Everyone else is doing a great job of ripping your nonsense to pieces but I couldn't let this one fly by.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetz
... Keep in mind that Apple wouldn't exist today if investors all over hadn't provided the capital to grow that company. ...
This is just BS Capitalist dogma. The "investors" that helped Apple come into being are mostly dead now and it was a long long time ago that it happened.
Just a few years ago Apple was $60.00 a share. For the entire majority of it's existence, it traded much lower than that. Almost everyone currently invested bought shares *after* the stock took off.
Almost none of the current investors in the company (if any) can rightly say that their "investment" had anything at all to do with Apple's "existence." By far the majority of today's Apple shareholders, (including yourself), are nothing but worthless leeches, riding the company tip it drops (which you constantly predict will happen tomorrow), whipping it in the ass to make it go faster, sucking profits out and spreading a ton of FUD and BS along the way.
You are not owed anything by Apple, you are in fact, just using it for your own purposes and contributing nothing.
MSFT has a higher P/E because it is a software company, not a hardware company (Wall Street doesn't count the 10 units of Zunes and tablets MS has sold). You're comparing apples to oranges.
I do think Apple is undervalued. Their hardware business is supported by a healthy dose of software. The Apple ecosystem is much "stickier" than say RIM's business. Also, Apple does make/sell a fair amount of software/content (iTunes, app store, music, movies, iOS, final cut, pages, etc.)
Honestly though, MSFT P/E should be lower, given the serious threats they face going forward (ball dropped on Windows 8 and missed the whole mobile computing shift).
I agree too that Apple is undervalued. By how much is the multi-billion dollar question. The stickier ecosystem is more a marketing point than revenue generator though. End of the day, all those media/app/software sales are insignificant in comparison to the hardware sales revenue.
Everyone else is doing a great job of ripping your nonsense to pieces but I couldn't let this one fly by.
This is just BS capitalist dogma. The "investors" that helped Apple come into being are mostly dead now and it was a long long time ago that it happened.
Just a few years ago Apple was $60.00 a share. For the entire majority of it's existence, it traded much lower than that. Almost everyone currently invested bought shares *after* the stock took off.
Almost none of the current investors in the company (if any) can rightly say that their "investment" had anything at all to do with Apple's "existence." By far the majority of today's Apple shareholders, (including yourself), are nothing but worthless leeches, riding the company tip it drops (which you constantly predict will happen tomorrow), whipping it in the ass to make it go faster, sucking profits out and spreading a ton of FUD and BS along the way.
You are not owed anything by Apple, you are in fact, just using it for your own purposes and contributing nothing.
Wait. So the entire framework for capitalism is bunk and investor concerns are entirely irrelevant beyond a certain point in time? Interesting. Why doesn't Apple put that in its disclosure?
Sorry, but whether you like it or not, last I checked, Apple is a publicly listed company and as such they certainly have to respond to shareholder concerns. If they don't want to inconvenience themselves with something so bothersome, they are free to buy us out and take the company private. Would be interesting to see Apple follow Dell's precedent!
From a shareholder perspective? Not enough. Stock will keep deflating.
Sooner or later the shareholders are going to vote Cook off the Island if they keep hoarding cash for no apparent reason. The buyback sounded good until they said it's distributed over several years.
Or, it is exactly enough...
Wait… "are" going to vote Cook off the Island? Well first of all, Shareholders don't vote for CEO. They vote for Board Members who then appoint/fire officers. It'll be a cold day in hell...
And "distributed over several years" makes it sound long and unpalatable. What's wrong with simply pointing out the facts? The end of FY 2015 is… when? Do the math… yah. Is that "several years"? Really…?? How about "roughly two years…" Then it becomes a good, careful pace for buying back SIXTY BILLION dollars in shares. Anything faster would artificially inflate the stock price, and then you'd have something ELSE negative to say, for sure...
Cook said they will pay out about $10 billion in dividends per year now. Add to the $60 billion / 3 years = $20 billion per year in buybacks is $30 billion per year from their profits. That just seems crazy.
To put that in perspective, Facebook is a $60B company. This just goes to show how much cash Apple is generating.
Wait… "are" going to vote Cook off the Island? Well first of all, Shareholders don't vote for CEO. They vote for Board Members who then appoint/fire officers. It'll be a cold day in hell...
