or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › Carl Icahn drops push for more aggressive Apple share buyback
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Carl Icahn drops push for more aggressive Apple share buyback - Page 2

post #41 of 102
Originally Posted by maccherry View Post
How can you get out more than what you put in?

 

Be a bank. :p

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #42 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post

Carl is finally seeing that Apple spending money on share buy back is not driving the value up, you can not grow revenue streams by spending money on stock buy back and as long as Wall Street believe Apple has not future growth they will continue to hold the stock down. I suspect they Carl will be begin slowly dumping his position at this point.
The value in a stock buy back is not in short terms gains; that was never the argument. Buying back stock increases proportional ownership of each outstanding share, which means value is realised in future earnings growth. Carl was always betting long term in Apple, which few of the decriers seemed to realise.

A little disappointing that he's dropping the action off of a (relatively) small commitment from Apple, though hopefully Apple will continue on the same track.

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #43 of 102
And suddenly the stock leaps nearly $12/share? IF you don't call that stock manipulation then you're a freakin' tool of Wall Street.
post #44 of 102
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post
And suddenly the stock leaps nearly $12/share? IF you don't call that stock manipulation then you're a freakin' tool of Wall Street.

 

Regular, old-style shareholders celebrating the end of the threat, maybe?

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #45 of 102
Charlatan!
post #46 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by leavingthebigG View Post


Thanks! But being so public about his Apple share purchases, being able to publicize when he sells the shares would be great.

He makes his buys public because it serves his interest, which getting control over a company, selling and making it known would not be in his interest since he has so many shared he can not sell in one lot so it will take time or find a large institutional buyer, but letting people know your selling large shares will only drive the price down.

post #47 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

Regular, old-style shareholders celebrating the end of the threat, maybe?

 

Perhaps one day governments will legalize murder under the guise of ``maintaining optimal consumption patterns'' and people can trade in lives, eh?

post #48 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by mpantone View Post
 

Carl's such a tool. I'm delighted to see him get embarrassed again.

 

One thing for sure, he doesn't seem to understand high-tech.

 

HUH?

 

He got EXACTLY what he wanted.  An aggresive buyback by Apple with their $14B last two weeks.

post #49 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by leavingthebigG View Post


Thanks! But being so public about his Apple share purchases, being able to publicize when he sells the shares would be great.

 

If he sells Apple it will be documented in his Quarterly holdings report.

My guess is he won't be selling till we see $650-$750.

Dude is not satisfied with 10-20% returns on a winner.  He held Netflix until it went up 457%.

He won't be satisified with a 'small' 10-20% return with all the risk he took and the confidence he has in the company.

post #50 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by mpantone View Post
 

Carl's such a tool. I'm delighted to see him get embarrassed again.

 

One thing for sure, he doesn't seem to understand high-tech.

 

Yes, Carl must be a real tool to be as successful as he is.

post #51 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Disturbia View Post
 

Bunch of lazy ass no talent animals called investors!

 

Leon Trotsky, is that you?

post #52 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frac View Post

Remind me never tp play poker with Tim Cook.
Icahn raised twice and folded when Apple called...and they still didn't show their hand.

 

Icahn bought apple in the $400-$450 range four months ago. Apple is now $529. Man, what a loser! No, not Carl, YOU.

post #53 of 102
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

Perhaps one day governments will legalize murder under the guise of ``maintaining optimal consumption patterns'' and people can trade in lives, eh?

 

That certainly has anything to do with what we’re saying¡

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #54 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by leavingthebigG View Post

I want to know Carl starts selling even one share of Apple stock! This guy has been allowed to destroy many companies due to his greed and has not been forced to pay for the destruction. This time he encountered a force that had friends to oppose his destructive greed. Goodbye, Carl!! Do not come back!!!!

 

Yes, making 25% in four months on $3BN should really teach Icahn a lesson....

post #55 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post
 

 

If he sells Apple it will be documented in his Quarterly holdings report.

My guess is he won't be selling till we see $650-$750.

Dude is not satisfied with 10-20% returns on a winner.  He held Netflix until it went up 457%.

