or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › Apple announces 7-for-1 stock split, buybacks bumped to $90 billion
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple announces 7-for-1 stock split, buybacks bumped to $90 billion - Page 4

post #121 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
 

 

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/price-earningsratio.asp

 

Where do you get informed about P/E ratio?  It's based on CURRENT stock price and the combination of the last 12 months of earnings.  PERIOD.  

 

Amazon has a PE of 570.

 

Are you telling me that based on what they will do in the next 12 months?

 

I'm not saying the PE is not calculated using 12 month earnings and Price.  I'm saying the actual stock price (a component of the PE ratio) is based on 2 or 3 years or even more of growth.

 

Amazon's PE ratio of 570 is not justified with what they will do in the next 12 months but rather the next 5 - 10 years.

 

So if you look at Apple growing at 8% for the next 3 years that would justify a stock price going up by 30%

post #122 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

I haven't heard the entire analyst call, but I ran into an Apple employee and he said something to the effect of increased dividends as well and that this was all going to start in June.  I don't know what changes they are making to the dividends, but I think this is a welcome stock split, I just wish I had a bunch of shares to take advantage of this moving forward.   For some reason, the new price is going to be around $76 a share instead of $535, and I think it's going to be a LOT easier for Apple to reach $100 a share and HOPEFULLY not go back down than it is for Apple to reach $700 a share and to have that as the new base line.  Time will tell what happens, but I think what happens at WWDC and their announcements is going to make me feel either more or less comfortable.


One thing I must say, when I listened to part of the conference call and listen to some of the "positive" comments they were mentioning, some of them are fluff.  I hate it when they make a comment, but there isn't much substance behind it.  Having 800 Million iTunes account holders is FLUFF to me, but if they said they are seeing a 30% increase per user of money being spent, that's more substance. Having an account doesn't mean you are spending money.  I haven't rented or bought any movies in a while and I"m a little upset they don't have a yearly subscription service.  I have one with Amazon (bought it before the price increase) and I use it fairly regularly.  For a while I was using it daily for several hours catching up on shows I've never seen before.  There service is pretty decent quality and serves up the content pretty good, but I wish Apple had this service without having an AppleTV. Watching on a 27 inch iMac is good enough right now. But I would like to maybe see Apple have some sort of $9.95 a month for unlimited streaming, as long as they have enough decent content (TV and Movies) to watch on my iMac.  I might be up for that.

The auto integration, I'm sorry, but I see it only as a way to make people feel more comfortable using an iPhone with a car and I so far don't see how Apple is making money from this.  So, I think it would be better if they had some other NEW revenue stream from the auto industry.  If they had some deal where cars came with a built in iPad on the dashboard instead of some other system, that might excite me if it was catching on.  But I would like to see them have an actual new revenue stream to get hot and bothered about it.


The green stuff is fluff, it's cool they are doing it, but it's not going to effect the stock price, only what Greenpeace THINKS about Apple.

On a conference call, it is imperative to proudly exclaim your accomplishments. 700m+ c.c.'s on file is something no other company can come close to. What other company even has 100m? Who cares if it grows even 1% yoy? That's 8 million additional users. You have take consider that 800m relative to every other # in the history of the world. It's staggering, not fluff.

Ios in the car will be huge. You could write a book about why it's imperative for their business model to succeed. There is a reason why 100% of car mfgrs will offer it within 3 years. If they don't, their sales will be had by a competitor. Granted, they won't make huge numbers off iOS in the car, but they will make huge profits selling iPhones and iPads and Iwatches.

Apple's ecosystem exists to sell hardware, not to generate insane profits. The lion's share of profits come from hardware sales. I think payments will eventually account for 15% of Apple's profits...down the road.

I agree with your thoughts about the subscription service. But ultimately, I could care less. I go to my Netflix and Prime app if I want to stream old movies. I don't like spending the 20% Apple premium, compared to Amazon, on rentals and purchases of digital content, but I overcome that by buying $100 iTunes cards on sale for $75 on ebay once a year. Although, I've noticed recently their prices are more in line with Amazon's.
post #123 of 202
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

Amazon has a PE of 570.

 

Well, that’s better than the 5,300 it used to be. :p

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #124 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

Amazon has a PE of 570.

Are you telling me that based on what they will do in the next 12 months?

I'm not saying the PE is not calculated using 12 month earnings and Price.  I'm saying the actual stock price (a component of the PE ratio) is based on 2 or 3 years or even more of growth.

Amazon's PE ratio of 570 is not justified with what they will do in the next 12 months but rather the next 5 - 10 years.

So if you look at Apple growing at 8% for the next 3 years that would justify a stock price going up by 30%

I remember reading somewhere that Bezos used to work on Wall Street. I think Amazon is the perfect Wall Street scam.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #125 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

Amazon has a PE of 570.

Are you telling me that based on what they will do in the next 12 months?

I'm not saying the PE is not calculated using 12 month earnings and Price.  I'm saying the actual stock price (a component of the PE ratio) is based on 2 or 3 years or even more of growth.

Amazon's PE ratio of 570 is not justified with what they will do in the next 12 months but rather the next 5 - 10 years.

So if you look at Apple growing at 8% for the next 3 years that would justify a stock price going up by 30%

PE is price to earnings ratio. It's the stock price divided by the company's yearly earnings (earnings per share). Conceivably a stock could have a PE of 1000, if their earnings are projected to increase dramatically. Or a company can have a PE of 1 if they are on the verge of bankruptcy. Or if a company has losses over a fiscal year, they are not assigned a PE. Apple's forward PE is 7. I believe the average forward PE in the s&P is around 15. Take that for what it's worth. The Law of Large Numbers is what kills Apple's valuation, and this will always be the case. Apple will never have a PE above 15 again.
post #126 of 202
Does anyone know the implications the stock-split will have on short-sellers. I read a few years ago that the large share price makes it easier for the billionaires to short Apple with impunity, and that a split would help investors in this regard. Any WallStreet types out there?
post #127 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
 

Yeah, that's after-hours trading right after the announcement.  We'll see where the stock is at on the day they actually perform the split.  It's common to have large increases right after the announcement and then see a normal price after people have come down off their cloud and more into REALITY.