And "distributed over several years" makes it sound long and unpalatable. What's wrong with simply pointing out the facts? The end of FY 2015 is… when? Do the math… yah. Is that "several years"? Really…?? How about "roughly two years…" Then it becomes a good, careful pace for buying back SIXTY BILLION dollars in shares. Anything faster would artificially inflate the stock price, and then you'd have something ELSE negative to say, for sure...
What's your agenda here?
Agreed. And to add to your point, Apple wants to have the liberty of buying back the shares when they want so that they can buy wihtout disrupting the market. I'm hoping Cook can buy all those shares back shares at below $400 or even better yet at $330, which is my basis in my Apple shares.
So basically, they aren't reducing the cash hoarde at all. They are just growing it slower.
From an investor perspective, AAPL and MSFT are slowly starting to converge. MSFT investors too, thought their stock would rebound. It never did. Instead, MSFT stabilized in a new trading range and became a blue chip dividend stock. Real risk that this is what will happen to AAPL if there are no blockbuster new products on the horizon or the board isn't interested in returning money to shareholders.
WILL happen… if, and if, and if and when and if……. I mean, look at Microsoft!!!
Seriously, man… look at Apple. That's who we're talking about, and I see none of the same illusions that you do.
I'm fine with Apple having a cash reserve (I prefer "reserve"… from a business perspective, that's a healthy thing to have. "Hoard" is a word with negative connotations used by people who just want more of that pie for less invested)...
You keep speaking "from an investor perspective"…. but, as an investor, my perspective isn't at all like the one you claim to know everything about.
From MY investor perspective, 2015 is only 2 years, and that's an excellent, conservative pace for a share buyback of this magnitude. It keeps the options open and maximizes possible results (while minimizing disruption). It's fine with me that they aren't DRAINING the cash reserve, but enacting a capital return that makes sense and keeps the reserves healthy. Meanwhile, they're increasing my dividend another 35 cents a share which is about what I expected. Actually 5 ~ 10 cents higher than I expected (I expected a 25 ~ 30 cent increase).
From an investor perspective, I have little to complain about, other than the artificially low value of the stock at present, and I don't blame Apple management for that. Something tells me that's about to change, however. Up up and away…….
Wait. So the entire framework for capitalism is bunk and investor concerns are entirely irrelevant beyond a certain point in time? Interesting. Why doesn't Apple put that in its disclosure?
Sorry, but whether you like it or not, last I checked, Apple is a publicly listed company and as such they certainly have to respond to shareholder concerns. If they don't want to inconvenience themselves with something so bothersome, they are free to buy us out and take the company private. Would be interesting to see Apple follow Dell's precedent!
Yeah, blah blah blah. Capitalism **** Yeah! etc.
You're already attempting to answer every post in the thread all by yourself so I'll just let you continue. You're wasting yours, and every else's time though.
Here for example, you haven't even addressed my argument, just put words in my mouth that I didn't say and pushed out some more dogma about stuff that I wasn't even talking about.
Can you actually hear anyone but yourself? The only people that care about what you're saying think you're completely wrong. What does that tell you?
I get the argument. Heck, I thought that too as I watched Apple go through $700 and crash through my position at $580.
But here's the thing about P/E. It's based on market sentiment about whether or not the company is going to grow or is able to generate income going forward. The iTV rumours keep advancing by a year every year. No new products, while Apple faces commoditization on its existing products and outright hostility to the idea of returning cash, is bound to keep investor sentiment negative towards Apple's P/E.
I picked up some AAPL today, before the announcement. I think the stock is ridiculously cheap. But I won't lie. I am very fearful that AAPL may well settle under $500 for years to come and I'll either have to eat my losses or wait a very long time for the $3 dividend to make up for it.
Wait a minute... in your previous post you went all macho about investments not being "emotional", then in this post seemed to be basing pretty much all your perspective on emotion (and fear) and what I'd point to as supposition and false narrative.
I remember when Apple was at 580. I wouldn't have bought in at that particular point. Why did you? And more importantly, how emotional a decision was it? (I'm speaking of the opposite emotion known as "irrational hubris"). This isn't an 'attack' by the way… a real question.
So basically, they aren't reducing the cash hoarde at all. They are just growing it slower.
From an investor perspective, AAPL and MSFT are slowly starting to converge. MSFT investors too, thought their stock would rebound. It never did. Instead, MSFT stabilized in a new trading range and became a blue chip dividend stock. Real risk that this is what will happen to AAPL if there are no blockbuster new products on the horizon or the board isn't interested in returning money to shareholders.
Correct, (re first sentence), but notice that this was in line with the Einhorn proposal (he was not suggesting reducing the pile).
