Well, these guys are like everyone else—they want profits on their investments. A problem the way these, and other investment houses work, is that they almost always have limits to the percentage of ownership in any investment vehicle. So if they are limited to having any one stock to no more than 8% of their investment, by their charter, then what happens when they reach that limit? If Apple is over 70% owned by institutions with these limits, what happens when most, or all, are fully vested in Apple stock?
One thing that happens is that the frenzied buying slows down dramatically. Then the stock price begins to waver. What happens when there is fear that large investment profits may be taxed at a higher level because of the "fiscal cliff"? We get a big sell off. What happens to the stock price, well, it tumbles. What happens when large corporate options traders have strike off prices that might not be met? I'm generalizing terribly here. They buy or sell off very large amounts of stock (which they are allowed to do) so that the stock price comes to where they need it to be to make those large profits, and not end up with losses. Is that manipulation? Sure, though some refuse to call it that because there isn't a coordinated effort, just the fact that many professional traders have the same ideas at the same time (surprise!). We had that on the 18th of this month last Friday. So we were being told that Friday would possibly be the last great opportunity to buy Apple stock at a bargain price.
I believe that many professional traders aren't really concerned about the long term future of a company at all. They are just looking at more immediate results for themselves. If that results in large movements of stock, they don't really care. After all, you can make large amounts of money whether a stock is going up or down.
All that may be true. But the fact is, big institutions are the remaining holders of Apple - you can't blame THEM for the drop in the stock because they're the only ones left!
We all know Wall Street is a casino. Their wish list is nothing shy of insanity. The consumer can only buy so much. So when Apple or any other public company doesn't measure up they crucify them. It is insane!! Wall Street makes these bets ahead of time and then puts the full court pressure on these companies prior to earning reports.
In the end Wall Street could even get Tim kicked out, find another CEO. Happens all the time.
Look at Palm. Company was broken up into hardware and software then finally sold off to them clowns at HP.
Bottom line: Greed.
Apple cash is the largest hedge fund , Apple doesn't fear .
Ah, but you are misunderstanding the upheaval in the computer industry. People have made that mistake before. Minicomputers would never become a serious computing platform because they could not do what mainframes could do, and they would fade away. Workstations couldn't do what minicomputers could do, and so they would fade away. Microcomputers would never be taken seriously because they were toys that couldn't do any real work. Laptops were useless because they were so much less powerful than desktops, that they would never be used for real work. Notebooks were not usable for business or other serious computing tasks because they weren't as powerful as laptops. And, of course, tablets are just another fad and toy, and will fade away after a few years, and notebooks will, again, become the primary computer used for work and play.
Yup, you sure don't understand the computing industry.
It was estimated that by 2015, tablet sales would overtake all laptop sales for that year. Now, they are saying it will happen this year. The numbers are there. We're not talking about netbooks, which were mainly a child of the Recession. This is very different. I can already do work on my iPad that I could just barely do 10 years ago on my Powermac. In two or three years, the iPad will be several times as powerful as it is now. Heck, my iPhone 5 is more powerful than the fastest G4 laptop Apple manufactured. In another year or so, the newest iPhone and iPad will be more powerful than the earlier generations of Intel laptops, and the earlier Intel Mac Pro machines.
Things are changing for sure. The largest companies and government agencies are abandoning their notebooks for tens of thousands of iPads. This doesn't indicate a fad, even if you may want to think so.
Indeed. the insistence of some people to consider the existence of the keyboard to qualify a machine for "serious work" is pathetic, and reminds me some previous similar statements about the mouse .... At that time, too, the well known corporate statement was "nobody has ever got fired because of purchasing from IBM ..."
Well, these guys are like everyone else—they want profits on their investments. A problem the way these, and other investment houses work, is that they almost always have limits to the percentage of ownership in any investment vehicle. So if they are limited to having any one stock to no more than 8% of their investment, by their charter, then what happens when they reach that limit? If Apple is over 70% owned by institutions with these limits, what happens when most, or all, are fully vested in Apple stock?
One thing that happens is that the frenzied buying slows down dramatically. Then the stock price begins to waver. What happens when there is fear that large investment profits may be taxed at a higher level because of the "fiscal cliff"? We get a big sell off. What happens to the stock price, well, it tumbles. What happens when large corporate options traders have strike off prices that might not be met? I'm generalizing terribly here. They buy or sell off very large amounts of stock (which they are allowed to do) so that the stock price comes to where they need it to be to make those large profits, and not end up with losses. Is that manipulation? Sure, though some refuse to call it that because there isn't a coordinated effort, just the fact that many professional traders have the same ideas at the same time (surprise!). We had that on the 18th of this month last Friday. So we were being told that Friday would possibly be the last great opportunity to buy Apple stock at a bargain price.
