or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple earnings, profits, and cash embarrass Microsoft
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple earnings, profits, and cash embarrass Microsoft - Page 3

post #81 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by hvidos View Post

So, you do realize that Apple copied their UI from Xerox long before Microsoft copied it from Apple, right?

Please PEOPLE.

Why are most ANTI MS users morons!!!

Dock = google YZ Dock, original NOT APPLE.
SEARCH=MS invented it, it came out first in OSX, then ViSTA
RESTORE=Then Time Machine, when it works of course.

I know people give Vista a bad rap but OS9 anyone? R U KIDDING?
What a joke.

The 50 lb imac? Seriously? Genius?

Now a MB with no firewire (= no backup, no cam corder = a way to justify getting pro's to use macbook pro's and charging $10 grand for a piece of memory? Genius? Really?

Long live EFI-X

A mac is just a ABIT/ASUS motherboard with Apple OS and shell.

Apple doesn't make memory, hard drives, motherboards, wafer fabs.

My goodness, why do pure Apple people refuse to act like idiots even after the Intel transition which saved them.

Powerbook = STUDIO ON THE ROAD!
Yeah right, it was pounced over and over by the PC.
post #82 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

The first part makes no sense, the second part is anecdotal if true and hardly relevant, and the third part isn't true.




You're confusing Ives with Jobs.

You mean the guy who stood there with the lights on during the KEYNOTE afraid someone might steal a uni body and told them to hurry up as he eyed everyone Jobs?

hee hee
post #83 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwdav View Post

I saw it as a way for the majority shareholders to get the cash out of the company for themselves, at the expense of smaller shareholders.

I wonder who the majority shareholders are ...

What? It's not as if those with fewer shares aren't getting any money. If it really reduced share value, bigger shareholders would be hurting themselves more than smaller ones. Dividends are given out based on your number of shares. If dividends are $1 / a share, someone holding ten shares gets $10, someone with a thousand shares get $1000. It's not like the big holder gets all the money and the small ones don't get any.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hiimamac View Post

Dock = google YZ Dock, original NOT APPLE.
SEARCH=MS invented it, it came out first in OSX, then ViSTA

YZ Dock? I can't find any information in its heritage, does it really predate NextStep, the company that Apple bought which introduced the dock concept?

MS invented search?
post #84 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by hiimamac View Post

RESTORE=Then Time Machine, when it works of course.

This is much more advanced and user friendly than Windows Restore. There is so much more going on with TM. BTW, I have had no issues with since the Leopard Betas.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hiimamac View Post

You mean the guy who stood there with the lights on during the KEYNOTE afraid someone might steal a uni body and told them to hurry up as he eyed everyone Jobs?

hee hee

He was pretty anal about getting them back before proceeding.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

YZ Dock? I can't find any information in its heritage, does it really predate NextStep, the company that Apple bought which introduced the dock concept

I think if anyone gets credit prior to NeXT, it's Acorn, but the Dock has come so far from what even NeXT had. As for Google, I don't even think they were even a company when the OS X was designed.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #85 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsachdev View Post

I think calling them irrelevant just makes you a fan boy...

Right, calling me a fanboy shows how limited your vocalbulary is, come up with something else, you're not trying hard enough.
post #86 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltimateKylie View Post

WRONG WRONG WRONG. A PC for example makes profit for both HP and Microsoft. A Mac makes profit only for Apple. (If you ignore Intel, Nvidia etc, as they make profit in both cases) Thus Microsoft is a software company and Apple is Hardware and Software in regards to Computers. I specifically stated that.

Microsoft did not do any comparison either, and neither did Analysts. Its fan driven website that is, and you are not comparing apples to apples (no pun intended). In fact its a stark reminder that the Mac is still way behind then it should be, and its the fact the iPhone and iPod are competively priced that they are doing so well.

A direct comparison of Zune vs iPod profits is welcome, and Apple obviously succeeds there. But a true comparison of the state of Microsoft would be a Windows vs OS X profits. Microsoft even beat analysts expectations, so its no suprise then that Apple had more profits as this has been expected based on analysts expectations on both sides. The whole spin has been as a failure when Microsoft and Vista is doing fine, and they are exceeding expectations with profits from Vista and Office. The ONLY reason Apple is up is do to the iPod and iPhone. I don't see how that threatens Windows, unless those users switch to Mac. Microsoft's core business is still Windows. While Apple has switched from being Apple Computer to Apple to focus on the iPod and iPhone.

