Big holiday season predicted to be just the beginning for Apple

13»

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 60
    cameronjcameronj Posts: 2,357member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by teckstud View Post


    Don't you have then more options available? Sell, etc?



    No...
  • Reply 42 of 60
    cameronjcameronj Posts: 2,357member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by NeilM View Post


    Because that strategy worked so well in the housing market...



    Yes we should all only pay cash for everything.
  • Reply 43 of 60
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AdamIIGS View Post


    The reason for no split is so that it makes it harder for small movers / day trading having a large effect on your stock price / company valuation.



    That is irrelevant for a $150+ billion mkt cap company like Apple. Unless you think that being able to sell one share at $95 (i.e., 0.0000000000067%) will move Apple's stock price significantly differently than being forced to to sell one share at $190 (0.00000000133%) - assuming, for the sake of argument, a 2-for-1 split.
  • Reply 44 of 60
    cameronjcameronj Posts: 2,357member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wordwise View Post


    I thought splits only 'helped' when a company declared dividends - usually per share. If you buy one, and then it splits in two and they declare dividends per share, you get double the dividends...



    False
  • Reply 45 of 60
    cameronjcameronj Posts: 2,357member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by xwiredtva View Post


    Someone once said on CNBC (back when Apple was below $50 a share in 2005) that if Apple were to release div's on stock even at 1% you could expect the stock to triple overnight... I bought in at that time ($42.xx) with all our savings... Still waiting on the Divs... I'm not upset and I didn't file the class action BS that went out either. I vote with the board because it seems to work.



    First, there's no way anyone ever said that on CNBC. Not that CNBC is the source of all that is true, but that's absurd. Second, if you believe that any stock will triple based on news like that, I have a bridge to sell you.
  • Reply 46 of 60
    cameronjcameronj Posts: 2,357member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post


    Interesting. I don't really follow these matters (mutual funds for me, too many other things to think about) but I would have expected that there might be some slight longer term effect, psychological, based on the perception of value (i.e., people being used to it be "higher"), that might keep it slightly elevated relative to the market. But, maybe all the computerized trading wipes out these sorts of effects, except when the whole market takes leave of it's senses.



    When a change happens that does not affect in any way the REAL value of something, the effect on its price cannot be "long term." The logical extension of what you expected above would be stocks that split regularly would have a far higher returns than stocks that did not, resulting in every company splitting its stock regularly, resulting in the returns on those stocks to fall back to the mean.



    The impossibility of higher returns caused by splits is self evident and self reinforcing.
  • Reply 47 of 60
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by aaarrrgggh View Post


    Splits are useful in many ways; as Techstud says, you can sell a little (but keep it a full lot)....



    Seriously? Because you can sell one share for $95 instead of being forced to settle for having to sell the equivalent of, say, two, and be forced to take $190 in cash? That is 'useful?'



    Why not make it even more useful. How about Apple do a 20-for-1 split so that a shareholder can sell one share to raise enough liquidity to buy a pack of cigarettes or a few songs on iTunes (after transaction cost)?
  • Reply 48 of 60
    cameronjcameronj Posts: 2,357member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    Seriously? Because you can sell one share for $95 instead of being forced to settle for having to sell the equivalent of, say, two, and be forced to take $190 in cash? That is 'useful?'



    Why not make it even more useful. How about Apple do a 20-for-1 split so that a shareholder can sell one share to raise enough liquidity to buy a pack of cigarettes or a few songs on iTunes (after transaction cost)?



    People are really dumb about stock splits. Thankfully, any effect that that stupidity has only lasts a day before it is reversed.
  • Reply 49 of 60
    nikon133nikon133 Posts: 2,600member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by buceta View Post


    Lets hope this holiday season will spell the beginning of the end for the blackberry. Also lets hope it will squish the Android back out of existence.



    Why Blackberry? Isn't Nokia actually Microsoft of the smartphone market?
  • Reply 50 of 60
    teckstudteckstud Posts: 6,476member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    Seriously? Because you can sell one share for $95 instead of being forced to settle for having to sell the equivalent of, say, two, and be forced to take $190 in cash? That is 'useful?'



    Why not make it even more useful. How about Apple do a 20-for-1 split so that a shareholder can sell one share to raise enough liquidity to buy a pack of cigarettes or a few songs on iTunes (after transaction cost)?



    It's called being conservative- you don't have to give it all up so fast. Sell a little here and there.
  • Reply 51 of 60
    thomprthompr Posts: 1,521member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    Yes, that.



    Two, the tablet/pad/whatever (on which many of the '10 numbers are premised) is still vaporware. We have to see what it is, what it does, how it is priced, how many people are interested, how it performs in the wild, and so forth. I feel like there could be a speculative bubble on AAPL coming around the Tablet. Indeed, the perception that such a price runup could happen will make it a self-fulfilling prophecy.



    Three, I am worried about re-establishing the "Apple is SJ and SJ is Apple" association. It brings back possible volatility in AAPL stock price, just when the market seemed to have started to shrug off the issue.