Let's look at IPhone sales.  I read last year that they finally reached a daily production of 500,000 phones a day.  I don't know if that was TOTAL or just Foxconn.  Now, if they are at 45 Mill phones a quarter, how can they get much higher in unit sales per year if they don't increase production?  if you look at their quarterly units shipped they've been hovering between 31 Million to as high as 51 Million units shipped for a 12 month total of 159+ over the past 12 months.  Obviously at the end of the quarter they have so much in inventory carrying over, but they are supposedly at 180 Million units a year which is less than a 20% increase if they actually hit 180 Million units over the next 12 months.  Personally, I firmly believe they have to crank out the iPhone 6 in June, and then refresh the 5S, 5C, etc. in Sept and between all of these, if they don't have massive production issues, they MIGHT be able to actually hit 60 Million instead of only 51 Million they did last Christmas, which is only a 20% increase, but hopefully the slower quarters might start hitting in the 40+ Million range rather than low 30 Million range.  To drop all of their new products at then of the year is dangerous for Apple and they need to spread out product introductions in the iPhones and maybe even the iPads so they don't always run into lots of spillover because of production problems.  They've done this two years in a row and it's frustrating when they do it.  I think 45 Million in a quarter needs to be their NEW low and 60 Million in a quarter, needs to be their new high and that will help them get to $700 a share much easier and then they need to raise that bar again and again.  Due to bigger markets opening up, and more screen size choices, I think they can, but building more production  and getting components is a key issue.

 

$567.77 ding ding

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #128 of 202
"Dr. Blank" has been Dr. Blocked for some time for me.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #129 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post
 

 

Amazon has a PE of 570.

 

Are you telling me that based on what they will do in the next 12 months?

 

I'm not saying the PE is not calculated using 12 month earnings and Price.  I'm saying the actual stock price (a component of the PE ratio) is based on 2 or 3 years or even more of growth.

 

Amazon's PE ratio of 570 is not justified with what they will do in the next 12 months but rather the next 5 - 10 years.

 

So if you look at Apple growing at 8% for the next 3 years that would justify a stock price going up by 30%

No, it's based on WHAT THEY DID IN THE LAST 12 MONTHS.  As you can plainly see, they hardly make any earnings and the price is rather high in comparison, and for most NORMAL people,t his would be GROSSLY overvalued, but for some reason, people think that this is great stock buy because it always trades at a very high P/E, but I personally wouldn't risk investing in this stock at that high of a P/E ratio.  When the .com thing started, there were a LOT of companies that were trading at excessively high P/E ratio because people just wanted to get into internet companies trying to see which is going to be the next big thing.  As a result of too much over buying of loser stocks and companies that flopped, we had that big market correction and some of these companies went back down to more reasonable P/E ratios.  For some STUPID reason, this is one that STILL has a rather high P/E ratio, but it used to be MUCH higher.

 

Apple's earnings have done about 15 to 20% over the past year, so assumptions are over the next year, the stock will go up around 15 to 20% which is why a lot of analysts put in about $600 a share (pre split), but they haven't updated those numbers as they only do that only once in a while, and you have to check Yahoo! or whatever to see if they've changed it.  Sometimes they change it every quarter or maybe once a year, so you have to see when they do it for a specific company. 

 

Now, if Apple can show more growth because they are entering new product categories in high growth market, A la the SmartTV market, they might increase their earnings beyond 20% and that might change the outlook, but unit they give guidance of that, the analysts will stick with what they know to be a more closer expatiation of what to expect.  Obviously, most analysts like to be kind of conservative since they don't want to advise someone that stock is going 30% when there aren't any indications of that, as it pisses investors off if they are grossly out of whack to reality.

 

The market is something you can't always put in a little box and make generalizations, as each company has to be evaluated by itself and against the same like industry.  A lot of people make the mistake of comparing Apple to Google and Microsoft, but the truth is that these three companies compete in the OS wars, but they are listed with the SEC in three entirely different categories and they really shouldn't compare them to one another since they derive their revenues on completely different models.  Apple is a Personal Computer company, Google is internet Services, and Microsoft is software.  

 

I hope this helps.  So, just compare one stock by its historical data, look what kinds of trends in the share price, earnings, listen to what the company gives as it's challenges, etc. during these conference calls and see if you can pick up on how well the company will really do and it you think that it's going to outperform and do well, then it might.  But it takes a LONG time to get the knack of this stuff.  I started reading Stock market info and Annual Reports of companies, read books, asked questions, I was addicted CNBC and Financial News Network and other places as well as getting a degree in Finance.  So, it's taken a LONG time, and I still learn new things.  I do, however, like to listen to Cramer, he's actually pretty good MOST of the time, sometimes he's not, but most of the time I think he's pretty good.  He actually gave proof on one of the market collapses before it happened and I didn't want to believe him, but it came true.   He downgraded Apple for a short period of time and then identified the best time to reinvest and he was right on target.  He actually has liked Apple for a long time, but he kind of knows when to get in and when not to .   He's obnoxious to listen to for long periods of time, but he is good to listen to in order to pick things up about how to look at different stocks that don't fit the normal mold.

post #130 of 202
$3.29 per share %u2026 prior to split, so $0.47 post split correct?

All my life, I always wanted to be somebody. Now I see that I should have been more specific.
- Lily Tomlin
Reply

All my life, I always wanted to be somebody. Now I see that I should have been more specific.
- Lily Tomlin
Reply
post #131 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric38 View Post


On a conference call, it is imperative to proudly exclaim your accomplishments. 700m+ c.c.'s on file is something no other company can come close to. What other company even has 100m? Who cares if it grows even 1% yoy? That's 8 million additional users. You have take consider that 800m relative to every other # in the history of the world. It's staggering, not fluff.

Ios in the car will be huge. You could write a book about why it's imperative for their business model to succeed. There is a reason why 100% of car mfgrs will offer it within 3 years. If they don't, their sales will be had by a competitor. Granted, they won't make huge numbers off iOS in the car, but they will make huge profits selling iPhones and iPads and Iwatches.

Apple's ecosystem exists to sell hardware, not to generate insane profits. The lion's share of profits come from hardware sales. I think payments will eventually account for 15% of Apple's profits...down the road.

