Morgan Stanley recommends Apple use cash for share buybacks, dividends

12467

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 126
    diddydiddy Posts: 282member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post


    What does the stock symbol for Appell Petroleum Corporation have anything to do with this discussion?



    One more thing, Katy is one of the worst analysts tracking Apple.



    Yea... This news is kinda silly. Investors have said that Apple should do lots of things with it's stock. This isn't the first time some financial analysts have said that Apple should do this. Apple regularly ignores such advice.
  • Reply 62 of 126
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cameronj View Post


    Apple isn't MANAGING their cash hoard, they're sitting on it.



    "Sitting on cash" has done about as well as - or even beat, depending on your horizon - beat the market. Short of investing in an asset that has performed well, such as Apple (i.e., a repurchase), sitting on it is fine for now.



    Stop being such an angry young man, and move along....
  • Reply 63 of 126
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DrFreeman View Post




    Am I missing something here or MS just stated the obvious?



    Bingo!
  • Reply 64 of 126
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by gprovida View Post


    Aside from litle evidence dividend or share buy back improves stock price in general and the very real tax liabilities this is not self evident in stockholdeers interest. In fact, if stock value is important, best way to improve stock value is not sales or growth, but accumulating cash, ironic!



    Nonsense. This is some third rate Wall Street 'research.'



    To the extent that it's correlated, it's only because cash is cumulative earnings.
  • Reply 65 of 126
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by stelligent View Post


    Why do people keep insisting that a company's cash belongs to the shareholders? That is incorrect legally, technically and really. Not a single penny belongs to the shareholders unless the SHA says otherwise. And I assure you the SHA does not say so.



    Who/what is 'SHA'?



    This sounds like more grand internet finance wisdom being touted by anonymous geniuses....
  • Reply 66 of 126
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tenzo View Post


    I hate to say it but....

    America is not a manufacturing country anymore and I don't think it is coming back.



    You're exactly right. In 2011, manufacturing will constitute only about 12% of US GDP.
  • Reply 67 of 126
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by FriedLobster View Post


    I got my MBA from Stanford and I say you're a frickin idiot.



    Ouch!
  • Reply 68 of 126
    Question. Where does Apple actually have all this cash, and I assume there also paying for it to be insured by someone? Would be one hell of a news story if they lost a significant part of it from the bank holding it going bankrupt.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by stelligent View Post


    Dividends and buybacks are gimmicks, needed when a company isn't growing. Why do they need gimmicks?



    Why are they gimmicks? You invest in a company to make money. If your investing for the long term then you need dividends. That way you can keep re-investing and getting bigger rewards. Right now Apple is an awkward investment, if you invested 10 years ago then awesome you've made a killing on the share price going up. Until you sell though you've got nothing. You have owned part of what is either the highest or second highest valued company in the world and in the last 10 years you earned 0 from it. Apple looks set to continue to be great but you can never increase your shares in it unless you make the money elsewhere.



    Buybacks are also exactly what they say. The actual value of the company will stay the same but everyones share price goes up as the number of shares go down. Profit is released to those choosing the leave.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by stelligent View Post


    Why do people keep insisting that a company's cash belongs to the shareholders? That is incorrect legally, technically and really. Not a single penny belongs to the shareholders unless the SHA says otherwise. And I assure you the SHA does not say so.



    Your right it doesn't. But if you own part of the company, something you invested money into then you expect to get a share of the profits. Is it right that the very lowest paid worker in the company earns more from Apple than a shareholder?







    Best option I can see is Apple uses all the money to invest in a company that buys Apple shares. That way increasing the demand and value of Apple shares. That way Apple still has the value on their balance sheet and the share price increases.
  • Reply 69 of 126
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by scotty321 View Post


    This is the Morgan Stanley that went bankrupt and was sold to Bank of America to remain solvent?



    Yeah, maybe they should keep their mouths shut when it comes to what companies need to do with their profitable cash stockpiles.



    No it isn't. They didn't go bankrupt and were not sold to BoA. BoA purchased Merrill Lynch, an investment back that was in trouble. I get it that you don't like banks, but perhaps you should check your facts before sounding off.
  • Reply 70 of 126
    There is more than one fractional purchase program avail to people, so I don't agree with the 'barrier to entry' position.



    Obviously MS does not fully understand the value of the component pre-buy's that Apple does.



    They also seem to not understand the large IP wars that are underway. They will require a war chest.



    I am a also a stock holder, and I invested in Apple to be Apple and to let them do what they think is right. So far I am very happy, if at any time I am not, I have the option to sell my shares.



    If you want a dividend stock there are many others to choose from, but at this point one should understand Apple is not one of them, and a person should act accordingly. (Stay or Sell)
  • Reply 71 of 126
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by timgriff84 View Post


    Is it right that the very lowest paid worker in the company earns more from Apple than a shareholder?