He won't be satisified with a 'small' 10-20% return with all the risk he took and the confidence he has in the company.

 

He took very little risk. He bought apple at the bottom. Whatever you think of the guy (I personally think he is a jerk), he is very good at what he does.

post #56 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post
 

He makes his buys public because it serves his interest, which getting control over a company, selling and making it known would not be in his interest since he has so many shared he can not sell in one lot so it will take time or find a large institutional buyer, but letting people know your selling large shares will only drive the price down.

 

My natural language parser just crashed.

post #57 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


I know the wordage there is justifiable but it's so distasteful. Tim Cook has worked there for 16 years, Carl just bought some second-hand stock I think it was 6 months ago and it's like he's got his arm round Tim's shoulder talking to him like he's one of them now.

 

Carl believed in Apple, and put his money ($3BN, as I recall) where his beliefs were. Tim Cook sells his stock as soon as it vests. Hmm...

post #58 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inkling View Post

Is is just me, or is there something perverse about a Carl Icahn who is so greedy and self-obsessed that he thinks Apple's policies should be driven by what does or doesn't make him money?

Does Apple Insider publish each every open letter by every Apple stock holder? Then why bother to publish his letter. Why give the guy a platform?

Broaden your scope a bit. Make fun of his greed and show how pitiful he is. Portray him like Charles Dickens did Scrooge in "A Christmas Carol." Show you know that there's more to life than the latest gadget or newest app.

 

Icahn only makes money (on this particular deal) if EVERY apple shareholder makes money [there is no greenmail involved, as far as I know]. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being an activist shareholder, and Icahn has enough street cred (and skin in the game) for people (including Apple Insider) to listen to him.

post #59 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978 View Post
 


You realize he is up a billion dollars or so on his Apple investment...

EXACTLY! All these posts full of vitriol and trying to read the tea leaves about Icahn's motives can't understand the simple reason for his actions that's right in front of their face. He invested to make some money! And, on paper, he has!

 

Let's be realistic. Icahn owns around 1% of AAPL. He has a bully pulpit to gain media coverage for his suggestions to Apple, but he sure doesn't have enough influence to force Apple and its board to do something it really doesn't want to do. But it happens that his advocacy of a more aggressive buyback program aligns with the goals of other investors with long positions in AAPL. Dropping his shareholder proposal is exactly what he he says. The accelerated buyback recently has gotten pretty close to what he was seeking. To claim he came out a loser in this is ludicrous. Icahn has all the notoriety he could ever want. And now he's got more money, which is what he continues to want.

 

Yet this thread has been populated by a host of small-time investing bigmouths on this thread who throw their nickels around like manhole covers and have barely a pot to pee in. In other words, would-be cowboys who are all hat and no cattle.

 

For all those self-appointed financial geniuses, you're letting your emotions and prejudices about some of Icahn's past financial moves run away with you. It marks you as people who don't make wholly rational financial decisions and beg to be fleeced.

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

Reply

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

Reply
post #60 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by thompr View Post
 

Yes, Tim Cook is a wolf in sheep's clothing.  No impatience, no fear.  His polite demeanor works in his favor, and I honestly believe he is better at negotiation than even Steve Jobs was.

 

Thompson

 

Yes, he certainly showed that Icahn, by doing exactly what Icahn wanted him to do.

post #61 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kibitzer View Post
 

EXACTLY! All these posts full of vitriol and trying to read the tea leaves about Icahn's motives can't understand the simple reason for his actions that's right in front of their face. He invested to make some money! And, on paper, he has!

 

Let's be realistic. Icahn owns around 1% of AAPL. He has a bully pulpit to gain media coverage for his suggestions to Apple, but he sure doesn't have enough influence to force Apple and its board to do something it really doesn't want to do. But it happens that his advocacy of a more aggressive buyback program aligns with the goals of other investors with long positions in AAPL. Dropping his shareholder proposal is exactly what he he says. The accelerated buyback recently has gotten pretty close to what he was seeking. To claim he came out a loser in this is ludicrous. Icahn has all the notoriety he could ever want. And now he's got more money, which is what he continues to want.

