or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › With Apple shareholder proposal pending, Carl Icahn turns his attention to Hertz
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

With Apple shareholder proposal pending, Carl Icahn turns his attention to Hertz - Page 2

post #41 of 118

No but it still went to 385 with good quarterly reports. Wall Street is about perception and if I need to tell you that, youa re a wall street neophyte just like the Apple Board.

 

Vote against Icahn if you want to take the ride down to 300 again, not me, 

post #42 of 118
Originally Posted by castcore View Post
Wall Street is about perception

 

And the perception of those who know nothing is worth what compared to the perception of those who know everything?

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
post #43 of 118

Perhaps you are unfamiliar with the invisible hand theory.  Bone up on it.

post #44 of 118
The usual blather from a bunch of Icahnites in this thread.

Look guys, Apple's stock price fell because its margins and growth fell in 2013. The market fully expected it. Did the stock, however, fall a bit too much relative to fundamentals? Perhaps. But for any investor with a horizon longer than that of the lifespan of a gnat, that should have been a once-in-a-lifetime buying opportunity.

Did Icahn's purchase have a positive influence on the price? Yes, but at the margin. Any time there is such a large purchase, it signals investor optimism. The move in AAPL would likely have been similar if a long-term investor like Buffett had made the purchase, rather than a raider like Icahn.

At the end of the day, Apple's value -- for that matter, the value of any company -- comes from it's expected future cash flows, business risk, and growth. That, in turn, is a function of innovating and building great products that people want to buy, selling them at a profit, and sustaining that profit. Financial engineering in the form of repurchases, splits, debt issuances, dividend increases, etc. can only do so much.

As many people here have pointed out, if you dislike the management and the board so much, put your money where your mouth is, sell, and get out. There are hundreds of other stocks out there in which you can invest.
post #45 of 118
Originally Posted by Jack Baker View Post
Perhaps you are unfamiliar with the invisible hand theory.  Bone up on it.

 

So basically “knowledge doesn’t matter as long as the majority makes out well” would be the applicable summary answer to my question?

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
post #46 of 118

Why do people like you care so much if he's in it for the long hall?  If he pushes for a good capital allocation strategy (which he is), makes the stock go up to where it should be trading and then sells his measly 2-3 billion of the stock, so what?  His sale will have little impact in what will be a 750 billion dollar market cap if he gets what he wants.  The shareholders will all make a lot of money.  How exactly is that "bad" again?

post #47 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

So basically “knowledge doesn’t matter as long as the majority makes out well” would be the applicable summary answer to my question?

Umm........No.

post #48 of 118
Originally Posted by Jack Baker View Post
Why do people like you care so much if he's in it for the long hall? 

 

Haul.

 

And I’m now very worried that you’re supporting him without even knowing why he’s doing what he’s doing. Holy cow.

 

His stance dictates his decisions. His decisions affect the company. If his decisions are out of line with the way the company is run, you get the grating we’re seeing here. 

 

Apple is run under the premise that the stock will take care of itself, and it does. Look at Apple in 2003, look at Apple in 2013, and then shut up. No one intelligent invested into AAPL looks at local peaks, local lows, local anything. It just doesn’t happen. They don’t care. Because they know it’s local.

 

Icahn is a glorified day trader. He’s a day trader with a few billion to blow, so he’s a month trader. He’s a danger in his ignorance.

 
If he pushes for a good capital allocation strategy (which he is)

 

Which you know, being one of the Senior VPs of Apple.

 
…makes the stock go up to where it should be trading…

 

Who are you to say where it “should” be trading? Why are you pushing for him to show his hand? Do you not subscribe to the invisible hand theory?

 

Originally Posted by Jack Baker View Post
Umm........No.

 

So what, then?

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
post #49 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

The usual blather from a bunch of Icahnites in this thread.

Look guys, Apple's stock price fell because its margins and growth fell in 2013. The market fully expected it. Did the stock, however, fall a bit too much relative to fundamentals? Perhaps. But for any investor with a horizon longer than that of the lifespan of a gnat, that should have been a once-in-a-lifetime buying opportunity.