I believe that many professional traders aren't really concerned about the long term future of a company at all. They are just looking at more immediate results for themselves. If that results in large movements of stock, they don't really care. After all, you can make large amounts of money whether a stock is going up or down.
Great post. One of the few with some sense and understanding of capital markets.
This is why for a 'trader' Apple stock isn't particularly attractive. However if the stock comes back down to 350 or so then it looks attractive perhaps as a longer term investment, assuming management is up for dividend increases and whatnot.
Indeed. the insistence of some people to consider the existence of the keyboard to qualify a machine for "serious work" is pathetic, and reminds me some previous similar statements about the mouse .... At that time, too, the well known corporate statement was "nobody has ever got fired because of purchasing from IBM ..."
Perhaps a bad analogy, since IBM still has some of the best enterprise products, except today it's supercomputers, Linux, analytics, etc... Apple also doesn't compete with anything IBM does.
All that may be true. But the fact is, big institutions are the remaining holders of Apple - you can't blame THEM for the drop in the stock because they're the only ones left!
They are by no means the only shareholders left. I don't know how you get that idea, unless you aren't really serious. If I put an order in for 1,000 shares of Apple, to buy, or to sell, that will affect the price of the shares by a little bit, for a few moments, unless others think it's the beginning of something and change their asking, or selling prices. But when a very large order goes through, even through a private exchange, that could affect the stock more permanently. That's is, for a few hours, or days, depending on how the market reacts to it.
There are, no doubt, many small owners of Apple stock. But most own just a few dozen, or few hundred shares.
What will happen if Apple pull out of Wall Street listings? Does Apple need to sell shares to raise capital?
You can't just pull out. It's a major hassle. If they attempted to de-list, there would be fallout. The usual way a company does that is to go private. Dell is attempting to do that now. Anyone know how to raise $500 billion to take Apple private?
Great post. One of the few with some sense and understanding of capital markets.
This is why for a 'trader' Apple stock isn't particularly attractive. However if the stock comes back down to 350 or so then it looks attractive perhaps as a longer term investment, assuming management is up for dividend increases and whatnot.
I assume that Apple will be upping their dividend during, or around the time of the shareholders meeting. I wish I could go, but it's always at a bad time for me.
If Apple could bring some of that cash back to the US, we would see a much higher dividend, or a large one time disbursement, as Microsoft was practically forced to do several years ago. But with most of their business overseas, that's going to be a continuing problem for major US based companies, that will only get worse as business out of the US becomes a larger portion of their sales and profits. That will artificially limit dividends here.
Perhaps a bad analogy, since IBM still has some of the best enterprise products, except today it's supercomputers, Linux, analytics, etc... Apple also doesn't compete with anything IBM does.
They do in some areas. But IBM sells Apple products in its business solutions packages. Since they sold off their PC division, they have become platform agnostic, and Macs have been making a major comeback in large business.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
Well, these guys are like everyone else—they want profits on their investments. A problem the way these, and other investment houses work, is that they almost always have limits to the percentage of ownership in any investment vehicle. So if they are limited to having any one stock to no more than 8% of their investment, by their charter, then what happens when they reach that limit? If Apple is over 70% owned by institutions with these limits, what happens when most, or all, are fully vested in Apple stock?
One thing that happens is that the frenzied buying slows down dramatically. Then the stock price begins to waver. What happens when there is fear that large investment profits may be taxed at a higher level because of the "fiscal cliff"? We get a big sell off. What happens to the stock price, well, it tumbles. What happens when large corporate options traders have strike off prices that might not be met? I'm generalizing terribly here. They buy or sell off very large amounts of stock (which they are allowed to do) so that the stock price comes to where they need it to be to make those large profits, and not end up with losses. Is that manipulation? Sure, though some refuse to call it that because there isn't a coordinated effort, just the fact that many professional traders have the same ideas at the same time (surprise!). We had that on the 18th of this month last Friday. So we were being told that Friday would possibly be the last great opportunity to buy Apple stock at a bargain price.
I believe that many professional traders aren't really concerned about the long term future of a company at all. They are just looking at more immediate results for themselves. If that results in large movements of stock, they don't really care. After all, you can make large amounts of money whether a stock is going up or down.
All that may be true. But the fact is, big institutions are the remaining holders of Apple - you can't blame THEM for the drop in the stock because they're the only ones left!
the last several articles on this subject are totally manipulative. Someone wants to buy this stock cheap.
What will happen if Apple pull out of Wall Street listings? Does Apple need to sell shares to raise capital?
Apple cash is the largest hedge fund , Apple doesn't fear .