    I don't think ANYBODY has tablet sales as a significant earnings contributor in their models. Most of the mammoth earnings are still indicated by huge iPhone estimates and increasing Mac unit sales. Many analysts provide the bases for their earniings and stock price targets. Show me the one that has anything in there for a non-announced tablet product.
  • Reply 52 of 60
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by thompr View Post


    I don't think ANYBODY has tablet sales as a significant earnings contributor ......



    Really? See James Stewart's column today in wsj.com, on Amazon v. Kindle: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...701250952.html



    (i) Where did I say anything about analysts? and (ii) I specifcally said, "I feel there could be a speculative bubble coming...."



    If that is not a hedged statement, I don't know what is.
  • Reply 53 of 60
    cameronjcameronj Posts: 2,357member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    Really? See James Stewart's column today in wsj.com, on Amazon v. Kindle: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...701250952.html



    (i) Where did I say anything about analysts? and (ii) I specifcally said, "I feel there could be a speculative bubble coming...."



    If that is not a hedged statement, I don't know what is.



    The speculative bubble has already happened. Has everyone been asleep for the past 6 months? The markets will be lower in January than they are now.
  • Reply 54 of 60
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cameronj View Post


    The speculative bubble has already happened. Has everyone been asleep for the past 6 months? The markets will be lower in January than they are now.



    While I tend to agree with that vis-a-vis the market as a whole - the valuations are way ahead of the fundamentals at this point - I am not so sure that Apple's bubble "has already happened."



    And, I certainly don't know enough about the markets (nor am I sure anyone does) to say whether it will be in January or before or after, by when the markets will be lower.



    Oh, I have not at all been asleep for the past 6 months.
  • Reply 55 of 60
    tundraboytundraboy Posts: 1,893member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by aaarrrgggh View Post


    Well, look at what dividends (and share buybacks) did to MSFT. If Apple can manage continued 20-25% growth, I am happy to let them hold on to the cash in hopes of making good strategic moves.



    All you should do with the dividends (at less than 4% or so) is reinvest them, so it doesn't really change the picture much.



    You're right. But you failed to note that you are actually reinvesting pre-tax dollars when a company doesn't pay dividends.



    Let me add a few more points. Here are the basics of the economics behind not paying out dividends. Notice how the price of a mutual fund share falls the day it pays out a dividend or a realized gain. If corporations don't pay out dividends, then the value of those dividends just get piled into the stock price. The main difference is that this value has to be estimated by the stock market (buyers & sellers) rather than have a hard number in the form of a dividend per share payout.



    What's the advantage of incorporating the value of foregone dividends in the stock price? Instead of paying the regular income tax rates on the dividends as soon as they get paid out, you pay capital gains rates (much lower on long term holdings) on the stock when you choose to sell them to cash out.



    So with AAPL, because they don't pay out dividends, not only are you reinvesting pre-tax dollars into Apple stock but when you cash out long term holdings, you pay a lower tax! You get a bonus at both ends.
  • Reply 56 of 60
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cameronj View Post


    Yes we should all only pay cash for everything.



    It could be very soon we have to start trading in gold or silver coins with the very real threat of hyperinflation. As a matter of opinion, AAPL may even double in value based on the dollar's plummeting worth.
  • Reply 57 of 60
    cubertcubert Posts: 728member
    "Robert Cihra with Caris & Company"



    So thats what that cow has been doing lately!
  • Reply 58 of 60
    cameronjcameronj Posts: 2,357member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post


    It could be very soon we have to start trading in gold or silver coins with the very real threat of hyperinflation. As a matter of opinion, AAPL may even double in value based on the dollar's plummeting worth.



    Considering how much of AAPL's value is based on the dollar denominated cash holdings Apple has, perhaps not
  • Reply 59 of 60
    newbeenewbee Posts: 2,055member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    Splits do nothing to create or destroy value, since EPS falls commensurately. It is no different than my saying "I feel richer because I have two $5 bills in my pocket than one $10 bill."



    That's true, but more people will buy at lower prices thus driving share prices up. Plus if shares go up $1, I'd rather own twice as many shares. Your reply is correct only at the time of the split because prices rarely remain static, especially nowadays ... a lot of volatility.
  • Reply 60 of 60
    thomprthompr Posts: 1,521member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    Really? See James Stewart's column today in wsj.com, on Amazon v. Kindle: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...701250952.html



    (i) Where did I say anything about analysts? and (ii) I specifcally said, "I feel there could be a speculative bubble coming...."



    If that is not a hedged statement, I don't know what is.



    Well, we all come on here to share opinions and hopefully provide a unique perspective. Why waste all of our time with hedged statements? If you've got a great point to make, then make it with conviction.



    Whether Apple has a first year surprise or a complete flop on their hands with a (unannounced) tablet, it will pale in comparison to their current revenue and profit. Therefore, it would be foolish to look towards the tablet as a stock price driver.



    And, by the way, the quoted article says nothing about an Apple tablet.



    Thompson
Sign In or Register to comment.