or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › Apple's $44 billion in stock buybacks have helped increase market cap by $100 billion
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple's $44 billion in stock buybacks have helped increase market cap by $100 billion - Page 2

post #41 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

I think I know what your issue is. You think the reason for a share repurchase is to reduce the number of active shares. It's not. That's just an effect of the purchase. The point is to reduce the float and based on a given market cap the buyback will have the exact same effect whether is't 7x as many shares at 1/7th the valuation as a month prior because those numbers are all connected to the market cap. I honestly don't know why you're even asking about this.

Why would Apple need to reduce the float?
post #42 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post

The point of buying back stock isn't to have less stock, it's to increase the value of the remaining stock going forward, which should return more value to existing shareholders if/when the stock price rises.

Splitting it splits the value of each individual share to make it more affordable to buy a piece of Apple for low volume stock traders, but doesn't have any effect on the total value (price x quantity) of the stock held by existing shareholders.

The goals of buying back and splitting stock do not conflict.

I know reducing the number of shares is supposed to increase the stock value remaining, etc.

And I also know that splitting to make it more affordable, etc. etc. All of this was explained to me decades ago. I'm well aware of both of those.

My point is why do both within a short period of time and doesn't buying those shares reduce their cash position? I have never seen a company do both within a short period of time of one another. I've seen a company buy back shares when there are a TON of them available. Microsoft did that and they have about 8.5 Billion shares outstanding and there stock has been stuck in the 30 to 40 range.

I've also seen various companies do stock splits because the share price got to high while the company was in hyper growth mode (like Apple's been in for about a decade), and then once the company kind of gets out of that growth mode of stock splits, etc. it then goes into becoming more of a dividend stock and I just think that's what Apple is in the process of doing.

I've just never seen a company buy back shares and then do a stock split within a relatively short period of time. That's what I'm having a problem with. It's just not something I've ever seen before. and I'm just wondering where they are taking the cash from to repurchase these large blocks of shares.

If buying shares increases the stock price, and splitting the stock reduces the stock price, then that's a conflict. I don't know why they didn't just save their money by not repurchasing stocks and just do a stock split. They used to split the stock every time it hit $100 a share until something like 2005 I believe was their last stock split. Then they just let it ride up and up and up until these drastic "mood" swings from $400 to $700 and then back down to $500. I just think they should have just paid dividends and split the stock and leave it at that.
Edited by drblank - 4/27/14 at 2:42am
post #43 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post


The point of buying back stock isn't to have less stock, it's to increase the value of the remaining stock going forward, which should return more value to existing shareholders if/when the stock price rises.

Splitting it splits the value of each individual share to make it more affordable to buy a piece of Apple for low volume stock traders, but doesn't have any effect on the total value (price x quantity) of the stock held by existing shareholders.

The goals of buying back and splitting stock do not conflict.

I don't know what anyone else thinks, but based on what i know from listening and reading about what Apple's done and plans on, I think they'll make profits, but they aren't going to grow that fast and I think for the time being the stock is going to be a dividend stock cheap enough for people to buy and there will be a shift in investors and I don't see the stock moving to higher plateaus for a while until they can prove they will get back to a 30% year to year growth rate without destroying profit margins.  I think it's going to be stuck in between two numbers and I'll figure out what those two numbers are later after the stock split.  In the mean time, I'm just going to be looking at and caring about the P/E ratio and see where it's new range is. I think it's going to take a hit after the stock split.  That's my gut feeling.

post #44 of 135

I really think that the repurchases are happening along with the stock split is Apple's way of working with the large institutional players to shift their positions from growth related funds into dividend related funds and Apple's trying to appease both crowds at the same time.  That's the only reasoning that would make sense.

 

Before you respond to this notion, just give it a day to THINK about it.  The Board of Directors/CEO are ALWAYS dealing with the pressures of the large institutional buyers since they have lots of voting power.

 

I read about several other companies that did things that didn't get a lot of public support and it came out that they were getting pressure from the large institutional investors and they were kind of calling the shots behind the scenes.   Right, wrong, indifferent, the large investors unfortunately can be the ones calling the shots and we don't always here about it.

post #45 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

My point is why do both within a short period of time
Why not? As mentioned above, different goals that don't conflict. Apple are more than capable of patting their head and rubbing their tummy at the same time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

and doesn't buying those shares reduce their cash position?
Yes, so? Apple are hardly cash strapped, and the buy back increases existing shareholders proportional ownership. That's the point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

I have never seen a company do both within a short period of time of one another.
So? Apple are in an unusual position of being among the most valuable companies in the world, very cash rich, with a high stock price, yet not viewed as a secure stock. Unusual positions give rise to unusual reactions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

I've seen a company buy back shares when there are a TON of them available. Microsoft did that and they have about 8.5 Billion shares outstanding and there stock has been stuck in the 30 to 40 range.
Microsoft is not a growth stock. That doesn't mean the buy back was a bad idea, if the stock is stuck at the same position that suggests it was a neutral idea.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

I've also seen various companies do stock splits because the share price got to high while the company was in hyper growth mode (like Apple's been in for about a decade), and then once the company kind of gets out of that growth mode of stock splits, etc. it then goes into becoming more of a dividend stock and I just think that's what Apple is in the process of doing.
Possibly, though that remains to be seen. If it's the case then the buy back is a neutral activity, it doesn't affect the stock value one way or the other, and the stock split may increase small volume trading. No problem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

I've just never seen a company buy back shares and then do a stock split within a relatively short period of time. That's what I'm having a problem with. It's just not something I've ever seen before. and I'm just wondering where they are taking the cash from to repurchase these large blocks of shares.
US cash flow and the money raised in the bond sale a while back. This isn't a secret, so not sure why it's causing you confusion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

If buying shares increases the stock price, and splitting the stock reduces the stock price, then that's a conflict.
Buying back stock does not increase the stock price, it increases the proportional value of the remaining stock, which will be beneficial to shareholders in the event of growth.
Splitting stock only reduces the stock price proportionate to the new reduction in share that it represents. It does not in itself reduce the price:value ratio.
There is no conflict here because the goals are different, the buy back benefits existing shareholders who hold the stock expecting growth, the split benefits low volume traders who are buying and selling g the stock.
These are two entirely different groups of shareholders. Neither are affected by the other.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

I don't know why they didn't just save their money by not repurchasing stocks and just do a stock split. They used to split the stock every time it hit $100 a share until something like 2005 I believe was their last stock split. Then they just let it ride up and up and up until these drastic "mood" swings from $400 to $700 and then back down to $500. I just think they should have just paid dividends and split the stock and leave it at that.
See above. The buy back rewards long term investors who see growth potential. It's a show of faith in the company.

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #46 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

Why would Apple need to reduce the float?

This page has plant of information for you on the benefit of a company owning more of itself: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Share_repurchase

"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 #47 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post


Why not? As mentioned above, different goals that don't conflict. Apple are more than capable of patting their head and rubbing their tummy at the same time.
Yes, so? Apple are hardly cash strapped, and the buy back increases existing shareholders proportional ownership. That's the point.
So? Apple are in an unusual position of being among the most valuable companies in the world, very cash rich, with a high stock price, yet not viewed as a secure stock. Unusual positions give rise to unusual reactions.
Microsoft is not a growth stock. That doesn't mean the buy back was a bad idea, if the stock is stuck at the same position that suggests it was a neutral idea.
Possibly, though that remains to be seen. If it's the case then the buy back is a neutral activity, it doesn't affect the stock value one way or the other, and the stock split may increase small volume trading. No problem.
US cash flow and the money raised in the bond sale a while back. This isn't a secret, so not sure why it's causing you confusion.
Buying back stock does not increase the stock price, it increases the proportional value of the remaining stock, which will be beneficial to shareholders in the event of growth.
Splitting stock only reduces the stock price proportionate to the new reduction in share that it represents. It does not in itself reduce the price:value ratio.
There is no conflict here because the goals are different, the buy back benefits existing shareholders who hold the stock expecting growth, the split benefits low volume traders who are buying and selling g the stock.
These are two entirely different groups of shareholders. Neither are affected by the other.
See above. The buy back rewards long term investors who see growth potential. It's a show of faith in the company.