I agree with your thoughts about the subscription service. But ultimately, I could care less. I go to my Netflix and Prime app if I want to stream old movies. I don't like spending the 20% Apple premium, compared to Amazon, on rentals and purchases of digital content, but I overcome that by buying $100 iTunes cards on sale for $75 on ebay once a year. Although, I've noticed recently their prices are more in line with Amazon's.

What's more important to me is how much is the average person buying and is that average going up, down, or staying the same.  Facebook has 1 Billion active users, but they don't make $hit.  I like hard number that I can quantify the buying potential moving forward as the number of active users is fluff, I can't derive any earnings from it.  Now if they said at the beginning of the quarter they averaged $500 a user in purchases and at the end of the quarter, they average $550, and I had some history on the average per year purchases, then I can then look at some trends and make some better assumptions.  ITunes, net profits is NOT a huge money maker due to how much they actually make.  IF they have 800 Million accounts, but only 10% are active, then means something different. Seriously, they need to give more numbers to help people that run numbers to generate better predictability on future earnings.

 

Well, they need to cut their overhead somehow so they don't have to be the premium player.   I think if Apple can replace Akamai (I like Akamai by the way) and cut some of their overhead costs by doing the same thing, only cheaper, that would be better.


I've looked at Amazon only briefly on how they price things and they have, what I would consider, a VERY screwy way of determining their price to the consumer.  I've purchased products from them where they had the product actually listed above MSRP and they make it SEEM like you're getting a discount, but you weren't.  You have to be careful with them.

 

I never liked their stock because of the excessively high P/E ratio, but I do use their services quite often.

post #132 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by tink View Post

$3.29 per share %u2026 prior to split, so $0.47 post split correct?

Not necessarily. $3.29 applies this time. It could be more or less after the split.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #133 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
 

Yeah, the dollar value is the same when they conduct the split from that specific time period, but when it goes up by $1 a share he'll have it go up $210 instead of $30 and he'll probably get more dividends each quarter.  If it goes down by $1 it goes down more, but hopefully in the long run you'll be better off as long as Apple doesn't pull a Zune, Surface, Windows 8/8.1 type of mistakes, which I doubt they will.

 

... but if the share price goes up 10% or down 10%, it's exactly the same thing on your total balance, pre-split or post-split.

na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #134 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post
 

 

$567.77 ding ding

 

Wait until the stock actually splits and let's see what the price is then.  This is just going up because of the outrageous news, but there is a lot of hype, misinformation and people get into these buying frenzy and then someone figures it out and dumps stock to push it down so they can buy it back at a low point.  What out for large ups and downs in a stock price.  What goes up, does come down, just be aware of it so you get all depressed because it did what you didn't want it to do.

post #135 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

"Dr. Blank" has been Dr. Blocked for some time for me.

 

And? Who are you? Well, maybe I should just block you for now on, so we are even.  That works for me!

post #136 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post
 

 

... but if the share price goes up 10% or down 10%, it's exactly the same thing on your total balance, pre-split or post-split.

Stock splits are great if the company is in high growth and you are a long term holding on to the stock a good 5, 10, 15 years.  I did that with Microsoft back in 86 when they went public.  I didn't have much money, but I invested a few thousand, I didn't touch the stock for at least 10 years and that stock was 2/1 splits about every year to year 1/2 and I ended up making a LOT of money from that small investment. And I ended up selling enough to recoup my original investment so I knew I at least got my initial investment back and the rest was pure profit.  I don't recall how much I ended making in total but between the year's 86 through about 2001 when I saw the company peaking, I think I probably made a good $150K on about $3,500 investment.  Not bad if you ask me, I wish I invested more at the time, but I wasn't wealthy enough to put in a good $50K or so, which would make me a millionaire several times over.  Some investors are short term players and some are long term players. So, in the end it almost doesn't matter ultimately as what matters how much did you invest, what was your annual rate of return and did you make a tidy profit.  A lot of people get wrapped up in this stock split frenzy and sometimes they make a mistake and overpay and the stock doesn't do much afterwards.  I've seen that happen before.    But I think Apple is safe in terms of making over the long term about 15 to 20% annual rate of return over the long haul.


Some people are going into other growth areas like 3D printing, but you have to watch some of those companies carefully to see their stock trends to get in at a low point and get out at a high point or just hang on for a long period of time.

 

Some other stocks have actually done well over the past couple of years, but I will caution you, there have been several experts that have been discussing a huge stock market correction. When it will happen is up in the air, they disagree on that, but they are pointing out signs of it, so be aware of that. 


Remember, buy low, sell high.  That's all I have to say about that.

post #137 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
 

Some other stocks have actually done well over the past couple of years, but I will caution you, there have been several experts that have been discussing a huge stock market correction. When it will happen is up in the air, they disagree on that, but they are pointing out signs of it, so be aware of that. 

 

Oh, the correction is coming... no doubt. I'm guessing it could even be sometime this year.

 

The thing is... AAPL will be crushed along with everything else... but the crushing of AAPL will be nothing in comparison to AMZN, GOOG, TSLA etc.

na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #138 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

"Dr. Blank" has been Dr. Blocked for some time for me.

You Odo'd him?
post #139 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post
 

 

Oh, the correction is coming... no doubt. I'm guessing it could even be sometime this year.

 

The thing is... AAPL will be crushed along with everything else... but the crushing of AAPL will be nothing in comparison to AMZN, GOOG, TSLA etc.

Actually for the most part, Apple did pretty well even though there was a market correction.  For a period they were actually more immune to it, I don't know how much they are now, but it is something to be aware of definitely.

 

I personally always liked long term companies, but the good thing about Apple is the higher dividends.  Personally, if I owned shares, I would probably just do dividend reinvestments and hang on to it for 10 years or so.  There's nothing wrong with a company making 15 to 20% annual interest rate and paying dividends if that's how Apple is going to continue for the next 10 years,   it's a HELL of a lot better than most companies.  But the days of seeing Apple have 35 to 70% annual growth rate is over, at least until they make some great announcement that would equate into some serious gross revenues and net profits.  I know iTunes wasn't originally to make money, but if it only makes 5% Net profit margin, that does drag down the rest of the company and they really need to do something about it.  The only way I can see it is by cutting their overhead wherever they can without disrupting the service.  I think going to 24 bit will help and they've openly had information leading people that it was eventually going to 24bit AAC files, it's just a matter of when, etc.  but I think this goes about about 2 years when there first was discussion from them on their Mastering For iTunes software.  Hopefully they'll do it sooner and it will be done well from the start.