So here's your question: Why didn't you sell at $700?
It's a good question. On the way back down I would have certainly sold around $640, give or take, if I had bought in at $580… 10% is a decent return on a short turnaround. Once it tucked under $600, I'd have been sold out and sitting in a wait-and-see orbit...
Unless we're talking about 100 shares… then, I don't know if it warrants discussion...
I wouldn't call the drop unfounded though. We had the maps (PR) fiasco, followed by execs dumping stock, followed by execs leaving, followed by a lower profit margin. Taken together, I can see why people would be fearful, especially after a huge run up.
I would certainly call the drop 'unfounded'. After almost two years of record revenue growth under Cook, including the period in question (where the stock price dropped by $300 : 45%), with all the numbers looking pretty great, especially when taking broader markets into consideration (it's easy to forget that Apple has been giving us this extraordinary financial performance throughout a prolonged global recession and ongoing economic weakness).
The Maps "fiasco" isn't the first thing Apple has ever misfired on (under Jobs we had a fair share of those), and it shouldn't have any measurable impact on stock price, much less a 45% effect. After all, did the "fiasco" with the .mac rollout cause a major dip in stock value? Nope…).
"Execs dumping stock" overstates the situation to a huge degree. I'm sensitive to that stuff, and did NOT see it that way at all. (Check Microsoft in the same period, however… m-hm...)
"Followed by execs leaving"… um. What...? Do you mean Ron Johnson leaving for JCP? Or Forstall and Browett (a "shakeup" that was required in my view)? Reality check: three people does not an 'executive exodus' make.
"Lower profit margin"…? Erm… you can't be referring to the mild fluctuations in overall margins alongside significantly higher revenues resulting in immensely increased profits? That's what we're used to seeing with Apple, and those fluctuations are NEVER an issue… are you parroting some MSM 'analyst' talking head or something? TODAY is the first time in TEN YEARS that the company has seen REDUCED profit margins.
This is not a LOSS either, merely a very slight reduction in the level of margin. Not showing growth for ONE quarter, for the first time in ten years does not a profit exodus make either.
In the end, that was quite a list you came up with, most of it not very relevant in fact...
This is a company that learns from its mistakes, identifies and fixes problems, and always comes up with results beyond expectation. I can't slight them in the least. That said, I buy and sell their stock mostly according to how I think the market will perform, and not based all that much on Apple's corporate/financial performance. Those don't correlate well and often. I pay more attention to "market sentiment" to judge my buy/sell cycles…
Buying back $60 billion in shares. I can't wait to see how people put a negative spin on that.
That's a great number. At today's prices, that's about 15% of Apple's outstanding shares.
If Wall Street starts to act logically, for a change, taking 15% of shares off the table should result in a 15% share gain - even without considering anything else.
That's a great number. At today's prices, that's about 15% of Apple's outstanding shares.
If Wall Street starts to act logically, for a change, taking 15% of shares off the table should result in a 15% share gain - even without considering anything else.
it would be great if they could spend $60 billion of that $147 tomorrow on the buy back. I know it can't happen but it would be a great way to boost the stock value and say FU to Wall Street.
Maybe instead you should cry all YOU want. Your goals as an investor are not necessarily the goals of all other investors, and as someone who, less than a decade ago, bought in at 85 a share, I'm STILL flying on cloud nine, having more than sextupled my money. I'm in for the long haul, and like me, there are more investors out there who understand the stupidity, arrogance, and emotional response of short-sighted, short-term investors and day traders in the marketplace, hence, we do not "lose our shit" if Apple drops from 700 to 350 in under 12 months when their fundamentals are so clearly superhuman.
This is how it is with Apple. We in for the long haul know where its going, and we're patient. We who are in for the long haul understand that short-haulers cause these kinds of fluctuations and we sit calmly through them, just like we did in 05, 08 and now 2013. You who are in for the short term should perhaps consider finding another game to play if you can't handle the truth of the marketplace.
Buying back $60 billion in shares. I can't wait to see how people put a negative spin on that.
There is no negative spin. This is what everyone who is bearish on Apple was suggesting and hoping they do. It won't get them back to 700, but it is a way to return capital to investors, which is the end game for any corporation....
Comments
Everyone else is doing a great job of ripping your nonsense to pieces but I couldn't let this one fly by.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetz
... Keep in mind that Apple wouldn't exist today if investors all over hadn't provided the capital to grow that company. ...
