Congratulations Android for replacing Nokia as the worlds most
popular,
irelevant,
useless,
and crappiest
mobile platform.
Well that was random and unprovoked. I'd call you a loser or lame or a childish fool but that may get me another warning point like it did when I said something similar to hill.
Why the stock surge today of all days? There are no announcements, nothing as far as I know has changed. Is this simply because of some highly suspect market analysis on iPhones that are neither announced nor shipped?
I've come to the conclusion that Apple only concerns itself about shareholders in an indirect way. Apple's main focus is to design, build and sell great products for consumers to enjoy using and that it does very well. If Apple sells enough products and builds enough revenue then I guess it's only natural that the share price will go up. I'm in my 60's and maybe I will see a dividend in a year or two. I'm not expecting it or anything since I'm Apple long since 2004 and have made out very well. I've certainly made back far more than I've ever spent on Apple products since 1984. With Apple stockpiling so much cash it is possible that in the future Apple will do something grand with it and everyone that's griping now will have long forgotten about these stockpiling days.
For those that want a dividend now, why not just sell your Apple stock and buy a stock that offers a dividend such as Microsoft or ExxonMobil or plenty of others. No one is being forced to hold Apple stock if they're unhappy with it. I happen to know that Apple is the best performing investment I've ever owned and if anything, Apple has done an excellent job to become such a powerful industry leader. If Wall Street doesn't value it properly, Apple can't be blamed for that, at least from my viewpoint.
Couldn't agree more.
Many other companies should follow suit. Think more about the customers than about the financial markets. If yo do that right, financial markets will follow you. Otherwise it's the other way around.
Why the stock surge today of all days? There are no announcements, nothing as far as I know has changed. Is this simply because of some highly suspect market analysis on iPhones that are neither announced nor shipped?
There has been a bunch of news lately about iPhones for China. Maybe the enormity of the opportunity is starting to sink in. Against a backdrop of general bad news, Apple looks better and better. Could be no more than that.
But yet they refuse to pay out a dividend...with almost a hundred billion dollars in the bank. Apple has realized they no longer need those who invest in them because of their cash stockpile. Very sad. Never forget those who helped fund you when things were just ok.
Apple maximizes shareholder value. Always. If they had only the means of paying dividends, they would do that. Or they would initiate a stock repurchase program. But those are methods for mature companies, and Apple may still be a growth company.
At any rate, the lack of a dividend is NOT an indication that Apple thinks it no longer needs shareholders.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anfboymn
If you're gonna hoard your money, at least give more back to the community. Do I dare mention Target gves more money back to the community and they are no where near Apple's worth? You're already number 1 in so many areas, try to be number 1 in areas that really matter.
Target believes that the PR value will yield profits in excess of the amounts it "gives back". Target is not a charitable organization. Target aims to maximize profits.
Apple is acting like money is everything by not being a community leader; you can still be hugely successful while still being a major player in the philanthropy arena. And I promise you, Steve Jobs is now realizing money isn't everything.
Steve was on multiple transplant lists because he had his own Learjet to transport him literally anywhere in the world at a moment's notice. I think he knows the value of money just fine.
Anyone else in his situation that didn't have access to unlimited funds would be dead today. Period.
Just brace yourselves - if there's no cataclysm, AAPL is going through the roof and I don't even have the guts to guess away where AAPL will be a year from now.
Challenge: any guesses? $600 anyone?
Look at SNE - a similar CE company. Once worth $150, it is now worth around $20.
Once it was the hottest thing in tech. Things change.
Apple is acting like money is everything by not being a community leader; you can still be hugely successful while still being a major player in the philanthropy arena. And I promise you, Steve Jobs is now realizing money isn't everything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConradJoe
Look at SNE - a similar CE company. Once worth $150, it is now worth around $20.
Once it was the hottest thing in tech. Things change.
And that's precisely why they keep all those funds in reserve.
Apple was on top of the world with the Apple II, then the whole thing fell apart once IBM started licensing the hardware to other manufacturers. the same thing could easily happen with Android. Hardware wise it's already happening. The saving grace for Apple is that wireless providers charge the same exorbitant rates for Android plans that they do for iPhones.