The whole things is awfully strange and yes, I do believe buying shares to increase the share price and then increasing the number of share to decrease the share price is opposite.  I've never seen this before and I don't think others have either.

 

Well, whatever..

post #48 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

The whole things is awfully strange and yes, I do believe buying shares to increase the share price and then increasing the number of share to decrease the share price is opposite.  I've never seen this before and I don't think others have either.

Well, whatever..

Are you purposely being obtuse? I sincerely hope you're just trolling now because if you honestly can't understand these simple concepts you need to just stop.

"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 #49 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
 

The whole things is awfully strange and yes, I do believe buying shares to increase the share price and then increasing the number of share to decrease the share price is opposite.  I've never seen this before and I don't think others have either.

 

Well, whatever..

They are not related to each other in any way.  There is no connection or correlation to buying back shares and a stock split.

 

If it was a good idea to buy back shares before the split, then it will still be a good idea to buy them back after the split for 1/7 the price.  Buying back shares increasing remaining stockholders value while a shares split does NOTHING to affect stockholders value.  

 

Its like asking "why would someone both want to earn more money AND break a $20 bill into $5 bills?"  You can see that the size of the bill doesn't change the total value to the person who owns them.  But earning more money WILL make them more wealthy.  The goal of breaking your $20 is completely independent of your purpose in continuing to work and earn money.  Similarly, splitting the stock means NOTHING to the shareholders or the company in terms of value.  But buying back shares DOES increase the value of people's remaining stock (independent of stock splits).  

 

The only thing a stock split does is make it easier for investors with small amounts of money to invest due to it not being such a big chunk of money in the same way that having a $5 bill is easier to spend at a dollar store than a $100 bill.  If it weren't for this, there is no real difference in anyway before and after the stock split.  

post #50 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


Are you purposely being obtuse? I sincerely hope you're just trolling now because if you honestly can't understand these simple concepts you need to just stop.

I was going to say the same thing about you.  I'm not trolling, I've just never seen a company do large block purchases and a massive stock split within a fairly short period of time and I don't think anyone else here has either.

 

If you have, name a stock that's done that.  Because I can't.

 

Different types of investors have different types of habits, and this stock is obviously changing the type of investor with a different habit and until this thing normalizes out from a shares outstanding point of view.  It's a little too weird for me, I just get nervous and if I were to look at Apple stock right now, I wouldn't buy in right now, I would wait unit I see a low point and then maybe buy in, but not have the same expectations of the ROI since it's not in high growth anymore. 

 

I can't help if we think differently on this.  You have your opinions but calling me a troll is really being juvenile and childish.  So please stop with the name calling.  BTW, I can understand the simple concepts just fine.   So, stop your assumptions.

post #51 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Savio View Post
 

They are not related to each other in any way.  There is no connection or correlation to buying back shares and a stock split.

 

If it was a good idea to buy back shares before the split, then it will still be a good idea to buy them back after the split for 1/7 the price.  Buying back shares increasing remaining stockholders value while a shares split does NOTHING to affect stockholders value.  

 

Its like asking "why would someone both want to earn more money AND break a $20 bill into $5 bills?"  You can see that the size of the bill doesn't change the total value to the person who owns them.  But earning more money WILL make them more wealthy.  The goal of breaking your $20 is completely independent of your purpose in continuing to work and earn money.  Similarly, splitting the stock means NOTHING to the shareholders or the company in terms of value.  But buying back shares DOES increase the value of people's remaining stock (independent of stock splits).  

 

The only thing a stock split does is make it easier for investors with small amounts of money to invest due to it not being such a big chunk of money in the same way that having a $5 bill is easier to spend at a dollar store than a $100 bill.  If it weren't for this, there is no real difference in anyway before and after the stock split.  

Apple can't buyback enough shares after the split to make a dent in it to make any difference for the long term, it's just short term hits for short term gains.  I personally think at this time, they would be better off not buying back the stock and just letting it split.

post #52 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

I've just never seen a company do large block purchases and a massive stock split within a fairly short period of time and I don't think anyone else here has either.

I've never seen Tim Cook on a Mexican restaurant on a Tuesday. What's your point?
Quote:
If you have, name a stock that's done that.  Because I can't.

WHY THE **** ARE YOU CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT HAS BEEN DONE BEFORE AND WHAT HASN'T. THESE THINGS ARE NEITHER CONNECTED NOR CONTRADICTORY. YOU'VE MADE THAT UP IN YOUR HEAD. IF YOU DON"T UNDERSTAND THAT BUYING BACK A STOCK WHEN IT'S LOW INCREASES THE VALUE OF THE STOCK FOR EVERYONE AND STOCK SPLITS DON'T AFFECT THE VALUE FOR ANYONE BUT MAKE IT EASIER TO BUY WITH A NEW LOWER PRICE POINT THEN YOU NEED TO STOP. JUST STOP. GO READ ONE OF THE BILLION ARTICLES ON THESE SIMPLE ACTIONS.

"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 #53 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


I've never seen Tim Cook on a Mexican restaurant on a Tuesday. What's your point?
WHY THE **** ARE YOU CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT HAS BEEN DONE BEFORE AND WHAT HASN'T. THESE THINGS ARE NEITHER CONNECTED NOR CONTRADICTORY. YOU'VE MADE THAT UP IN YOUR HEAD. IF YOU DON"T UNDERSTAND THAT BUYING BACK A STOCK WHEN IT'S LOW INCREASES THE VALUE OF THE STOCK FOR EVERYONE AND STOCK SPLITS DON'T AFFECT THE VALUE FOR ANYONE BUT MAKE IT EASIER TO BUY WITH A NEW LOWER PRICE POINT THEN YOU NEED TO STOP. JUST STOP. GO READ ONE OF THE BILLION ARTICLES ON THESE SIMPLE ACTIONS.

Get over it.  It's not commonly done at the same time.   Are you afraid that I'm going to scare people away form buying the stock so you can't make as much money? 

 

If they make any large bulk purchases it would be nice to know a day ahead of when they do it.  I think that would be nice. :-)

post #54 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

Get over it.  It's not commonly done at the same time.   Are you afraid that I'm going to scare people away form buying the stock so you can't make as much money? 

1) Of course it's not down because there are so few companies throughout history that have been in Apple's position but, again, for the last time, THESE ARE NOT CONTRADICTORY EVENTS.

2) Anyone reading this thread, sans you, will see that Apple is a great buy. All you're doing is showing a) how fucking ignorant you are on this rudimentary subject, and b) your inability to educate yourself on the benefits of stock posits, buybacks, and dividends.

3) If you're goal is to keep people from buying Apple from a poorly contrived and invented argument then how can you say you're not trolling… not that I'd expect a troll to admit it.

"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 #55 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
 

Apple can't buyback enough shares after the split to make a dent in it to make any difference for the long term, it's just short term hits for short term gains.  I personally think at this time, they would be better off not buying back the stock and just letting it split.

The stock split has no effect on the value of shares that Apple can buy back.  They can buy back EXACTLY the same value as they could before.  