This is just BS Capitalist dogma. The "investors" that helped Apple come into being are mostly dead now and it was a long long time ago that it happened.
Just a few years ago Apple was $60.00 a share. For the entire majority of it's existence, it traded much lower than that. Almost everyone currently invested bought shares *after* the stock took off.
Almost none of the current investors in the company (if any) can rightly say that their "investment" had anything at all to do with Apple's "existence." By far the majority of today's Apple shareholders, (including yourself), are nothing but worthless leeches, riding the company tip it drops (which you constantly predict will happen tomorrow), whipping it in the ass to make it go faster, sucking profits out and spreading a ton of FUD and BS along the way.
You are not owed anything by Apple, you are in fact, just using it for your own purposes and contributing nothing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ash471
MSFT has a higher P/E because it is a software company, not a hardware company (Wall Street doesn't count the 10 units of Zunes and tablets MS has sold). You're comparing apples to oranges.
I do think Apple is undervalued. Their hardware business is supported by a healthy dose of software. The Apple ecosystem is much "stickier" than say RIM's business. Also, Apple does make/sell a fair amount of software/content (iTunes, app store, music, movies, iOS, final cut, pages, etc.)
Honestly though, MSFT P/E should be lower, given the serious threats they face going forward (ball dropped on Windows 8 and missed the whole mobile computing shift).
I agree too that Apple is undervalued. By how much is the multi-billion dollar question. The stickier ecosystem is more a marketing point than revenue generator though. End of the day, all those media/app/software sales are insignificant in comparison to the hardware sales revenue.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
Everyone else is doing a great job of ripping your nonsense to pieces but I couldn't let this one fly by.
This is just BS capitalist dogma. The "investors" that helped Apple come into being are mostly dead now and it was a long long time ago that it happened.
Just a few years ago Apple was $60.00 a share. For the entire majority of it's existence, it traded much lower than that. Almost everyone currently invested bought shares *after* the stock took off.
Almost none of the current investors in the company (if any) can rightly say that their "investment" had anything at all to do with Apple's "existence." By far the majority of today's Apple shareholders, (including yourself), are nothing but worthless leeches, riding the company tip it drops (which you constantly predict will happen tomorrow), whipping it in the ass to make it go faster, sucking profits out and spreading a ton of FUD and BS along the way.
You are not owed anything by Apple, you are in fact, just using it for your own purposes and contributing nothing.
Wait. So the entire framework for capitalism is bunk and investor concerns are entirely irrelevant beyond a certain point in time? Interesting. Why doesn't Apple put that in its disclosure?
Sorry, but whether you like it or not, last I checked, Apple is a publicly listed company and as such they certainly have to respond to shareholder concerns. If they don't want to inconvenience themselves with something so bothersome, they are free to buy us out and take the company private. Would be interesting to see Apple follow Dell's precedent!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetz
From a shareholder perspective? Not enough. Stock will keep deflating.
Sooner or later the shareholders are going to vote Cook off the Island if they keep hoarding cash for no apparent reason. The buyback sounded good until they said it's distributed over several years.
Or, it is exactly enough...
Wait… "are" going to vote Cook off the Island? Well first of all, Shareholders don't vote for CEO. They vote for Board Members who then appoint/fire officers. It'll be a cold day in hell...
And "distributed over several years" makes it sound long and unpalatable. What's wrong with simply pointing out the facts? The end of FY 2015 is… when? Do the math… yah. Is that "several years"? Really…?? How about "roughly two years…" Then it becomes a good, careful pace for buying back SIXTY BILLION dollars in shares. Anything faster would artificially inflate the stock price, and then you'd have something ELSE negative to say, for sure...
What's your agenda here?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Cook said they will pay out about $10 billion in dividends per year now. Add to the $60 billion / 3 years = $20 billion per year in buybacks is $30 billion per year from their profits. That just seems crazy.
To put that in perspective, Facebook is a $60B company. This just goes to show how much cash Apple is generating.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tribalogical
Or, it is exactly enough...
Wait… "are" going to vote Cook off the Island? Well first of all, Shareholders don't vote for CEO. They vote for Board Members who then appoint/fire officers. It'll be a cold day in hell...
And "distributed over several years" makes it sound long and unpalatable. What's wrong with simply pointing out the facts? The end of FY 2015 is… when? Do the math… yah. Is that "several years"? Really…?? How about "roughly two years…" Then it becomes a good, careful pace for buying back SIXTY BILLION dollars in shares. Anything faster would artificially inflate the stock price, and then you'd have something ELSE negative to say, for sure...