Bull, Microsoft is always bringing up how irrelevant Apple is, so we have a right to compare them and last time I checked ipods have always been more expensive than the competition but yet they keep outselling them. What about iphones, they are more expensive than most phones but yet Apple manages to sell a lot of them.
post #87 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichL View Post

Saw the title and knew interesting who had written this article. *yawn*

Who cares about Microsoft? They don't compete with Apple on any serious level. Why this obsession with them?

It's also worth pointing out that having massive stock piles of cash is generally considered a bad thing. It incurs massive opportunity costs and gives poor value of money to shareholders. That's why Microsoft got rid of their great swimming pool of cash.

Why does Microsoft have an obsession with Apple?
post #88 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by timgriff84 View Post

I agree, people are always quick to say Microsoft are rubbish yet they have done a lot of good. Office is used by everyone not because there locked into using it, but because it was better than the rest early on and continues to.

Even now they are fixing the flaws with there main problems. Yes Vista doesn't run all your old programs and it wont run on all hardware but eventually your hardware will need to be replaced anyway (even with a Mac) and the restrictions on software has made more secure than a Mac! As for speed which someone else mentioned, Vista boots up faster on my iMac that OS X does. Apple goes on about how great it is to make the hardware and software but if thats the case how does an OS made be another company that has to support a lot lot lot more hardware configurations start faster than there's!!!

What the heck are you rambling on about?
post #89 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by hiimamac View Post

Please PEOPLE.

Why are most ANTI MS users morons!!!

Dock = google YZ Dock, original NOT APPLE.
SEARCH=MS invented it, it came out first in OSX, then ViSTA
RESTORE=Then Time Machine, when it works of course.

I know people give Vista a bad rap but OS9 anyone? R U KIDDING?
What a joke.

The 50 lb imac? Seriously? Genius?

Now a MB with no firewire (= no backup, no cam corder = a way to justify getting pro's to use macbook pro's and charging $10 grand for a piece of memory? Genius? Really?

Long live EFI-X

A mac is just a ABIT/ASUS motherboard with Apple OS and shell.

Apple doesn't make memory, hard drives, motherboards, wafer fabs.

My goodness, why do pure Apple people refuse to act like idiots even after the Intel transition which saved them.

Powerbook = STUDIO ON THE ROAD!
Yeah right, it was pounced over and over by the PC.

This is pure garbage.
post #90 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adjei View Post

This is pure garbage.

agreed
post #91 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by hiimamac View Post

Please PEOPLE.

5000 posts in the 4 months since you joined - that is 40 posts per day. Were they all this high quality?
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #92 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by monstrosity View Post

agreed

Also agreed.
post #93 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by StuBeck View Post

It depends on what market you're looking at. Microsoft (I don't understand people's fascination with changing the name of a company) is still doing really well in the server market and office productivity. I don't think Microsoft will really care if people stop buying new PCs, if they still have to spend £349 on Office 2k8 (to get exchange support) and £100-£200 on Vista to run those few products which aren't on the Mac.

I do support for quite a few Apple based companies. Everyone still runs Office, and everyone still uses Windows server 2k3as well for exchange support. This is the area where Microsoft is moving to, even if you go past their games business which is doing rather well.

As long as Apple has a closed hardware model, there will still be a market for Windows. While I know there is a big market for black boxes which just work, there is also a big market where people will look just at price and avoid all the extras you get from a Mac. I think this is the big area where if Apple made a midtower for $1k (and stops calling the Mini a piece of crap) they would expand their market a lot.

"Everyone still runs Office".

This is based only on the limited sample that is covered by your experience. There are plenty of companies that don't use Office, and at my University, a good 1/3 of all my colleagues and students use iWork instead of Office. So before you go making these claims, I suggest you look outside of the realm of your own navel.

"As long as Apple has a closed hardware model,..."