Did Icahn's purchase have a positive influence on the price? Yes, but at the margin. Any time there is such a large purchase, it signals investor optimism. The move in AAPL would likely have been similar if a long-term investor like Buffett had made the purchase, rather than a raider like Icahn.

At the end of the day, Apple's value -- for that matter, the value of any company -- comes from it's expected future cash flows, business risk, and growth. That, in turn, is a function of innovating and building great products that people want to buy, selling them at a profit, and sustaining that profit. Financial engineering in the form of repurchases, splits, debt issuances, dividend increases, etc. can only do so much.

As many people here have pointed out, if you dislike the management and the board so much, put your money where your mouth is, sell, and get out. There are hundreds of other stocks out there in which you can invest.

A few points here.

 

1.) Buffet didn't invest in Apple. You have no way of knowing how low Apple stock might have gone without the dividend and the buy-back as a put under the stock. We have Einhorn and Icahn to thank for Cook and the board to get off their duffs and do the correct things in terms of the dividend and the buy-back.  Don't ever forget that.  It was not going to happen without their involvement.  Shareholder activism is a good thing.

 

2.)  Apple's current value has disconnected from the streets expectation of future growth and cash flows.  Google and Apple have the same 5 year expected growth rate on the street, yet Google sells at a 100% premium to Apple.  And, Google is a one trick pony whose ad revenue model is at risk with 40% of there total revenues now coming from less lucrative mobile search.  So, no, Apple is not trading in tandem with other stocks based on expectations.

 

3.) Sharholders are the owners of Apple.  They should not leave if they don't like the board.  That is just the attitude that allows boards to become lazy and feckless like the Apple board.  Apple has 150 billion in the bank (mostly due to offshore tax avoidance strategies) and 40 billion a year of positive free cash flow.  They continue to make tiny acquisitions that are rounding errors on their money market account.  The Apple board has to sh*t or get off the pot or the shareholders should fire them and get new board members.  Remember, the board works for the shareholders.  Not the other way around.

post #50 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

Haul.

 

And I’m now very worried that you’re supporting him without even knowing why he’s doing what he’s doing. Holy cow.

 

His stance dictates his decisions. His decisions affect the company. If his decisions are out of line with the way the company is run, you get the grating we’re seeing here. 

 

Apple is run under the premise that the stock will take care of itself, and it does. Look at Apple in 2003, look at Apple in 2013, and then shut up. No one intelligent invested into AAPL looks at local peaks, local lows, local anything. It just doesn’t happen. They don’t care. Because they know it’s local.

 

Icahn is a glorified day trader. He’s a day trader with a few billion to blow, so he’s a month trader. He’s a danger in his ignorance.

 

Which you know, being one of the Senior VPs of Apple.

 

Who are you to say where it “should” be trading? Why are you pushing for him to show his hand? Do you not subscribe to the invisible hand theory?

 

 

So what, then?

Icahn will do what he thinks is in his best interest as an Apple shareholder.  That will benefit all other Apple shareholders.  Also, he is not a day trader or a month trader, LOL. And he is worth a hell of a lot more than a few billion, LOL.

post #51 of 118
Originally Posted by Jack Baker View Post

You have no way of knowing how low Apple stock might have gone without the dividend and the buy-back as a put under the stock.

 

Sure we do. We absolutely do. Are you insane? We know it wouldn’t go to $1. This is known. We know it wouldn’t go to $10. Or $50, or even $100. It would stay above these numbers. 

 

The magical dividend and buyback didn’t “save” the stock. There was nothing to save.

 

We have Einhorn and Icahn to thank for Cook and the board to get off their duffs and do the correct things in terms of the dividend and the buy-back.  Don't ever forget that.

 

It’s not Superman. It’s Superman breaking through the wall and finding not only no danger, but the owner furious for the damage done to his home.