What's your agenda here?
Agreed. And to add to your point, Apple wants to have the liberty of buying back the shares when they want so that they can buy wihtout disrupting the market. I'm hoping Cook can buy all those shares back shares at below $400 or even better yet at $330, which is my basis in my Apple shares.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetz
From now till 2015?
So basically, they aren't reducing the cash hoarde at all. They are just growing it slower.
From an investor perspective, AAPL and MSFT are slowly starting to converge. MSFT investors too, thought their stock would rebound. It never did. Instead, MSFT stabilized in a new trading range and became a blue chip dividend stock. Real risk that this is what will happen to AAPL if there are no blockbuster new products on the horizon or the board isn't interested in returning money to shareholders.
WILL happen… if, and if, and if and when and if……. I mean, look at Microsoft!!!
Seriously, man… look at Apple. That's who we're talking about, and I see none of the same illusions that you do.
I'm fine with Apple having a cash reserve (I prefer "reserve"… from a business perspective, that's a healthy thing to have. "Hoard" is a word with negative connotations used by people who just want more of that pie for less invested)...
You keep speaking "from an investor perspective"…. but, as an investor, my perspective isn't at all like the one you claim to know everything about.
From MY investor perspective, 2015 is only 2 years, and that's an excellent, conservative pace for a share buyback of this magnitude. It keeps the options open and maximizes possible results (while minimizing disruption). It's fine with me that they aren't DRAINING the cash reserve, but enacting a capital return that makes sense and keeps the reserves healthy. Meanwhile, they're increasing my dividend another 35 cents a share which is about what I expected. Actually 5 ~ 10 cents higher than I expected (I expected a 25 ~ 30 cent increase).
From an investor perspective, I have little to complain about, other than the artificially low value of the stock at present, and I don't blame Apple management for that. Something tells me that's about to change, however. Up up and away…….
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetz
Wait. So the entire framework for capitalism is bunk and investor concerns are entirely irrelevant beyond a certain point in time? Interesting. Why doesn't Apple put that in its disclosure?
Sorry, but whether you like it or not, last I checked, Apple is a publicly listed company and as such they certainly have to respond to shareholder concerns. If they don't want to inconvenience themselves with something so bothersome, they are free to buy us out and take the company private. Would be interesting to see Apple follow Dell's precedent!
Yeah, blah blah blah. Capitalism **** Yeah! etc.
You're already attempting to answer every post in the thread all by yourself so I'll just let you continue. You're wasting yours, and every else's time though.
Here for example, you haven't even addressed my argument, just put words in my mouth that I didn't say and pushed out some more dogma about stuff that I wasn't even talking about.
Can you actually hear anyone but yourself? The only people that care about what you're saying think you're completely wrong. What does that tell you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetz
I get the argument. Heck, I thought that too as I watched Apple go through $700 and crash through my position at $580.
But here's the thing about P/E. It's based on market sentiment about whether or not the company is going to grow or is able to generate income going forward. The iTV rumours keep advancing by a year every year. No new products, while Apple faces commoditization on its existing products and outright hostility to the idea of returning cash, is bound to keep investor sentiment negative towards Apple's P/E.
I picked up some AAPL today, before the announcement. I think the stock is ridiculously cheap. But I won't lie. I am very fearful that AAPL may well settle under $500 for years to come and I'll either have to eat my losses or wait a very long time for the $3 dividend to make up for it.
Wait a minute... in your previous post you went all macho about investments not being "emotional", then in this post seemed to be basing pretty much all your perspective on emotion (and fear) and what I'd point to as supposition and false narrative.
I remember when Apple was at 580. I wouldn't have bought in at that particular point. Why did you? And more importantly, how emotional a decision was it? (I'm speaking of the opposite emotion known as "irrational hubris"). This isn't an 'attack' by the way… a real question.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetz
From now till 2015?
So basically, they aren't reducing the cash hoarde at all. They are just growing it slower.
From an investor perspective, AAPL and MSFT are slowly starting to converge. MSFT investors too, thought their stock would rebound. It never did. Instead, MSFT stabilized in a new trading range and became a blue chip dividend stock. Real risk that this is what will happen to AAPL if there are no blockbuster new products on the horizon or the board isn't interested in returning money to shareholders.
Correct, (re first sentence), but notice that this was in line with the Einhorn proposal (he was not suggesting reducing the pile).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
So here's your question: Why didn't you sell at $700?