This is true, but you've completely missed the point, as you have with what I mention above. It's not about a closed vs. open hardware model. It's about the fact that Monoposoft (and I call them that as a reminder that the only reason they have been as dominant in the market as they are is because they forced their products down companies throats through illegal tying, and not because of the quality of their products), and specifically Bonzo keep spewing FUD and simple flat-out lies about their products and Apple's products. Again, look at the Monkey Boy's statement that Windows Mobile has 60% - 80% of the smart phone market, which is either a blatant lie or a flat out delusion. THATS what this is about, and why Apple's profit level and sales level is an embarrassment for Monoposoft; they have 10x more of the market than Apple, and yet their profits are barely double that of Apple's.

In the future, try addressing the point, not diverting to something else. Gee... sounds kind of like spending $300M on advertising to make Windows more appealing than actually trying to fix the real problems with it.

Oh, and for the supposed "stability and security" of Vista? My wife is a network security manager at a major california university, and no one in her department, NO ONE, uses Vista. They all use XP because to quote my wife "No one in my office has found Vista to be anything other than change for change's sake. It just doesn't work as well as XP."
post #94 of 122
There are people who voted for Bush twice and will still vote for McCain. This country doesn't always choose the best product, they just choose what they know and are comfortable with, even if it sucks.

Just look at the top 5 songs right now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by htoelle View Post

I cannot say I agree even though I would like to . There shall always be a market for second rate. There may also be a chance it will always be larger, because many will settle for second best. Respectfully submitted.

Thank you
post #95 of 122
It's fun to be the underdog and fight but with that said you have some good points some dumb ones.

VIsta vs OS9? That is stupid they are 10 years apart. Try OS9 vs Windows 98 winner OS9.
Now, on to your point about the hardware you are dead on. I think the new line of computers from Apple suck big hairy balls, I still love the OS but the hardware sucks. When my MBP dies I will be looking into building my own computer and hacking OSX on it. I will not buy a fucking glass screen computer so I could stair in the mirror all day long, and the price of a MacPro is just nonsense.

Apple is no longer the underdog, time to fight a new battle.




Quote:
Originally Posted by hiimamac View Post

Please PEOPLE.

Why are most ANTI MS users morons!!!

Dock = google YZ Dock, original NOT APPLE.
SEARCH=MS invented it, it came out first in OSX, then ViSTA
RESTORE=Then Time Machine, when it works of course.

I know people give Vista a bad rap but OS9 anyone? R U KIDDING?
What a joke.

The 50 lb imac? Seriously? Genius?

Now a MB with no firewire (= no backup, no cam corder = a way to justify getting pro's to use macbook pro's and charging $10 grand for a piece of memory? Genius? Really?

Long live EFI-X

A mac is just a ABIT/ASUS motherboard with Apple OS and shell.

Apple doesn't make memory, hard drives, motherboards, wafer fabs.

My goodness, why do pure Apple people refuse to act like idiots even after the Intel transition which saved them.

Powerbook = STUDIO ON THE ROAD!
Yeah right, it was pounced over and over by the PC.
post #96 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by hiimamac View Post

Dock = google YZ Dock, original NOT APPLE.

Original = NeXT

Quote:
Originally Posted by hiimamac View Post

SEARCH=MS invented it, it came out first in OSX, then ViSTA

Too broad a term. What does “search” mean? Apple had Sherlock search long before it was easy or fast to find files on the average PC.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hiimamac View Post

I know people give Vista a bad rap but OS9 anyone? R U KIDDING?
What a joke.

No it wasn't. It was one of the most reliable versions of the classic OS ever put out and served its purpose of allowing users to transition to OS X. It added the keychain (which others have copied), multiple users, software update, voice login and a string of other new features, including disc burning. Microsoft had Windows ME out at the same time. OS 9 was better.
post #97 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltimateKylie View Post

In addition the MAJORITY of profits are not from OS X or Mac Hardware but from the iPod and iPhone (albeit with roots in OS X, which itself has roots in BSD, which is free and open source).

OS X has its roots in NextStep, which was around long before FreeBSD.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hvidos View Post

So, you do realize that Apple copied their UI from Xerox long before Microsoft copied it from Apple, right?

