding on to something like Apple goes against every accepted financial guideline. Everyone's position is unique. For me, it works..

I stopped my financial adviser from ever bring up the subject again by telling them that when their over all portfolio starts to out perform my Apple stock, I'll consider entertaining their suggestions. You might want to ask your financial 'expert' to sign a letter stating that his services are free until he can provide you with better performance than Apple. My guess is that you will hear crickets chirping just like I did when I dropped that bomb on my 'expert'.

I wish I had a job that would allow me to be wrong most of the time.

Couldn't have said it better myself. Others can crow all they want about the "risk" around AAPL, but the results are pretty much speaking for themselves.
post #151 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by marcusj0015 View Post

So, Apple is now the largest company in existence?

no they aren't, don't confuse market cap and company size
post #152 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by palomine View Post

That's a great post. Same thing happened to us. Can I use your quote next time I talk to my broker? I have to admit though, they haven't said one word about our AAPL holdings in quite some time. I managed to buy back half our position over time, but we would be a lot better off if we hadn't sold any in the first place. AAPL is a >MSFT for this era, and it hasn't ripened yet! It should be though. It should be at 1K a share at least

It's done what it has done in the worst economic environment since the thirties!

What a story! Now we have a new category killer iTV, a new iPad 3, new iPhone soon, and a stockholders meeting coming up with a lot of buzz surrounding it. Most valuable company in the world. Patents filing. Wow.

I knew they were going to make it big but this is more than I expected of them.

The poor analysts are lost on their raft in the ocean, they just crossed the bow of the queen Mary II. I think they've finally noticed how big Apple is.

These financial advisors just follow rules of thumb: diversify your holdings, rebalance regularly, etc. Which is okay if you don't have time to really look into a company, follow it religiously, and understand what makes it succeed. Or fail.

So when it comes to Apple, it's very hard for most people to resist the lure of the law of large numbers. Surely, this streak can't go on forever. Surely their luck will run out because they're due to come up with a major flop. Surely 500 billion market cap is just a fluke.

But then if you look at Apple's numbers and ask yourself "Other than 'this surely can't last that long', is there any reason why I should think that Apple is not going keep selling more and more iDevices in the next few years?" It's hard to come up with a convincing 'yes' for an answer.

When I told the missus that Apple hit 495 today she said I should go find another Apple. Well, easier said than done. Apple is an exceptional company. (Exceptional in terms of growth.) Just like Microsoft was the exceptional company in the 80's and 90's and Standard Oil was the exceptional company a hundred years ago. So exceptional companies are not impossibilities, but they come few and far between and I suspect there can only be at most one at any given era.

I'd just enjoy the ride and make sure I cash out before Apple's growth era comes to a close. Yes, easier said then done.
post #153 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

Just a scenario for you to consider: Apple's board decides to pay stockholders a very generous annual dividend of 2%, which I will round up to $10 a share. The total cost to Apple's cash flow would be $9.3b. That's only a bit more than half the amount of cash they added to the stockpile in just the last quarter alone. It could easily amount to not more than 20% of their annual free cash flow -- which means they could still stockpile 80%, or $50b more every year, even assuming that the accumulation rate doesn't increase.

So tell me again, how does this damage Apple's ability to do anything?

On one level, you are correct that Apple has more than enough ability to pay out a cash dividend without impacting its capital reserves and therefore its strategic investment options. However, many of us who own AAPL are not particularly interested in that $10 dividend because we've seen that Apple is better at managing that investment of capital over time better than we ourselves would. I have no magic insight into why Apple wants to currently hold such a large (and growing) cash reserve but I suspect they have either have a reason or simply want to ensure their options remain open.

As a left wing liberal capitalist, I believe capital will inevitably go to the most efficient place possible (without judging the social impact, of course). In the situation with Apple's large cash reserves that capital will find it's way to the most efficient place. If that's a dividend, we'll see a dividend. If that's an investment or acquisition or series of acquisitions or some combination of all of those, then that's what will happen.

As a shareholder, I'm going to benefit financially with whatever happens ... because that capital will go to the best place possible. Non shareholders will get no benefit.
post #154 of 191
Lots of good comments here.

I look at 1) the PE ratio, 2) the product momentum, 3) the market share, & 4) brand

I think apple's PE is penalized right now because of size, that is unavoidable I think, they should be a real 14x and not 10x like they are. But BAC's are often 10x so it may not change.

Their products have real momentum, each outdoing the earlier gen, a very good sign of knowing what people want better than the competition

The share in key segments is not that high (highest in tablets but it's an early market, 30% in smart phones but low in total phones so room to grow, low in computers which also have momentum)

One of the best brands going, don't have to prove their value to consumers, if it says apple it is good

I expect another year or two of real growth.....just my opinion
post #155 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Even if we consider the US investors and their US cash holdings that seems like it would still be doable and I have no problem with Apple doing whatever they want with their money so long as it doesn't negatively affect their business or their valuation.

My question is why must it be done for the company to be successful? Why do you require them to Dellify their cash by "giving the money back to the stockholders" instead of investing it? I certainly didn't buy AAPL because I expected quarterly dividends; I have other stocks for that.