 

If Apple could buy back $1B worth of shares (and a certain % of their total) BEFORE the split, then they can buy back exactly the same amount ($1B worth) AND the same % of their total stock.  

 

Again, the split CHANGES NOTHING and has absolutely 0 effect on the effect of their buyback.  

 

I feel like I am trying to explain to my kid that a $20 is worth the same as 20 $1 bills but they just can't understand it.   

 

Apple will be buying back 7x more shares per day after the stock split but each share will cost 1/7 of what it did before.  ITS THE SAME total value and its THE SAME % of the total outstanding shares.  

post #56 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

It's not commonly done at the same time.   

Since these are 2 completely independent events that don't affect each other, they occur close to each other at times and far from each other at other times.  

 

It just doesn't matter since neither event has any effect on the other.  

post #57 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

Apple can't buyback enough shares after the split to make a dent in it to make any difference for the long term, it's just short term hits for short term gains.  I personally think at this time, they would be better off not buying back the stock and just letting it split.
Apple don't buy back shares by quantity, they buy back according to value. They don't say "we're going to buy 100 million shares", they say "we're going to buy $600 million of shares". Likewise, the point of the buy back is not to retire an absolute number of shares, but a proportion of the whole. The buy back will have the exact same proportionate effect after the stock split.

As I keep saying, the stock split makes absolutely no difference to the rationale behind, or the method of, the buy back. They're completely mutually exclusive in intent and impact.

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #58 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post



1) Of course it's not down because there are so few companies throughout history that have been in Apple's position but, again, for the last time, THESE ARE NOT CONTRADICTORY EVENTS.



2) Anyone reading this thread, sans you, will see that Apple is a great buy. All you're doing is showing a) how fucking ignorant you are on this rudimentary subject, and b) your inability to educate yourself on the benefits of stock posits, buybacks, and dividends.



3) If you're goal is to keep people from buying Apple from a poorly contrived and invented argument then how can you say you're not trolling… not that I'd expect a troll to admit it.

 



When they bought shares a couple of days ago, it wasn't at a low point, it was at a high point. The 52 week low was under $400 a share, so they bought at closer to a high point for the 52 week range. I think they did it to prevent a massive selloff right when they announced the Stock Split.

No, my goal is to not have people buy when the stock is overvalued. I think it's overvalued or at least very close to that. Look at the stock price last year. It dipped lower during the summer months, so if I want people to maximize their profits for people trying to get into the stock, I would advise them waiting until they see a much lower P/E ratio, because they have traded at a much lower P/E, I think they've gone as low as 11 or slightly lower within the last year. Now, for those expecting the stock to reach $700 like it was last year, I would advise it's not going to happen that soon and they'd be better off just hanging on to the stock, do some dividend reinvestments and wait a few more years and HOPEFULLY it will hit $700 (equivalent).

I'm all for buying low and selling high, which is about as fundamental as possible. I don't see this as a low point moving forward, my gut feeling is that it will move lower within the next 6 months.

I think you are conjuring up misleading statements about MY intentions.. Your intentions are purely selfish ones, mine aren't. I just don't like it when people get suckered into thinking this stock is trading at a low point right now. What also concerns me is the Beta, it's traded at around 1 for many, many years, and it's not. It's at .7, that signifies a different level of stability. I don't like stocks that have erratic behavior. Apple bought stock because they didn't want a massive sell off the next day after their announcement, and I think that's artificially sending people the idea that this stock is going to take off like a rocket ship like it's trading at a low point. I don't think it is, that's all.

What I don't like is getting used to Apple just being the savior of the stock price THINKING they are always going to buy back shares forever when the stock is about to take a dump.

I personally have not been real thrilled with Cooks' method of handling certain things over the past couple of years. He has, IMO, room for improvement. I don't just prescribe to the "I LOVE EVERYTHING THEY DO", just because I'm a fan of the platform. I don't agree with everything that's been done, I do think there's room for improvement and I'm not just going to THINK Cook can't do no wrong, because he hasn't earned a solid A in my book yet. He's got a solid B, maybe B+, but right now, i think he's at a B for me.

Do you know that they haven't made a product announcement in about 7 months? That's a long time for Apple not to make a product announcement. Their last product announcement was in the beginning of Oct, so I could Oct, Nov, Dec, Jan, Feb, March and now April with no product announcements. That's a long time in the high tech industry with a product mix like them.
post #59 of 135
The product plan really has nothing to do with buy backs and stock splits.

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #60 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Savio View Post
 

The stock split has no effect on the value of shares that Apple can buy back.  They can buy back EXACTLY the same value as they could before.  

 

If Apple could buy back $1B worth of shares (and a certain % of their total) BEFORE the split, then they can buy back exactly the same amount ($1B worth) AND the same % of their total stock.  

 

Again, the split CHANGES NOTHING and has absolutely 0 effect on the effect of their buyback.  

 

I feel like I am trying to explain to my kid that a $20 is worth the same as 20 $1 bills but they just can't understand it.   

 

Apple will be buying back 7x more shares per day after the stock split but each share will cost 1/7 of what it did before.  ITS THE SAME total value and its THE SAME % of the total outstanding shares.  

But Apple can't continue to constantly buy back shares to prevent sell offs forever.  They don't have unlimited abilities to do this and to always think that Apple is always going to "SAVE THE DAY" from sell offs when the stock shouldn't be trading as high as it is, is being a little foolish.  I look at the P/E to see when it's over or undervalued.  As of the last 52 weeks, it's approaching the maximum P/E, which would indicate it's overvalued.  I wouldn't buy this stock until it reaches a undervalued state to have a much better chance of a better ROI.


You don't have repeat what a Stock split is, what you should be more concerned about is how the stock is going to behave once their 7x as many shares because look at what happened to Microsoft after they reached their peak in shares.

 

I learned what a stock split was at 10 years old in 1969, because I was pointing to my father about IBM and other stocks that were splitting routinely and I wanted to understand why the stock price ran up to 400 a share and then went down to about 40 and was doing it consistently.  My father actually bought some IBM stock after I pointed this out to him.  Me? I was just looking at numbers on a daily basis in WSJ because i liked looking at number fluctuations as a inquisitive kid.  I actually pointed out all of the time some of the best stocks before I studied finance in college, so I'm very familiar with stock splits.  But I'm also familiar with seeing stocks go from a high growth state to a dividend stock which has less volatility.  I just think Apple is creating a false sense of security thinking they are always going to buy back stocks and save everyone's bacon.  We don't know everything that goes on behind the scenes with the discussions between Apple executives and these big institutional investors unless it's publicized.  Just beware of Apple's purchase behavior because they are more about saving what the market would do under normal circumstances.  All Apple did when they bought shares the other day was delay a drop in share price, it's just temporary false sense of reality.

post #61 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
 

 



When they bought shares a couple of days ago, it wasn't at a low point, it was at a high point. The 52 week low was under $400 a share, so they bought at closer to a high point for the 52 week range. I think they did it to prevent a massive selloff right when they announced the Stock Split.

No, my goal is to not have people buy when the stock is overvalued. I think it's overvalued or at least very close to that. Look at the stock price last year. It dipped lower during the summer months, so if I want people to maximize their profits for people trying to get into the stock, I would advise them waiting until they see a much lower P/E ratio, because they have traded at a much lower P/E, I think they've gone as low as 11 or slightly lower within the last year. Now, for those expecting the stock to reach $700 like it was last year, I would advise it's not going to happen that soon and they'd be better off just hanging on to the stock, do some dividend reinvestments and wait a few more years and HOPEFULLY it will hit $700 (equivalent).

