Just because some moron bloggers says so doesn't make it so. Most of the links that you provide are trash like this. That's why you can't blame me for thinking that you must be promoting some of these sites, and perhaps because they are related to you.
You also never really answer the questions you are asked. Time and time again, you'll pick one, go off on a tangent, and ignore other substantive questions.
So, let me ask you again: Do you know what a 'hedge' fund is? If so, please define it for us. Does earning a return of 1% sound like a hedge fund operation to you? (No need to show me statistics of some hedge fund that might have actually earned that return; the question really has to do with Apple's investing style with its cash. If you don't know how to answer my question, I'd be happy to try and find some credible links on Apple's investment approach to its cash).
Thanks. I just grabbed the first apropos article I could find on the subject, I forgot to mention it's two years out of date. "cash" is a term that's very loosely defined when Apple's is discussed, anyway.
The cash and cash equivalents is roughly 10% of the publicly claimed cash numbers.
This is not correct. That will give you the wrong number.
At a minimum, you have to add Short-term Marketable Securities to Cash and Cash Equivalent under Current Assets -- the two together, from the Balance Sheet for the latest quarter (you can look it up in Apple's investor website), total $16.2B + 23.7B = $39.9B. And even then, the two together only give you Apple's financial securities holdings with a maturity of less than one year.
Since most of Apple's cash has been sitting around for longer than a year, it has been moved to Long-term Marketable Securities which, as of the end of the latest quarter, amount to $97.3B. (Now you can see where the $137B number comes from -- it is $39.9B + $97.3B; it turns out that on this aggregate amount, they've been earning a return of about 1%).
Edit: I see after I posted this that gatorguy actually provided a useful link that answers your question! Thanks, and hooray! There's hope yet....
Did Apple ever promise to spend lots of its cash to lure investors to buy its stock? Did this guy not do any research into Apples business practices before investing in the company? If so he knew what Apple was about beforehand so why is this such a big deal to him now? He is just trying to see if Cook and co. will blink now that Jobs has been gone awhile. If you don't like the way the company runs sell the stock. Quit crying.
This guys proposal is to issue new share which will no be offer to the general public and allow owners of those share to siphon off the money without out it going to the over major share holders.
So allow only those who are rich enough to buy these preferred shares. neat trick wouldn't say.
Just because some moron bloggers says so doesn't make it so. Most of the links that you provide are trash like this. That's why you can't blame me for thinking that you must be promoting some of these sites, and perhaps because they are related to you.
You also never really answer the questions you are asked. Time and time again, you'll pick one, go off on a tangent, and ignore other substantive questions.
So, let me ask you again: Do you know what a 'hedge' fund is? If so, please define it for us. Does earning a return of 1% sound like a hedge fund operation to you? (No need to show me statistics of some hedge fund that might have actually earned that return; the question really has to do with Apple's investing style with its cash. If you don't know how to answer my question, I'd be happy to try and find some credible links on Apple's investment approach to its cash).
No sir, I don't have an in-depth knowledge of investing either. All I really know of hedge-funds is what I've read. I don't have any money invested in one either, nor any other tech stock for that matter. I tend to invest in new businesses and/or expansion of existing ones. I look at it as a safer investment with better returns than playing the stock market. Particularly true if the market is as heavily manipulated as you and most others here say. IMHO that would put a lowly individual investor like me at a severe disadvantage so why play?
BTW, what questions have I ever avoided answering? You make it sound like a habit of mine (time and again??). It sounds more like a red herring.
This is not correct. That will give you the wrong number.
At a minimum, you have to add Short-term Marketable Securities to Cash and Cash Equivalent under Current Assets -- the two together, from the Balance Sheet for the latest quarter (you can look it up in Apple's investor website), total $16.2B + 23.7B = $39.9B. And even then, the two together only give you Apple's financial securities holdings with a maturity of less than one year.
Since most of Apple's cash has been sitting around for longer than a year, it has been moved to Long-term Marketable Securities which, as of the end of the latest quarter, amount to $97.3B. (Now you can see where the $137B number comes from -- it is $39.9B + $97.3B; it turns out that on this aggregate amount, they've been earning a return of about 1%).
Edit: I see after I posted this that gatorguy actually provided a useful link that answers your question! Thanks, and hooray! There's hope yet....