And you do realise that the Xerox GUI was lacking many of the things we take for granted in modern GUIs today which were pioneered by the Macintosh? Overlapping Windows, proportionally spaced fonts, drop down menus etc.
post #98 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by hiimamac View Post

Please PEOPLE.

5000 posts in the 4 months since you joined - that is 40 posts per day. Were they all this high quality?

Yes, they have been, although large numbers of them are identical. He obviously speaks English as a fourth or fifth language, is stoned, is mentally challenged, is a paid Microsoft shill, is batshit crazy, or some combination of those possibilities.

I lean toward the paid shill theory though, because his screenname reveals the same misunderstanding of the "I'm a Mac" commercials as MS reveals in their "I'm a PC" response: confusing being a PC with being a PC user.

In any case, his incoherent and approximately meaningless diatribes are more than tiresome, I agree.
post #99 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by PXT View Post

My biggest concern as a consumer is that Apple could be tempted out of its winning formula by its increasing ability to compete with Microsoft.

I think Apple has realized it's better to focus simply on making the best..of computers, phones, etc. That includes the best innovative featuresets, the latest hardware and most logical 'under the hood' stuff / OS capabiilities.

The growth, $ and marketshare will follow... Apple's playing a better tune on all fronts. Of course having their own highly open / advanced / easy to develop for running across all their own hardware is perfect for them and ideal for consumers and most importantly developers

You be amazed how many ex-Windows / Java / Web developers I just met recently at a Vancouver, BC ad-hoc iPhone programmers meet-up - all have essentially 'switched' to developing on this platform! I bet this is happening in many cities around the world!
post #100 of 122
this isn't really possible to do but let's break out the numbers:

-if you remove the iphone and the ipod from Apple's quarter

-if you remove WinMo and zune from MS's quarter

what picture do you think this would paint overall?

Mac/Macbook/iMac sales are steadily getting better now that virtualization on Intel proc's allow for easier compatibility with essential Windows functions, but let's not kid ourselves. The Windows OS/Office slice of the pie dwarfs everything.
post #101 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcy View Post

this isn't really possible to do but let's break out the numbers:

-if you remove the iphone and the ipod from Apple's quarter

-if you remove WinMo and zune from MS's quarter

what picture do you think this would paint overall?

Mac/Macbook/iMac sales are steadily getting better now that virtualization on Intel proc's allow for easier compatibility with essential Windows functions, but let's not kid ourselves. The Windows OS/Office slice of the pie dwarfs everything.

Software unti sales, sure, but if you only add up Apple's personal computing revenue and Microsoft's personal computing revenue wouldn't Apple still have about 1/4 of the revenue MS makes from 90% marketshare? MS' still kicks financial butt, but not nearly as much as OS marketshare would imply.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #102 of 122
I have stock in both Apple and MS and this is some good news. Apple's stock has dropped huge recently and been hanging around $96, I actually purchased more @ $87, while MS has stayed within the $25 range.

I know this is an Apple biased site but there is some haters here to a point where you see rage instead of sensibility.

I'm invested in both since they are both great companies. I use both Vista, no problems to date on my HP desktop and Vaio laptop, and OS X with my wife's macbook. I like both operating systems and have no biased to one as long as I have MS Office available. I have encountered the same amount of crashes on both systems but have the patience to reboot, no biggie. I can say this about Vista, it may have stubbled out the blocks but the system presently has been stable IMO. Vista has the stereotype of the hospitality industry where one complaint = 10 complaints, while OS X problems are characterized as "glitches" where it will fix itself but continue on. I have some friends who can't comprehend that OS X has problems also just like Vista, it's just not magnified as much.

This is my first post, it may seem I'm defending MS but I'm not. I'm just speaking of experience. I currently own two iPhones, one iPod classic, plus my wife's Macbook.

