Apple spoke of both the Buyback and Dividends at their last quarter's financials. I've used and profited from Apple in my business and in stock I purchased over 12 years ago. Am I paranoid to think that the fact that Apple did nothing to quell the concerns of the market when bogus stories about cutting screen orders, etc., was not addressed was a way to manipulate the market?
I believe "analysts" and the press were the prime reason the stock tanked, but with no input from Apple, these sources took on total credibility and the Apple market tanked. As a result I lost over $200,000. (on paper) and a lot of respect for Apple. Is there anyone who can logically dispute my thinking here? If so, PLEASE DO. Until then, after over 20 years of being exclusively Apple - I'm ready to bale.
I am here to learn: please cite 5 proven examples where share price of a example climbed significantly and stayed at that level for good entirely because of share buyback. I am all ears/eyes.
Here are hundreds of examples, and dozens of academic papers backing this up. Happy to send you all the cites you need if you PM me.
'For good' is a tough criterion that nothing in finance can meet, since lots of other events of market significance intervene, making it very difficult to isolate the long-term impact of any particular event. .
Thats right. Stock-based compensation share creep has been aprox.3% yearly. A good use for excess cash for shares outstanding to remain neutral. Not a negative at all.
Apple spoke of both the Buyback and Dividends at their last quarter's financials. I've used and profited from Apple in my business and in stock I purchased over 12 years ago. Am I paranoid to think that the fact that Apple did nothing to quell the concerns of the market when bogus stories about cutting screen orders, etc., was not addressed was a way to manipulate the market?
I believe "analysts" and the press were the prime reason the stock tanked, but with no input from Apple, these sources took on total credibility and the Apple market tanked. As a result I lost over $200,000. (on paper) and a lot of respect for Apple. Is there anyone who can logically dispute my thinking here? If so, PLEASE DO. Until then, after over 20 years of being exclusively Apple - I'm ready to bale.
Given how long you claim youve owned Apple -- I guess many, many years -- I find it somewhat suspicious that you are reacting so vehemently to a fairly short term movement.
Why not be patient and give it a few more months? Do you seriously think the stock has much further to fall, and then stay at that level for a while? Or that management won't address this? Can you imagine the wealth loss among Apple employees, managers, and directors? You think they are not aware of it or not hurting from it as much shareholders like you and I are? (They are probably less diversified than the average shareholder in Apple).
LOL..Dreams of large buybacks. outside of the 10B which only offsets stock grants and thus does NOT shrink the float contrary to this article's statement, Apple will not be increasing their buyback. They are in it to hold the cash. Just like Jobs ignored Buffett we will see Cook ignore Wall Street on this.
Also the 10B which only offsets stock grant dilution would have only taken out less than 2% of the company float. To put this in more perspective apple trades about this much in dollar volume daily. 10B was paltry over one year or the 3 they said they would do. If they do it all now don't expect any other buybacks for 2 more years. After that they will do another buyback maybe to offset the next slug of stock grants
Share buybacks and dividends (or sale of the company) are ultimately what gives stocks on the stock market value. Everything else is a game of musical chairs / greater fool theory. Most investors don't realize this, but they're jockeying for a position in owning a company that will eventually directly pay them.
I don't know where this idea came from that buybacks and dividends are somehow shameful. They promise of both is what makes the stock market tick.
Here are hundreds of examples, and dozens of academic papers backing this up. Happy to send you all the cites you need if you PM me.
'For good' is a tough criterion that nothing in finance can meet, since lots of other events of market significance intervene, making it very difficult to isolate the long-term impact of any particular event. .
What you should do is give a lesson on this forum that explains the benefits of diversification and removing emotion when it comes to investing. Reading these threads over the last few days it is clear that people on this forum have too much emotion because they are in love with Apple as a company or in love with Steve Jobs.
While I did sell off some of my AAPL when it was 672 and change like you I also bought in during this downward swing. If people can't handle taking risk then they should put their cash in a money market and call it a day.
You may also want to point out that stock manipulation expands well outside the scope of Apple, if they don't believe you they need to take a look a oil futures.
For the person that posted to you I had to laugh because well actually you are an expert on this subject.
The issue about the number of shares is a poor excuse by Chowdhry. Apple could have issued EARNINGS guidance without EPS guidance. In other words, they could have guided how much money they expected to earn without dividing that number by the outstanding shares.
Ummmm... That is exactly what apple did... They expect revenue ranging from 41-43 billion...........