 

Yet this thread has been populated by a host of small-time investing bigmouths on this thread who throw their nickels around like manhole covers and have barely a pot to pee in. In other words, would-be cowboys who are all hat and no cattle.

 

For all those self-appointed financial geniuses, you're letting your emotions and prejudices about some of Icahn's past financial moves run away with you. It marks you as people who don't make wholly rational financial decisions and beg to be fleeced.

 

agree.

 

Some of idiots on this message board think Apple is incapable of executing a good capital allocation plan AND run the operations.  Good companies do BOTH.  Just because Icahn was pushing for buybacks does not mean he was anti-Apple long term.  You can run the business to appease shareholders AND grow operations.  Many here like to act like you can't do both.

 

Carl is satisified because Tim Cook FINALLY showed some balls and bought back $14B in a two week span.  That was a big F'You Wall street and option hacks. 

post #62 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post


The value in a stock buy back is not in short terms gains; that was never the argument. Buying back stock increases proportional ownership of each outstanding share, which means value is realised in future earnings growth. Carl was always betting long term in Apple, which few of the decriers seemed to realise.

A little disappointing that he's dropping the action off of a (relatively) small commitment from Apple, though hopefully Apple will continue on the same track.

 

The thing is that Apple was never opposed to returning cash to investors. They just have a more deliberate pace to it. The long term play is to gradually return money to investors while not taking on insane amounts of debt or repatriating their off shore holdings and paying huge taxes. Even then, Apple increased their buy back amount and pace when it saw fit. Icahn wanted it higher and faster. That is the big difference. I think a big part of him stepping back is two large institutional investors and ISS putting their two cents in. Apple announced their recent $14b buy back last week and Icahn could have pulled back then but he announced it after ISS put out a release.

post #63 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post
 

Carl is satisified because Tim Cook FINALLY showed some balls and bought back $14B in a two week span.  That was a big F'You Wall street and option hacks. 

Thanks for your overall support, but not exactly. The $14B buyback wasn't about testosterone, and it wasn't about giving the finger to anybody. It was an opportunity. Imagine how we would feel if the company had dropped $14B two weeks earlier and the market price subsequently dropped as it did. Again, let's take the emotion out of it. When good judgement indicates that the market has erred in underpricing the stock, that's the time to buy.

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

Reply

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

Reply
post #64 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post
 

 

HUH?

 

He got EXACTLY what he wanted.  An aggresive buyback by Apple with their $14B last two weeks.

 

But that means that you're assuming that Apple wouldn't have done it regardless of Icahn, which I don't think is a fair assumption.

post #65 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by foad View Post
 

 

But that means that you're assuming that Apple wouldn't have done it regardless of Icahn, which I don't think is a fair assumption.

?? I don't see where sog35 made that assumption at all.

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

Reply

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

Reply
post #66 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kibitzer View Post

?? I don't see where sog35 made that assumption at all.

Apologies. I should have worded it differently. The statement of Apple being more aggressive with it's buy back can be construed that Apple wouldn't have been more aggressive without Icahn being a part of the conversation. My opinion is that Apple is more aggressive when it sees fit. They increased the initial buy back to the $60b without Icahn being in the conversation. Even Icahn said that the release by ISS influenced his decision to pull back.
post #67 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kibitzer View Post
 

Thanks for your overall support, but not exactly. The $14B buyback wasn't about testosterone, and it wasn't about giving the finger to anybody. It was an opportunity. Imagine how we would feel if the company had dropped $14B two weeks earlier and the market price subsequently dropped as it did. Again, let's take the emotion out of it. When good judgement indicates that the market has erred in underpricing the stock, that's the time to buy.

 

There were opportunities at $385 and $400.  But Tim Cook was not as aggressive as when he dropped the hammer the last two weeks.  I think that is all Ichan wanted.  For Tim to be aggressive when the price is right.

post #68 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phone-UI-Guy View Post
 

 

I would argue that he actually did. The board has been pretty slow and I really believe it was the spotlight that Icahn brought to the problem that got the company to be more aggressive. He put pressure on Apple where there was none. Apple is now being more aggressive. Glad to see he is backing off now that Apple is taking the issue more seriously. I expect him to stay in the stock long term as there is no reason to get out. 

