or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › SV150: Apple, Inc. earns more than HP, Google, Intel & Cisco combined
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

SV150: Apple, Inc. earns more than HP, Google, Intel & Cisco combined

post #1 of 49
Thread Starter 
A listing of Silicon Valley's top companies points out that Apple now brings in more revenue ($174 billion) than second place Hewlett Packard and third place Google combined, and earns more money ($37 billion) than the rest of the top five together.

SV150 Q1 2014


The SV150 is compiled by the region's San Jose Mercury News from Bloomberg data and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filings of the companies

Despite its leadership position in revenues and profits, investors have valued Apple with a market capitalization that's only about 70 percent of the combined value of HP, Google, Intel and Cisco.



The region's eleventh largest firm, Facebook, has a market cap that's nearly a third the size of Apple's, despite revenues that are just 4 percent of the iPhone maker's, and profits that are less than 4 percent of Apple's earnings.
post #2 of 49

Apple’s down $3.87. This must be why.

 

EDIT: Instead of direct sarcasm, take it now as semi-direct pseudo-sarcasm.


Edited by Tallest Skil - 4/13/14 at 12:59pm

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 fucked.

 

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 fucked.

 

Reply
post #3 of 49
1) That title doesn't do this fact justice. I'd think something like: "Apple earns more profit than next four companies combined" would be more powerful. I also don't see a reason to use Incorporated in the title.

2) Interesting that Google has a higher profit margin than Apple and that MS doesn't make the top 11.

edit: I see now this only for Silicon Valley.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Apple’s down $3.87. This must be why.

That was close on Friday. Everything I monitor was down that day, and most were down more than the 0.74% that AAPL was down.
Edited by SolipsismX - 4/13/14 at 1:02pm

"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 #4 of 49
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post
That was close on Friday.

 

I lose days all the time. The passing of time means next to nothing to me. Thanks for the fix. :(

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 fucked.

 

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 fucked.

 

Reply
post #5 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

1)
2) Interesting that Google has a higher profit margin than Apple

No surprise since their research and development costs for consumer products are virtually nonexistent; deferred to Apple and dependent upon Xerox.1smoking.gif
post #6 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacBook Pro View Post

No surprise since their research and development costs for consumer products are virtually nonexistent; deferred to Apple and dependent upon Xerox.1smoking.gif

I know you're kidding but it's also a good time to note that Google is one of the top spenders of R&D int his industry by both a dollar value and by a percentage of their sales.

Apple has been increasing their R&D dramatically so I do expect some great things from them within a couple years.

"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 #7 of 49
In my opinion consumer electronics has, by far, the greatest potential for growth. The next 37 years, 3 months, 10 days will be even more Amazing for Apple, Inc.
post #8 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

I know you're kidding but it's also a good time to note that Google is one of the top spenders of R&D int his industry by both a dollar value and by a percentage of their sales.

Apple has been increasing their R&D dramatically so I do expect some great things from them within a couple years.


Google does some interesting things but they lack clarity of vision resulting in spending ridiculous amounts of money on projects that either never reach fruition or are repealed when Google fails to capitalize on the market.
post #9 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Apple’s down $3.87. This must be why.

EDIT: Instead of direct sarcasm, take it now as semi-direct pseudo-sarcasm.

So /sdps? 1wink.gif
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #10 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacBook Pro View Post

Google does some interesting things but they lack clarity of vision resulting in spending ridiculous amounts of money on projects that either never reach fruition or are repealed when Google fails to capitalize on the market.

Most companies (and people*) don't seem to have the proper focus. I think we all agree it's annoying that Apple is so secretive and waits so long to release a new product category or some case no category at all (like an iOS-based home server) but when they do release something they do have a way of making it the only way forward from that point on.


* I count myself as one of those people. I have ideas and if I focused on a single idea I think I could make it great but I like to spread out my interests which means I'll likely never discover anything or do something better than any other person in the world before me.



edit: Oops. Forget to add don't.
Edited by SolipsismX - 4/13/14 at 4:26pm

"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 #11 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

* I count myself as one of those people. I have ideas and if I focused on a single idea I think I could make it great but I like to spread out my interests which means I'll likely never discover anything or do something better than any other person in the world before me.