 
It was not going to happen without their involvement.

 

Oh, this we know.

 

yet Google sells at a 100% premium to Apple.  And, Google is a one trick pony whose ad revenue model is at risk with 40% of there total revenues now coming from less lucrative mobile search.  So, no, Apple is not trading in tandem with other stocks based on expectations.

 

Sounds far more like Google is setting itself up for the coolest crash of all time.

 
3.) Sharholders are the owners of Apple.

 

Yeah? Are they? Guess what they aren’t, though. They aren’t involved in daily, weekly, monthly, or yearly operations. They aren’t privy to the parts deals, don’t know the 

 
…lazy and feckless like the Apple board.

 

Proof, please. And no, “they haven’t been giving me the returns on my stock that I demand for absolutely no reason other than I demand them” is not a reason.

 
Apple has 150 billion in the bank (mostly due to offshore tax avoidance strategies) and 40 billion a year of positive free cash flow.  They continue to make tiny acquisitions there are rounding errors on their money market account.

 

‘Kay. And?

 
The Apple board has to sh*t or get off the pot or the shareholders should fire them and get new board members.

 

Nah. Sorry. You’re wrong. They are not bad for managing money wisely. They are not bad for operating like a startup. They are not bad for deciding not to waste their money on things they don’t care about and which would lead to worse products.

 

Originally Posted by Jack Baker View Post
Icahn will do what he thinks is in his best interest as an Apple shareholder.  That will benefit all other Apple shareholders.

 

Is that second sentence just a second ending to the first sentence, or are you implying that specifically what Icahn thinks is best as a shareholder will inherently benefit other shareholders?

 
Also, he is not a day trader or a month trader, LOL. And he is worth a hell of a lot more than a few billion, LOL. 

 

Yes, we’re well aware that you’re incapable of understanding what an analogy is.

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
post #52 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post


Crazy Carl is doing this to line his own pockets. He doesn't care about Apple, he cares about $$$. How is the Board greedy? By keeping the money for Apple? Once Apple reaches his target price, he's gone.

Apple already has a buy back program.

What do you care about Carl's pockets?  The board is greedy because they are getting paid a lot and not doing a good job of returning value to shareholders.  I have news for you.   That 150 billion dollars belongs to the shareholders, not Tim Cook or the Apple board.  I don't care if he's gone after his target price.  Apple should be selling at 800-1,000 now.  If he gets us there and then he takes off I could care less.  He will have made me and every other Apple shareholder a lot of money in the process of making himself money.  When he ultimately sells his relatively tiny position in Apple stock it will have very little impact of the share price.

post #53 of 118
Originally Posted by Jack Baker View Post
That 150 billion dollars belongs to the shareholders, not Tim Cook or the Apple board.

 

I think we have a much better picture of who you are and what you think now.

 
Apple should be selling at 800-1,000 now.

 

Who says? You? What right do you have to say that?

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
post #54 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Constable Odo View Post

Carl Icahn is a fool for wasting his time with Apple. He could pick any tech stock name out of a hat and find a better performing stock. Tim Cook is practically useless as a CEO. A company with all that reserve cash and yet Tim Cook can't figure out how to boost shareholder value by normal means except for some financial sleight-of-hand with buybacks. Where are all these products that Apple is supposed to be selling.

I read all these stories of how Apple is leading in this and that category but every time I look at the share price it's dropping lower and lower just like it did last year. It's been a whole year and yet Tim Cook hasn't learned a darn thing except how to make Apple's share price go lower. It's bad enough he's a wuss, but he's making the whole company look incompetent while the rest of the tech stocks are soaring. Even loss leader H-P is gaining in share value while canning employees left and right. Apple's share performance is downright feeble. I hope Apple has been buying up shares like a maniac while the stock plummets.

Oh, and Happy New Year everyone, except for Apple shareholders whose new year is turning out just like last year.

