Seriously, let's see how the economy plays out. In the current conditions, I don't see such a bullish case being made for any stock.
Yes, but you forget how Apple performed through the depths of the recession. Now that we're looking towards recovery, you somehow think they'll perform worse? This stock was recession-proof. Blowout quarter after blowout quarter.
Not sure what you are implying. AAPL first broke $200 in December 2007, IIRC. That was before the recession hit, as you may recall. The stock fell by 60% after that, and took nearly two years to get back to $200 due to the overwhelming pessimism of investors.
Actually, that drop was mostly related to Steve's health. Overall, AAPL greatly outperformed the market. Apple benefits from a flight to quality every time.
Not sure what you are implying. AAPL first broke $200 in December 2007, IIRC. That was before the recession hit, as you may recall. The stock fell by 60% after that, and took nearly two years to get back to $200 due to the overwhelming pessimism of investors.
Apple is not immune to the swings of the larger market, as there is a herd-mentality that governs much of the market. The fundamental performance of the company has been flawless during this time, though. That's the sign to watch for, as it implies the stock will correct itself (upward, of course) once the jitters are shaken from the market.
Seriously, who else can match Apple for product innovation? Who else can create revenue and margin like they can?
They sold 3m devices in the first 60 days, all at a price of at least $500 gross, in a category that did not even exist before, with estimated gross margin of about 50%. (isuppli cost estimate). In other words, $1.5 billion of new gross revenue, and $750 million of new gross margin! in 60 days! Are you kidding me! On an entirely new product segment! Show me another company that can do that.
They then proceeded to sell 1.7m iphone 4's in the first 3 days! Gross revenue at at least $400 per unit (including the ATT contribution) , gross margin also at least 50% (again using isuppli component cost). So in 3 days that is $0.7B gross revenue and $0.35B gross margin. Wow!
That's all true, but the market also works on herd mentality and psychology. Apple's market cap is probably too high, but it doesn't matter because sometimes stock becomes its own currency, although that can also be a danger, as it was during the dot.com failures.
Is Apple really worth the combination of any two of the following?
And if Apple's stock does hit 300, it would be more like any three of the above, assuming they don't also rise in tandem.
(And I say this as a happy owner of Apple stock and with the price down a bit today, I might buy some more.)
On the other hand, we are becoming so used to "big numbers", I don't think we appreciate just what Apple has accomplished in the numbers you quote. The time it took all manufacturers combined to sell just one million units is as follows for these other technologies (data from the Yankee Group):
Satellite TV: 144 months
Cable TV: 144 months
Online Subscription Services: 114 months
VCRs: 58 months
DVRs: 53 months
Analog TV: 40 months
Radio: 39 months
MP3 players: 28 months
CD players: 28 months
XM Satellite radio: 23 months
DVD players: 21 months.
Apple has accomplished this in just a few days.
But having said that, I see dangers lurking. Apple's arrogance can really hurt the company as people are starting to not see Apple as the hip underdog, but more like Microsoft. It seems to be starting to make engineering mistakes which are probably driven by a lack of proper comprehensive testing, which I bet is not happening because of Apple's paranoia over product release leaks. But there's no point exerting such control over product leaks if the products are going to suffer because of it. (Was the phone not properly tested because it was secured to a table at Apple and therefore, never held in someone's hand?) If the antenna issue is really a big issue on the new phone, that's going to negatively impact the perception that Apple always executes brilliantly. And their unwillingness to help solve the issue by giving away a piece of plastic that probably costs them 20 cents to make is obnoxious.
Apple traditionally was always pushing a high-end experience, but now Jobs talks about how 720p video is "good enough" (in regards to the debate about Blu-ray inclusion) or how we're "holding the phone wrong." He seems to want to de-emphasize the traditional computer so that Apple can control the entire experience, including the type of apps we use and access to the file system.
I'm a lot less interested in Apple if it only wants to make appliances in the future and is willing to settle for lower quality in order to attract the masses. Apple created its own retail experience because it was unhappy how other retailers presented Apple products, but now some products will be sold in Wal-Mart? What does that do to Apple's image?
Mmmm.. I remember someone telling me the same thing about the $200 barrier
In all likelihood they're right. The economy is shaky right now and the stock market is quite nervous. AAPL has this potential (and the bugs and whatnot with iOS 4 and the iPhone 4 aren't going to change that), but not until the economy finds its footing again. And even then it assumes continued stellar performance from Apple going forward (not just doing as well as they are, but continued trampling of their previous exceptional performance).