OK, if they're only getting 1% on that much money, then something is wrong. I expected that it would be a lot better than that. So I agree on that part with Einhorn, but I don't agree with the way he's trying to fix it, at least the timing of the lawsuit, or the specific changes he demands.
Oh great. Now the arguements start here too. Basically if the share holders are in it for the money then sell the apple shares and buy stock of another company that will pay big enough dividends for them. It's not like you have to keep the shares you have! That's the point of the stock exchange! Honestly some people would rather sue than actually trade. Both in my opinion are sleazy and dishonest but at least traders make no bones about being ruthless!
Great - another D-Bag - as if we don't have enough.
Who is John Galt?
My GOD - all these people that don't do SHIT - complaining that Apple is making too much money and not giving it to them fast enough. Maybe Apple should pull a Dell and go private. Then we can laugh as all the of Wall St. masturbates with their $100 bills - only to realize the party is over - that the cash tree has dried up - and the locus and lemming herd need to go find a different company to manipulate and rape.
Personally - I don't give a rat's ass about their stock. I care about great products. If it takes having $100B in the bank to make great products - then so be it. What do I care?
(In case the link is incorrect, my post was: Another pointless link from you. Who's Horace Dideu? (I know, I know, he says he has an MBA from Harvard! wow!!) Another blogger who's a cousin? Can you explain his methodology to us? What does he or his methodology have to do with the company whose numbers and methodology are being quoted in this story? Do you even bother to read the links you cite? Will you actually answer each of these five questions? )
imo, He's making a play. On one hand he's talking himself up by seeming to speak on behalf of AAPL shareholders and what benefit his wizard scheme could do for them. OTOH Greenlight Capital is suing in a move to - what ? Discredit the BOD ? Add more disruptive comment ? Talk the share price down further ?
I'd trust him about as far as I could throw him - he's got a plan with eyes firmly set on some that cash, that's for sure.
Gotta watch out for the Tall Poppy thing Einhorn ....
Comments
deleted
Originally Posted by frankie
By the way apple pay your taxes like the rest of us.
They do. Don't start that again…
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
It looks like a hedge fund to the article's author. (No relationship by the way before you ask if he's my cousin
There's some additional background on Braeburn here for those curious:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-09-30/presenting-worlds-biggest-hedge-fund-you-have-never-heard
Just because some moron bloggers says so doesn't make it so. Most of the links that you provide are trash like this. That's why you can't blame me for thinking that you must be promoting some of these sites, and perhaps because they are related to you.
You also never really answer the questions you are asked. Time and time again, you'll pick one, go off on a tangent, and ignore other substantive questions.
So, let me ask you again: Do you know what a 'hedge' fund is? If so, please define it for us. Does earning a return of 1% sound like a hedge fund operation to you? (No need to show me statistics of some hedge fund that might have actually earned that return; the question really has to do with Apple's investing style with its cash. If you don't know how to answer my question, I'd be happy to try and find some credible links on Apple's investment approach to its cash).
Thanks. I just grabbed the first apropos article I could find on the subject, I forgot to mention it's two years out of date. "cash" is a term that's very loosely defined when Apple's is discussed, anyway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
No.
Be realistic.
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money/perfi/columnist/krantz/2011-08-09-apple-cash_n.htm
The cash and cash equivalents is roughly 10% of the publicly claimed cash numbers.
This is not correct. That will give you the wrong number.
At a minimum, you have to add Short-term Marketable Securities to Cash and Cash Equivalent under Current Assets -- the two together, from the Balance Sheet for the latest quarter (you can look it up in Apple's investor website), total $16.2B + 23.7B = $39.9B. And even then, the two together only give you Apple's financial securities holdings with a maturity of less than one year.
Since most of Apple's cash has been sitting around for longer than a year, it has been moved to Long-term Marketable Securities which, as of the end of the latest quarter, amount to $97.3B. (Now you can see where the $137B number comes from -- it is $39.9B + $97.3B; it turns out that on this aggregate amount, they've been earning a return of about 1%).
Edit: I see after I posted this that gatorguy actually provided a useful link that answers your question! Thanks, and hooray! There's hope yet....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple IIc
Apple wouldn't have this "cash problem" if it spent some of that money on US production facilities and other investments in the US.