Apple is acting like money is everything by not being a community leader; you can still be hugely successful while still being a major player in the philanthropy arena. And I promise you, Steve Jobs is now realizing money isn't everything.
Apple is a huge multinational corporation. To a huge multinational corporation money IS everything. That is the nature of such an institution. They are duty-bound to act in that manner.
Steve Jobs is a human being. He has no such duty. He can do what he wants.
If you would like to support a philanthropic organization, you have may choices. So does Steve.
But Apple just makes money for its owners. Nothing more, nothing less. They will do anything and everything they can to make profits or otherwise maximize shareholder value.
If they thought that giving money to charity would increase shareholder value, they would do it in a heartbeat. So far, they think that what they currently do is the best path. So far, they seem to be doing it very well.
Apple does NOT do what it does for ANY reason except to make profits. They do not do it merely to be "hugely successful", but instead, to be "as successful as possible" with no limits. And BTW, Target is exactly the same.
Sorry, when you measure company size (as in "largeness"), the accepted measurement is revenue, not market capitalization. The three largest companies in America today are Wal-mart, Exxon Mobil, and Chevron.
Someday, AI may actually properly report financial topics accurately.
But not today.
Perhaps, but you can't compare a retail operation's revenue to a resource extraction company or a manufacturing company. A better measure is value added. How much of a company's revenue is value it actually created rather than just costs that go straight out the door and into a supplier's bank account.
Apple's reputation is so valuable it cannot be priced, but it may be worth more that all that cash that they have in the bank. If many people begin to believe (with a basis in truth) that Apple is not a "good" corporate citizen, Apple will be badly hurt.
If and when it becomes more profitable to give money to charity, Apple will do so. So far, however, there is no real need to do so.
Apple exists to make money. If they can make lots more by giving away a little bit, they will do so. But they will never give money away for any reason other than getting MORE money back.
Well I think that successful corporations have a responsibility beyond just profits. Apple obviously believes that too (see their environmental policies). So you obviously disagree with Apple.
Does that make you feel silly or superior?
You are picking the wrong sort of institutions. Corporations have no such responsibility.
Apple believes that their environmental policies will yield higher total profits, via the PR value of having such policies. The policies are just a means to an end. They make people such as you "like" Apple, and they establish the brand in your mind as "good". That, in turn, yields sales and profits. If Apple thought that a slash and burn policy would yield higher total profits, they would rape and pillage. That's what Apple is.
And the crazy thing about all you who say that profits are the only thing a corporation should care about is, Apple has (at least under Jobs) been focused on quality first, not profits.
I believe that in the Apple culture profits are seen as the outcome of creating great products, not the goal.
Nope. Not correct.
The goal is profits. Making great products is the means to the goal. If they could increase total profits by making crap, they would do it.
It may be that they convince run-of-the-mill employees that "quality first" is the goal. When I worked in retail, the training school drilled into us that "customer satisfaction" was the goal. But in both cases, it was a means, and not an end.
The risk of global recession is "quite high, maybe 50 percent," Krugman told Bloomberg. He added: "The risk of something that feels like a recession is much higher than that. My central belief is that we're likely to have higher unemployment a year from now than we do today."
This whole discussion about how Apple should give something back has really helped me understand thinking in the US a bit better.
It seems that a lot of people believe that it's the role of companies to take care of them (help fund schools, etc). So now it makes sense to me why people don't feel government is important, don't vote, and would be happier to just get rid of government altogether and not pay any taxes.
When in reality, the goal of a company is simply to make as much money as possible. If being charitable is cheaper than advertising as a means to get people to buy their products, or if it provides them some other benefit which outweighs the cost, they'll do it. Otherwise they won't. Sure there are exceptions to the rule, but in general, that's the guiding principal of any business.
IMO, it's the role of government to balance private interests (re. profit) against things which are in the general interest of the public (access to good education, health care, decent city infrastructure, etc) through taxation or other means. So people really need to look to government for these things, not industry.
Comments
Apple Is Almost Worth As Much As Google And Microsoft Combined
http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-market-cap-2011-9
The antitrust case against Google
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/09/...e/?iid=SF_F_LN
Congratulations Android for replacing Nokia as the worlds most
popular,
irelevant,
useless,
and crappiest
mobile platform.