That's all true, but the market also works on herd mentality and psychology. Apple's market cap is probably too high, but it doesn't matter because sometimes stock becomes its own currency, although that can also be a danger, as it was during the dot.com failures.
Is Apple really worth the combination of any two of the following?
Sure. This is pretty elementary. Apple trades at such a high value, and is projected so favorably, because they continually innovate and progress their company in such a way that it grows at a rate unheard of in most other big businesses. I could go into specifics (Toyota: cars tied strongly to economy, recent brake issues; Intel: relatively stagnant growth; Citigroup: banking/finances) but all it comes down to is an expectation that Apple will continue performing as they have in the past.
If you accept (as I do) that Apple is in the cat-bird's seat for the entire next generation computation model (i.e. its mobile ecosystem), then it absolutely is.
At least that's where my bet is. Time will tell.
But for now, these short term ups/downs are just noise.
Sure. This is pretty elementary. Apple trades at such a high value, and is projected so favorably, because they continually innovate and progress their company in such a way that it grows at a rate unheard of in most other big businesses. I could go into specifics (Toyota: cars tied strongly to economy, recent brake issues; Intel: relatively stagnant growth; Citigroup: banking/finances) but all it comes down to is an expectation that Apple will continue performing as they have in the past.
all those car companies have 2 r to 40 yr pension plans to fund
they all have billion dollar debts
they have over paid workers who hate their jobs
they ship very heavy products that cost a fortune to ship
apple has no pension to fund like the size like car companies are sadled with
>>>in any case apple employee pension funds are fully funded by apple
apple pay no dividends
apple has 55 bn in the bank by 2012
apple has no debt
apple has no debt
minus the 42 bn right now from the share price and what is left .
then include 18 million macs a yr in sales
55 million phones a yr
32 millon ipods a yr in sales
every yr these number grow
ipad sale 10 milion a yr
factor imna 32% percent profit rate accross the board
apple use near slave labor in red china to keep it cost down
even after 30percent pay raises by foxcomm apple still will give some payment to those slave workers
imported from poor harbin area of china
apple factory workers have no union's or pension's
apple is 70 percent green and getting greener by the day
Then they estimate earnings multiples (P/E).......The P/E assumption here is the one to question, IMO.
Absolutely.
What is interesting, however, is that the forward P/E of Apple at the current price is less than 16 (the 'consensus' estimate for Apple's forward EPS is ~$14).
I say 'interesting,' because 16 is not a terribly high number for a company like Apple (as you probably know, the P/E of the S&P500 has averaged 15-16 in the past century).
Yes, but you forget how Apple performed through the depths of the recession. Now that we're looking towards recovery, you somehow think they'll perform worse? This stock was recession-proof. Blowout quarter after blowout quarter.
Actually he doesnt; he is worried about multiple erosion. Earnings growth only goes so far without PE expansion.
Where I sit (ignoring the 20% drop in my portfolio this week), I don't see the economic problems. I see continuing unemployment, but I also see a whole lot of people trying to hire, including myself. I see businesses starting up deferred capital expenditure just like we saw in 2004-2005. I see a single small economy in Europe having real economic stress, disproportionally impacting the exchange rate. I see all the ingredients for an artificial dip in the market by the folks who profit on volatility.
In AAPL, I see a stock with a dramatically smaller percentage of their customers in serious financial stress... and I keep buying!
That's all true, but the market also works on herd mentality and psychology. Apple's market cap is probably too high, but it doesn't matter because sometimes stock becomes its own currency, although that can also be a danger, as it was during the dot.com failures.
Is Apple really worth the combination of any two of the following?
And if Apple's stock does hit 300, it would be more like any three of the above, assuming they don't also rise in tandem.
(And I say this as a happy owner of Apple stock and with the price down a bit today, I might buy some more.)
On the other hand, we are becoming so used to "big numbers", I don't think we appreciate just what Apple has accomplished in the numbers you quote. The time it took all manufacturers combined to sell just one million units is as follows for these other technologies (data from the Yankee Group):
Satellite TV: 144 months
Cable TV: 144 months
Online Subscription Services: 114 months
VCRs: 58 months
DVRs: 53 months
Analog TV: 40 months
Radio: 39 months
MP3 players: 28 months
CD players: 28 months
XM Satellite radio: 23 months
DVD players: 21 months.