But that assumes you can find the trained labor, materials, supply chain, components etc. to support the gargantuan scale that Apple needs.
As an aside, Apple has started to do exactly this.
So allow only those who are rich enough to buy these preferred shares. neat trick wouldn't say.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
Just because some moron bloggers says so doesn't make it so. Most of the links that you provide are trash like this. That's why you can't blame me for thinking that you must be promoting some of these sites, and perhaps because they are related to you.
You also never really answer the questions you are asked. Time and time again, you'll pick one, go off on a tangent, and ignore other substantive questions.
So, let me ask you again: Do you know what a 'hedge' fund is? If so, please define it for us. Does earning a return of 1% sound like a hedge fund operation to you? (No need to show me statistics of some hedge fund that might have actually earned that return; the question really has to do with Apple's investing style with its cash. If you don't know how to answer my question, I'd be happy to try and find some credible links on Apple's investment approach to its cash).
No sir, I don't have an in-depth knowledge of investing either. All I really know of hedge-funds is what I've read. I don't have any money invested in one either, nor any other tech stock for that matter. I tend to invest in new businesses and/or expansion of existing ones. I look at it as a safer investment with better returns than playing the stock market. Particularly true if the market is as heavily manipulated as you and most others here say. IMHO that would put a lowly individual investor like me at a severe disadvantage so why play?
BTW, what questions have I ever avoided answering? You make it sound like a habit of mine (time and again??). It sounds more like a red herring.
OK, if they're only getting 1% on that much money, then something is wrong. I expected that it would be a lot better than that. So I agree on that part with Einhorn, but I don't agree with the way he's trying to fix it, at least the timing of the lawsuit, or the specific changes he demands.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Creid1987
Frankly, he's right. There's no conceivable use for $137bn in cash.
Oh I don't know, if you wanted to buy Samsung Electronics....
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui
Oh I don't know, if you wanted to buy Samsung Electronics....
..... and shut it down (like Oracle did with PeopleSoft)...... ;-)
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35
Bottom line is this:
having $140 Billion doing nothing but returning 1% is horrible for shareholders and the company.
Apple will net about $20-$25 billion more this year in cash. (after dividend / buybacks)
Apple needs to let investor know if this cash will just be wasted away return 1%
You truly, really need to stop smoking whatever it is you bought on the street. Your humor is getting old.
Who is John Galt?
My GOD - all these people that don't do SHIT - complaining that Apple is making too much money and not giving it to them fast enough. Maybe Apple should pull a Dell and go private. Then we can laugh as all the of Wall St. masturbates with their $100 bills - only to realize the party is over - that the cash tree has dried up - and the locus and lemming herd need to go find a different company to manipulate and rape.
Personally - I don't give a rat's ass about their stock. I care about great products. If it takes having $100B in the bank to make great products - then so be it. What do I care?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
BTW, what questions have I ever avoided answering? You make it sound like a habit of mine (time and again??). It sounds more like a red herring.
Sure! For a typical example, see here: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/155839/apple-samsung-capture-103-of-handset-profits-as-rivals-lose-money#post_2272318
(In case the link is incorrect, my post was: Another pointless link from you. Who's Horace Dideu? (I know, I know, he says he has an MBA from Harvard! wow!!) Another blogger who's a cousin? Can you explain his methodology to us? What does he or his methodology have to do with the company whose numbers and methodology are being quoted in this story? Do you even bother to read the links you cite? Will you actually answer each of these five questions?
deleted
Originally Posted by sflocal
You truly, really need to stop smoking whatever it is you bought on the street. Your humor is getting old.
Thing is, he bought it on Wall Street, and it's Apple stock he's smoking.
Has a nice wooden flavor to it, but the experience is unlike any other. Don't be surprised if it's confusing to many.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Einhorn_(hedge_fund_manager)
imo, He's making a play. On one hand he's talking himself up by seeming to speak on behalf of AAPL shareholders and what benefit his wizard scheme could do for them. OTOH Greenlight Capital is suing in a move to - what ? Discredit the BOD ? Add more disruptive comment ? Talk the share price down further ?
I'd trust him about as far as I could throw him - he's got a plan with eyes firmly set on some that cash, that's for sure.
Gotta watch out for the Tall Poppy thing Einhorn ....
nice website, btw lol
https://www.greenlightcapital.com/