Well that was random and unprovoked. I'd call you a loser or lame or a childish fool but that may get me another warning point like it did when I said something similar to hill.
I've come to the conclusion that Apple only concerns itself about shareholders in an indirect way. Apple's main focus is to design, build and sell great products for consumers to enjoy using and that it does very well. If Apple sells enough products and builds enough revenue then I guess it's only natural that the share price will go up. I'm in my 60's and maybe I will see a dividend in a year or two. I'm not expecting it or anything since I'm Apple long since 2004 and have made out very well. I've certainly made back far more than I've ever spent on Apple products since 1984. With Apple stockpiling so much cash it is possible that in the future Apple will do something grand with it and everyone that's griping now will have long forgotten about these stockpiling days.
For those that want a dividend now, why not just sell your Apple stock and buy a stock that offers a dividend such as Microsoft or ExxonMobil or plenty of others. No one is being forced to hold Apple stock if they're unhappy with it. I happen to know that Apple is the best performing investment I've ever owned and if anything, Apple has done an excellent job to become such a powerful industry leader. If Wall Street doesn't value it properly, Apple can't be blamed for that, at least from my viewpoint.
Couldn't agree more.
Many other companies should follow suit. Think more about the customers than about the financial markets. If yo do that right, financial markets will follow you. Otherwise it's the other way around.
Why the stock surge today of all days? There are no announcements, nothing as far as I know has changed. Is this simply because of some highly suspect market analysis on iPhones that are neither announced nor shipped?
There has been a bunch of news lately about iPhones for China. Maybe the enormity of the opportunity is starting to sink in. Against a backdrop of general bad news, Apple looks better and better. Could be no more than that.
Mmmmm, AAPL, what a lovely alpha you have.
Mmm... 'Dat Alpha
Better off putting your money in Apple than T-Bills or Bank Accounts. Its probably safer.
The veracity of this statement is indeed disturbing.
I'm sure that Apple will use these absurd profits and limitless equity to create jobs in America.
They'll definitely use them to create jobs in a place that's profitable to do so. I think it's safe to say that place is not America.
But yet they refuse to pay out a dividend...with almost a hundred billion dollars in the bank. Apple has realized they no longer need those who invest in them because of their cash stockpile. Very sad. Never forget those who helped fund you when things were just ok.
Apple maximizes shareholder value. Always. If they had only the means of paying dividends, they would do that. Or they would initiate a stock repurchase program. But those are methods for mature companies, and Apple may still be a growth company.
At any rate, the lack of a dividend is NOT an indication that Apple thinks it no longer needs shareholders.
If you're gonna hoard your money, at least give more back to the community. Do I dare mention Target gves more money back to the community and they are no where near Apple's worth? You're already number 1 in so many areas, try to be number 1 in areas that really matter.
Target believes that the PR value will yield profits in excess of the amounts it "gives back". Target is not a charitable organization. Target aims to maximize profits.
Apple is acting like money is everything by not being a community leader; you can still be hugely successful while still being a major player in the philanthropy arena. And I promise you, Steve Jobs is now realizing money isn't everything.
Steve was on multiple transplant lists because he had his own Learjet to transport him literally anywhere in the world at a moment's notice. I think he knows the value of money just fine.
Anyone else in his situation that didn't have access to unlimited funds would be dead today. Period.
Just brace yourselves - if there's no cataclysm, AAPL is going through the roof and I don't even have the guts to guess away where AAPL will be a year from now.
Challenge: any guesses? $600 anyone?
Look at SNE - a similar CE company. Once worth $150, it is now worth around $20.
Once it was the hottest thing in tech. Things change.
Apple is acting like money is everything by not being a community leader; you can still be hugely successful while still being a major player in the philanthropy arena. And I promise you, Steve Jobs is now realizing money isn't everything.
Look at SNE - a similar CE company. Once worth $150, it is now worth around $20.
Once it was the hottest thing in tech. Things change.
And that's precisely why they keep all those funds in reserve.
Apple was on top of the world with the Apple II, then the whole thing fell apart once IBM started licensing the hardware to other manufacturers. the same thing could easily happen with Android. Hardware wise it's already happening. The saving grace for Apple is that wireless providers charge the same exorbitant rates for Android plans that they do for iPhones.