Apple has accomplished this in just a few days.
But having said that, I see dangers lurking. Apple's arrogance can really hurt the company as people are starting to not see Apple as the hip underdog, but more like Microsoft. It seems to be starting to make engineering mistakes which are probably driven by a lack of proper comprehensive testing, which I bet is not happening because of Apple's paranoia over product release leaks. But there's no point exerting such control over product leaks if the products are going to suffer because of it. (Was the phone not properly tested because it was secured to a table at Apple and therefore, never held in someone's hand?) If the antenna issue is really a big issue on the new phone, that's going to negatively impact the perception that Apple always executes brilliantly. And their unwillingness to help solve the issue by giving away a piece of plastic that probably costs them 20 cents to make is obnoxious.
Apple traditionally was always pushing a high-end experience, but now Jobs talks about how 720p video is "good enough" (in regards to the debate about Blu-ray inclusion) or how we're "holding the phone wrong." He seems to want to de-emphasize the traditional computer so that Apple can control the entire experience, including the type of apps we use and access to the file system.
I'm a lot less interested in Apple if it only wants to make appliances in the future and is willing to settle for lower quality in order to attract the masses. Apple created its own retail experience because it was unhappy how other retailers presented Apple products, but now some products will be sold in Wal-Mart? What does that do to Apple's image?
iffy post
some great facts
some good questions
most people cannot tell the diff bet 720p 1080p
its not that 720 p is good enough
its that the screen size needs certain levels
42 in or bigger needs 720 or higher
48 in or bigger need 1080p peridot
computer screens need far less for
its tiny real estate thana 90 in plasma
3D set
so bluray for apple as opposed to itunes HD is a non starter
apple HD rocks
blu ray should be free
bluray on my 42 plasma rocks
apple HD ported from my MBP15IN with no sound to my TV rocks
bluray wins by a hair
anyway apple is a company
apple is not some sort of cult or feeling or even an idea
apple is a for profit company
apple is nice to it clients because thats good biz
apple has zero feelings
so dude re think part of your post
80% of everyone loved msft and still does
apple will always be loved greatly for the great happiness it gives its buyers
the 160g ipod is maybe the break thru product of all time
even the silly white plastic MB is fantastic at under 1150$
the ipad and ios4 will win converts for decades to come
itouches accross the board have thrill a whole new non tech crowd beyond belief
3rd world people living here with no devices cept cell phones have bought the touch in droves
What is interesting, however, is that the forward P/E of Apple at the current price is less than 16 (the 'consensus' estimate for Apple's forward EPS is ~$14).
I say 'interesting,' because 16 is not a terribly high number for a company like Apple (as you probably know, the P/E of the S&P500 has averaged 15-16 in the past century).
question for you dude !!
if you minus 42 bn in apple bank from its share price
if you minus 42 bn in apple bank from its share price
what is the real aapl share price ??
thanks for the help
That's very simple. Assuming 'cash' is worth 'cash' (perhaps not too bad of an assumption), the non-cash (i.e., the 'operating') part of Apple is worth $225B - $42B = $183B.
Seriously, let's see how the economy plays out. In the current conditions, I don't see such a bullish case being made for any stock.
All analyst do is GUESS based on sales and earning, etc. The real question is the market could tank YET AGAIN - Double Dip (HOPE NOT!) but its looking bad right now. Earnings season should start and help give us a boost but don't it will hold onto any gains after the earnings season is over.
Jobs and Housing needs to be addressed - So we will all have Gov't HEALTH CARE but who will have a JOB??
I did have a target price of $350-400 before the ipad.
Comments
It would be enlightening to see how accurate these analysts are in predicting a stock price.
Seriously, let's see how the economy plays out. In the current conditions, I don't see such a bullish case being made for any stock.
Yes, but you forget how Apple performed through the depths of the recession. Now that we're looking towards recovery, you somehow think they'll perform worse? This stock was recession-proof. Blowout quarter after blowout quarter.
Not sure what you are implying. AAPL first broke $200 in December 2007, IIRC. That was before the recession hit, as you may recall. The stock fell by 60% after that, and took nearly two years to get back to $200 due to the overwhelming pessimism of investors.