I'm all for buying low and selling high, which is about as fundamental as possible. I don't see this as a low point moving forward, my gut feeling is that it will move lower within the next 6 months.


Do you know that they haven't made a product announcement in about 7 months? That's a long time for Apple not to make a product announcement. Their last product announcement was in the beginning of Oct, so I could Oct, Nov, Dec, Jan, Feb, March and now April with no product announcements. That's a long time in the high tech industry with a product mix like them.

 

First off NO ONE should be basing their investing decisions on what the price of a stock was LAST year.  You are saying people should not invest in Apple now because the price is higher than last year.  Really?  So are you telling me it was stupid to invest in Apple in 2005 when the price was $40 since the price was only $20 in 2004?  Crazy talk. You don't base the buy/sell decision on price history.

 

You need to base it on forecasted earnings in the next year, 5 years, and 10 years down the line.  What happened last year was last year and should have ZERO effect on your decision to buy Apple.

 

So why was Apple $385 last year and $571 now?  Easy.  Apple was reporting quarterly AND yearly profit decline.  EPS was declining on an average of 10%.  If that trend continued the stock would easily stay at $400 and eventually $300.  So why is it $571?  Because they just announced that EPS GREW 15% this quarter after EPS DECLINE of 10% the last fiscal year.  Earnings grow leads to higher PE ratio's and higher stock prices.  The buyback is also helping.  Apple has already purchased about 7% of the total shares.  All things equal that means the shares you hold are worth 7% more.  Cook also increased the dividend and made it clear that yearly dividend increases are part of the long term plan.  That is EXACTLY what value and income investors want to hear.

 

Once the $90,000,000,000 is done in 2015 then things will get very interesting.  Apple should be generating $60,000,000,000 of free cash flows a year and could easily raise the dividend by 100%.  By then the stock will probably be valued close to fair value and there would be no need to do additional buybacks.

 

So if you are going to say Apple is OVER-VALUED you need to bring facts to the table.  You can't say its because the price is higher than last year.  Are the circumstances the same as last year?  No.  We are at 15% earnings growth instead of 10% earnings decline.  So what are your facts?  

 

You think profits will fall?

You think iPhone will fail?

You think the new products will fail?

You think the buybacks/dividends/Split will hurt?

 

Give us your reasons or you look like a troll.

 

Here are my reasons why I think the stock is still UNDER-VALUED and why I bought another 50 shares at $570:

 

1. Wall street sentiment has changed. So obvious.  Stocks are on a great rotation.  Wall Street loves to rotate into one stock and then rotate out of it.  In 2009-2012 they loved Apple and hated Google.  Apple went up over 500% in that time period.   Google only went up 50%.  From 2012 till now it was Google that went up 100% and Apple decline.  My guess is from 2014-2017 Apple will be favored and Google smashed.  Wall Street makes their money by fooling Main Street.  They made a killing fooling Main Street into selling their Apple shares at $380 last year.  They will make a killing fooling people into buying Google at $1200 this year.

 

2.  Profit growth is back.  Profits and Margins are up.  15% growth is not a small matter.  Google's profits grew a mere 1% last quarter and a pathetic 6% after taking out the loss from Motorola.  

 

3. iPhone6 will destroy the competition.  The only edge the Samsung line has over Apple is screen size.  That advantage ends this year.  The build out of the ChinaMobile network can potentially grow iPhone sales in China by 300% in the next 18 months.  Don't forget that the high middle class in China is growing at a rapid pace.  Very soon the amount of consumers that can afford to buy an iPhone in China will surpass America and all of Europe COMBINED.

 

4.  New products.  iWatch will revolutionize the industry.  

 

5. New services.  A digital wallet and payments is a given.  Soon Apple will have over 1,000,000,000 credit card numbers on file.  Do you realize how valuable that is?  Apple is also increasing its footprint in search, advertising, maps, siri, and retail.

 

6. Style and Retail.  Cook said they will TRIPLE the amount of Apple stores in the next 12 months.  Lead by former Burburry CEO Angela Ahrendts.  They also have hired Paul Deneve, former CEO and president of the iconic Yves Saint Laurent luxury brand.  Big things are coming.

 

7. Buybacks and dividends.  When all is said and done Apple will buy back 15-20% of the float.  In other words you own 15-20% more of the company than when the buyback began.  It means your claim for the $60,000,000,000 in free cash flows every year and the $150,000,000,000 in cash is greater.  If you buy now you can easily be locking into a 5-6% dividend in the near future.  Think about that.  

post #62 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post

The product plan really has nothing to do with buy backs and stock splits.

But it does prove whether this company is on track for better growth and a more stabilized growth for all quarters rather than just the Dec and March quarters.  I like to see ALL quarters increase at a consistent rate and they need more consistent product announcements.  I just don't like them pumping out everything in a one month period versus constant quarterly product releases.  That's all.  I think it's dangerous what they are doing.  I'm just VERY cautious right now until I see some thing that indicates something different than what happened over the past 2 years.  That's all. I'm just being cautious.

post #63 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
 

But Apple can't continue to constantly buy back shares to prevent sell offs forever.  

If that is true, then it is as true before as after the stock split since the stock split has absolutely no effect on the share buyback.  

 

Also I would point out that AAPL is considered undervalued by most stock analysts and that they have a lower P/E ratio than most of their competitors making the argument that their stock continues to be undervalued as it has been for some time.  

 

AAPL P/E:  13.67

Google's P/E:  28.03

MSFT  P/E: 14.97

Facebook P/E: 73.37

Amazon P/E:  476..41

Netflix P/E: 121.08

post #64 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
 

But Apple can't continue to constantly buy back shares to prevent sell offs forever.  They don't have unlimited abilities to do this and to always think that Apple is always going to "SAVE THE DAY" from sell offs when the stock shouldn't be trading as high as it is, is being a little foolish.  I look at the P/E to see when it's over or undervalued.  As of the last 52 weeks, it's approaching the maximum P/E, which would indicate it's overvalued.  I wouldn't buy this stock until it reaches a undervalued state to have a much better chance of a better ROI.


You don't have repeat what a Stock split is, what you should be more concerned about is how the stock is going to behave once their 7x as many shares because look at what happened to Microsoft after they reached their peak in shares.

 

I learned what a stock split was at 10 years old in 1969, because I was pointing to my father about IBM and other stocks that were splitting routinely and I wanted to understand why the stock price ran up to 400 a share and then went down to about 40 and was doing it consistently.  My father actually bought some IBM stock after I pointed this out to him.  Me? I was just looking at numbers on a daily basis in WSJ because i liked looking at number fluctuations as a inquisitive kid.  I actually pointed out all of the time some of the best stocks before I studied finance in college, so I'm very familiar with stock splits.  But I'm also familiar with seeing stocks go from a high growth state to a dividend stock which has less volatility.  I just think Apple is creating a false sense of security thinking they are always going to buy back stocks and save everyone's bacon.  We don't know everything that goes on behind the scenes with the discussions between Apple executives and these big institutional investors unless it's publicized.  Just beware of Apple's purchase behavior because they are more about saving what the market would do under normal circumstances.  All Apple did when they bought shares the other day was delay a drop in share price, it's just temporary false sense of reality.

 

Why would buybacks stop?

 

They are generating $50,000,000,000 of free cash flows a year.  What will they do with all the money?  Dividends only take about $12,000,000,000 a year.  What about the other $38B?

 

And tell me what the maximum PE for Apple should be.  And explain why.

 

Show me another company that is growing earnings at 15% and has a PE below 14.