 

I was thinking, maybe Apple could restructure iTunes as a separate privately held company where it didn't drag down the rest of the companies' profit margins, but from the customer's standpoint it was transparent.    That would help drive higher annual earnings growth rate while still offering the same service.  They could just run it as a privately held company that simply existed for the sole purpose of helping drive more hard ware sales, but not negatively impact the margins.   I would be interested  to see if Apple could actually do that.  Kind of like structure them almost like Filemaker/Claris.

post #140 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

No, it's based on WHAT THEY DID IN THE LAST 12 MONTHS.  As you can plainly see, they hardly make any earnings and the price is rather high in comparison, and for most NORMAL people,t his would be GROSSLY overvalued, but for some reason, people think that this is great stock buy because it always trades at a very high P/E, but I personally wouldn't risk investing in this stock at that high of a P/E ratio.  When the .com thing started, there were a LOT of companies that were trading at excessively high P/E ratio because people just wanted to get into internet companies trying to see which is going to be the next big thing.  As a result of too much over buying of loser stocks and companies that flopped, we had that big market correction and some of these companies went back down to more reasonable P/E ratios.  For some STUPID reason, this is one that STILL has a rather high P/E ratio, but it used to be MUCH higher.

Apple's earnings have done about 15 to 20% over the past year, so assumptions are over the next year, the stock will go up around 15 to 20% which is why a lot of analysts put in about $600 a share (pre split), but they haven't updated those numbers as they only do that only once in a while, and you have to check Yahoo! or whatever to see if they've changed it.  Sometimes they change it every quarter or maybe once a year, so you have to see when they do it for a specific company. 

Now, if Apple can show more growth because they are entering new product categories in high growth market, A la the SmartTV market, they might increase their earnings beyond 20% and that might change the outlook, but unit they give guidance of that, the analysts will stick with what they know to be a more closer expatiation of what to expect.  Obviously, most analysts like to be kind of conservative since they don't want to advise someone that stock is going 30% when there aren't any indications of that, as it pisses investors off if they are grossly out of whack to reality.

The market is something you can't always put in a little box and make generalizations, as each company has to be evaluated by itself and against the same like industry.  A lot of people make the mistake of comparing Apple to Google and Microsoft, but the truth is that these three companies compete in the OS wars, but they are listed with the SEC in three entirely different categories and they really shouldn't compare them to one another since they derive their revenues on completely different models.  Apple is a Personal Computer company, Google is internet Services, and Microsoft is software.  

I hope this helps.  So, just compare one stock by its historical data, look what kinds of trends in the share price, earnings, listen to what the company gives as it's challenges, etc. during these conference calls and see if you can pick up on how well the company will really do and it you think that it's going to outperform and do well, then it might.  But it takes a LONG time to get the knack of this stuff.  I started reading Stock market info and Annual Reports of companies, read books, asked questions, I was addicted CNBC and Financial News Network and other places as well as getting a degree in Finance.  So, it's taken a LONG time, and I still learn new things.  I do, however, like to listen to Cramer, he's actually pretty good MOST of the time, sometimes he's not, but most of the time I think he's pretty good.  He actually gave proof on one of the market collapses before it happened and I didn't want to believe him, but it came true.   He downgraded Apple for a short period of time and then identified the best time to reinvest and he was right on target.  He actually has liked Apple for a long time, but he kind of knows when to get in and when not to .   He's obnoxious to listen to for long periods of time, but he is good to listen to in order to pick things up about how to look at different stocks that don't fit the normal mold.

Man you are clueless.

Apple did not have even close to 15% eps growth the last 3 quarters before this quarter.
post #141 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

Man you are clueless.

Apple did not have even close to 15% eps growth the last 3 quarters before this quarter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

Man you are clueless.

Apple did not have even close to 15% eps growth the last 3 quarters before this quarter.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

Man you are clueless.

Apple did not have even close to 15% eps growth the last 3 quarters before this quarter.

Did you calculate that the same way you calculate everything else? Looking 2 to 3 years in the future?

Please stop replying.
post #142 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post



Did you calculate that the same way you calculate everything else? Looking 2 to 3 years in the future?

Please stop replying.

I just blocked you, you are wasting my time. Unless you want to pay me money to teach you something, please don't waste my time. And make sure you do all of your calculations for 2 to 3 years into the future.
post #143 of 202
Call me crazy, but in the post above, is that Dr. Blank arguing with...then blocking...himself?

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #144 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post



Did you calculate that the same way you calculate everything else? Looking 2 to 3 years in the future?

Please stop replying.

Quarter ending Dec 2013 14.50 eps vs 13.81. Eps grow of 5%
Quarter ending Sept 2013. 8.26 eps vs 8.67. Negative eps growth
Quarter ending Jun 2013. 7.47 eps vs 9.32. Negative eps
Quarter ending Apr 2013. 10.09 eps vs 12.30. Negative eps growth.

Someone please quote this so drblank knows hes wrong.

Apple was NOT growing earnings 15% the last 4 quarters until this quarter.
post #145 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post


Apple's earnings have done about 15 to 20% over the past year, so assumptions are over the next year, the stock will go up around 15 to 20% which is why a lot of analysts put in about $600 a share (pre split)



Quarter ending Dec 2013 14.50 eps vs 13.81. Eps grow of 5%
Quarter ending Sept 2013. 8.26 eps vs 8.67. Negative eps growth
Quarter ending Jun 2013. 7.47 eps vs 9.32. Negative eps
Quarter ending Apr 2013. 10.09 eps vs 12.30. Negative eps growth.


Apple was NOT growing earnings 15% the last 4 quarters until this quarter.
post #146 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric38 View Post

On a conference call, it is imperative to proudly exclaim your accomplishments. 700m+ c.c.'s on file is something no other company can come close to. What other company even has 100m? Who cares if it grows even 1% yoy? That's 8 million additional users. You have take consider that 800m relative to every other # in the history of the world. It's staggering, not fluff.