LOL, Icahn is in Apple for the very reason you say he should not be in it.

post #55 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Baker View Post
 

Why do people like you care so much if he's in it for the long hall?  If he pushes for a good capital allocation strategy (which he is), makes the stock go up to where it should be trading and then sells his measly 2-3 billion of the stock, so what?  His sale will have little impact in what will be a 750 billion dollar market cap if he gets what he wants.  The shareholders will all make a lot of money.  How exactly is that "bad" again?

This explains the problem with your thinking. How in heck did you come to the conclusion that Icahn has a ‘good capital allocation strategy’? How is saddling Apple with $150B in debt and/or bringing its overseas cash back at a 35% tax rate and/or the economics of buying back at the current price ($550 - $575, as opposed to the $425 - $450 price when Apple initiated its buyback program) a good capital allocation strategy?

 

Moreover, if it was so simple to do and will have the valuation impact you suggest, why stop at that number? Why not buy back $200B? Heck, wouldn’t $300B or $400B be even better? In fact, why not take it to the logical extreme, load the company up with massive amounts of debt and do an LBO, taking it private? And, why don’t all companies do this?

 

The trouble with people like Icahn and Einhorn is, they just throw some wild numbers out there, and expect that people will swallow it. Apparently, some do. It is pure financial alchemy.

 

Unless, of course, you can show us your analysis? (If you want to learn from a really solid analysis on why Einhorn’s proposal was laughable – and was rightly thrown out by Apple’s shareholders – see here: http://bit.ly/1bIKaw7).

post #56 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Baker View Post
 
Quote:

A few points here.

 

1.) Buffet didn't invest in Apple. You have no way of knowing how low Apple stock might have gone without the dividend and the buy-back as a put under the stock. We have Einhorn and Icahn to thank for Cook and the board to get off their duffs and do the correct things in terms of the dividend and the buy-back.  Don't ever forget that.  It was not going to happen without their involvement.  Shareholder activism is a good thing.

 

2.)  Apple's current value has disconnected from the streets expectation of future growth and cash flows.  Google and Apple have the same 5 year expected growth rate on the street, yet Google sells at a 100% premium to Apple.  And, Google is a one trick pony whose ad revenue model is at risk with 40% of there total revenues now coming from less lucrative mobile search.  So, no, Apple is not trading in tandem with other stocks based on expectations.

 

3.) Sharholders are the owners of Apple.  They should not leave if they don't like the board.  That is just the attitude that allows boards to become lazy and feckless like the Apple board.  Apple has 150 billion in the bank (mostly due to offshore tax avoidance strategies) and 40 billion a year of positive free cash flow.  They continue to make tiny acquisitions that are rounding errors on their money market account.  The Apple board has to sh*t or get off the pot or the shareholders should fire them and get new board members.  Remember, the board works for the shareholders.  Not the other way around.

These arguments are full of platitudes. You missed the main point of my post, which is that, value is created from the real things Apple does as a business, not how it shuffles pieces of paper on the right hand-side of its balance sheet.

 

1) See post above for why Icahn/Einhorn’s plans are questionable.

 

2) The ‘Street’s’ estimates of growth (in revenues, earnings, cash flows; not some engineered number like EPS) amount to a hill of beans. Google’s P/E ratio is twice that of Apple’s. If you knew some finance, you’d know that, given their respective costs of capital (which are roughly similar), the long run earnings growth rate implied in Google’s P/E is substantially higher than in Apple’s. That is the market’s verdict.

 

Please explain, before going any further, exactly will a buyback change that perception?

 

3) Of course shareholders are the owners of a company. That is a platitude. The question however is, are they long-term shareholders or short-term (US corporate law makes some important distinctions there)?

