Apple profits soar 77% on record sales of 3.47 million Macs

12346»

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 109
    dr millmossdr millmoss Posts: 5,403member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    Normally, you're a very careful reader of what people write -- indeed, you often admonish people for not doing so with things you write -- and I'll give you the benefit of doubt. Perhaps, in your mad rush to shoot off an answer, you didn't really read what I wrote.



    Btw, one more thing. I have no disagreement with the notion that Apple could return a significant chunk. Please reread what I wrote.



    Given the ambiguity of what you wrote, I did the best I could to interpret your meaning. Feel free to elaborate if you feel that I have misinterpreted something.
  • Reply 102 of 109
    dr millmossdr millmoss Posts: 5,403member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    I'm looking at the cash influx vs the number of shares. Less than a billion shares vs a billion of new cash per month which will likely increase on average as Apple continues to grow.



    This year Apple will be about $60 billion. Next year, $80 billion, the year after that, likely at least $100 billion. How much cash will they generate then? 2% (per year, of course) of current stock numbers won't seem like much.



    If I understand you correctly, no, it's not very much. A dividend of a dollar per share would cost Apple roughly three weeks of cash flow, at the current rate of accumulation. This would leave them accumulating cash for the other 49 weeks of the year. The cash mountain continues to grow, only at a slightly slower rate.
  • Reply 103 of 109
    visionaryvisionary Posts: 118member
    How about Apple buy out our government. It is in need of a hostile takeover by somebody who knows how to turn a business around.

  • Reply 104 of 109
    svnippsvnipp Posts: 430member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Postulant View Post


    "Apple now has $45.8 billion dollars in cash. That's a lot of cash -- up $4.1 billion from last quarter."



    I think that Apple is building a pile of cash for the same reasons as many other companies. The Obama administration seems to be quite anti-business. Things like healthcare and this new equal paycheck whatever can potentially cost companies like Apple billions. I heard a report recently that large US companies have (I think the number was) a couple trillion dollars stashed in cash. The primary reason for this according to the CEOs/CFOs of these companies is uncertainty about government regulations and taxes.



    Sorry to throw politics into this, but it seems as if the current administration is truly stifling the economic recovery with all of this massive government growth. US businesses appear to have lots of capital on hand that COULD be used to get the economy moving again and yet they sit on the money rather than hiring or expanding out of fear of what the regulatory and tax environment is going to look like.



    OK. Off the soapbox.
  • Reply 105 of 109
    zoetmbzoetmb Posts: 2,655member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by svnipp View Post


    I think that Apple is building a pile of cash for the same reasons as many other companies. The Obama administration seems to be quite anti-business. Things like healthcare and this new equal paycheck whatever can potentially cost companies like Apple billions. I heard a report recently that large US companies have (I think the number was) a couple trillion dollars stashed in cash. The primary reason for this according to the CEOs/CFOs of these companies is uncertainty about government regulations and taxes.



    Sorry to throw politics into this, but it seems as if the current administration is truly stifling the economic recovery with all of this massive government growth. US businesses appear to have lots of capital on hand that COULD be used to get the economy moving again and yet they sit on the money rather than hiring or expanding out of fear of what the regulatory and tax environment is going to look like.



    OK. Off the soapbox.



    That's ridiculous. Apple already supplies healthcare to all its employees - it would hardly be affected by the new healthcare regulations - in fact, if the new healthcare regulations bring down the overall cost of healthcare because more people are insured, it could actually reduce (or limit growth) in Apple's healthcare costs over the long term. The new healthcare bills are mostly going to impact smaller businesses - those that offer only very limited or no health care today, not larger ones.



    And all Equal Paycheck is is a restating of the Equal Pay Act of 1963 - that you must have a reason if you pay less by gender for equal work. However I will admit that while the intent of this law is fine, it's impractical because companies can still generally get around it by changing job titles, descriptions, etc.



    Corporations in the U.S. are paying the LEAST amount of corporate taxes that they've ever paid in recent history. I can't seem to find total numbers for more recent years, but in 2000, corporations paid $207 billion in taxes and by 2003, they paid only $132 billion. Neither Exxon-Mobil (which recorded a $42.5 billion profit), nor GE (which reported $10.5 billion in pre-tax income), paid ANY Federal corporate taxes in 2009. Do you really think this makes sense? U.S. corporations paid far higher corporate taxes during the Reagan administration than they're paying now (as are high income people).



    So stop believing the garbage spouted by conservative media. Obama could support every idea Reagan and Bush ever came up with and they'd STILL be against him.



    US businesses aren't spending because they have no guts - they're filled with executives who only know how to manage from quarter to quarter and are primarily concerned about the stock price because that's what their absurdly large bonuses (or stock options) are based upon.



    Apple has proven that you can make tons of money in a very tough economy. I'm a supporter of Apple and I own the stock, but even I thought they would take a big hit in this economy. I'm still surprised that people are shelling out for their products.
  • Reply 106 of 109
    brucepbrucep Posts: 2,823member
    moved new address soon

    off topic post

    9
  • Reply 107 of 109
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mesomorphicman View Post


    Wow, and to think the only people who buy Apple products are idiots, uninformed, and most of all sheep. I am sure many other companies wish they had a sheep farm like Apple.



    If Apple's customers are sheep, then the whole world is New Zealand.
  • Reply 108 of 109
    john galtjohn galt Posts: 960member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by zoetmb View Post


    Do you really think this makes sense?



    No, it makes no sense. It's also untrue.



    Federal corporate income taxes in the US are the second-highest in the world. That fact and enormous near-term uncertainty regarding regulations and unprecedented government intrusion on all levels are the biggest reasons businesses in the US are suffering, causing massive unemployment and widespread misery. It's no wonder that XOM and GE invest everywhere but in the US.



    AAPL pays an effective tax rate of 30%. That's insane.



    By the way, XOM paid the most taxes of any company in the world, its liability for 2009 has not yet been determined, and GE is getting audited for several of the past years.



    The top 5% income earners in the US pay 50% of all taxes, and the top 1% pay more than the bottom 95%. This also makes no sense. Unfortunately it is true.
    (My source is not the "conservative media" (talk about an oxymoron) but the non-partisan National Taxpayers Union and The Tax Foundation.)
    Turning this insanity around will enable businesses to expand, hire, and prosper. They'll pay more income taxes than ever, just like in the past. Surely you'll agree - after all, you said it yourself:



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by zoetmb View Post


    U.S. corporations paid far higher corporate taxes during the Reagan administration than they're paying now ... .



  • Reply 109 of 109
    visionaryvisionary Posts: 118member
    Who is John Gault?
Sign In or Register to comment.