    Wait, what??? You're not seriously suggesting that Apple should be paying their shareholders more than any of their employees?
  • Reply 72 of 126
    cwscws Posts: 59member
    Please buy back shares instead. I do not want to pay taxes on the dividends! Just give me capital appreciation!
  • Reply 73 of 126
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tenzo View Post


    I hate to say it but....

    America is not a manufacturing country anymore and I don't think it is coming back.



    That is nonsense. We still manufacture a very large percentage of what we consume. Not as high a percentage as in the past, but well over half. There's lot of manufacturing in the U.S. - and some signs that some companies are bringing some back.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by timgriff84 View Post


    Question. Where does Apple actually have all this cash, and I assume there also paying for it to be insured by someone? Would be one hell of a news story if they lost a significant part of it from the bank holding it going bankrupt.



    If you have to ask where Apple has the cash, you need to go back to school. It's not sitting in a safe deposit box. The 'cash' is in 1s and 0s all over the world banking system. I'm sure that a great deal is in various banks (well insured, undoubtedly), but even more is probably in cash instruments (equivalent to money market accounts).



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by timgriff84 View Post


    Why are they gimmicks? You invest in a company to make money. If your investing for the long term then you need dividends. That way you can keep re-investing and getting bigger rewards. Right now Apple is an awkward investment, if you invested 10 years ago then awesome you've made a killing on the share price going up. Until you sell though you've got nothing. You have owned part of what is either the highest or second highest valued company in the world and in the last 10 years you earned 0 from it. Apple looks set to continue to be great but you can never increase your shares in it unless you make the money elsewhere.



    Yep. You need to go back to school - or stop commenting on financial matters which you don't understand. Long term investors need dividends? That's one of the most ludicrous things I've ever seen. A long term investor only cares about one thing - whether they have more money at some date in the future than present. It doesn't matter one whit whether that is in stock appreciation or dividends - except for the fact that they'll pay more taxes if it's in dividends than in stock appreciation.



    Issuing dividends to allow people to buy more shares is a zero-sum game.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by timgriff84 View Post


    Your right it doesn't. But if you own part of the company, something you invested money into then you expect to get a share of the profits. Is it right that the very lowest paid worker in the company earns more from Apple than a shareholder?



    So you don't understand the difference between wages and investment? Wow.



    In reality, Apple shareholders have done extremely well over the past decade. They have (collectively) made billions of dollars. The fact that the money is in share value rather than cash is irrelevant (other than, again, the fact that they're not taxed as heavily this way).



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by timgriff84 View Post


    Best option I can see is Apple uses all the money to invest in a company that buys Apple shares. That way increasing the demand and value of Apple shares. That way Apple still has the value on their balance sheet and the share price increases.



    I take it back - I thought you made the most foolish financial statement in the world above - but you've topped it.



    Maybe Apple should just invest in Merril Lynch or Morgan Stanley. Those have been really great investments over the past decade.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post


    You do realise the current GUARANTEED returns Apple gets by "sitting" on that cash hoard, don't you? The INTEREST alone from the cash hoard is enough to finance... A heck of a lot of things.



    Apple is Thinking Different, even financially. Rather than finance themselves through ever more surmounting debt, they're financing themselves essentially through interest of "sitting" on that cash hoard. Why eat the cost of 5% interest on loans when you can actually GET 5% bonus interest on your own cash. Apple is essentially its own private bank now.



    Even if nobody bought any Apple products for a year, Apple would still be in a better financial situation and still less prone to takeover than most large companies.



    Collectively we must rethink debt and recognise its crippling nature.



    Better yet - get yourself a financial education. Corporate debt is often an incredible leverage tool to maximize profits and corporate value.



    And Apple isn't getting 5% on their cash. The actual figure is somewhere around 1%, IIRC. Undoubtedly, their money is in very conservative investments and there is an additional cost for insurance which reduces the return.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cameronj View Post


    Apple wouldn't pay 5% for debt, first of all. It would be around 2%. Second, Apple has no need for any debt because it is highly profitable. Third, Apple doesn't GET 5% for it's money.



    It's amazing what uneducated people think about finances. Sheesh. You must think it's like magic or something.



    No way Apple could borrow money for 2%.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tundraboy View Post


    Share buy back my arse. You want your share of Apple's cash hoard? Sell your stock. I don't know why these unimaginative wall street types think that they know better than apple how to run their business.



    Exactly. The most tax-effective way for Apple to return money to shareholders is in share price appreciation.
  • Reply 74 of 126
    bwikbwik Posts: 565member
    This is idiotic. AAPL already embeds the cash value. Paying a dividend results in huge tax liabilities to shareholders including institutions. Up to half the money is instantly vaporized.. this idiotic move could cost investors tens of billions.



    The only reason AAPL should buy back shares at $375 is if we all believe AAPL is a guaranteed great investment at $375. I would have serious reservations about that. It's certainly no slam dunk. What is a slam dunk is liquid cash in today's environment. In retrospect, Apple could not have been more prudent or more optimal in its cash management. Apple very likely could lecture others on financial mgmt. They need no lecture.