You're flat out incorrect.  Apple stated long before Icahn, they planned to buy back $60B in stock.  This latest chunk timing coincides with their financials and market fluctuations.  He's  had no effect on Apple's share buyback.  Both of Carl's suggestions were ridiculous, including the original and modified figures. 

 

His open letter claiming 'victory' is a face saving PR tactic, after months of clamoring on Twitter like a stupid clown.  He needs to keep up appearances for his investor associates, and for them to forget his latest failure to manipulate the market thru press hype.  Wall St. media is typically very susceptible to this kind of chicanery, and its a very good thing Apple is not.

post #69 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by redefiler View Post
 

You're flat out incorrect.  Apple stated long before Icahn, they planned to buy back $60B in stock.  This latest chunk timing coincides with their financials and market fluctuations.  He's  had no effect on Apple's share buyback.  Both of Carl's suggestions were ridiculous, including the original and modified figures. 

 

His open letter claiming 'victory' is a face saving PR tactic, after months of clamoring on Twitter like a stupid clown.  He needs to keep up appearances for his investor associates, and for them to forget his latest failure to manipulate the market thru press hype.  Wall St. media is typically very susceptible to this kind of chicanery, and its a very good thing Apple is not.

 

He does need to keep up any kind of appearances, since he has made a boatload of money with his Apple stake, which is all his "investor associates" care about (correctly). Any suggestion that Icahn's activism made no difference to Apple's behavior is absurd (and in any case, counter-factual statements are notoriously hard to verify).

post #70 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by foad View Post
 

 

The thing is that Apple was never opposed to returning cash to investors. They just have a more deliberate pace to it. The long term play is to gradually return money to investors while not taking on insane amounts of debt or repatriating their off shore holdings and paying huge taxes. Even then, Apple increased their buy back amount and pace when it saw fit. Icahn wanted it higher and faster. That is the big difference. I think a big part of him stepping back is two large institutional investors and ISS putting their two cents in. Apple announced their recent $14b buy back last week and Icahn could have pulled back then but he announced it after ISS put out a release.

 

Ichan never wanted Apple to repratriate funds or take on 'insane debt'.

 

All Ichan was asking for was $50B buyback for 2014.  Mr Cook has already spend $14B in the first month.  To spend an additional $36B would not require Apple to repratriate funds or take on insane debt.  They generate $45B in free cash flows a year and could easily pay out the $36B by floating another $16B bond like they did last year.

 

That would make total long-term debt at $32B which is not insane.

The interest paid on the bonds would be about 2% which is actually lower than the dividend yield.

So Apple would actually make money issuing more bonds.

 

Apple has $20B remaining for the buyback of $60B.

I'm almost certain they will increase the $60B total to $80B or even $100B in March or April.

post #71 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kibitzer View Post
 

Thanks for your overall support, but not exactly. The $14B buyback wasn't about testosterone, and it wasn't about giving the finger to anybody. It was an opportunity. Imagine how we would feel if the company had dropped $14B two weeks earlier and the market price subsequently dropped as it did. Again, let's take the emotion out of it. When good judgement indicates that the market has erred in underpricing the stock, that's the time to buy.

Yep.  Also the fact that it's Q1 in a new year, rather than part of last year's purchases.

 

He's full of it. Apple has already clearly stated their intentions.  It's like advising Apple to release a new iPhone this year, then when they do, declaring victory and claiming you influenced their management.

post #72 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by marubeni View Post
 

 

He does need to keep up any kind of appearances, since he has made a boatload of money with his Apple stake, which is all his "investor associates" care about (correctly). Any suggestion that Icahn's activism made no difference to Apple's behavior is absurd (and in any case, counter-factual statements are notoriously hard to verify)

 

Apple already said they were buying back 60 billion over time.  This 14 is part of that.  Exactly how did Carl influence anything?  His 100 billion number was insanely stupid for them to consider, as is his amended 50 billion for this year alone.

