Einhorn isn't telling what apple should do with its business, he giving apple no brain financial advice.
Others on wall st continue to tell apple it should make this (iphone mini) or do that (buy twitter and nflx, i agree!).
He is just giving them sound financial advice, solve two issues. How to continue to have a sovereign wealth fund operation in Nevada ($200billion by years end), and rewarding investors who by definitions are owners of apple (Einhorn being a large one, as he is also probably heavily invested in his fund).
My issue regarding this is simple...i look at Skype acquisition by msft, offshore cash, bought company that will basically return msft a higher than the fix income return it was getting on its overseas cash, and build msft ecosystem.
Apple should deploy cash like that now, why get treasury or low rate returns on all that money, when u can buy nflx, ebay, or god knows what other dominate vertical player and ad to ecosystem, get above fixed income return.
Or buy back stock, cause apple is still growing faster than its investment returns and i still think its one of the best investments out there, ad apple management should agree.
I like buying some key players, this market is still in play (slight weakness between mow and tv, iwatch, new fingerprint homebutton
iphone)
Either way, i agree with Einhorn about the proxy, very unapple to say the least.
David just wants to have the right to answer three questions to vote on separately. not bundled together as is, really is that to much to ask
I have it all wrong. Forgive me. He's a nice guy after all.
uhh, why the claim for irreparable harm ?
You know, seeing as its just about bundling and him wanting to help Apple with its financial decisions and all.
Great guy that he is - you know, concerned shareholder, big investor and all.
IMO Greenlight are damaging there own investment as this kind of action does nothing but drive down the value if Apple shares, making their investment worth less. All this negativity is driving down Apple's value which must be damaging the USA economy as their biggest company is now worth only about 70% of what it was 6 months ago.
Probably shouldn't have bundled but really of no consequence since all proposals increased power of shareholders. TC called it a "silly sideshow" because said aapl wouldn't issue another class of stock without shareholder approval anyway. The proposed preferred issuance (to all common shareholders) I've heard discussed is only for @$50B at 4%--@$2B/yr.. That's less than a 20% bump to present dividend. Any "unlocking value" beyond cash actually paid out as dividends is speculative. On its face the proposal seems attractive (sell the preferred, keep the common) but no one is discussing the downside(s) of Einhorn's proposal, if any. Generally, there is no free lunch
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmav5
Most of u i think have it wrong.
Einhorn isn't telling what apple should do with its business, he giving apple no brain financial advice.
Others on wall st continue to tell apple it should make this (iphone mini) or do that (buy twitter and nflx, i agree!).
He is just giving them sound financial advice, solve two issues. How to continue to have a sovereign wealth fund operation in Nevada ($200billion by years end), and rewarding investors who by definitions are owners of apple (Einhorn being a large one, as he is also probably heavily invested in his fund).
My issue regarding this is simple...i look at Skype acquisition by msft, offshore cash, bought company that will basically return msft a higher than the fix income return it was getting on its overseas cash, and build msft ecosystem.
Apple should deploy cash like that now, why get treasury or low rate returns on all that money, when u can buy nflx, ebay, or god knows what other dominate vertical player and ad to ecosystem, get above fixed income return.
Or buy back stock, cause apple is still growing faster than its investment returns and i still think its one of the best investments out there, ad apple management should agree.
I like buying some key players, this market is still in play (slight weakness between mow and tv, iwatch, new fingerprint homebutton
iphone)
Either way, i agree with Einhorn about the proxy, very unapple to say the least.
David just wants to have the right to answer three questions to vote on separately. not bundled together as is, really is that to much to ask
I have it all wrong. Forgive me. He's a nice guy after all.
uhh, why the claim for irreparable harm ?
You know, seeing as its just about bundling and him wanting to help Apple with its financial decisions and all.
Great guy that he is - you know, concerned shareholder, big investor and all.
Yup he's a prince.
The proposed preferred issuance (to all common shareholders) I've heard discussed is only for @$50B at 4%--@$2B/yr.. That's less than a 20% bump to present dividend. Any "unlocking value" beyond cash actually paid out as dividends is speculative. On its face the proposal seems attractive (sell the preferred, keep the common) but no one is discussing the downside(s) of Einhorn's proposal, if any. Generally, there is no free lunch