I think Apple fans are the most sensible people but there is also fans that have hatred of MS running in their blood.
"Microsoft was supposed to be the evil one, but now you guys are busting down doors in Palo Alto while Commandant Gates is ridding the world of mosquitoes."
Reply
"Microsoft was supposed to be the evil one, but now you guys are busting down doors in Palo Alto while Commandant Gates is ridding the world of mosquitoes."
Reply
post #103 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Software unti sales, sure, but if you only add up Apple's personal computing revenue and Microsoft's personal computing revenue wouldn't Apple still have about 1/4 of the revenue MS makes from 90% marketshare? MS' still kicks financial butt, but not nearly as much as OS marketshare would imply.

i'm sorry but are you comparing apple's hardware + software sales vs. MS's OS license sales? so if you're comparing units where it's priced at $1000-$3000 (hardware + OS) versus a Dell license of $100-$300, then you don't have to sell many bundled units to look respectable against the smaller units

i.e., there is no "Microsoft computer"
post #104 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcy View Post

i'm sorry but are you comparing apple's hardware + software sales vs. MS's OS license sales? so if you're comparing units where it's priced at $1000-$3000 (hardware + OS) versus a Dell license of $100-$300, then you don't have to sell many bundled units to look respectable against the smaller units

i.e., there is no "Microsoft computer"

Yes, you made a post suggesting the removal of Apple's and MS' non-PC business. You then stated that "MS still dwarfs everything". I then pointed out that if you remove the products you suggesting (ie: only focusing on personal computing revenue) that MS is only takes in about 4x the revenue. The point being that OS percentage may look impressive, but HW sales count for a lot more in both revenue and profit.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #105 of 122
Whoever wrote this is an idiot. MS is more profitable (both overall and by revenue), has a greater market share and distributes cash back to shareholders. Boasting about how much cash Apple has is idiotic. Anyone in finance will tell you that holding on to cash like that is inefficient, irresponsible and bad for shareholders. It's called a lazy balance sheet. The cash is going to earn a low rate of interest and would be better in the hands of shareholders who could reinvest it. Apple should do what MS has been doing: share buy-backs, dividends and acquisitions. It should not hold on to billions in cash. Apple is doing well, but the fact that you claim that MS's results are embarrassing only makes you look obtuse.
post #106 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiro View Post

No, dividends are not the reasons companies exist. Companies exist to make profits.

Which are then meant to be given to the people that own the company. There's no point buying part of a company if your not getting a dividend out of it. Think about it, if you start a company your aim is to make money from the profits it makes, you don't just leave it all in the companies bank account.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiro View Post

Apple did not "copy" the Xerox GUI. They got permission to use it as the wunderkinds in charge Xerox-PARC couldn't see how it would be applicable to their document reproduction business.

When you get permission it is not "copy", but "evolved from", or "originated with". The original idea folks still got all the credit for coming up with it and thanks was given for allowing the use.

Still not self invented as Apple fans seem to like to believe everything Apple do is.
post #107 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by KenC View Post

@ruffryder,

You're right about the 75% growth, which is a minor detail, since as you note, it's still a very high growth rate. I calculated that a year ago, if you did non-GAAP accounting you might have $6.6B in sales, not $6.2B. Compared to either number $11.7B is huge!

Where you're wrong is the second point you make. If you listened to the conference call, you would have heard Oppenheimer go thru how they calculated the non-GAAP figs. They backed out the previous deferred revenue, before adding in the current revenue. They're NOT that stupid. And, GAAP would allow this kind of accounting if Apple would only charge for significant feature upgrades to the iPhone and ATV. So far, this kind of accounting has saved iPhone users, one fee over the last 15 months. I think Apple has lost far more in analyst confusion than it has gained in goodwill by not charging its iPhone owners $10 for one new feature set.


Point taken, However, GAAP would definitely allow for them to push up point updates without charging, companies do it all the time, and do not use subscription accounting(this is just the excuse Apple gives to sound good to investors). I believe the real reason apple reports like this is to manage spikes in the reported numbers, and to keep more consistent earnings growth. Yes it is easy to derive the real numbers with a little bit of algebra, but companies like to report certain numbers, for certain reasons. Look at the press the reported numbers get, the footnotes don't get the press.

This being said I agree with most of your retorts.
post #108 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by timgriff84 View Post

Which are then meant to be given to the people that own the company. There's no point buying part of a company if your not getting a dividend out of it. Think about it, if you start a company your aim is to make money from the profits it makes, you don't just leave it all in the companies bank account.