 

Carl's activism abilities has served him well to manipulate the short term fragile, reactionary nature of Wall St... in the past.  With Yahoo and now Apple, that ability seems to have diminish

 

Throw around 'absurd' all you want, but it's clear my kung-fu is stronger.

My best advice for you, take a few days to reflect and think this through some more.

post #73 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post
 

 

Ichan never wanted Apple to repratriate funds or take on 'insane debt'.

 

All Ichan was asking for was $50B buyback for 2014.  Mr Cook has already spend $14B in the first month.  To spend an additional $36B would not require Apple to repratriate funds or take on insane debt.  They generate $45B in free cash flows a year and could easily pay out the $36B by floating another $16B bond like they did last year.

 

That would make total long-term debt at $32B which is not insane.

The interest paid on the bonds would be about 2% which is actually lower than the dividend yield.

So Apple would actually make money issuing more bonds.

 

Apple has $20B remaining for the buyback of $60B.

I'm almost certain they will increase the $60B total to $80B or even $100B in March or April.

 

I should have been more clear. I don't think Apple is of the mindset of taking on more debt unless absolutely necessary, especially long term debt. Sure the interest paid would be less than the dividend yield and they would actually make money, it's still debt though. The markets that Apple competes in are volatile and while Apple's free cash flow is high right now, you never know how the world market is going to react; the iPhone 5c comes to mind. As confident as Apple can be in their product pipeline, you never know what is going to happen. Apple's stock price is irrational and there's no way of knowing how doubling their debt in less than 12 months would impact the stock. That is why ISS is backing Apple and not Icahn, as are two other large institutional investors...they think that Apple is tentatively on the right path.

 

I still stand by my original thought. All the showboating by Icahn makes it seems as though Apple didn't intend on taking the exact same steps that he is pushing for. Prior to Icahn investing, Apple increased its buy back and like you, I'm fairly confident in assuming they would increase it even beyond the original $60b they are at right now.

post #74 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by redefiler View Post
 

Yep.  Also the fact that it's Q1 in a new year, rather than part of last year's purchases.

 

He's full of it. Apple has already clearly stated their intentions.  It's like advising Apple to release a new iPhone this year, then when they do, declaring victory and claiming you influenced their management.

 

Where in his letter did Ichan take credit for Apple's buyback? 

All he said was he gave credit to Mr Cook for being aggressive! 

 

"Additionally, we are pleased that Tim and the board have exhibited the "opportunistic" and "aggressive" approach to share repurchases that we hoped to instill with our proposal."

 

He said hoped.  He did not take the credit.

And where did he declare victory?

All he said was Apple is doing such a great job at returning cash that he sees no reason to push for the $50B buyback.

post #75 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kibitzer View Post
 

Thanks for your overall support, but not exactly. The $14B buyback wasn't about testosterone, and it wasn't about giving the finger to anybody. It was an opportunity. Imagine how we would feel if the company had dropped $14B two weeks earlier and the market price subsequently dropped as it did. Again, let's take the emotion out of it. When good judgement indicates that the market has erred in underpricing the stock, that's the time to buy.

 

I agree. It was the right time to expedite the existing plan and take advantage on the lower price.

post #76 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by redefiler View Post
 

 

Apple already said they were buying back 60 billion over time.  This 14 is part of that.  Exactly how did Carl influence anything?  His 100 billion number was insanely stupid for them to consider, as is his amended 50 billion for this year alone.

 

Carl's activism abilities has served him well to manipulate the short term fragile, reactionary nature of Wall St... in the past.  With Yahoo and now Apple, that ability seems to have diminish

 

Throw around 'absurd' all you want, but it's clear my kung-fu is stronger.

My best advice for you, take a few days to reflect and think this through some more.

 

How is Ichan's $50B request insanely stupid??????

 

Apple has bought back $40B from May2013 to Jan2014.  That's an average of $4.4B a month which is actually MORE THAN ICHAN REQUESTED for 2014.  LOL.

 

So are you calling Apple insanely stupid for buying back $40B in 9 months?

How is that less stupid than Ichan wanted $50B in 12 months?

LOL!

post #77 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post
 

 

Ichan never wanted Apple to repratriate funds or take on 'insane debt'.