Show me another company that is growing earnings and dominating its sector and has a sans-cash PE of below 10?

 

Again don't just say the company is OVER-VALUED because you say it is.  Give me reasons and facts.

post #65 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
 

But it does prove whether this company is on track for better growth and a more stabilized growth for all quarters rather than just the Dec and March quarters.  I like to see ALL quarters increase at a consistent rate and they need more consistent product announcements.  I just don't like them pumping out everything in a one month period versus constant quarterly product releases.  That's all.  I think it's dangerous what they are doing.  I'm just VERY cautious right now until I see some thing that indicates something different than what happened over the past 2 years.  That's all. I'm just being cautious.

 

They been doing this the past 6 years.

 

Revenue has increased by 1000% and profits by 2000%

 

i think they know what they are doing.

post #66 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Savio View Post
 

If that is true, then it is as true before as after the stock split since the stock split has absolutely no effect on the share buyback.  

 

Also I would point out that AAPL is considered undervalued by most stock analysts and that they have a lower P/E ratio than most of their competitors making the argument that their stock continues to be undervalued as it has been for some time.  

 

AAPL P/E:  13.67

Google's P/E:  28.03

MSFT  P/E: 14.97

Facebook P/E: 73.37

Amazon P/E:  476..41

Netflix P/E: 121.08

MSFT and Apple are both dividend stocks.  All of the others listed are grossly overvalued and shouldn't even be compared against one another.

 

Look at Microsoft, Intel, Cisco, and companies that have stabilized, Google is stable in terms of their quarterly earnings.

 

Facebook is grossly overvalued. So is Amazon, so is Netflix and those companies aren't dividend stocks.

 

Quit trying to compare Apples to Oranges (no pun intended)

 

If you want to look at dividend stocks then just compare dividend stock, if you want to compare risky high growth stocks, then compare those against one another.  If you look at Amazon, their stock has been taking a nosedive lately and it wouldn't surprise me if it continues through the next couple of quarters until Christmas kicks in when they do more business.

 

I haven't studied NetFlix and I try not to pay any attention to Facebook because I don't like the company and how they sold their iPO with a ton of shares.  

 

Google has a more stable P/E because their earnings are more stable, but they are still younger than MSFT, APPL, INTL, CISCO.

 

Some companies are also very cyclical and some aren't.  So you have to look at their cycles.

post #67 of 135

I'm in agreement with those that say that we shouldn't be putting our Apple Fanboyism when it comes to analyzing a stock and I think some people are guilty of this.  The numbers are the numbers and leave the Fanboyism on hold while you look at the numbers of what it's done over the past year, and what the most likely scenario is for the next 12 months.

 

Until Apple does some major announcements so I'm not so cautious I'm just VERY cautious.  I don't like THINKING they are going to something when in reality they aren't or can't.  7 months to me is a LONG time without product announcements.

 

I certainly hope they make some killer announcements at WWDC.  I really do.   I don't like being cautious with Apple, but the last  24 months as made me VERY cautious.  What I want Apple to do and what they will do are two different things.  I want them to come out with the iPhone 6 in June for several reasons.  1.  So I can buy one.  2. So it can grab a LOT of market share away from Android 3. so it doesn't get crammed into everything else at the end of the year.  Will it happen?  I don't know. 

 

Don't make me out to be the bad guy because you think they are going up from today on when I don't think they are.   This is just a cautious time until after WWDC and the current quarter results, which are typically worse than the previous quarter due to going into the summer.

post #68 of 135

I'm into looking for high growth opportunities that are more of a sure thing, so that's why I'm paying attention to other stocks right now. :-)

post #69 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
 

MSFT and Apple are both dividend stocks.  All of the others listed are grossly overvalued and shouldn't even be compared against one another.

 

Look at Microsoft, Intel, Cisco, and companies that have stabilized, Google is stable in terms of their quarterly earnings.

 

Facebook is grossly overvalued. So is Amazon, so is Netflix and those companies aren't dividend stocks.

 

Quit trying to compare Apples to Oranges (no pun intended)

 

If you want to look at dividend stocks then just compare dividend stock, if you want to compare risky high growth stocks, then compare those against one another.  If you look at Amazon, their stock has been taking a nosedive lately and it wouldn't surprise me if it continues through the next couple of quarters until Christmas kicks in when they do more business.

 

I haven't studied NetFlix and I try not to pay any attention to Facebook because I don't like the company and how they sold their iPO with a ton of shares.  

 

Google has a more stable P/E because their earnings are more stable, but they are still younger than MSFT, APPL, INTL, CISCO.

 

Some companies are also very cyclical and some aren't.  So you have to look at their cycles.

 

Google earnings stable?

 

You do realize they reported  1% earrings growth last quarter.  That is THE DEFINITION of a non-growth company yet they have a high growth PE of 28.

 

Their earnings are NOT stable.  Their main source of revenue and profits is desktop search.  A market that is shrinking rapidly every quarter.  In fact their cost per click has gone down 9 straight quarters as people are using mobile devices to access the web and are using apps to do their searches such as Facebook and Twitter that do not use Google.

 

Again tell me why Apple is OVER-VALUED.  And don't say because its price is higher than last year.  Will revenues drop? Will iPhone fail?  Will margins fall?  If you don't give any reason you are giving an impression you are a troll (which i think you are not)

post #70 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
 

I'm into looking for high growth opportunities that are more of a sure thing, so that's why I'm paying attention to other stocks right now. :-)

 

High growth and sure thing does not happen.  

 

Risk vs Reward.  Its a basic and fundamental part of investing.

 

High growth stocks by definition are less of a sure thing.

 

Of course there are exceptions.  If you can find those exceptions you will make millions

post #71 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
 

 

 

Don't make me out to be the bad guy because you think they are going up from today on when I don't think they are.   This is just a cautious time until after WWDC and the current quarter results, which are typically worse than the previous quarter due to going into the summer.

 

Investors and APPLE ITSELF does not compare quarterly results to the last quarter.  

 

They don't compare the quarter ending June2014 to quarter ending Mar2014

They compare June2014 to June2013

 

They do that at the conference call and in their earnings press release.  Their guidance shows that they will beat last years June quarter by a decent margin.  And they have not missed guidance in over 40 quarters.

post #72 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Savio View Post
 

Since these are 2 completely independent events that don't affect each other, they occur close to each other at times and far from each other at other times.  

 

It just doesn't matter since neither event has any effect on the other.  

If you want to think that way go right ahead.  I'll think what I want and I've had a pretty damn good track record for predicting Apple until a couple of years ago when I didn't see the sign of a melt down, now I'm recognizing that the company and stock is becoming a dividend stock and the dymanics surrounding Apple are far different.  I think they could be doing better from a company standpoint, but they are just slowly moving right now.  Maybe that will change but these stock buybacks I see them as temporary stock plays and falsely manipulating the stock price from what it would have normally done and what it most likely WILL do.  they can't always run in to save the day which that's all that buyback tries to do.

post #73 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post
 

 

First off NO ONE should be basing their investing decisions on what the price of a stock was LAST year.  You are saying people should not invest in Apple now because the price is higher than last year.  Really?  So are you telling me it was stupid to invest in Apple in 2005 when the price was $40 since the price was only $20 in 2004?  Crazy talk. You don't base the buy/sell decision on price history.

 

You need to base it on forecasted earnings in the next year, 5 years, and 10 years down the line.  What happened last year was last year and should have ZERO effect on your decision to buy Apple.