Actually, that drop was mostly related to Steve's health. Overall, AAPL greatly outperformed the market. Apple benefits from a flight to quality every time.
Not sure what you are implying. AAPL first broke $200 in December 2007, IIRC. That was before the recession hit, as you may recall. The stock fell by 60% after that, and took nearly two years to get back to $200 due to the overwhelming pessimism of investors.
Apple is not immune to the swings of the larger market, as there is a herd-mentality that governs much of the market. The fundamental performance of the company has been flawless during this time, though. That's the sign to watch for, as it implies the stock will correct itself (upward, of course) once the jitters are shaken from the market.
Seriously, who else can match Apple for product innovation? Who else can create revenue and margin like they can?
They sold 3m devices in the first 60 days, all at a price of at least $500 gross, in a category that did not even exist before, with estimated gross margin of about 50%. (isuppli cost estimate). In other words, $1.5 billion of new gross revenue, and $750 million of new gross margin! in 60 days! Are you kidding me! On an entirely new product segment! Show me another company that can do that.
They then proceeded to sell 1.7m iphone 4's in the first 3 days! Gross revenue at at least $400 per unit (including the ATT contribution) , gross margin also at least 50% (again using isuppli component cost). So in 3 days that is $0.7B gross revenue and $0.35B gross margin. Wow!
That's all true, but the market also works on herd mentality and psychology. Apple's market cap is probably too high, but it doesn't matter because sometimes stock becomes its own currency, although that can also be a danger, as it was during the dot.com failures.
Is Apple really worth the combination of any two of the following?
HP, Toyota, Oracle, Intel, Citigroup, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Coke, Cisco.
And if Apple's stock does hit 300, it would be more like any three of the above, assuming they don't also rise in tandem.
(And I say this as a happy owner of Apple stock and with the price down a bit today, I might buy some more.)
On the other hand, we are becoming so used to "big numbers", I don't think we appreciate just what Apple has accomplished in the numbers you quote. The time it took all manufacturers combined to sell just one million units is as follows for these other technologies (data from the Yankee Group):
Satellite TV: 144 months
Cable TV: 144 months
Online Subscription Services: 114 months
VCRs: 58 months
DVRs: 53 months
Analog TV: 40 months
Radio: 39 months
MP3 players: 28 months
CD players: 28 months
XM Satellite radio: 23 months
DVD players: 21 months.
Apple has accomplished this in just a few days.
But having said that, I see dangers lurking. Apple's arrogance can really hurt the company as people are starting to not see Apple as the hip underdog, but more like Microsoft. It seems to be starting to make engineering mistakes which are probably driven by a lack of proper comprehensive testing, which I bet is not happening because of Apple's paranoia over product release leaks. But there's no point exerting such control over product leaks if the products are going to suffer because of it. (Was the phone not properly tested because it was secured to a table at Apple and therefore, never held in someone's hand?) If the antenna issue is really a big issue on the new phone, that's going to negatively impact the perception that Apple always executes brilliantly. And their unwillingness to help solve the issue by giving away a piece of plastic that probably costs them 20 cents to make is obnoxious.
Apple traditionally was always pushing a high-end experience, but now Jobs talks about how 720p video is "good enough" (in regards to the debate about Blu-ray inclusion) or how we're "holding the phone wrong." He seems to want to de-emphasize the traditional computer so that Apple can control the entire experience, including the type of apps we use and access to the file system.
I'm a lot less interested in Apple if it only wants to make appliances in the future and is willing to settle for lower quality in order to attract the masses. Apple created its own retail experience because it was unhappy how other retailers presented Apple products, but now some products will be sold in Wal-Mart? What does that do to Apple's image?
Mmmm.. I remember someone telling me the same thing about the $200 barrier
In all likelihood they're right. The economy is shaky right now and the stock market is quite nervous. AAPL has this potential (and the bugs and whatnot with iOS 4 and the iPhone 4 aren't going to change that), but not until the economy finds its footing again. And even then it assumes continued stellar performance from Apple going forward (not just doing as well as they are, but continued trampling of their previous exceptional performance).
That's all true, but the market also works on herd mentality and psychology. Apple's market cap is probably too high, but it doesn't matter because sometimes stock becomes its own currency, although that can also be a danger, as it was during the dot.com failures.