    Edit: Actually, AAPL should have brought more AAPL in the past. We all should have. Care to do it now?
  • Reply 75 of 126
    herbapouherbapou Posts: 2,228member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by FriedLobster View Post


    Absolutely stupid idea.

    Company's who pay dividends are usually companies with no/limited growth potential, that's why they have to pay dividends to attract investors, etc.

    Apple's revenue and profit is exploding EVERY QUARTER! paying dividend is the worst thing they can do right now with their money.



    I don?t agree, most growth stocks don?t pay dividends because they also don?t make a lot of profit. People need to go back to fundamentals... ultimately, why do we own a stock that doesn?t returns anything? Apple stock price sits on the ?future? possibility of it returning some dividends or else it?s not worth anything at all.



    At some point, Apple needs to start paying shareholders. It doesn?t have to be when the company stops growing.
  • Reply 76 of 126
    bwikbwik Posts: 565member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by herbapou View Post


    I don’t agree, most growth stocks don’t pay dividends because they also don’t make a lot of profit. People need to go back to fundamentals... ultimately, why do we own a stock that doesn’t returns anything? Apple stock price sits on the “future” possibility of it returning some dividends or else it’s not worth anything at all.



    At some point, Apple needs to start paying shareholders. It doesn’t have to be when the company stops growing.



    Not at all; plenty of assets are worth money even if they do not spit out cash. It has a value because it's money (literally, with regard to this cash). Even if Apple never pays a dividend, it can be a good investment.. it has value, as cash does (or perhaps better than that). It is an asset that can be converted to money. It need not liquidate just to prove that. Value is enough.



    Actually, if Apple spits out money and the money goes to tax, the net change in shareholder welfare would be negative. They get $35 dividend afte taxes, but they lost $70 in share value, which they could have recouped by selling stock. It's like you prefer money in fifties instead of twenties, so you're willing to pay a 35% tax just to change bills. Not good.
  • Reply 77 of 126
    tnsftnsf Posts: 203member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by John.B View Post


    In MBA Finance courses, they teach the suits that this is a parlor trick to artificially prop up the stock price that is sagging, which doesn't sound like Apple to me. Buybacks don't really return value to shareholders because market forces factor that into the going rate. Esp. if the shares are held by the corporate treasury for potential later reissue.



    There are many very healthy companies that engage in long-term share buyback programs as a way of returning value to shareholders. Its not always a parlor trick.
  • Reply 78 of 126
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by doubleusn View Post


    I am a also a stock holder, and I invested in Apple to be Apple and to let them do what they think is right. So far I am very happy, if at any time I am not, I have the option to sell my shares.



    Absolutely.



    If you do your research correctly, you will know what you are getting into when you invest in AAPL, Berkshire-Hathaway (BRK.A and BRK.B) or any other investment vehicle. AAPL has never paid a dividend and there has never been widespread belief that they would change that policy. AAPL shareholders should know that. If you were looking for a dividend payment, go buy some Windstream or AT&T. Or even junk bonds, those are yielding 8 percent right now.



    When you buy shares of a company's stock, you are basically putting your approval stamp on the company's senior management team in running the business. If you have disagreement with the way Apple is using its cash hoard, you really shouldn't be an investor. Or more accurately, if you're not a fund manager or the top guy at Legg Mason, no one is going to listen to you. But keep filling in those proxy ballots.
  • Reply 79 of 126
    Morgan Stanley should first learn how to run their own business -- their customer service is terrible!
  • Reply 80 of 126
    zoetmbzoetmb Posts: 2,652member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mytdave View Post


    Dividends would be a good idea. It would actually make the stock more attractive. Not too much though. Apple is wise to keep lots of cash on hand. There will be more lawsuits on the way, and they'll need to pay for defense. I also think there is a financial firestorm coming, and any company without a treasure chest (relative to their size) won't survive. \



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post


    No it wouldn't. Dividends are issues by Stocks that are done growing.



    Wrong. Dividends are issues by companies who want to attract investors who are looking for income.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BUSHMAN4 View Post


    Only time that companies usually do stock buybacks is when they cannot continue to increase their profits. Apple is still firing on all cylinders so no share buyback is necessary.

    MS analist (not mispelled) looking for a quick boost to Apples stock price.



    Wrong. Companies buy back their own stock when it's undervalued. And Apple's stock is currently undervalued because it's getting hit by the same factors (possible Greece default, etc.) that is bringing down the entire market.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by FriedLobster View Post


    Absolutely stupid idea.



    Company's who pay dividends are usually companies with no/limited growth potential, that's why they have to pay dividends to attract investors, etc.



    Apple's revenue and profit is exploding EVERY QUARTER! paying dividend is the worst thing they can do right now with their money.



    It's not the worst thing they can do. If they want to buy something big instead or develop a new technology, fine.



    The overall point is that Apple may not be doing a great job of managing their cash.
Sign In or Register to comment.