The extra stimuli we have now is part of the reason we no longer see the likes of a Mozart, or Michelangelo.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #12 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

The extra stimuli we have now is part of the reason we no longer see the likes of a Mozart, or Michelangelo.

Even in their time there was so much stimuli compared to the generations that preceded them. There has to be that something special in the individual to make them focus on a single concept so intently. One could describe it as an unhealthy obsession (but like genius v insanity, one's level of success probably determines if it'll be considered healthy or unhealthy). Fraunhofer lines are a great example of this.


Neil deGrasse Tyson mentioned Joseph Fraunhofer on last week's Cosmos episode. For those that don't know, those lines that Fraunhofer hated seeing in his lenses are what we now use to accurately determine the chemical makeup of the heavens.
Edited by SolipsismX - 4/13/14 at 2:05pm

"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 #13 of 49
To those who say that google has a better profit margin, look at the tax they paid. Google paid 16 percent while apple paid 26 percent. Yet apple is the one attacked/investigated.
post #14 of 49
Google makes ~ 1/3 as much as Apple, yet their market cap is close to 80%.
post #15 of 49
And Apple does very little advertising. Very little yet their stores are always packed!!!!!
post #16 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael_C View Post

Google makes ~ 1/3 as much as Apple, yet their market cap is close to 80%.

Further evidence that profits and market caps are not directly connected to each other.
Edited by SolipsismX - 4/13/14 at 2:48pm

"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 #17 of 49

What's with that ignoramus Joe Nocera over at the nytimes.com today? How much is Samsung paying him under the table--or is this quid pro quo Samsung receives for spending millions on ads in the NY Times? He states Apple refuses to settle its intellectual property disputes with other companies, when it's only Samsung that Apple refuses to settle with because Samsung refuses to commit to not copying Apple designs. Apple has settled long ago with virtually every other major handset maker. Apple is the only one suing over nonessential patents that Samsung chose to infringe. The Office of the President of the U.S.A. has effectively affirmed the legitimacy of Apple's legal pursuit involving nonessential patents and the illegitimacy of Samsung's countersuits over FRAND patents. The present trial has revealed that it took a huge team of experts at Google to settle on copying Apple's swipe-to-unlock technology. What a crock of b.s. the pro-Android, anti-Apple crowd is spewing over this one patent of Apple's alone.


Edited by Cpsro - 4/13/14 at 3:29pm
post #18 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

A listing of Silicon Valley's top companies points out that Apple now brings in more revenue ($174 billion) than second place Hewlett Packard and third place Google combined, and earns more money ($37 billion) than the rest of the top five together.

How an that be?! We all know that Apple is doomed! Doomed, I tell you!!!
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
post #19 of 49
Apple may earn more but without an iwatch, Apple TV set, 6" iPhone, NFC, they are doooooomed!
post #20 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael_C View Post

Google makes ~ 1/3 as much as Apple, yet their market cap is close to 80%.

Further evidence that profits and market caps are not directly connected to each other.

Of course they're connected. Through the expected future growth in profits. That's why Google's PE ratio is ~30, while Apple's is ~13. (Price = EPS*PE)

Rightly or wrongly, the market expects much faster profit growth out of Google. It also expects that Apple's profits won't grow as fast as even that of the average company in the market, let alone Google.

Apple just has to prove them wrong. And they will, for those who wait.
post #21 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpsro View Post

What's with that ignoramus Joe Nocera over at the nytimes.com today?

That was, indeed, a pathetic pos op-ed. Most of his op-eds are.
post #22 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Of course they're connected. Through the expected future growth in profits. That's why Google's PE ratio is ~30, while Apple's is ~13. (Price = EPS*PE)

Rightly or wrongly, the market expects much faster profit growth out of Google. It also expects that Apple's profits won't grow as fast as even that of the average company in the market, let alone Google.