Is Apple really worth the combination of any two of the following?
HP, Toyota, Oracle, Intel, Citigroup, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Coke, Cisco.
Sure. This is pretty elementary. Apple trades at such a high value, and is projected so favorably, because they continually innovate and progress their company in such a way that it grows at a rate unheard of in most other big businesses. I could go into specifics (Toyota: cars tied strongly to economy, recent brake issues; Intel: relatively stagnant growth; Citigroup: banking/finances) but all it comes down to is an expectation that Apple will continue performing as they have in the past.
Is Apple really worth the combination of any two of the following?
HP, Toyota, Oracle, Intel, Citigroup, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Coke, Cisco.
If you accept (as I do) that Apple is in the cat-bird's seat for the entire next generation computation model (i.e. its mobile ecosystem), then it absolutely is.
At least that's where my bet is. Time will tell.
But for now, these short term ups/downs are just noise.
Sure. This is pretty elementary. Apple trades at such a high value, and is projected so favorably, because they continually innovate and progress their company in such a way that it grows at a rate unheard of in most other big businesses. I could go into specifics (Toyota: cars tied strongly to economy, recent brake issues; Intel: relatively stagnant growth; Citigroup: banking/finances) but all it comes down to is an expectation that Apple will continue performing as they have in the past.
all those car companies have 2 r to 40 yr pension plans to fund
they all have billion dollar debts
they have over paid workers who hate their jobs
they ship very heavy products that cost a fortune to ship
apple has no pension to fund like the size like car companies are sadled with
>>>in any case apple employee pension funds are fully funded by apple
apple pay no dividends
apple has 55 bn in the bank by 2012
apple has no debt
apple has no debt
minus the 42 bn right now from the share price and what is left .
then include 18 million macs a yr in sales
55 million phones a yr
32 millon ipods a yr in sales
every yr these number grow
ipad sale 10 milion a yr
factor imna 32% percent profit rate accross the board
apple use near slave labor in red china to keep it cost down
even after 30percent pay raises by foxcomm apple still will give some payment to those slave workers
imported from poor harbin area of china
apple factory workers have no union's or pension's
apple is 70 percent green and getting greener by the day
this in the future will be worth billions
with carbon cap and trade
most car companies suck .their stock is worthless
gm says so
at 65 cents a share gm warns you it has no value
apple is cheap at 299 a share
rant is over
mow your lawn
9
What will the market cap look like then?
Approximately $355B.
(FYI, Exxon Mobil, currently the most valuable company in the US, has a market cap of $267B.)
Then they estimate earnings multiples (P/E).......The P/E assumption here is the one to question, IMO.
Absolutely.
What is interesting, however, is that the forward P/E of Apple at the current price is less than 16 (the 'consensus' estimate for Apple's forward EPS is ~$14).
I say 'interesting,' because 16 is not a terribly high number for a company like Apple (as you probably know, the P/E of the S&P500 has averaged 15-16 in the past century).
Yes, but you forget how Apple performed through the depths of the recession. Now that we're looking towards recovery, you somehow think they'll perform worse? This stock was recession-proof. Blowout quarter after blowout quarter.
Actually he doesnt; he is worried about multiple erosion. Earnings growth only goes so far without PE expansion.
Where I sit (ignoring the 20% drop in my portfolio this week), I don't see the economic problems. I see continuing unemployment, but I also see a whole lot of people trying to hire, including myself. I see businesses starting up deferred capital expenditure just like we saw in 2004-2005. I see a single small economy in Europe having real economic stress, disproportionally impacting the exchange rate. I see all the ingredients for an artificial dip in the market by the folks who profit on volatility.
In AAPL, I see a stock with a dramatically smaller percentage of their customers in serious financial stress... and I keep buying!
That's all true, but the market also works on herd mentality and psychology. Apple's market cap is probably too high, but it doesn't matter because sometimes stock becomes its own currency, although that can also be a danger, as it was during the dot.com failures.
Is Apple really worth the combination of any two of the following?
HP, Toyota, Oracle, Intel, Citigroup, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Coke, Cisco.
And if Apple's stock does hit 300, it would be more like any three of the above, assuming they don't also rise in tandem.
(And I say this as a happy owner of Apple stock and with the price down a bit today, I might buy some more.)