Have you considered that Apple is saving up for something big? Maybe they want to eventually bring the production back to the US with robots that run off of iOS or buy the Cook Islands and relocate their HQ, or make their space ship campus into real spaceship.

They don't have to do to it for the company to be successful, they can do it because they are so successful.

I realize your last paragraph was meant as a joke (the Cook Islands indeed), but it does point out the difficulty of using this kind of cash in a responsible fashion. I don't anticipate the company spending it in any sort of frivolous or very risky way, so the question is how they can use such immense amounts of money in any other.

And again, I haven't suggested anything that amounts to a "dellification." As for your expectations, perhaps they should change as the circumstances change. Apple has quadrupled their cash holdings in about three years. That's the elephant in the room. It's two elephants. Soon it will be a whole herd of elephants. Should our expectations as stockholders never change?
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #156 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

They don't have to do to it for the company to be successful, they can do it because they are so successful.

I realize your last paragraph was meant as a joke (the Cook Islands indeed), but it does point out the difficulty of using this kind of cash in a responsible fashion. I don't anticipate the company spending it in any sort of frivolous or very risky way, so the question is how they can use such immense amounts of money in any other.

And again, I haven't suggested anything that amounts to a "dellification." As for your expectations, perhaps they should change as the circumstances change. Apple has quadrupled their cash holdings in about three years. That's the elephant in the room. It's two elephants. Soon it will be a whole herd of elephants. Should our expectations as stockholders never change?

At this point I think Apple does have enough cash on hand to do a buyback or dividends, asssuming they don't have some big plan for the money we haven't yet conceived. When we first discussed this I didn't think they had enough because they need to be able to wait out every possible downturn that could affect there business and to its greatest degree in order to cover their ass. At $100 billion and at the current growth rate doing a yearly or quarterly dividend that would pay out to $20 billion a year seems reasonable.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #157 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by focher View Post

On one level, you are correct that Apple has more than enough ability to pay out a cash dividend without impacting its capital reserves and therefore its strategic investment options. However, many of us who own AAPL are not particularly interested in that $10 dividend because we've seen that Apple is better at managing that investment of capital over time better than we ourselves would. I have no magic insight into why Apple wants to currently hold such a large (and growing) cash reserve but I suspect they have either have a reason or simply want to ensure their options remain open.

As a left wing liberal capitalist, I believe capital will inevitably go to the most efficient place possible (without judging the social impact, of course). In the situation with Apple's large cash reserves that capital will find it's way to the most efficient place. If that's a dividend, we'll see a dividend. If that's an investment or acquisition or series of acquisitions or some combination of all of those, then that's what will happen.

As a shareholder, I'm going to benefit financially with whatever happens ... because that capital will go to the best place possible. Non shareholders will get no benefit.

They could pay it not only without impacting capital reserves, but with them still growing at a rate of $50b a year, very conservatively. At some point I think we do need to come to grips with the massive scale of Apple's free cash flow. It is staggering now, and continuing to accelerate.

So here's a kind of irony. The way the tax code is structured today, preferred dividends are taxed at a maximum 15% rate. This is how the super rich in this country became even more super rich over the last ten years, by making passive income and paying taxes on it at a much lower rate than wager earners. This is not a political point. I am simply saying that it's kind of strange to hear someone who is presumably not one of the super rich begging off the kind of tax favored income that makes rich people richer.

So here's my offer. Since I wouldn't have any trouble figuring out how to use my dividend, and you don't want one, if they declare one I'd be happy to take the check off your hands and pay the taxes. It's just one of the services I provide. This is the kind problem I like to have.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #158 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz View Post

Wait...Where's Slappy to tell us that Android is Winning?

Where's the haters to tell us how "innovative" Microsoft is with its Windows Phones?

Funny, I don't seem to hear anything...

Yeah. I also don't hear anyone talking about marketshare anymore either. Microsoft still has the lions share of the O/S market, but it doesn't matter, does it?
post #159 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

At this point I think Apple does have enough cash on hand to do a buyback or dividends, asssuming they don't have some big plan for the money we haven't yet conceived. When we first discussed this I didn't think they had enough because they need to be able to wait out every possible downturn that could affect there business and to its greatest degree in order to cover their ass. At $100 billion and at the current growth rate doing a yearly or quarterly dividend that would pay out to $20 billion a year seems reasonable.

Thank you, at least one person doesn't think what I am suggesting is unreasonable.

I want to comment on the downturn scenario though. What you are suggesting is that Apple is hanging onto huge mountains of cash because someday they might need to dip into their reserves to pay operating expenses, that cash flow would not cover it. This is called "losing money" -- and not just a little money, but one hell of a lot. I don't even want to imagine this very scary thing happening, and if Apple really is stockpiling cash against armageddon, then I really don't want to know.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #160 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

I want to comment on the downturn scenario though. What you are suggesting is that Apple is hanging onto huge mountains of cash because someday they might need to dip into their reserves to pay operating expenses, that cash flow would not cover it. This is called "losing money" -- and not just a little money, but one hell of a lot. I don't even want to imagine this very scary thing happening, and if Apple really is stockpiling cash against armageddon, then I really don't want to know.

Does giving x-amount back benefit Apple's bottom line?

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AAPL Investors
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › Apple now worth more than Google and Microsoft combined [u]