 

All Ichan was asking for was $50B buyback for 2014.  Mr Cook has already spend $14B in the first month.  To spend an additional $36B would not require Apple to repratriate funds or take on insane debt.  They generate $45B in free cash flows a year and could easily pay out the $36B by floating another $16B bond like they did last year.

 

That would make total long-term debt at $32B which is not insane.

The interest paid on the bonds would be about 2% which is actually lower than the dividend yield.

So Apple would actually make money issuing more bonds.

 

Apple has $20B remaining for the buyback of $60B.

I'm almost certain they will increase the $60B total to $80B or even $100B in March or April.

 

Much mental gymnastic folding, yet this logic still doesn't quite fit into the box.  

Apple's past words and actions mean more than your speculation of future events.

 

I've go massive crystal balls, and they say Apple won't be taking on any debt to buy back stocks, because that's a stupid idea and their management has been very smart about handling their money.  

 

I guess you like Carl, great... but he's the one offering the 'peace treaty' not the other way around.  I'm not sure there's enough energy in the physical universe to muster this into a win for him.  No need for tears, I'm sure he can afford to buy a nice hanky for the egg on his face.

post #78 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post
 

 

How is Ichan's $50B request insanely stupid??????

 

Apple has bought back $40B from May2013 to Jan2014.  That's an average of $4.4B a month which is actually MORE THAN ICHAN REQUESTED for 2014.  LOL.

 

So are you calling Apple insanely stupid for buying back $40B in 9 months?

How is that less stupid than Ichan wanted $50B in 12 months?

LOL!

It's roughly 1/3 of their cash.  Spending a third of your savings on dumb stuff is always 'insanely stupid'.  They don't need the stock, and that cash is much more valuable for other options.

post #79 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by foad View Post
 

 

I should have been more clear. I don't think Apple is of the mindset of taking on more debt unless absolutely necessary, especially long term debt. Sure the interest paid would be less than the dividend yield and they would actually make money, it's still debt though. The markets that Apple competes in are volatile and while Apple's free cash flow is high right now, you never know how the world market is going to react; the iPhone 5c comes to mind. As confident as Apple can be in their product pipeline, you never know what is going to happen. Apple's stock price is irrational and there's no way of knowing how doubling their debt in less than 12 months would impact the stock. That is why ISS is backing Apple and not Icahn, as are two other large institutional investors...they think that Apple is tentatively on the right path.

 

I still stand by my original thought. All the showboating by Icahn makes it seems as though Apple didn't intend on taking the exact same steps that he is pushing for. Prior to Icahn investing, Apple increased its buy back and like you, I'm fairly confident in assuming they would increase it even beyond the original $60b they are at right now.

 

Apple went from $0 debt to $16B and no one in Wall Street blinked an eye.  An additional $16B debt won't matter because they will have over $200B in cash by the end of the year.  The key is the debt is extremely cheap and it doesn't take a genius to see that Apple could pay off all the debt even if their free cash flows is CUT IN HALF.

 

Once a Republican president gets into the White House we will probably see a tax holiday.  Then Apple can bring back all their cash and pay off all their debt.

post #80 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by redefiler View Post
 

 

Apple already said they were buying back 60 billion over time.  This 14 is part of that.  Exactly how did Carl influence anything?  His 100 billion number was insanely stupid for them to consider, as is his amended 50 billion for this year alone.

 

Carl's activism abilities has served him well to manipulate the short term fragile, reactionary nature of Wall St... in the past.  With Yahoo and now Apple, that ability seems to have diminish

 

Throw around 'absurd' all you want, but it's clear my kung-fu is stronger.

My best advice for you, take a few days to reflect and think this through some more.

 

Ooh, condescending to your betters -- a great way to win an argument. Your post above is nonsense. There is nothing insane about $100BN buyback (I am not necessarily saying Apple should have done it, but it is not unreasonable), and Carl's activism made him close to $1BN in well under half a year (on a $3BN investment). Not what I would describe as failure. Why don't you take your own condescending advice?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AAPL Investors
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › Carl Icahn drops push for more aggressive Apple share buyback