On the other hand, we are becoming so used to "big numbers", I don't think we appreciate just what Apple has accomplished in the numbers you quote. The time it took all manufacturers combined to sell just one million units is as follows for these other technologies (data from the Yankee Group):
Satellite TV: 144 months
Cable TV: 144 months
Online Subscription Services: 114 months
VCRs: 58 months
DVRs: 53 months
Analog TV: 40 months
Radio: 39 months
MP3 players: 28 months
CD players: 28 months
XM Satellite radio: 23 months
DVD players: 21 months.
Apple has accomplished this in just a few days.
But having said that, I see dangers lurking. Apple's arrogance can really hurt the company as people are starting to not see Apple as the hip underdog, but more like Microsoft. It seems to be starting to make engineering mistakes which are probably driven by a lack of proper comprehensive testing, which I bet is not happening because of Apple's paranoia over product release leaks. But there's no point exerting such control over product leaks if the products are going to suffer because of it. (Was the phone not properly tested because it was secured to a table at Apple and therefore, never held in someone's hand?) If the antenna issue is really a big issue on the new phone, that's going to negatively impact the perception that Apple always executes brilliantly. And their unwillingness to help solve the issue by giving away a piece of plastic that probably costs them 20 cents to make is obnoxious.
Apple traditionally was always pushing a high-end experience, but now Jobs talks about how 720p video is "good enough" (in regards to the debate about Blu-ray inclusion) or how we're "holding the phone wrong." He seems to want to de-emphasize the traditional computer so that Apple can control the entire experience, including the type of apps we use and access to the file system.
I'm a lot less interested in Apple if it only wants to make appliances in the future and is willing to settle for lower quality in order to attract the masses. Apple created its own retail experience because it was unhappy how other retailers presented Apple products, but now some products will be sold in Wal-Mart? What does that do to Apple's image?
iffy post
some great facts
some good questions
most people cannot tell the diff bet 720p 1080p
its not that 720 p is good enough
its that the screen size needs certain levels
42 in or bigger needs 720 or higher
48 in or bigger need 1080p peridot
computer screens need far less for
its tiny real estate thana 90 in plasma
3D set
so bluray for apple as opposed to itunes HD is a non starter
apple HD rocks
blu ray should be free
bluray on my 42 plasma rocks
apple HD ported from my MBP15IN with no sound to my TV rocks
bluray wins by a hair
anyway apple is a company
apple is not some sort of cult or feeling or even an idea
apple is a for profit company
apple is nice to it clients because thats good biz
apple has zero feelings
so dude re think part of your post
80% of everyone loved msft and still does
apple will always be loved greatly for the great happiness it gives its buyers
the 160g ipod is maybe the break thru product of all time
even the silly white plastic MB is fantastic at under 1150$
the ipad and ios4 will win converts for decades to come
itouches accross the board have thrill a whole new non tech crowd beyond belief
3rd world people living here with no devices cept cell phones have bought the touch in droves
apple can do no wrong
even when they do we still love them
peace
9
Absolutely.
What is interesting, however, is that the forward P/E of Apple at the current price is less than 16 (the 'consensus' estimate for Apple's forward EPS is ~$14).
I say 'interesting,' because 16 is not a terribly high number for a company like Apple (as you probably know, the P/E of the S&P500 has averaged 15-16 in the past century).
question for you dude !!
if you minus 42 bn in apple bank from its share price
what is the real aapl share price ??
thanks for the help
question for you dude !!
if you minus 42 bn in apple bank from its share price
what is the real aapl share price ??
thanks for the help
That's very simple. Assuming 'cash' is worth 'cash' (perhaps not too bad of an assumption), the non-cash (i.e., the 'operating') part of Apple is worth $225B - $42B = $183B.
183B divided by 0.91B shares = $201 per share.
Seriously, let's see how the economy plays out. In the current conditions, I don't see such a bullish case being made for any stock.
All analyst do is GUESS based on sales and earning, etc. The real question is the market could tank YET AGAIN - Double Dip (HOPE NOT!) but its looking bad right now. Earnings season should start and help give us a boost but don't it will hold onto any gains after the earnings season is over.
Jobs and Housing needs to be addressed - So we will all have Gov't HEALTH CARE but who will have a JOB??
I did have a target price of $350-400 before the ipad.
These criminals should be in JAIL.