Apple just has to prove them wrong. And they will, for those who wait.

There is nothing direct about an exception of profits by a market diviner and profits that have actually been counted.

"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 #23 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


The extra stimuli we have now is part of the reason we no longer see the likes of a Mozart, or Michelangelo.

 

That's your nostalgia filter at work. Its also a blank generalization.  Are you part of the general public that only knows names thru cultural osmosis? There has been a great many geniuses over the last 100 to 150 years. 


Edited by lightstriker - 4/13/14 at 4:19pm
post #24 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by fjose1929 View Post

To those who say that google has a better profit margin, look at the tax they paid. Google paid 16 percent while apple paid 26 percent. Yet apple is the one attacked/investigated.

Apple paid income taxes equal to 26% of it's corporate profits? When and where was that?
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #25 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by lightstriker View Post

That's your nostalgia filter at work. Its also a blank generalization.  Are you part of the general public that only knows names thru cultural osmosis? There's has been a great many geniuses over the last hundred years. 

I agree partly with your comment about a nostalgia filter as we only know the relatively few exceptions that rise to the surface in a generation but I don't think the term "genius" should be used to describe all such people. Genius, in relation to intelligence has to deal with the capacity for exceptional intellectual, creative power or other natural ability but by itself it's not not enough. There are many other factors at play to create the next [name that will be remembered above all others for a given era].

On that point, the most intelligent and clever people I know are not the ones that make the most money or most likely to change the world. It seems like you need to at least have a particular mental aptitude, a high degree of focus, and have been born into the the right circumstances.

The aforementioned Fraunhofer was making glass his whole life as an indentured servant. If that horrible act had not come about and he had a normal and happy childhood what would he have become? I think the odds fall heavily on him not be famous today and certainly not being remembered for his important discovery for modern science. Maybe it's better to have a surgeon that has spent so many years studying medicine that they don't know much about other subjects. I've certainly met such people.

"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 #26 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by lightstriker View Post

That's your nostalgia filter at work. Its also a blank generalization.  Are you part of the general public that only knows names thru cultural osmosis? There has been a great many geniuses over the last 100 to 150 years. 

True, and I could've picked some of the more obscure ones that few only know about, but I chose 2 of the most known to help prove my point to the many.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #27 of 49
On each new post, I scroll down to see who it's written by. Once I see it's by Daniel, I get excited knowing it will be an interesting read lol.


No offense Neil...

Paul Thurrott on iPad (2010): "Anyone who believes this thing is a game changer is a tool. I'm sorry, but that's just the way it is."

Reply

Paul Thurrott on iPad (2010): "Anyone who believes this thing is a game changer is a tool. I'm sorry, but that's just the way it is."

Reply
post #28 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by lightstriker View Post
 

 

That's your nostalgia filter at work. Its also a blank generalization.  Are you part of the general public that only knows names thru cultural osmosis? There has been a great many geniuses over the last 100 to 150 years. 

One of them is at work in Silicon Valley and elsewhere right now and goes by the name of Elon Musk. Oh... and his privately owned spacecraft is flying to the ISS on Monday, again. Even the somewhat self-absorbed British TV show Top Gear had this to say - 'The Tesla Model S is the most important car Top Gear has tested.' http://www.topgear.com/uk/photos/Maserati-Ghibli-takes-on-Model-S-2014-04-03

 

Interested to learn whether there is something to the talk of a mutual interest with Apple in a battery production plant in California. Hopefully greater collaboration.

 

All the best.

Where are we on the curve? We'll know once it goes asymptotic!
Reply
Where are we on the curve? We'll know once it goes asymptotic!
Reply
post #29 of 49
Originally Posted by IQatEdo View Post
One of them is at work in Silicon Valley and elsewhere right now and goes by the name of Elon Musk.

 

He will be one of–if not the–first trillionaires, a word which OS X still thinks is misspelled. Musk has my vote to do just about anything. I think we can pretty well say that someone is “the Steve Jobs of [field]”, and Musk would probably fit that bill a few times over.

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 fucked.

 

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 fucked.