 

Re. Apple’s board, sure it could probably do with some new blood (e.g., the Intuit guy; the Avon lady). But many of the same board members oversaw the company’s creation of the iMac, OSX, iPod, iPhone, iPad….. and were part of the process of its share price from the teens to the upper-$500s, making the most valuable company in the world. Give them some credit.

post #57 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by castcore View Post

No but it still went to 385 with good quarterly reports. Wall Street is about perception

Right but it has nothing to do with Apple's business. Your comment "Apple was dead in the water" suggests that the company was doing badly. The company was doing just fine. Their stock price going down doesn't mean they are. As you rightly state, the stock value comes from the perception of traders. It's not Apple's responsibility to convince traders of anything - they aren't in need of funding, it's up to traders what they want to believe. If Apple keeps running well then people with a negative perception sell and lose money and it's their fault, that's how it works. The false media reports that drive a lot of trader perception shares a lot of the blame so criticize them.
post #58 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Baker View Post

What do you care about Carl's pockets?  The board is greedy because they are getting paid a lot and not doing a good job of returning value to shareholders.  I have news for you.   That 150 billion dollars belongs to the shareholders, not Tim Cook or the Apple board.  I don't care if he's gone after his target price.  Apple should be selling at 800-1,000 now.  If he gets us there and then he takes off I could care less.  He will have made me and every other Apple shareholder a lot of money in the process of making himself money.  When he ultimately sells his relatively tiny position in Apple stock it will have very little impact of the share price.

Hogwash. You're right, his tiny position in stick shouldn't impact Apple's share price--good or bad.

This Same board also oversaw the Increase in share price from 32 to 540 in 8 years. I say that's worth it.
post #59 of 118
Shareholder And a customer for several years now I believe in the team at Apple they are still innovating Steve jobs was amazing . And he believed in Tom Cook and the rest of the team!!
post #60 of 118
You have to deal in reality. The stock going down to 300s is not good for the company of it's shareholders regardless of how hard headed the board want sto be about not caring about what the outside thinks and that their business is great. At the core, any business is about the stock price, so any board that doesn't recognize that or chose to ignore that on the basis os "WE GOT A GREAT BUSINESS" is not living in reality and need to be replaced.
post #61 of 118
Originally Posted by castcore View Post
At the core, any business is about the stock price

 

You don’t have the first clue what Apple is. Stop talking.

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
post #62 of 118

Lol, if you don't know what I sam saying, you are the one with no clue

post #63 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by castcore View Post

You have to deal in reality. The stock going down to 300s is not good for the company of it's shareholders regardless of how hard headed the board want sto be about not caring about what the outside thinks and that their business is great. At the core, any business is about the stock price, so any board that doesn't recognize that or chose to ignore that on the basis os "WE GOT A GREAT BUSINESS" is not living in reality and need to be replaced.

They assess the success of their business on earnings, not speculative trading. Speculative trading is not based in reality because that future reality hasn't happened yet and Apple's success has been helped greatly by their future roadmap not being known.

I like how you say 300s when it only just dipped below 400. The lowest value it reached of $390 still meant it had over $350b market cap. So at its worst, the company was still valued as the 2nd most valuable company in the world and didn't drop much below the highest point when Steve was running the company.

If you think being the second most valuable company in the world is somehow indicative of a management problem, I think you need to lower your expectations.
post #64 of 118
I have faith in Apple to continue to deliver great products that sell for many years to come. Because of that I think the share price will go up significantly in the future. And because of that I am totally behind Icahn's proposal, which is a vote of confidence in the company's future value.

Icahn himself I can take or leave, but buying back stock while it is cheap and cheap credit is available is a no-brainer for increasing shareholder value.

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #65 of 118
Originally Posted by castcore View Post
Lol, if you dont know what I sam saying

 

I know exactly what you are saying. What you are saying exhibits no knowledge whatsoever of the core of Apple’s operation. This lack of knowledge has led you to make the wrong decision. I am informing you of this.

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
post #66 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

If you want to learn from a really solid analysis on why Einhorn’s proposal was laughable – and was rightly thrown out by Apple’s shareholders – see here: http://bit.ly/1bIKaw7).