It's a good question. On the way back down I would have certainly sold around $640, give or take, if I had bought in at $580… 10% is a decent return on a short turnaround. Once it tucked under $600, I'd have been sold out and sitting in a wait-and-see orbit...
Unless we're talking about 100 shares… then, I don't know if it warrants discussion...
Quote:
Originally Posted by majjo
I wouldn't call the drop unfounded though. We had the maps (PR) fiasco, followed by execs dumping stock, followed by execs leaving, followed by a lower profit margin. Taken together, I can see why people would be fearful, especially after a huge run up.
I would certainly call the drop 'unfounded'. After almost two years of record revenue growth under Cook, including the period in question (where the stock price dropped by $300 : 45%), with all the numbers looking pretty great, especially when taking broader markets into consideration (it's easy to forget that Apple has been giving us this extraordinary financial performance throughout a prolonged global recession and ongoing economic weakness).
The Maps "fiasco" isn't the first thing Apple has ever misfired on (under Jobs we had a fair share of those), and it shouldn't have any measurable impact on stock price, much less a 45% effect. After all, did the "fiasco" with the .mac rollout cause a major dip in stock value? Nope…).
"Execs dumping stock" overstates the situation to a huge degree. I'm sensitive to that stuff, and did NOT see it that way at all. (Check Microsoft in the same period, however… m-hm...)
"Followed by execs leaving"… um. What...? Do you mean Ron Johnson leaving for JCP? Or Forstall and Browett (a "shakeup" that was required in my view)? Reality check: three people does not an 'executive exodus' make.
"Lower profit margin"…? Erm… you can't be referring to the mild fluctuations in overall margins alongside significantly higher revenues resulting in immensely increased profits? That's what we're used to seeing with Apple, and those fluctuations are NEVER an issue… are you parroting some MSM 'analyst' talking head or something? TODAY is the first time in TEN YEARS that the company has seen REDUCED profit margins.
This is not a LOSS either, merely a very slight reduction in the level of margin. Not showing growth for ONE quarter, for the first time in ten years does not a profit exodus make either.
In the end, that was quite a list you came up with, most of it not very relevant in fact...
This is a company that learns from its mistakes, identifies and fixes problems, and always comes up with results beyond expectation. I can't slight them in the least. That said, I buy and sell their stock mostly according to how I think the market will perform, and not based all that much on Apple's corporate/financial performance. Those don't correlate well and often. I pay more attention to "market sentiment" to judge my buy/sell cycles…
Quote:
Originally Posted by OriginalG
$60B amazing, that's a huge number. Is this local, non-foreign cash?
Yes, combined with borrowed funds apparently.
I wish they could repatriate their offshore funds more affordably. I'd love to have more of that cash circulating in our domestic economy...
That's a great number. At today's prices, that's about 15% of Apple's outstanding shares.
If Wall Street starts to act logically, for a change, taking 15% of shares off the table should result in a 15% share gain - even without considering anything else.
it would be great if they could spend $60 billion of that $147 tomorrow on the buy back. I know it can't happen but it would be a great way to boost the stock value and say FU to Wall Street.
Maybe instead you should cry all YOU want. Your goals as an investor are not necessarily the goals of all other investors, and as someone who, less than a decade ago, bought in at 85 a share, I'm STILL flying on cloud nine, having more than sextupled my money. I'm in for the long haul, and like me, there are more investors out there who understand the stupidity, arrogance, and emotional response of short-sighted, short-term investors and day traders in the marketplace, hence, we do not "lose our shit" if Apple drops from 700 to 350 in under 12 months when their fundamentals are so clearly superhuman.
This is how it is with Apple. We in for the long haul know where its going, and we're patient. We who are in for the long haul understand that short-haulers cause these kinds of fluctuations and we sit calmly through them, just like we did in 05, 08 and now 2013. You who are in for the short term should perhaps consider finding another game to play if you can't handle the truth of the marketplace.
You aren't qualified to criticize Tim Cook yet.
Can somebody explain the "borrowed cash?" Why would Apple borrow cash?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan
Stock essentially flat after hours. Lot of good dolling out the cash did.
See what happens between now and the 13th of May. You never know what the market will think tomorrow.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Buying back $60 billion in shares. I can't wait to see how people put a negative spin on that.
There is no negative spin. This is what everyone who is bearish on Apple was suggesting and hoping they do. It won't get them back to 700, but it is a way to return capital to investors, which is the end game for any corporation....