 

Reply
post #30 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

He will be one of–if not the–first trillionaires, a word which OS X still thinks is misspelled. Musk has my vote to do just about anything. I think we can pretty well say that someone is “the Steve Jobs of [field]”, and Musk would probably fit that bill a few times over.

I believe that the opportunities for the two folds, Apple and Musk's companies, to take advantage of synergies is enormous. For example, SpaceX apparently, according to Musk at least, is cheaper at lofting payloads than even the Chinese. When his systems become fully re-usable, the advantage will grow even further. This with fully home-grown technology and manufacturing, something Apple must certainly be well aware of. When Musk begins a new venture, I doubt that he gives a thought to it being sited anywhere other than in the US.

Where are we on the curve? We'll know once it goes asymptotic!
Reply
Where are we on the curve? We'll know once it goes asymptotic!
Reply
post #31 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Of course they're connected. Through the expected future growth in profits. That's why Google's PE ratio is ~30, while Apple's is ~13. (Price = EPS*PE)

Rightly or wrongly, the market expects much faster profit growth out of Google. It also expects that Apple's profits won't grow as fast as even that of the average company in the market, let alone Google.

Apple just has to prove them wrong. And they will, for those who wait.

There is nothing direct about an exception of profits by a market diviner and profits that have actually been counted.

I guess we can debate the degree of 'direct'ness until the cows come home, but the point is that markets are not valuing what you did for me in the last quarter/year/decade. They are valuing what they think you can do for me in the future. Forming expectations of about that future does not require one to be a diviner, not by a long shot.

Profits that have been 'actually counted' matter in only two ways, really: (1) Whether and what it tells us about the management's ability to deliver the same type of performance in the future; and (2) What management plans to with all the past cash (including whether they're just going to return it to shareholders).
post #32 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

I guess we can debate the degree of 'direct'ness until the cows come home, but the point is that markets are not valuing what you did for me in the last quarter/year/decade. They are valuing what they think you can do for me in the future. Forming expectations of about that future does not require one to be a diviner, not by a long shot.

Profits that have been 'actually counted' matter in only two ways, really: (1) Whether and what it tells us about the management's ability to deliver the same type of performance in the future; and (2) What management plans to with all the past cash (including whether they're just going to return it to shareholders).

That valuation can use recorded profits in their prognostication the way a fortune teller can use visual clues to sometimes make accurate guesses about their next customer but in no way is each a 1:1 (i.e.: direct) indicator of what the future holds. As we've clearly seen the stock will go up and down even as profits go up and down.

Furthermore, investors tend to guess what the stock will do, not what the company's profit will do which is why we see articles stating what they say the stock will be in a year, not what a company's profits will be in a year.

"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 #33 of 49

Yes indeed ... google does a lot of this to people to see which one makes analysts / investors excited!

 

 

....the lack of properly optimized apps is one of the reasons "why the experience on Android tablets is so crappy".

Tim Cook ~ The Wall Street Journal - February 7, 2014

Inside Google! 

Reply

....the lack of properly optimized apps is one of the reasons "why the experience on Android tablets is so crappy".

Tim Cook ~ The Wall Street Journal - February 7, 2014

Inside Google! 

Reply
post #34 of 49
Seems like unless Apple start to lost money, spent money to acquire meaningless businesses, copy others, lie to the shareholders, pay the damn politicians, lobbyiny jerks, data research firms, journalists, analysts, the stock will be not move up like the others.
post #35 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post
 
..... which is why we see articles stating what they say the stock will be in a year, not what a company's profits will be in a year.

Where/how do you think the people that prognosticate on where "the stock will be in year" get at that number? 

(Hint: I gave you the answer in a prior reply, when I said that analysts estimate price as Price = EPS*PE).

post #36 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Where/how do you think the people that prognosticate on where "the stock will be in year" get at that number? 
(Hint: I gave you the answer in a prior reply, when I said that analysts estimate price as Price = EPS*PE).