 

So why was Apple $385 last year and $571 now?  Easy.  Apple was reporting quarterly AND yearly profit decline.  EPS was declining on an average of 10%.  If that trend continued the stock would easily stay at $400 and eventually $300.  So why is it $571?  Because they just announced that EPS GREW 15% this quarter after EPS DECLINE of 10% the last fiscal year.  Earnings grow leads to higher PE ratio's and higher stock prices.  The buyback is also helping.  Apple has already purchased about 7% of the total shares.  All things equal that means the shares you hold are worth 7% more.  Cook also increased the dividend and made it clear that yearly dividend increases are part of the long term plan.  That is EXACTLY what value and income investors want to hear.

 

Once the $90,000,000,000 is done in 2015 then things will get very interesting.  Apple should be generating $60,000,000,000 of free cash flows a year and could easily raise the dividend by 100%.  By then the stock will probably be valued close to fair value and there would be no need to do additional buybacks.

 

So if you are going to say Apple is OVER-VALUED you need to bring facts to the table.  You can't say its because the price is higher than last year.  Are the circumstances the same as last year?  No.  We are at 15% earnings growth instead of 10% earnings decline.  So what are your facts?  

 

You think profits will fall?

You think iPhone will fail?

You think the new products will fail?

You think the buybacks/dividends/Split will hurt?

 

Give us your reasons or you look like a troll.

 

Here are my reasons why I think the stock is still UNDER-VALUED and why I bought another 50 shares at $570:

 

1. Wall street sentiment has changed. So obvious.  Stocks are on a great rotation.  Wall Street loves to rotate into one stock and then rotate out of it.  In 2009-2012 they loved Apple and hated Google.  Apple went up over 500% in that time period.   Google only went up 50%.  From 2012 till now it was Google that went up 100% and Apple decline.  My guess is from 2014-2017 Apple will be favored and Google smashed.  Wall Street makes their money by fooling Main Street.  They made a killing fooling Main Street into selling their Apple shares at $380 last year.  They will make a killing fooling people into buying Google at $1200 this year.

 

2.  Profit growth is back.  Profits and Margins are up.  15% growth is not a small matter.  Google's profits grew a mere 1% last quarter and a pathetic 6% after taking out the loss from Motorola.  

 

3. iPhone6 will destroy the competition.  The only edge the Samsung line has over Apple is screen size.  That advantage ends this year.  The build out of the ChinaMobile network can potentially grow iPhone sales in China by 300% in the next 18 months.  Don't forget that the high middle class in China is growing at a rapid pace.  Very soon the amount of consumers that can afford to buy an iPhone in China will surpass America and all of Europe COMBINED.

 

4.  New products.  iWatch will revolutionize the industry.  

 

5. New services.  A digital wallet and payments is a given.  Soon Apple will have over 1,000,000,000 credit card numbers on file.  Do you realize how valuable that is?  Apple is also increasing its footprint in search, advertising, maps, siri, and retail.

 

6. Style and Retail.  Cook said they will TRIPLE the amount of Apple stores in the next 12 months.  Lead by former Burburry CEO Angela Ahrendts.  They also have hired Paul Deneve, former CEO and president of the iconic Yves Saint Laurent luxury brand.  Big things are coming.

 

7. Buybacks and dividends.  When all is said and done Apple will buy back 15-20% of the float.  In other words you own 15-20% more of the company than when the buyback began.  It means your claim for the $60,000,000,000 in free cash flows every year and the $150,000,000,000 in cash is greater.  If you buy now you can easily be locking into a 5-6% dividend in the near future.  Think about that.  

You are asking me to respond to a lot at once, so give me some time to figure out my response since you probably didn't read some of my earlier comments on what I think they should do.


One thing Cook didn't mention was the average size of these stores.  Are they going to be the size of a kiosk in a country that has 10,000 potential buyers or are they going to be MegaStores with millions and millions of potential buyers.  I also don't want Cook to fall into the trap of saying they are going to something and not execute.  Tripling the amount of stores in 12 months is VERY ambitious.  That's 800 new stores in 12 months?  That tells me a lot of small kiosk stores, if you want my gut feeling.  I'll respond on the others after I finished my lunch, I need to run and eat some food.  But I will respond to rest your mind and STOP accusing me of being a troll.  Seriously, don't act like a juvenile on that so I don't retort back.  those kind of bully statements are meaningless.  But I promise you, I will address what I can later today.

post #74 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
 

You are asking me to respond to a lot at once, so give me some time to figure out my response since you probably didn't read some of my earlier comments on what I think they should do.


One thing Cook didn't mention was the average size of these stores.  Are they going to be the size of a kiosk in a country that has 10,000 potential buyers or are they going to be MegaStores with millions and millions of potential buyers.  I also don't want Cook to fall into the trap of saying they are going to something and not execute.  Tripling the amount of stores in 12 months is VERY ambitious.  That's 800 new stores in 12 months?  That tells me a lot of small kiosk stores, if you want my gut feeling.  I'll respond on the others after I finished my lunch, I need to run and eat some food.  But I will respond to rest your mind and STOP accusing me of being a troll.  Seriously, don't act like a juvenile on that so I don't retort back.  those kind of bully statements are meaningless.  But I promise you, I will address what I can later today.

 

I don't think you are a troll.

 

I'm just saying if you say the stock is OVER-VALUED yet give no reason it looks like trollish behavior.

 

I'd just like to know why you think they are OVER-VALUED from a fundamental prospective.  

post #75 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

Google earnings stable?

You do realize they reported  1% earrings growth last quarter.  That is THE DEFINITION of a non-growth company yet they have a high growth PE of 28.

Their earnings are NOT stable.  Their main source of revenue and profits is desktop search.  A market that is shrinking rapidly every quarter.  In fact their cost per click has gone down 9 straight quarters as people are using mobile devices to access the web and are using apps to do their searches such as Facebook and Twitter that do not use Google.

Again tell me why Apple is OVER-VALUED.  And don't say because its price is higher than last year.  Will revenues drop? Will iPhone fail?  Will margins fall?  If you don't give any reason you are giving an impression you are a troll (which i think you are not)

Look at Google's quarterly revenues and earnings over the past couple of years. I'm not taking about the growth of one quarter, I'm looking at their ability to post earnings with consistency, how much they go up in one quarter is not enough to judge. Google in the past would do better going into the Christmas seasons, but I haven't paid attention to Google for a while because I have no interest in them. but when I looked at their quarterly basis, I was looking at their ability to at least bring in earnings, as far as their growth? They are still considered a growth company, but they don't really sell hardware as their main source of revenue since they make money from ads, mostly. The thing about Google is they are trying to go into different markets to see what will stick, which means they are very immature company with growth potential and since they still don't many shares outstanding compared to the Microsoft's of the world, they are still considered a growth company that goes through weird quarter growth rates, but I think you are taking one growth period and labeling them rather than looking at Google from a bird's eye view.


I told you why I think Apple is still over valued. You just bought at a price I wouldn't have suggested you buy in at and your getting pissed at the messenger. You out paid, IMO, too much. Look at the P/E over the past 12 months, the P/E will guide on being over or undervalued.
post #76 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post
 

 

First off NO ONE should be basing their investing decisions on what the price of a stock was LAST year.  You are saying people should not invest in Apple now because the price is higher than last year.  Really?  So are you telling me it was stupid to invest in Apple in 2005 when the price was $40 since the price was only $20 in 2004?  Crazy talk. You don't base the buy/sell decision on price history.

 

You need to base it on forecasted earnings in the next year, 5 years, and 10 years down the line.  What happened last year was last year and should have ZERO effect on your decision to buy Apple.