Great article! Thanks. Some posters here should read that.
How to enter the Apple logo  on iOS:
/Settings/Keyboard/Shortcut and paste in  which you copied from an email draft or a note. Screendump
Reply
How to enter the Apple logo  on iOS:
/Settings/Keyboard/Shortcut and paste in  which you copied from an email draft or a note. Screendump
Reply
post #67 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Baker View Post
 

What do you care about Carl's pockets?

 

And the question to you is, what do you care about Apple's pockets? You just want to milk the cow until it dies, then kick the corpse.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #68 of 118
Mac Pro

With the following configuration:

• 3.5GHz 6-core with 12MB of L3 cache
• 16GB (4 x 4GB) of 1866MHz DDR3 ECC
• 512GB PCIe-based flash storage
• Dual AMD FirePro D300 GPUs with 2GB of GDDR5 VRAM each


Still waiting for my Mac Pro i'm looking at a delivery date February so I need my dividends for my Apple shares .
I bought Apple shares investment for my children so I do not care about short-term gain . I believe Tim Cook Will do the right thing for Apple and he has my full support .

What I do need a decent WebCam
Edited by comley - 1/6/14 at 6:20pm
post #69 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

Sure we do. We absolutely do. Are you insane? We know it wouldn’t go to $1. This is known. We know it wouldn’t go to $10. Or $50, or even $100. It would stay above these numbers. 

 

The magical dividend and buyback didn’t “save” the stock. There was nothing to save.

 

It’s not Superman. It’s Superman breaking through the wall and finding not only no danger, but the owner furious for the damage done to his home.

 

Oh, this we know.

 

Sounds far more like Google is setting itself up for the coolest crash of all time.

 

Yeah? Are they? Guess what they aren’t, though. They aren’t involved in daily, weekly, monthly, or yearly operations. They aren’t privy to the parts deals, don’t know the 

 

Proof, please. And no, “they haven’t been giving me the returns on my stock that I demand for absolutely no reason other than I demand them” is not a reason.

 

‘Kay. And?

 

Nah. Sorry. You’re wrong. They are not bad for managing money wisely. They are not bad for operating like a startup. They are not bad for deciding not to waste their money on things they don’t care about and which would lead to worse products.

 

 

Is that second sentence just a second ending to the first sentence, or are you implying that specifically what Icahn thinks is best as a shareholder will inherently benefit other shareholders?

 

Yes, we’re well aware that you’re incapable of understanding what an analogy is.

 

You clearly have very little understanding of the capital markets.  I get it.  You are a person who likes Apple products and feels threatened by someone very rich and powerful like Carl Icahn.  You don't really understand what he is suggesting in terms of capital structure.  That's OK, but don't pretend to understand because the subject matter is clearly over your head.  I could respond to each of your replies, but your answers are so illogical and without the slightest modicum of understand of the subject matter that any response at all would be fruitless.

post #70 of 118
Originally Posted by Jack Baker View Post
You are too obtuse to continue this discussion with.

 

Ah, the old “I’m leaving therefore you’re wrong” bit.

 
…feels threatened by someone very rich and powerful like Carl Icahn.

 

Yeah, I suppose I do feel that Apple is being threatened by an idiot with more money than sense.

 
You don't really understand what he is suggesting in terms of capital structure.

 

I understand that it’s not better than what Apple is doing now. I understand that Apple increased its share price 100 times over in the last ten years by not doing what he wants to do. I understand that Apple is a products company, not a stock company, and as such their core philosophies revolve around not giving a flying frick what the stock is doing or what shareholders demand in terms of money that they didn’t earn, but rather on making products that will allow the stock to be ignored.

 

These are all things 1) that are fact and 2) of which you don’t seem to have even the slightest comprehension. I’d look to that before hopping on the bandwagon.

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
post #71 of 118

Great post, some of these people have not the first clue of what Icahn is saying to unlock shareholder value. They stand behind Apple's balance sheet, great products and great earnings. That is all true and all the reason why this stock should not have lost 50% of it's value from it's high !

 

THAT IS NUTS! And the fact this board allowed that to happen without any action is reason for any sane stock holder to take pause!