Ios in the car will be huge. You could write a book about why it's imperative for their business model to succeed. There is a reason why 100% of car mfgrs will offer it within 3 years. If they don't, their sales will be had by a competitor. Granted, they won't make huge numbers off iOS in the car, but they will make huge profits selling iPhones and iPads and Iwatches.

Apple's ecosystem exists to sell hardware, not to generate insane profits. The lion's share of profits come from hardware sales. I think payments will eventually account for 15% of Apple's profits...down the road.

I agree with your thoughts about the subscription service. But ultimately, I could care less. I go to my Netflix and Prime app if I want to stream old movies. I don't like spending the 20% Apple premium, compared to Amazon, on rentals and purchases of digital content, but I overcome that by buying $100 iTunes cards on sale for $75 on ebay once a year. Although, I've noticed recently their prices are more in line with Amazon's.

I didn't say iOS for the car isn't needed, but I would like to know if they are able to communicate some minimization from that area. If so, how much do they make per car or at least as a whole.

If you look at Apple's business from a business segment, they have different slices of the pie, and if they are making revenues from the iOS auto efforts, then I think it would be nice to have the numbers associated with it, so we can see what amount of their revenues/profits come from iOS for the car market segment.

Yeah, I know it helps sell more iPhones, iPads, etc. etc. but I was just asking if they can monetize it and show the numbers so we can track and better predict the growth rate from that segment of the business.
post #147 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

Quarter ending Dec 2013 14.50 eps vs 13.81. Eps grow of 5%
Quarter ending Sept 2013. 8.26 eps vs 8.67. Negative eps growth
Quarter ending Jun 2013. 7.47 eps vs 9.32. Negative eps
Quarter ending Apr 2013. 10.09 eps vs 12.30. Negative eps growth.


Apple was NOT growing earnings 15% the last 4 quarters until this quarter.

They usually look at year to year growth rate, not just by quarter. Just to let you know.

When they look at P/E, that's based on yearly earnings, not quarterly.

If you look at Apple, they have a weird yearly cycle, their biggest quarter is their Q1, which is the December quarter and then it subsequently goes down and then jumps back up again. Other companies don't have that type of cycle, other companies might have a more consistent quarter to quarter cycle because their business model was just different.

For instance, Samsung, because they are actually a different business model, they are more consistent from quarter to quarter and not as cyclical. But overall, these analysts are looking at what's their YEARLY growth rates.

What happens is because of Apple's declining sales trends, people think they are doing worse business because they see this HUGE spike in December and then it gradually goes down, but that's how Apple's been for as long as I can remember. But what I think would be BETTER for Apple, is they need to not wait until the last quarter to make a TON of product announcements. It just screws up production and what has happened in the last two years alone is they can't meet demand for their hot products and they have to make customers wait longer to get product.

For the iPhones, I think if they are moving towards two, or even three screen sizes, they should release every so many months apart to always create a demand and sales that's more consistent throughout the year. If you look at Samsung, they release 3 different screens sizes of their flagship model throughout the year. They release a 4, 5, and 5.5 inch but they don't release them all at once, they usually have at least a few months between release dates and I think that's what Apple should do. I think because of the delay in getting a larger screen iPhone out to market, they should release that as quickly as possible to prevent any additional Android sales because I feel they could attract a LOT of Android users the sooner they release it. That's my own personal opinion.

I'm right, you're wrong. Please, go take some courses in Investments and Finance and then we'll talk. You guys seem to conjure up useless crap that Wall Street doesn't really look at to make a determination of the health of a company and predicting the stock valuation.

EARNINGS ARE RELEASED ON A QUARTERLY BASIS, BUT THEY LOOK AT YEAR TO YEAR GROWTH OF 12 MONTHS WORTH OF EARNINGS TO DETERMINE GROWTH RATE.

I should send you a bill for my training services. STOP acting like you know what you are talking about Spam, this is an area you obviously are NOT well versed in.
Edited by drblank - 4/24/14 at 11:22pm
post #148 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post
 

 

Amazon has a PE of 570.

 

Are you telling me that based on what they will do in the next 12 months?

 

I'm not saying the PE is not calculated using 12 month earnings and Price.  I'm saying the actual stock price (a component of the PE ratio) is based on 2 or 3 years or even more of growth.

 

Amazon's PE ratio of 570 is not justified with what they will do in the next 12 months but rather the next 5 - 10 years.

 

So if you look at Apple growing at 8% for the next 3 years that would justify a stock price going up by 30%

The P in P/E is the current stock price.  The E in P/E ratio is the combination of the last 4 quarters earnings and they update this P/E ratio every quarter as they release earnings.  Now, the P will change minute by minute, but that E only gets updated each quarter.


Now, when someone decides to invest, they usually want to invest when the P/E ratio is low because it means that it's undervalued and it should have a better chance of going up.  Each stock has it's own historical range for P/E and when a company is in their growth stage, the P/E's are generally higher than when they change from a "growth" company to a "Mature" company.  One aspect of maturity is that they'll start paying dividends and their yearly growth rates are lower and more REALISTIC for the long term.


Example, when Apple was seeing 40%, 50%, 60% growth rates, those are usually sustainable.  At some point in time, they'll reach saturation.


Now, some think they still have a lot more growth left over the long term in certain areas IF they can attract the business, grow into different markets and keep up with production.