The biggest joke I have ever heard
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazy_mac_lover
The biggest joke I have ever heard
So many financial experts around here
They think the largest company in the world should go private
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
Ah, but you are misunderstanding the upheaval in the computer industry. People have made that mistake before. Minicomputers would never become a serious computing platform because they could not do what mainframes could do, and they would fade away. Workstations couldn't do what minicomputers could do, and so they would fade away. Microcomputers would never be taken seriously because they were toys that couldn't do any real work. Laptops were useless because they were so much less powerful than desktops, that they would never be used for real work. Notebooks were not usable for business or other serious computing tasks because they weren't as powerful as laptops. And, of course, tablets are just another fad and toy, and will fade away after a few years, and notebooks will, again, become the primary computer used for work and play.
Yup, you sure don't understand the computing industry.
It was estimated that by 2015, tablet sales would overtake all laptop sales for that year. Now, they are saying it will happen this year. The numbers are there. We're not talking about netbooks, which were mainly a child of the Recession. This is very different. I can already do work on my iPad that I could just barely do 10 years ago on my Powermac. In two or three years, the iPad will be several times as powerful as it is now. Heck, my iPhone 5 is more powerful than the fastest G4 laptop Apple manufactured. In another year or so, the newest iPhone and iPad will be more powerful than the earlier generations of Intel laptops, and the earlier Intel Mac Pro machines.
Things are changing for sure. The largest companies and government agencies are abandoning their notebooks for tens of thousands of iPads. This doesn't indicate a fad, even if you may want to think so.
Indeed. the insistence of some people to consider the existence of the keyboard to qualify a machine for "serious work" is pathetic, and reminds me some previous similar statements about the mouse .... At that time, too, the well known corporate statement was "nobody has ever got fired because of purchasing from IBM ..."
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
Well, these guys are like everyone else—they want profits on their investments. A problem the way these, and other investment houses work, is that they almost always have limits to the percentage of ownership in any investment vehicle. So if they are limited to having any one stock to no more than 8% of their investment, by their charter, then what happens when they reach that limit? If Apple is over 70% owned by institutions with these limits, what happens when most, or all, are fully vested in Apple stock?
One thing that happens is that the frenzied buying slows down dramatically. Then the stock price begins to waver. What happens when there is fear that large investment profits may be taxed at a higher level because of the "fiscal cliff"? We get a big sell off. What happens to the stock price, well, it tumbles. What happens when large corporate options traders have strike off prices that might not be met? I'm generalizing terribly here. They buy or sell off very large amounts of stock (which they are allowed to do) so that the stock price comes to where they need it to be to make those large profits, and not end up with losses. Is that manipulation? Sure, though some refuse to call it that because there isn't a coordinated effort, just the fact that many professional traders have the same ideas at the same time (surprise!). We had that on the 18th of this month last Friday. So we were being told that Friday would possibly be the last great opportunity to buy Apple stock at a bargain price.
I believe that many professional traders aren't really concerned about the long term future of a company at all. They are just looking at more immediate results for themselves. If that results in large movements of stock, they don't really care. After all, you can make large amounts of money whether a stock is going up or down.
Great post. One of the few with some sense and understanding of capital markets.
This is why for a 'trader' Apple stock isn't particularly attractive. However if the stock comes back down to 350 or so then it looks attractive perhaps as a longer term investment, assuming management is up for dividend increases and whatnot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by umrk_lab
Indeed. the insistence of some people to consider the existence of the keyboard to qualify a machine for "serious work" is pathetic, and reminds me some previous similar statements about the mouse .... At that time, too, the well known corporate statement was "nobody has ever got fired because of purchasing from IBM ..."
Perhaps a bad analogy, since IBM still has some of the best enterprise products, except today it's supercomputers, Linux, analytics, etc... Apple also doesn't compete with anything IBM does.
They are by no means the only shareholders left. I don't know how you get that idea, unless you aren't really serious. If I put an order in for 1,000 shares of Apple, to buy, or to sell, that will affect the price of the shares by a little bit, for a few moments, unless others think it's the beginning of something and change their asking, or selling prices. But when a very large order goes through, even through a private exchange, that could affect the stock more permanently. That's is, for a few hours, or days, depending on how the market reacts to it.
There are, no doubt, many small owners of Apple stock. But most own just a few dozen, or few hundred shares.
You can't just pull out. It's a major hassle. If they attempted to de-list, there would be fallout. The usual way a company does that is to go private. Dell is attempting to do that now. Anyone know how to raise $500 billion to take Apple private?
I assume that Apple will be upping their dividend during, or around the time of the shareholders meeting. I wish I could go, but it's always at a bad time for me.
If Apple could bring some of that cash back to the US, we would see a much higher dividend, or a large one time disbursement, as Microsoft was practically forced to do several years ago. But with most of their business overseas, that's going to be a continuing problem for major US based companies, that will only get worse as business out of the US becomes a larger portion of their sales and profits. That will artificially limit dividends here.
Originally Posted by melgross
Anyone know how to raise $500 billion to take Apple private?
Kickstarter.
They do in some areas. But IBM sells Apple products in its business solutions packages. Since they sold off their PC division, they have become platform agnostic, and Macs have been making a major comeback in large business.