Apple is acting like money is everything by not being a community leader; you can still be hugely successful while still being a major player in the philanthropy arena. And I promise you, Steve Jobs is now realizing money isn't everything.
Apple is a huge multinational corporation. To a huge multinational corporation money IS everything. That is the nature of such an institution. They are duty-bound to act in that manner.
Steve Jobs is a human being. He has no such duty. He can do what he wants.
If you would like to support a philanthropic organization, you have may choices. So does Steve.
But Apple just makes money for its owners. Nothing more, nothing less. They will do anything and everything they can to make profits or otherwise maximize shareholder value.
If they thought that giving money to charity would increase shareholder value, they would do it in a heartbeat. So far, they think that what they currently do is the best path. So far, they seem to be doing it very well.
Apple does NOT do what it does for ANY reason except to make profits. They do not do it merely to be "hugely successful", but instead, to be "as successful as possible" with no limits. And BTW, Target is exactly the same.
Sorry, when you measure company size (as in "largeness"), the accepted measurement is revenue, not market capitalization. The three largest companies in America today are Wal-mart, Exxon Mobil, and Chevron.
Someday, AI may actually properly report financial topics accurately.
But not today.
Perhaps, but you can't compare a retail operation's revenue to a resource extraction company or a manufacturing company. A better measure is value added. How much of a company's revenue is value it actually created rather than just costs that go straight out the door and into a supplier's bank account.
Apple's reputation is so valuable it cannot be priced, but it may be worth more that all that cash that they have in the bank. If many people begin to believe (with a basis in truth) that Apple is not a "good" corporate citizen, Apple will be badly hurt.
If and when it becomes more profitable to give money to charity, Apple will do so. So far, however, there is no real need to do so.
Apple exists to make money. If they can make lots more by giving away a little bit, they will do so. But they will never give money away for any reason other than getting MORE money back.
Well I think that successful corporations have a responsibility beyond just profits. Apple obviously believes that too (see their environmental policies). So you obviously disagree with Apple.
Does that make you feel silly or superior?
You are picking the wrong sort of institutions. Corporations have no such responsibility.
Apple believes that their environmental policies will yield higher total profits, via the PR value of having such policies. The policies are just a means to an end. They make people such as you "like" Apple, and they establish the brand in your mind as "good". That, in turn, yields sales and profits. If Apple thought that a slash and burn policy would yield higher total profits, they would rape and pillage. That's what Apple is.
And the crazy thing about all you who say that profits are the only thing a corporation should care about is, Apple has (at least under Jobs) been focused on quality first, not profits.
I believe that in the Apple culture profits are seen as the outcome of creating great products, not the goal.
Nope. Not correct.
The goal is profits. Making great products is the means to the goal. If they could increase total profits by making crap, they would do it.
It may be that they convince run-of-the-mill employees that "quality first" is the goal. When I worked in retail, the training school drilled into us that "customer satisfaction" was the goal. But in both cases, it was a means, and not an end.
Better off putting your money in Apple than T-Bills or Bank Accounts. Its probably safer.
Generally, comments like this precede large crashes. Or so say Joe Kennedy and Bernard Baruch.
Generally, comments like this precede large crashes. Or so say Joe Kennedy and Bernard Baruch.
Even Krugman is on board now with a 50/50 chance of the world entering another recession.
From today:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0..._n_955507.html
The risk of global recession is "quite high, maybe 50 percent," Krugman told Bloomberg. He added: "The risk of something that feels like a recession is much higher than that. My central belief is that we're likely to have higher unemployment a year from now than we do today."
It seems that a lot of people believe that it's the role of companies to take care of them (help fund schools, etc). So now it makes sense to me why people don't feel government is important, don't vote, and would be happier to just get rid of government altogether and not pay any taxes.
When in reality, the goal of a company is simply to make as much money as possible. If being charitable is cheaper than advertising as a means to get people to buy their products, or if it provides them some other benefit which outweighs the cost, they'll do it. Otherwise they won't. Sure there are exceptions to the rule, but in general, that's the guiding principal of any business.
IMO, it's the role of government to balance private interests (re. profit) against things which are in the general interest of the public (access to good education, health care, decent city infrastructure, etc) through taxation or other means. So people really need to look to government for these things, not industry.