 

!.  Based on some surveys a year ago, there was a lot of Windows users that plan on switching to OS X.  If 10% of the Windows users left and went to OS X, Apple would have a HUGE increase in sales because 10% of Windows is a LOT of people.  I think Apple should do more Mac-based advertising because they do very little.  Most of Apple's advertising is more iPhone and iPad related, which is nice, but people need to still be reminded that Apple sells computers.    Apple has doubled their marketshare in terms of products shipped in the last 6 years and that is a linear trend line and I think they have a LOT more potential growth not only in the Enterprise market, but also in China, and then in India.  Apple if they played their cards right could double their shipments in the next 6 years again, until they reached about 30% total install base.  If you look at companies that have given their employees the option of choosing a Mac or PC, they have pretty good success rates that actually reach about 30% adoption in the workplace, their biggest hurdle is getting more large corporations to give their employees the option.  GE has a pilot that's allowing employees to choose a Mac vs a PC, but for that company, it takes a long time for them to shift.   I read an article a couple of years ago that at Jet Propulsion Labs and NASA that MacBookPros and iPads are actually standard issue now, which means Apple's doing well in certain places.  They just need MORE of these Enterprise opportunities to get more products sold.  I wish Apple had their products tested and met more Military requirements so they could get chosen for military purposes.  They sell some, but not as many as they could.   Apple could step it up a LOT more in the Enterprise and they would have a HUGE amount of increased sales, and Apple makes more revenue per Mac than they do per iPhone/iPad since the average selling price for a Mac is around $1500 vs $600 for iPhones and $500 for iPads.  I think Apple really could do better in Mac sales if they put their minds to it.  But they don't have the focus on that market like they should.

 

2.  Based on Apple's market penetration of iPads, each market they go after (whether it's education, enterprise, or consumer) or whether it's by country, Apple has varying market penetration.  For the educational market, they have a lot of penetration, so sales growth is based on how often the schools/colleges are repurchasing new replacement models, for the Enterprise, Apple has decent penetration, but they still have a ways to go before that reaches saturation.  In different countries as they ramp up, Apple still has a LOT of potential growth,  China is one of them, India is the next large growth opportunity.

post #149 of 202

What Apple isn't doing to go after the Enterprise market.  They USED to have a decent sized sales force going after the Enterprise market where they worked with resellers that had contracts and account penetration with the Enterprise market.  They got rid of most of those people several years ago.    I think they did it when they realized the Xserves weren't getting as much traction as they hoped.

 

So instead of at least TRYING to go after that market, they got out and they focused more on consumer products and retail which is why they opted for the Apple Store, iPhones, and IPads.  which proved to be a great success.

 

What's happening is that they are getting a certain degree of traction in iPhone and iPad sales into the Entprise, but they still need to start going after Mac OS X sales when they can.  Once they can get an Enterprise customer to "buy into' OS X as an option for their employees, they do quite well, but they aren't focusing as much on it as they are the iPhone/iPad.  It's a different sales approach. It's the "oh, by the way, we have Macs", which to these Enterprise customers is being kind of wimpy.

 

Now, there is a debate by these IT departments on management tools for desktops, phones, tablets, etc.  Most of these Enterprise companies usually use Microsoft administration tools, or Altris which their IT management people use to manage their computers, but they pretty much don't support Macs, but there is a company called JAMF which does manage Macs, iPhones, and iPads and does work in conjunction with Microsoft and Altris management software. 

The challenge is getting these Enterprise customers to adopt the management software and allow Macs, iPhones, and iPads into the door.  For the companies that do adopt, Apple can get pretty damn good traction with Mac laptop/desktop sales.  

 

Obviously, due to Apple's lack of Enterprise experience, they are taking the soft sales approach and going more after iPhones and iPads because let's face it, it's a LOT easier and they have done a pretty effective job in this area, with still room for growth.

 

I think Apple has a tremendous amount of future opportunity with Macs despite what anyone says.  Apple seems to think it's more iPads, but that's because they can't seem to crack that door open for Macs as easily.  yeah, tablets is a growing market and PCs isn't as much, but there is STILL a lot of disgruntled PC users that STILL want to use a Desktop or Laptop that don't want to switch to Windows 8 that are ripe for Apple to sell to, it's just a matter of making the products those people want to buy.

 

So while the growth is in iPads, they can still see growth in Macs and they have to sell 3 iPads to get the same revenue (on average) as one Mac.

post #150 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post


They usually look at year to year growth rate, not just by quarter. Just to let you know.

When they look at P/E, that's based on yearly earnings, not quarterly.

If you look at Apple, they have a weird yearly cycle, their biggest quarter is their Q1, which is the December quarter and then it subsequently goes down and then jumps back up again. Other companies don't have that type of cycle, other companies might have a more consistent quarter to quarter cycle because their business model was just different.

For instance, Samsung, because they are actually a different business model, they are more consistent from quarter to quarter and not as cyclical. But overall, these analysts are looking at what's their YEARLY growth rates.

What happens is because of Apple's declining sales trends, people think they are doing worse business because they see this HUGE spike in December and then it gradually goes down, but that's how Apple's been for as long as I can remember. But what I think would be BETTER for Apple, is they need to not wait until the last quarter to make a TON of product announcements. It just screws up production and what has happened in the last two years alone is they can't meet demand for their hot products and they have to make customers wait longer to get product.

For the iPhones, I think if they are moving towards two, or even three screen sizes, they should release every so many months apart to always create a demand and sales that's more consistent throughout the year. If you look at Samsung, they release 3 different screens sizes of their flagship model throughout the year. They release a 4, 5, and 5.5 inch but they don't release them all at once, they usually have at least a few months between release dates and I think that's what Apple should do. I think because of the delay in getting a larger screen iPhone out to market, they should release that as quickly as possible to prevent any additional Android sales because I feel they could attract a LOT of Android users the sooner they release it. That's my own personal opinion.

I'm right, you're wrong. Please, go take some courses in Investments and Finance and then we'll talk. You guys seem to conjure up useless crap that Wall Street doesn't really look at to make a determination of the health of a company and predicting the stock valuation.

EARNINGS ARE RELEASED ON A QUARTERLY BASIS, BUT THEY LOOK AT YEAR TO YEAR GROWTH OF 12 MONTHS WORTH OF EARNINGS TO DETERMINE GROWTH RATE.

I should send you a bill for my training services. STOP acting like you know what you are talking about Spam, this is an area you obviously are NOT well versed in.

 

Apple's biggest quarter coincides with iPhone launches.

 

APPLE DOES NOT NEED WALL STREET AT ALL.

 

They do not need to raise money to run their business by selling shares.

 

This more than anything drives analysts and financial "experts" crazy which has led to Apple having one of the most undervalued stocks in history.