I agree, but Hiro is correct about the timing of the dividend. Companies can and should have a declared dividend policy, and distribute dividends regularly rather than in one giant lump as MS did. It would kind of make sense if this was a one-time lump, together with a "from now on" policy of quarterly or annual dividends on a smaller scale, but that is not what they did. This excludes them from being considered a "value stock".
post #109 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by zunx View Post

The day 25% of users know about the Mac, Microsoft and Windows will be history in three years.

+80% of consumers will accept/put up with mediocrity.
post #110 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by hiimamac View Post

My goodness, why do pure Apple people refuse to act like idiots...

???
Because most of them aren't idiots.
Why should they act like something they aren't?
post #111 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bowser View Post

"Everyone still runs Office".

This is based only on the limited sample that is covered by your experience. There are plenty of companies that don't use Office, and at my University, a good 1/3 of all my colleagues and students use iWork instead of Office. So before you go making these claims, I suggest you look outside of the realm of your own navel.

So you criticized his use of a limited sample and then used one of your own?
post #112 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by a85 View Post

Whoever wrote this is an idiot. MS is more profitable (both overall and by revenue), has a greater market share and distributes cash back to shareholders. Boasting about how much cash Apple has is idiotic. Anyone in finance will tell you that holding on to cash like that is inefficient, irresponsible and bad for shareholders. It's called a lazy balance sheet. The cash is going to earn a low rate of interest and would be better in the hands of shareholders who could reinvest it. Apple should do what MS has been doing: share buy-backs, dividends and acquisitions. It should not hold on to billions in cash. Apple is doing well, but the fact that you claim that MS's results are embarrassing only makes you look obtuse.

Steve would look pretty stupid if he distributed cash as dividends, and then ended up going bankrupt during the recession because he could not borrow the needed cash from the broken capital markets. I am happy he is holding on to the cash.

Where else would you invest the money anyway? Every other investment vehicle is crap right now. If he distributed cash I would just reinvest it in Apple stock.

Quote:
Originally Posted by timgriff84 View Post

Which are then meant to be given to the people that own the company. There's no point buying part of a company if your not getting a dividend out of it. Think about it, if you start a company your aim is to make money from the profits it makes, you don't just leave it all in the companies bank account.

Current dividends + discounted value of potential future dividends are what matter. The reason why Apple does not need to issue a dividend is that people expect the earnings to turn into dividends in the future. Earnings are a proxy value for the dividends that could have been issued (or will be issued in the future), so the stock has value even if dividends are not currently issued.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #113 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978 View Post

Current dividends + discounted value of potential future dividends are what matter. The reason why Apple does not need to issue a dividend is that people expect the earnings to turn into dividends in the future. Earnings are a proxy value for the dividends that could have been issued (or will be issued in the future), so the stock has value even if dividends are not currently issued.

That is absolutely right. The problem is that there was a trend by tech companies to never ever distribute any dividend. Microsoft broke this mold, but in a weird way.

Apple has enough cash to sustain it through 6-7 years of zero sales. That is far too much for a cushion.
post #114 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by synp View Post

Apple has enough cash to sustain it through 6-7 years of zero sales. That is far too much for a cushion.

Unless they plan on spending it, to buy Adobe say (or even better, to make a great photoshop competitor).
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #115 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwdav View Post

I saw it as a way for the majority shareholders to get the cash out of the company for themselves, at the expense of smaller shareholders.

I wonder who the majority shareholders are ...

I wouldn't disagree with that. Especially if the big shareholders quietly threatened to walk and sell their positions. Comes out to the same thing I mentioned earlier though, a lame attempt to appease shareholders for fill-in-the-blank-reason.
.
Reply
.
Reply
post #116 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by hiimamac View Post

Please PEOPLE.

Why are most ANTI MS users morons!!!

Dock = google YZ Dock, original NOT APPLE.
SEARCH=MS invented it, it came out first in OSX, then ViSTA
RESTORE=Then Time Machine, when it works of course.

You realize the Dock was invented around 1987/8 by NeXT??? About a decade and a half before MS brought a variable called DockProperty to their .NET framework. And that Apple bought NeXT?