Share buybacks and dividends (or sale of the company) are ultimately what gives stocks on the stock market value. Everything else is a game of musical chairs / greater fool theory. Most investors don't realize this, but they're jockeying for a position in owning a company that will eventually directly pay them.
Not true. (Hint: Why do you think a market for real estate exists?)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jakeb
I don't know where this idea came from that buybacks and dividends are somehow shameful.
Initiating a dividend already has put it in the value stock column. Taking on that kind of debt will simply shout that out from the rooftops, and confirm that "Apple's growth is behind it" in the market's mind.
Not at all. It merely shows confidence in the current and future business. Considering the companies past anathema for debt, it seems unlikely. They have harped on this at previous corporate announcements.
Great news! I hope that Apple buys back a mindboggling shitload number of shares.
Unfortunately, only 40B is classified as "in the US", so repatriating any more for stock buybacks would lead to a very large tax hit. This leaves an upper bound on how much they will buy back.
Not at all. It merely shows confidence in the current and future business. Considering the companies past anathema for debt, it seems unlikely. They have harped on this at previous corporate announcements.
1) Why do need debt when they've got $137B in cash sitting around!?
2) What makes anyone doubt that Apple lacks confidence in its current and future business?
3) If signaling confidence in the future was the criterion, what else do you think a massive share repurchase does other than exactly that?
4) Who are the "they" that have "harped on this"? When? Can you provide a cite or a link?
Unfortunately, only 40B is classified as "in the US", so repatriating any more for stock buybacks would lead to a very large tax hit. This leaves an upper bound on how much they will buy back.
I remember reading something about that a while back.
The overseas money seems to be stuck in limbo though. I'm guessing that Apple doesn't want to repatriate the money with the current tax rates and they are looking for some sort of special deal. It doesn't seem like that deal is happening any time soon, so I'm guessing that the overseas cash pile will just keep growing bigger and bigger, while it's still basically held in limbo?
Unfortunately, only 40B is classified as "in the US", so repatriating any more for stock buybacks would lead to a very large tax hit. This leaves an upper bound on how much they will buy back.
First, it is estimated that about one-third of Apple's cash is in the US. One-third of $137B is over $45B. Second, they wouldn't do it one-shot (and it would be foolish to do so anyway); what they would do is announce a share repurchase program over a specific time period, with something like, say $20B spent up front. Third, if the stock price goes up substantially, it's something that can be -- and should be -- easily rescinded (those shareholders that want to sell do not have to sell to Apple; they would be just as happy to sell it in the market).
Comments
I believe "analysts" and the press were the prime reason the stock tanked, but with no input from Apple, these sources took on total credibility and the Apple market tanked. As a result I lost over $200,000. (on paper) and a lot of respect for Apple. Is there anyone who can logically dispute my thinking here? If so, PLEASE DO. Until then, after over 20 years of being exclusively Apple - I'm ready to bale.
Here are hundreds of examples, and dozens of academic papers backing this up. Happy to send you all the cites you need if you PM me.
'For good' is a tough criterion that nothing in finance can meet, since lots of other events of market significance intervene, making it very difficult to isolate the long-term impact of any particular event. .
Since we live in a world of stock manipulators, lazy "journalists," astroturfing, and trollery, here's a quick translation guide:
Good Apple News becomes:
Apple is Doomed
Great Apple News becomes:
Apple is Lying Along With Everyone Else Who Thinks Apple is Doing Well
Random Negative Rumors With Zero Evidence become:
Solid Fact That is Not to Be Doubted
Given how long you claim youve owned Apple -- I guess many, many years -- I find it somewhat suspicious that you are reacting so vehemently to a fairly short term movement.
Why not be patient and give it a few more months? Do you seriously think the stock has much further to fall, and then stay at that level for a while? Or that management won't address this? Can you imagine the wealth loss among Apple employees, managers, and directors? You think they are not aware of it or not hurting from it as much shareholders like you and I are? (They are probably less diversified than the average shareholder in Apple).
Great news! I hope that Apple buys back a mindboggling shitload number of shares.
LOL..Dreams of large buybacks. outside of the 10B which only offsets stock grants and thus does NOT shrink the float contrary to this article's statement, Apple will not be increasing their buyback. They are in it to hold the cash. Just like Jobs ignored Buffett we will see Cook ignore Wall Street on this.