 

Bottom line is if you believe in Apple 100% and think the stock will goto 700 or beyond. You should 100% be supporting Carl Icahn's proposal. Don't listen to media type or idiots keep calling Icahn names and this or that. LOOK AT WHAT HE IS PROPOSIGN FOR YOUSELF! Use your own brain!

 

Again, if you think Apple is bullet proof and will goto $700 or beyond, There is nothing wrong with buying stock on the cheap at $525 or $540!Saying no to that is like refusing a lottery prize after you won!

 

Please ,  some of you people need to educate urself  on the capital markets and how they work before speaking nonsense!

post #72 of 118

I understand that Apple is a products company, not a stock company---

 

 

 

You really have no clue, if that is the case, Apple should delist and go private! You should be mad at the board for not doing that?

post #73 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Ah, the old “I’m leaving therefore you’re wrong” bit.
Surprising how often you (and only you) hear that, isn't it?

By the way you said it wrong, it's "I'm leaving because you're childish and impossible and this isn't a real debate".

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #74 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by castcore View Post

Great post, some of these people have not the first clue of what Icahn is saying to unlock shareholder value. They stand behind Apple's balance sheet, great products and great earnings. That is all true and all the reason why this stock should not have lost 50% of it's value from it's high !

It's interesting you picked an arbitrary point. I can do you one better, 10 years ago Apple was at 11 (split adjusted) and now it's at 544. All w/o crazy Carl's help.
post #75 of 118
<div class="quote-container" data-huddler-embed="/t/161434/with-apple-shareholder-proposal-pending-carl-icahn-turns-his-attention-to-hertz/40#post_2454439" data-huddler-embed-placeholder="false"><span>Quote:</span><div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>Crowley</strong>&nbsp;<a href="/t/161434/with-apple-shareholder-proposal-pending-carl-icahn-turns-his-attention-to-hertz/40#post_2454439"><img src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" class="inlineimg" alt="View Post"/></a><br/><br/><br />

Surprising how often you (and only you) hear that, isn't it?<br />

<br />

By the way you said it wrong, it’s "I'm leaving because you're childish and impossible and this isn't a real debate".</div></div><p>&nbsp;</p>



Apple is also doomed. If you’re going to live in a fantasy world, at least complete the picture.
Edited by Tallest Skil - 1/7/14 at 8:22am

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
post #76 of 118

And 5 years ago Blackberry was on top of the world. You need to deal with the NOW and not the past. The Wall street environment now is what it is. There is no need for a great company like this to lose 40% in value and sit and do nothing.

 

I am surprised just at how naive people are here, do you people actually own shares and participate in the markets ?

post #77 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by castcore View Post

And 5 years ago Blackberry was on top of the world. You need to deal with the NOW and not the past. The Wall street environment now is what it is. There is no need for a great company like this to lose 40% in value and sit and do nothing.

I am surprised just at how naive people are here, do you people actually own shares and participate in the markets ?
yes I have shares I have faith in Tim Cook and his team
post #78 of 118
Originally Posted by castcore View Post
There is no need for a great company like this to lose 40% in value and sit and do nothing.

 

Exactly.

 

They’re not sitting there and they’re not doing nothing. They’re continuing to make great products.

 

Sell your stock and forget about AAPL. You don’t understand it.

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
post #79 of 118

You give the board way too much credit.  Most of that stock growth came under the leadership of Jobs.  Who do you think was calling the shots when Jobs was alive?  The board?  or Jobs?  This boards has simply been along for the ride.  That has become more apparent under Cook.

post #80 of 118

They are doing nothing when it comes to defending the stock price from a constant barrage of specious negative articles about Apple.  Cook, Oppenheimer and the Boards boss are the shareholders.  Apple underperformed the stock market's 30% return considerably in 2012.  Apple appreciated only 5%.  Most people in business lose their jobs for that kind of underperformance.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AAPL Investors
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › With Apple shareholder proposal pending, Carl Icahn turns his attention to Hertz