 

I wonder how much stock was "retired" by Apple when idiots dumped their stock after taking advice from the likes of you.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #151 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
 

What Apple isn't doing to go after the Enterprise market.  They USED to have a decent sized sales force going after the Enterprise market where they worked with resellers that had contracts and account penetration with the Enterprise market.  They got rid of most of those people several years ago.    I think they did it when they realized the Xserves weren't getting as much traction as they hoped.

 

So instead of at least TRYING to go after that market, they got out and they focused more on consumer products and retail which is why they opted for the Apple Store, iPhones, and IPads.  which proved to be a great success.

 

What's happening is that they are getting a certain degree of traction in iPhone and iPad sales into the Entprise, but they still need to start going after Mac OS X sales when they can.  Once they can get an Enterprise customer to "buy into' OS X as an option for their employees, they do quite well, but they aren't focusing as much on it as they are the iPhone/iPad.  It's a different sales approach. It's the "oh, by the way, we have Macs", which to these Enterprise customers is being kind of wimpy.

 

Now, there is a debate by these IT departments on management tools for desktops, phones, tablets, etc.  Most of these Enterprise companies usually use Microsoft administration tools, or Altris which their IT management people use to manage their computers, but they pretty much don't support Macs, but there is a company called JAMF which does manage Macs, iPhones, and iPads and does work in conjunction with Microsoft and Altris management software. 

The challenge is getting these Enterprise customers to adopt the management software and allow Macs, iPhones, and iPads into the door.  For the companies that do adopt, Apple can get pretty damn good traction with Mac laptop/desktop sales.  

 

Obviously, due to Apple's lack of Enterprise experience, they are taking the soft sales approach and going more after iPhones and iPads because let's face it, it's a LOT easier and they have done a pretty effective job in this area, with still room for growth.

 

I think Apple has a tremendous amount of future opportunity with Macs despite what anyone says.  Apple seems to think it's more iPads, but that's because they can't seem to crack that door open for Macs as easily.  yeah, tablets is a growing market and PCs isn't as much, but there is STILL a lot of disgruntled PC users that STILL want to use a Desktop or Laptop that don't want to switch to Windows 8 that are ripe for Apple to sell to, it's just a matter of making the products those people want to buy.

 

So while the growth is in iPads, they can still see growth in Macs and they have to sell 3 iPads to get the same revenue (on average) as one Mac.

 

Yes they are, Cook said as much when referring to Microsoft's late launch of Office for iPads.

 

POST

 

PC

 

WORLD

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #152 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post
 

 

Apple's biggest quarter coincides with iPhone launches.

 

APPLE DOES NOT NEED WALL STREET AT ALL.

 

They do not need to raise money to run their business by selling shares.

 

This more than anything drives analysts and financial "experts" crazy which has led to Apple having one of the most undervalued stocks in history.

 

I wonder how much stock was "retired" by Apple when idiots dumped their stock after taking advice from the likes of you.

Most of Apple's employees make money because of their stock options and shares that they own, so YES,  Apple does NEED Wall Street.  Most of the members of upper management make most of their money from options and stock issued, not their normal pay check.

 

Apple's biggest quarter is the Christmas quarter because they are more of a consumer based company.  They didn't start releasing iPhones at the end of the year until many years AFTER it was introduced.  Same with iPads.  They just have gotten into this forcing as much of their sales to the Dec quarter which is their Q1.  They used to use the iPods as their big Christmas seller, but now it's iPhones and iPads.  I think they'll announce new iPods this year as they didn't announce anything last year.  At least that's my observation.  It may be just storage upgrades, but I think they are getting ready for 24 Bit upgrades, Storage upgrade and maybe getting the iPod Touch to 64 Bit for more enhanced game playing.  I think maybe a iPod Touch 5 inch might be interesting for the game players out there.

 

I think Apple needs to go back to product releases each quarter and spread out the sales to kick the other months up a notch.  But that's just what i think.  I think Tim THINKS that they need to do hardware and OS updates at the same time and doing both OS X and iOS and that's a LOT of work to coincide all of this at the same time and keep production in line to meet the spike in demand.  It's just a very dangerous position to be in.

post #153 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post
 

 

Yes they are, Cook said as much when referring to Microsoft's late launch of Office for iPads.

 

POST

 

PC

 

WORLD

Well, there is STILL a lot more traction they could get with desktops and laptops since they only have about 7% worldwide market share and NOT everyone ONLY uses a tablet.  I use my desktop far more than my iPad, even though I use my iPad.  Reason?  When I'm doing spreadsheets, I get a LOT more real estate on the screen as my spreadsheets are quite large and on an iPad it's just painfully impossible to view everything.  Screen size is just too small for large spreadsheet usage.  A 12 inch would be better, but I'm using a 27inch screen and I STILL have to scroll around.  I have one spreadsheet that I work on a lot and it's 24 columns and 108 rows.  Try that size on a 9.7 inch screen.  Yeah, right.


Don't get me wrong, Office for a tablet is great, but for people that use large spreadsheets, we still need the real estate and power of a desktop or at least a laptop with a large monitor attached.

post #154 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
 

Well, there is STILL a lot more traction they could get with desktops and laptops since they only have about 7% worldwide market share and NOT everyone ONLY uses a tablet.  I use my desktop far more than my iPad, even though I use my iPad.  Reason?  When I'm doing spreadsheets, I get a LOT more real estate on the screen as my spreadsheets are quite large and on an iPad it's just painfully impossible to view everything.  Screen size is just too small for large spreadsheet usage.  A 12 inch would be better, but I'm using a 27inch screen and I STILL have to scroll around.  I have one spreadsheet that I work on a lot and it's 24 columns and 108 rows.  Try that size on a 9.7 inch screen.  Yeah, right.


Don't get me wrong, Office for a tablet is great, but for people that use large spreadsheets, we still need the real estate and power of a desktop or at least a laptop with a large monitor attached.

 

Not much marketshare but plenty of dollars.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #155 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post
 

 

Not much marketshare but plenty of dollars.

desktops and laptops?  Remember, XP is dead and now unsupported yet there are about 35% of Windows install base.  Many of these people DON'T like Windows 8.  That's HUNDREDS of MILLIONS of potential MacOS X users.  Maybe Apple needs to update their PC vs Mac ads again. They WERE successful back when they were running.  They just need to update them to make them more relevant.   