Also the 10B which only offsets stock grant dilution would have only taken out less than 2% of the company float. To put this in more perspective apple trades about this much in dollar volume daily. 10B was paltry over one year or the 3 they said they would do. If they do it all now don't expect any other buybacks for 2 more years. After that they will do another buyback maybe to offset the next slug of stock grants
Quote:
Originally Posted by mvigod
Just like Jobs ignored Buffett ....
Uh... what? Explain?
I don't know where this idea came from that buybacks and dividends are somehow shameful. They promise of both is what makes the stock market tick.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
Here are hundreds of examples, and dozens of academic papers backing this up. Happy to send you all the cites you need if you PM me.
'For good' is a tough criterion that nothing in finance can meet, since lots of other events of market significance intervene, making it very difficult to isolate the long-term impact of any particular event. .
What you should do is give a lesson on this forum that explains the benefits of diversification and removing emotion when it comes to investing. Reading these threads over the last few days it is clear that people on this forum have too much emotion because they are in love with Apple as a company or in love with Steve Jobs.
While I did sell off some of my AAPL when it was 672 and change like you I also bought in during this downward swing. If people can't handle taking risk then they should put their cash in a money market and call it a day.
You may also want to point out that stock manipulation expands well outside the scope of Apple, if they don't believe you they need to take a look a oil futures.
For the person that posted to you I had to laugh because well actually you are an expert on this subject.
Ummmm... That is exactly what apple did... They expect revenue ranging from 41-43 billion...........
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
Uh... what? Explain?
He only went for the vegan items instead of piling on the meats. But he did stop over for some all-natural Jell-o.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jakeb
Share buybacks and dividends (or sale of the company) are ultimately what gives stocks on the stock market value. Everything else is a game of musical chairs / greater fool theory. Most investors don't realize this, but they're jockeying for a position in owning a company that will eventually directly pay them.
Not true. (Hint: Why do you think a market for real estate exists?)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jakeb
I don't know where this idea came from that buybacks and dividends are somehow shameful.
Who said it was 'shameful'?
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
Borrow!?
Initiating a dividend already has put it in the value stock column. Taking on that kind of debt will simply shout that out from the rooftops, and confirm that "Apple's growth is behind it" in the market's mind.
Not at all. It merely shows confidence in the current and future business. Considering the companies past anathema for debt, it seems unlikely. They have harped on this at previous corporate announcements.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ko024
Ummmm... That is exactly what apple did... They expect revenue ranging from 41-43 billion...........
and margin guidance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][
Great news! I hope that Apple buys back a mindboggling shitload number of shares.
Unfortunately, only 40B is classified as "in the US", so repatriating any more for stock buybacks would lead to a very large tax hit. This leaves an upper bound on how much they will buy back.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ifij775
Not at all. It merely shows confidence in the current and future business. Considering the companies past anathema for debt, it seems unlikely. They have harped on this at previous corporate announcements.
1) Why do need debt when they've got $137B in cash sitting around!?
2) What makes anyone doubt that Apple lacks confidence in its current and future business?
3) If signaling confidence in the future was the criterion, what else do you think a massive share repurchase does other than exactly that?
4) Who are the "they" that have "harped on this"? When? Can you provide a cite or a link?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ifij775
Unfortunately, only 40B is classified as "in the US", so repatriating any more for stock buybacks would lead to a very large tax hit. This leaves an upper bound on how much they will buy back.
I remember reading something about that a while back.
The overseas money seems to be stuck in limbo though. I'm guessing that Apple doesn't want to repatriate the money with the current tax rates and they are looking for some sort of special deal. It doesn't seem like that deal is happening any time soon, so I'm guessing that the overseas cash pile will just keep growing bigger and bigger, while it's still basically held in limbo?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ifij775
Unfortunately, only 40B is classified as "in the US", so repatriating any more for stock buybacks would lead to a very large tax hit. This leaves an upper bound on how much they will buy back.
First, it is estimated that about one-third of Apple's cash is in the US. One-third of $137B is over $45B. Second, they wouldn't do it one-shot (and it would be foolish to do so anyway); what they would do is announce a share repurchase program over a specific time period, with something like, say $20B spent up front. Third, if the stock price goes up substantially, it's something that can be -- and should be -- easily rescinded (those shareholders that want to sell do not have to sell to Apple; they would be just as happy to sell it in the market).
Quote:
Originally Posted by nagromme
Random Negative Rumors With Zero Evidence become:
Solid Fact That is Not to Be Doubted
I heard Tim Cook wears a hair piece. He purchased his from the same place Donald Trump did.