MS's DockProperty serves an entirely different purpose than NeXT's or OS X's Dock.

Do we want to mention the OS 8.5 appearance of Sherlock? In 1998? About 2 years before Windows Desktop Search search debuted in Win2K? Both companies had ping-ponged which implementation was better since.

So if you are going to say some group is moronic, I suggest you look in the mirror then check your facts before you paint yourself with your own label.


On the not moronic front, just a less than wonderful choice for an example: I have yet to talk to a single human being that successfully used Windows Restore. Yes it beat TM to deployment, but I know of several circumstances where colleagues have used TM to recover successfully following: a stolen MBP, orange juice in the keyboard of a MBP, HD failure in a original MacPro, Hard drive upgrades(3 different users, one was me), HD failure & replacement following MB falling off a lectern. System restore can't do ANY of that!
.
Reply
.
Reply
post #117 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Mozzarella View Post

According to Google Finance...
MSFT: 198.86B
APPL: 85.62B

Microsoft has 9X the market share but only 2.33X the market share.
I believe Apple could reach a very happy balance with only 20-25% market share.
I hope they avoid the pitfalls of getting too big.

Reminds me a of an old story.
Two business men were discussing Apple and Microsoft.
One man dismissed Apple as having only 5% of the market.
The other man reminded him..."Yes but it is the top 5% of the market."

-->
Apple has 95% market share to gain. Microsoft has nothing but 95% to loose to others. Apple has a very strong product portfolio and a loyal customer base. Microsoft has only the OS and few applications and few peripherals and a customer base which is shrinking. Tell me how many percentage is happy with the Vista and 'nograding' technology that comes with Vista (if you want to buy XP - you have to buy Vista at a higher price and downgrade to XP by downloading XP again)

It is all Apple to blame for the openness that they gave the Leopard preview much before the actual release - Microsoft used it as a platform to 'copy'. Now that snow Leopard is not so 'open' Microsoft and Balmer has no clue on what it has. Windows 7 is going to be more joke than Vista. Common give me a break - how can a mega super patchwork of windows compete with Leopard?

<--
post #118 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978 View Post

Steve would look pretty stupid if he distributed cash as dividends, and then ended up going bankrupt during the recession because he could not borrow the needed cash from the broken capital markets. I am happy he is holding on to the cash.

Where else would you invest the money anyway? Every other investment vehicle is crap right now. If he distributed cash I would just reinvest it in Apple stock.



Current dividends + discounted value of potential future dividends are what matter. The reason why Apple does not need to issue a dividend is that people expect the earnings to turn into dividends in the future. Earnings are a proxy value for the dividends that could have been issued (or will be issued in the future), so the stock has value even if dividends are not currently issued.

Exactly, you could reinvest it in APPL. You could do whatever you wanted with the money. Invest it in VW maybe. The point is, it's the shareholders' cash and not Steve's. It is unnecessary to hold on to that amount of money. Apple is unlikely to go bankrupt with over 5 billion in cash, let alone 20. Apple is doing well, it should at least distribute part of its income so shareholders can use it as they will.
post #119 of 122
No. It is not the boards job to put found cash in shareholders pockets today. It is the Boards job to bring the best long term value to the shareholders, and it is debatable if a large one-time dividend qualifies as best value when looked at over the long term.
.
Reply
.
Reply
post #120 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by a85 View Post

Exactly, you could reinvest it in APPL. You could do whatever you wanted with the money. Invest it in VW maybe. The point is, it's the shareholders' cash and not Steve's. It is unnecessary to hold on to that amount of money. Apple is unlikely to go bankrupt with over 5 billion in cash, let alone 20. Apple is doing well, it should at least distribute part of its income so shareholders can use it as they will.

Ford distributed 20 billion a few years back, bet they feel pretty stupid now. Japan went through our current pain 25 years ago, and their economy stock market has gone down ever since - I want Apple to keep the money at least until we get out of this mess.

But it doesn't matter that much, I sold my apple stake at $107. Hopefully they drop back to 90 and I will buy it back again - one more run from 90 to 107 and I will be green for the year.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple earnings, profits, and cash embarrass Microsoft