 

So why was Apple $385 last year and $571 now?  Easy.  Apple was reporting quarterly AND yearly profit decline.  EPS was declining on an average of 10%.  If that trend continued the stock would easily stay at $400 and eventually $300.  So why is it $571?  Because they just announced that EPS GREW 15% this quarter after EPS DECLINE of 10% the last fiscal year.  Earnings grow leads to higher PE ratio's and higher stock prices.  The buyback is also helping.  Apple has already purchased about 7% of the total shares.  All things equal that means the shares you hold are worth 7% more.  Cook also increased the dividend and made it clear that yearly dividend increases are part of the long term plan.  That is EXACTLY what value and income investors want to hear.

 

Once the $90,000,000,000 is done in 2015 then things will get very interesting.  Apple should be generating $60,000,000,000 of free cash flows a year and could easily raise the dividend by 100%.  By then the stock will probably be valued close to fair value and there would be no need to do additional buybacks.

 

So if you are going to say Apple is OVER-VALUED you need to bring facts to the table.  You can't say its because the price is higher than last year.  Are the circumstances the same as last year?  No.  We are at 15% earnings growth instead of 10% earnings decline.  So what are your facts?  

 

You think profits will fall?

You think iPhone will fail?

You think the new products will fail?

You think the buybacks/dividends/Split will hurt?

 

Give us your reasons or you look like a troll.

 

Here are my reasons why I think the stock is still UNDER-VALUED and why I bought another 50 shares at $570:

 

1. Wall street sentiment has changed. So obvious.  Stocks are on a great rotation.  Wall Street loves to rotate into one stock and then rotate out of it.  In 2009-2012 they loved Apple and hated Google.  Apple went up over 500% in that time period.   Google only went up 50%.  From 2012 till now it was Google that went up 100% and Apple decline.  My guess is from 2014-2017 Apple will be favored and Google smashed.  Wall Street makes their money by fooling Main Street.  They made a killing fooling Main Street into selling their Apple shares at $380 last year.  They will make a killing fooling people into buying Google at $1200 this year.

 

2.  Profit growth is back.  Profits and Margins are up.  15% growth is not a small matter.  Google's profits grew a mere 1% last quarter and a pathetic 6% after taking out the loss from Motorola.  

 

3. iPhone6 will destroy the competition.  The only edge the Samsung line has over Apple is screen size.  That advantage ends this year.  The build out of the ChinaMobile network can potentially grow iPhone sales in China by 300% in the next 18 months.  Don't forget that the high middle class in China is growing at a rapid pace.  Very soon the amount of consumers that can afford to buy an iPhone in China will surpass America and all of Europe COMBINED.

 

4.  New products.  iWatch will revolutionize the industry.  

 

5. New services.  A digital wallet and payments is a given.  Soon Apple will have over 1,000,000,000 credit card numbers on file.  Do you realize how valuable that is?  Apple is also increasing its footprint in search, advertising, maps, siri, and retail.

 

6. Style and Retail.  Cook said they will TRIPLE the amount of Apple stores in the next 12 months.  Lead by former Burburry CEO Angela Ahrendts.  They also have hired Paul Deneve, former CEO and president of the iconic Yves Saint Laurent luxury brand.  Big things are coming.

 

7. Buybacks and dividends.  When all is said and done Apple will buy back 15-20% of the float.  In other words you own 15-20% more of the company than when the buyback began.  It means your claim for the $60,000,000,000 in free cash flows every year and the $150,000,000,000 in cash is greater.  If you buy now you can easily be locking into a 5-6% dividend in the near future.  Think about that.  

First off, I've already addressed many things you are asking about.  if you have a different opinion, then that's your opinion.  NOW, the only things i feel comfortable in addressing that i haven't addressed that I WANT to address is this.

 

1. First off, you sound like you contradict yourself.  You mention how I shouldn't look at the past performance of stock and then you look at past performances of companies. Which one is it?  I can't help it if you blew $28,500 on 50 shares at $570.  If you want my advice, as someone that's just giving you friendly advice as a non-professional stock advisor, I will say this.  First you might want to think about dollar cost averaging if/when that stock takes a nose dive and don't play this "FLOAT" BS.  That "FLOAT" you speak of is meant more of the professionals that can leverage and better predict these "FLOATS" as you say..  You are a small time investor with 50 shares.  You can't compete against people that are trading MILLIONS of dollars worth of stock.  So don't even try.   

 

2.  Profit for one quarter seems to be good because they had a bunch of sales/demand left over from December quarter. But one quarter does NOT make a year.  You have to see some consistency first.  And in order for Apple to see 15 to 20% gains over every quarter, they not only have to release products to meet the demand, but they have to be able to make enough to REACH a 15 to 20% year to year quarterly earnings.  If they can't produce 15% to 20% across the board (if there is that much demand) for producing that growth rate, then they might not be able to consistently grow 15% to 20%.  Remember, they did 50 Million iPhones last Dec. do you think they are going to be able to produce and sell 60 Million to reach just a 20% increase in iPhone revenues/profits from the year before?  That remains to be seen, what happens if they only manage to squeeze out 55 Million iPhones this Dec.?  

 

3. iWatch hasn't been released. Again, I have mentioned this before.  To me, it's probably not going to bring in HUGE amounts of profits because I don't think it's going to do that. It'll help a little, but I doubt it will make any significant impact on earnings.  Again, I haven't seen what they are going to release, so I don't know any more than just rumors.  Be careful of speculating based on rumors.  It's not good to get overly excited about it from an investment perspective. I treat rumors just as a side nobby, but I try not to let it influence my stock predictions because these rumors aren't always true.

 

4. I don't doubt the demand that's being created for iPhone 6's, etc., but I'm more worried about their release dates and production ramp up.  Can they meet the demand they're creating and are they going to clog the system with too many models at once or spread out the releases so they can increase ALL quarters.

 

5. Digital Wallet?  BIG F-ing DEAL.  That's not going to bring in tons of profits. It's a feature, not a monetized service that I can see.  Does Apple make a percentage of each transaction? If they did, then I want to see how they are going to monetize it by how much they make per transaction and how many transactions there are a quarter, etc. etc.  One thing to be careful of, services drain resources (DATA CENTERS) which cost money, so unless there is some way to monetize those transactions, it's kind of a feature that doesn't bring in direct profits.  So be careful.\

 

The rest I'm not going to address because I've probably already have addressed earlier or I simply don't have spare time to do research for you without getting paid.  If you want me to give you more insight moving forward, I'm going to have to charge you money for private consulting services with the knowledge that I accept no responsibility as simply a consultant.  You obviously aren't going to listen to me, so go stand behind your $570 a share purchase THINKING it's going to hit $700 a share. Look at the 12 month target, it's now $601 on Yahoo! finance.  It was $585 just a couple of days ago.  And you bought at how much?   $570?  OOOPS.  If I were you, I would start saving money to do a dollar cost average when that stock tumbles and reaches a P/E of around 10 or 11, which may happen this summer.  It did last year and history does repeat itself.  Look at the 1, 2, 3 year trend lines, look at the last couple of quarter trend lines, etc. and see what trends you see.

 

I'm done answering your questions because you simply take too much of my valuable time and I don't like being called a troll just because YOU paid too much money for a stock I would have advised waiting on and paying less for.  That's YOUR mistake, now own up to it.  Seriously.

 

One last thing on Google.  I personally think that Google would probably be better off getting out of the Android business because I heard a while back (I don't know if this has changed) that they actually make more money from iPhone users than Android users, so if that's still the case, they would be better off if Apple kicked Android's ass in unit sales.  Take it for what it's worth.