 

If there was 100 Million Windows users that switched to Mac, that's 100,000,000 x $1,500 (average Mac price sold) = $150 BILLION in Gross Sales, which equals about $55 Billion in Gross Profits.   100 Million Windows users only represents about 5% to 10% of the Windows install base, but that would effectively DOUBLE the amount of Mac users.  

 

Kind of staggering if you think about it.  Not everyone only wants to have JUST an iPad.

 

If I had enough money and room to spare on my computing, I'd have a MacMini as a dedicated music server, a moderately powered desktop, iPad, iPhone, and maybe even a laptop. and that's just for me.  so that's 3 Macs, 1 iPad, and 1 iPhone for one user.  :-)  I would upgrade each about every 2 to 3 years.

post #156 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
 

desktops and laptops?  Remember, XP is dead and now unsupported yet there are about 35% of Windows install base.  Many of these people DON'T like Windows 8.  That's HUNDREDS of MILLIONS of potential MacOS X users.  Maybe Apple needs to update their PC vs Mac ads again. They WERE successful back when they were running.  They just need to update them to make them more relevant.   

 

If there was 100 Million Windows users that switched to Mac, that's 100,000,000 x $1,500 (average Mac price sold) = $150 BILLION in Gross Sales, which equals about $55 Billion in Gross Profits.   100 Million Windows users only represents about 5% to 10% of the Windows install base, but that would effectively DOUBLE the amount of Mac users.  

 

Kind of staggering if you think about it.  Not everyone only wants to have JUST an iPad.

 

If I had enough money and room to spare on my computing, I'd have a MacMini as a dedicated music server, a moderately powered desktop, iPad, iPhone, and maybe even a laptop. and that's just for me.  so that's 3 Macs, 1 iPad, and 1 iPhone for one user.  :-)  I would upgrade each about every 2 to 3 years.

 

Maybe, the business I work for needs to update thousands of PC's, running XP in order to support legacy software that needs ActiveX running in IE6.

 

The replacement software they are working on will probably involve iPads.

 

The savings in space, security solutions and energy required will more than cover the cost.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #157 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post
 

 

Maybe, the business I work for needs to update thousands of PC's, running XP in order to support legacy software that needs ActiveX running in IE6.

 

The replacement software they are working on will probably involve iPads.

 

The savings in space, security solutions and energy required will more than cover the cost.

What legacy s/w do you have to use  ActiveX running on IE6?

You didn't know XP is officially dead?  NO security updates anymore, so it's a target for TONS of malicious crap.  Surprise, surprise, surprise.

 

 

Yeah, I guess installs have dropped down to 27% of the PC run it.  I don't know what the total count of PCs are out there, but it's probably at least a few hundred million people have to switch.

 

iPads run ActiveX running on IE6?  I did not know that.

 

If you IT department still has thousands of PC running XP, I would highly question your employment decision.   Maybe it's time to work for a little more progressive company.

post #158 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post


They usually look at year to year growth rate, not just by quarter. Just to let you know.

I'm right, you're wrong. Please, go take some courses in Investments and Finance and then we'll talk. You guys seem to conjure up useless crap that Wall Street doesn't really look at to make a determination of the health of a company and predicting the stock valuation.
 

 

 

You are wrong.  You said Apple was growing earnings 15% the past year.  Earnings have been shrinking.  Just admit you are wrong.  Thats why the stock went up this time because EPS was up 15%.

 

Here are the numbers for the last fiscal year vs previous year.

 

Year ending Sept 2013 - Net Income $37,037,000,000

Year ending Sept 2012 - Net Income $41,733,000,000

 

Thats a DECLINE in net income of 12.6%.  Not an increase of 15%.

 

Unlike you I will provide a link:

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=AAPL+Income+Statement&annual

 

Now its your turn to show that Apple has been increasing earnings 15% the last year.


Edited by sog35 - 4/25/14 at 7:33am
post #159 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post


They usually look at year to year growth rate, not just by quarter. Just to let you know.

When they look at P/E, that's based on yearly earnings, not quarterly.

If you look at Apple, they have a weird yearly cycle, their biggest quarter is their Q1, which is the December quarter and then it subsequently goes down and then jumps back up again. Other companies don't have that type of cycle, other companies might have a more consistent quarter to quarter cycle because their business model was just different.
 

 

The EPS comparisons that I gave you ARE YEAR OVER YEAR comparisons.  Not previous quarter.  Thats the way Apple presents their financials every conference call.  So here they are again:

 

Quarter ending Dec 2013 14.50 eps vs  Dec 2012 - 13.81. Eps grow of 5%
Quarter ending Sept 2013. 8.26 eps vs  Sept 2012 - 8.67. Negative eps growth
Quarter ending Jun 2013. 7.47 eps vs  Jun 2013 -  9.32. Negative eps
Quarter ending Apr 2013. 10.09 eps vs  Apr 2013 - 12.30. Negative eps growth.

 

And here is the link, I provide proof unlike you:

http://investor.apple.com/results.cfm

 

Its incredible that the for the past year you had no idea Apple's earnings was actually shrinking. 

 

You talk a big game with your Finance degree but at least I know how to read financial statements.


Edited by sog35 - 4/25/14 at 7:31am
post #160 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post
 

 

 

You are wrong.  You said Apple was growing earnings 15% the past year.  Earnings have been shrinking.  Just admit you are wrong.  Thats why the stock went up this time because EPS was up 15%.

 

Here are the numbers for the last fiscal year vs previous year.

 

Year ending Sept 2013 - Net Income $37,037,000,000

Year ending Sept 2012 - Net Income $41,733,000,000

 

Thats a DECLINE in net income of 12.6%.  Not an increase of 15%.

 

Unlike you I will provide a link:

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=AAPL+Income+Statement&annual

 

Now its your turn to show that Apple has been increasing earnings 15% the last year.

Yeah, that was LAST year.  They took a dump. That's why the stock took a dump and it lost a lot of price in the stock since it hit the high of $700 and then went back down.    I think it's comparing what Apple's predicted to do from 2013 to 2014.  That's what they are looking at. is what they expect this next year which ends in Sept.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AAPL Investors
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › Apple announces 7-for-1 stock split, buybacks bumped to $90 billion