It's all guesses on what they think will happen and not based on what has actually happened. If it was based solely on the latter Apple's valuation would be much higher and Amazon's would be much lower. Again, none of it is direct because it's all about predicting an unknown, uncertain future.

"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 #37 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Where/how do you think the people that prognosticate on where "the stock will be in year" get at that number? 
(Hint: I gave you the answer in a prior reply, when I said that analysts estimate price as Price = EPS*PE).

It's all guesses on what they think will happen and not based on what has actually happened. If it was based solely on the latter Apple's valuation would be much higher and Amazon's would be much lower. Again, none of it is direct because it's all about predicting an unknown, uncertain future.

1) It's not just 'guesses.' It's much more sophisticated than that. Unless you think all forecasting is 'guesses.'

 

2) In any event, what you personally about 'what has actually happened' is irrelevant. Markets, unfortunately, could give a s*** about that. I did tell you the two conditions under which 'what has actually happened' matters. You can choose to believe it or not.

 

3) You seem hung up on the concept of 'direct.' I am simply failing to see how and why that is remotely relevant to how markets actually price stocks. Direct or indirect is not a all relevant. What you think is 'direct' may not be what the market thinks is direct.

 

4) The future is, by definition, unknown and uncertain (Neils Bohr said it much better). But if you think that forecasting is useless or pointless because of that (which seems to me to be what you're implying here), we might as well shut down the economy and the markets. But that's not an option.

post #38 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

1) It's not just 'guesses.' It's much more sophisticated than that. Unless you think all forecasting is 'guesses.'

It doesn't matter if an educated guess it's still an estimate without sufficient information to be sure of being correct. Apple's earnings are to be taken as factual statements.

guess |ges|
verb [ with obj. ]
estimate or suppose (something) without sufficient information to be sure of being correct.
Quote:
You seem hung up on the concept of 'direct.' I am simply failing to see how and why that is remotely relevant to how markets actually price stocks. Direct or indirect is not a all relevant. What you think is 'direct' may not be what the market thinks is direct.

Of course I'm hung up on the use of direct. If it's direct it means that any additional sales made on a given day will mean that the stock will go up as a direct result of those sales. Stocks simply don't work that way. Actual profits are only a single metric used to determine their future potential.
Quote:
The future is, by definition, unknown and uncertain (Neils Bohr said it much better). But if you think that forecasting is useless or pointless because of that (which seems to me to be what you're implying here), we might as well shut down the economy and the markets. But that's not an option.

Of course I don't think it's useless or pointless. I'm a frequent contributor to a site called Apple Insider that oft posts rumours. My guesses are still just guesses regardless of how much research I do to back up my ideas or if my ideas about what Apple and other company may do turn out to be spot on.
Edited by SolipsismX - 4/13/14 at 8:24pm

"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 #39 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Apple paid income taxes equal to 26% of it's corporate profits? When and where was that?

Just look at the quarterly report. I will make it easier on you, go to google finance, select aapl and goog. Select each one and go to financials. See the last quarter:
Name, Income before tax, income after tax:

Goog 4,047.00, 3,381.00 tax rate: 16.4%
Aapl. 17,709.00, 13,072.00 tax rate; 26.2%

Tell me were i am wrong. Compare to msft

Msft 7,878.00 6,558.00 tax rate: 16.75%

Yet apple is vilified. Every news about tax avoidance is about apple. Again, tell me were aim wrong.
post #40 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by fjose1929 View Post

Just look at the quarterly report. I will make it easier on you, go to google finance, select aapl and goog. Select each one and go to financials. See the last quarter:
Name, Income before tax, income after tax:

Goog 4,047.00, 3,381.00 tax rate: 16.4%
Aapl. 17,709.00, 13,072.00 tax rate; 26.2%

Tell me were i am wrong. Compare to msft

Msft 7,878.00 6,558.00 tax rate: 16.75%

Yet apple is vilified. Every news about tax avoidance is about apple. Again, tell me were aim wrong.

Wow! Apple's tax is more than all of Google's income.

"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 › SV150: Apple, Inc. earns more than HP, Google, Intel & Cisco combined