Edited by drblank - 4/27/14 at 1:36pm
post #77 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

Look at Google's quarterly revenues and earnings over the past couple of years. I'm not taking about the growth of one quarter, I'm looking at their ability to post earnings with consistency, how much they go up in one quarter is not enough to judge. Google in the past would do better going into the Christmas seasons, but I haven't paid attention to Google for a while because I have no interest in them. but when I looked at their quarterly basis, I was looking at their ability to at least bring in earnings, as far as their growth? They are still considered a growth company, but they don't really sell hardware as their main source of revenue since they make money from ads, mostly. The thing about Google is they are trying to go into different markets to see what will stick, which means they are very immature company with growth potential and since they still don't many shares outstanding compared to the Microsoft's of the world, they are still considered a growth company that goes through weird quarter growth rates, but I think you are taking one growth period and labeling them rather than looking at Google from a bird's eye view.


I told you why I think Apple is still over valued. You just bought at a price I wouldn't have suggested you buy in at and your getting pissed at the messenger. You out paid, IMO, too much. Look at the P/E over the past 12 months, the P/E will guide on being over or undervalued.

So you are saying the stock is overvalued because the PE is higher now than last year.

Crazy talk. 5 years ago the PE was higher than today and the stock was under $300. Your reason makes no sense.
post #78 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

First off, I've already addressed many things you are asking about.  if you have a different opinion, then that's your opinion.  NOW, the only things i feel comfortable in addressing that i haven't addressed that I WANT to address is this.

1. First off, you sound like you contradict yourself.  You mention how I shouldn't look at the past performance of stock and then you look at past performances of companies. Which one is it?  I can't help it if you blew $28,500 on 50 shares at $570.  If you want my advice, as someone that's just giving you friendly advice as a non-professional stock advisor, I will say this.  First you might want to think about dollar cost averaging if/when that stock takes a nose dive and don't play this "FLOAT" BS.  That "FLOAT" you speak of is meant more of the professionals that can leverage and better predict these "FLOATS" as you say..  You are a small time investor with 50 shares.  You can't compete against people that are trading MILLIONS of dollars worth of stock.  So don't even try.   

2.  Profit for one quarter seems to be good because they had a bunch of sales/demand left over from December quarter. But one quarter does NOT make a year.  You have to see some consistency first.  And in order for Apple to see 15 to 20% gains over every quarter, they not only have to release products to meet the demand, but they have to be able to make enough to REACH a 15 to 20% year to year quarterly earnings.  If they can't produce 15% to 20% across the board (if there is that much demand) for producing that growth rate, then they might not be able to consistently grow 15% to 20%.  Remember, they did 50 Million iPhones last Dec. do you think they are going to be able to produce and sell 60 Million to reach just a 20% increase in iPhone revenues/profits from the year before?  That remains to be seen, what happens if they only manage to squeeze out 55 Million iPhones this Dec.?  

3. iWatch hasn't been released. Again, I have mentioned this before.  To me, it's probably not going to bring in HUGE amounts of profits because I don't think it's going to do that. It'll help a little, but I doubt it will make any significant impact on earnings.  Again, I haven't seen what they are going to release, so I don't know any more than just rumors.  Be careful of speculating based on rumors.  It's not good to get overly excited about it from an investment perspective. I treat rumors just as a side nobby, but I try not to let it influence my stock predictions because these rumors aren't always true.

4. I don't doubt the demand that's being created for iPhone 6's, etc., but I'm more worried about their release dates and production ramp up.  Can they meet the demand they're creating and are they going to clog the system with too many models at once or spread out the releases so they can increase ALL quarters.

5. Digital Wallet?  BIG F-ing DEAL.  That's not going to bring in tons of profits. It's a feature, not a monetized service that I can see.  Does Apple make a percentage of each transaction? If they did, then I want to see how they are going to monetize it by how much they make per transaction and how many transactions there are a quarter, etc. etc.  One thing to be careful of, services drain resources (DATA CENTERS) which cost money, so unless there is some way to monetize those transactions, it's kind of a feature that doesn't bring in direct profits.  So be careful.\

The rest I'm not going to address because I've probably already have addressed earlier or I simply don't have spare time to do research for you without getting paid.  If you want me to give you more insight moving forward, I'm going to have to charge you money for private consulting services with the knowledge that I accept no responsibility as simply a consultant.  You obviously aren't going to listen to me, so go stand behind your $570 a share purchase THINKING it's going to hit $700 a share. Look at the 12 month target, it's now $601 on Yahoo! finance.  It was $585 just a couple of days ago.  And you bought at how much?   $570?  OOOPS.  If I were you, I would start saving money to do a dollar cost average when that stock tumbles and reaches a P/E of around 10 or 11, which may happen this summer.  It did last year and history does repeat itself.  Look at the 1, 2, 3 year trend lines, look at the last couple of quarter trend lines, etc. and see what trends you see.

I'm done answering your questions because you simply take too much of my valuable time and I don't like being called a troll just because YOU paid too much money for a stock I would have advised waiting on and paying less for.  That's YOUR mistake, now own up to it.  Seriously.

So its a mistake buying at $570? You are a quick judge.

We shall see in the next 6 months who is right.

Ive been buying Apple stock the last year and i have 200 shares with a basis of $520.

So do you own any Apple shares currently? If you do why have you not sold your shares if you think its over valued?
post #79 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post


So you are saying the stock is overvalued because the PE is higher now than last year.

Crazy talk. 5 years ago the PE was higher than today and the stock was under $300. Your reason makes no sense.

5 years ago Apple was in a serious growth mode.  Those days are over and I've trying to explain this to you.  As they change from a growth state bringing in lots of yearly growth, the P/E ratios are higher, but since Appe's growth has slowed down (REMEMBER LAST YEAR WHEN THEY TOOK A DUMP) and they started paying dividends, the P/E ratios have DROPPED to know what Microsoft's P/E's look like because Apple's stock is becoming very similar to Microsofts, but you compare the last 12 month P/E ratio swing from high to low to see what the latest levels are at.  As you go from quarter to quarter, you can see how the P/E's are looking because it may change and it may not.  So, P/E's I would only look at their range within the last 12 months, but I would look at the price trends to see how they are trending from a share price perspective.

 

My reasoning makes sense, you just aren't LISTENING or READING what I'm saying.  Did I not say that Apple is no longer a high growth stock and it's more of a dividend stock?

 

A year ago, it was around $385 and went up and then took a nose dive because people like yourself get caught up in the frenzy and the professionals that control vast amounts of stocks are playing people like you that pay too much.  Just because the quarterly reports were good for last quarter does't mean they are going to do the same for the present quarter.  What was Cook's projections for the current quarter? And next quarter? Have you seen those?  What happens if Apple doesn't do well in June?  what happens if they don't do well in Sept,

post #80 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Constable Odo View Post

I don't understand why rapid growth makes a company so valuable to investors.  I would think that slow and steady growth with a long range outlook would be more valuable.  Companies that quickly spurt can burn out just as fast for so many reasons.  Multiple companies in the same market, each trying to spurt, would only seem to create a saturation point a lot faster.  Once that market is saturated, then bye-bye to rapid growth.  At that point, then suddenly those companies are no longer as valuable to investors as they were?  How does that make sense?  My simple mind just doesn't comprehend that type of reasoning.  Whether Apple grows a lot or not, the company is generating absolutely huge amounts of money, so why should it become less valuable to investors than some high growth company that's barely making any profits?  Gambling on growth just seems stupid.  I can't comprehend why Priceline stock is worth $1200 a share and Apple shares aren't even worth half of that.

I agree with you.
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AAPL Investors
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › Apple's $44 billion in stock buybacks have helped increase market cap by $100 billion