They are doing nothing when it comes to defending the stock price from a constant barrage of specious negative articles about Apple. Cook, Oppenheimer and the Boards boss are the shareholders. Apple underperformed the stock market's 30% return considerably in 2012. Apple appreciated only 5%. Most people in business lose their jobs for that kind of underperformance.
It's interesting you picked an arbitrary point. I can do you one better, 10 years ago Apple was at 11 (split adjusted) and now it's at 544. All w/o crazy Carl's help.
That does't mean Carl can't help now. Apple wasn't a 500 billion market cap company 10 years ago. It's a much different story now than it was back then. Apple has a huge market cap and everyone is gunning for Apple.
You're saying their quarterly financial earnings improved with Icahn's involvement? I doubt it. You must be talking about their stock price rising, which has nothing to do with the success of Apple's business. The stock price changed with the buyback, which they set out long before Carl got involved:
And the perception of those who know nothing is worth what compared to the perception of those who know everything?
The "amount" of what one knows is irrelevant as it pertains to perception. The only thing that is variable is the amount of power (capital) one has to act with. So, those who know less can have a much more dramatic impact on a stock price if they have the power to move the stock one way or the other. Which I believe is the case. Very few institutional investors really understand the Apple story. David Einhorn is one of the very few and he has 20% of his entire fund's capital in Apple stock. More in relative percentage terms than any other hedge fund.
And 5 years ago Blackberry was on top of the world. You need to deal with the NOW and not the past. The Wall street environment now is what it is. There is no need for a great company like this to lose 40% in value and sit and do nothing.
I am surprised just at how naive people are here, do you people actually own shares and participate in the markets ?
LOL, I don't think a lot of these posters actually hold shares or they wouldn't have the attitudes they do.
Sure we do. We absolutely do. Are you insane? We know it wouldn’t go to $1. This is known. We know it wouldn’t go to $10. Or $50, or even $100. It would stay above these numbers.
The magical dividend and buyback didn’t “save” the stock. There was nothing to save.
It’s not Superman. It’s Superman breaking through the wall and finding not only no danger, but the owner furious for the damage done to his home.
Oh, this we know.
Sounds far more like Google is setting itself up for the coolest crash of all time.
Yeah? Are they? Guess what they aren’t, though. They aren’t involved in daily, weekly, monthly, or yearly operations. They aren’t privy to the parts deals, don’t know the
Proof, please. And no, “they haven’t been giving me the returns on my stock that I demand for absolutely no reason other than I demand them” is not a reason.
‘Kay. And?
Nah. Sorry. You’re wrong. They are not bad for managing money wisely. They are not bad for operating like a startup. They are not bad for deciding not to waste their money on things they don’t care about and which would lead to worse products.
Is that second sentence just a second ending to the first sentence, or are you implying that specifically what Icahn thinks is best as a shareholder will inherently benefit other shareholders?
Yes, we’re well aware that you’re incapable of understanding what an analogy is.
If you are too obtuse to understand that the shareholders own Apple, then there is no need to respond to the rest of your nonsensical replies.
Most of that stock growth came under the leadership of Jobs.
Chart for posterity. Jobs’ return to death (black line) to today.
Seems that almost half the stock price was, at one time, generated after his death. And it keeps going up.
Originally Posted by Jack Baker
They are doing nothing when it comes to defending the stock price from a constant barrage of specious negative articles about Apple.
Exactly. They’re listening to Steve Jobs himself. No one cares about defending the stock price. It will defend itself.
Most people in business lose their jobs for that kind of underperformance.
Most people are idiots. They aren’t.
Originally Posted by Jack Baker
The "amount" of what one knows is irrelevant as it pertains to perception.
That couldn’t be further from the truth. I’m not going to listen to 100 idiots if 10 people actually know what they’re talking about.
Which I believe is the case. Very few institutional investors really understand the Apple story.
Yeah. Icahn. Knows nothing but has money.
Originally Posted by Jack Baker
If you are too obtuse to understand that the shareholders own Apple…
Man, you guys are hilarious. Again, gonna just keep repeating it until you shut up, give up, and do it: sell AAPL, go away. You don’t understand the company, you don’t understand what it means, you don’t understand how to handle this kind of stock.
You buy it, you sit on it, you cash in later. If you bought at $700, quit whining.
They are doing nothing when it comes to defending the stock price from a constant barrage of specious negative articles about Apple. Cook, Oppenheimer and the Boards boss are the shareholders. Apple underperformed the stock market's 30% return considerably in 2012. Apple appreciated only 5%. Most people in business lose their jobs for that kind of underperformance.
No you are clueless. What is the board doing right now to defend the stock? Any other company getting a 750 million people Chinese contract drop 40 bucks in a week?
What is board doing to respond to a downgrade to a phantom Iphone 6 by Wells Fargo.?
This is exactly the same pattern from Jan to May last year, are you really that stupid or just pretending?
No you are clueless. What is the board doing right now to defend the stock? Any other company getting a 750 million people Chinese contract drop 40 bucks in a week?
What is board doing to respond to a downgrade to a phantom Iphone 6 by Wells Fargo.?
This is exactly the same pattern from Jan to May last year, are you really that stupid or just pretending?
They can't and should not respond. They have more important things to do. The news is out there easy for anyone with a brain to read. They can't help it if analysts are stupid. So take your grubby hands out of my portfolio and sell.
They should not respond to lies that affects shareholder value?
If I call your mom a whore and it's not true? And it's affecting your mom's reputation? You should not respond? Do you have more important things to do?
They should not respond to lies that affects shareholder value?
If I call your mom a whore and it's not true? And it's affecting your mom's reputation? You should not respond? Do you have more important things to do?
So if Apple doesn't respond to something, does that inherently make it true? So Apple has to respond to everything then. Again, time would be wasted on that. And what's worse , analysts lying about Apple or Apple lying about something?
If you don't respond to my lies about your mom being a whore, people will start wondering if it's true or not and act accordingly towards her would they not? You answered your own question.
Stop talk about people's mothers being whores please, that lowers the tone, and should not be the go-to insult.
On a broader point, no, Apple should not respond to unsubstantiated gossip. If they do, they'll set a precedent and then they'll have to respond to all unsubstantiated gossip.
If you don't respond to my lies about your mom being a whore, people will start wondering if it's true or not and act accordingly towards her would they not? You answered your own question.
Great. Is your mom a whore? A b1tch? A money grubber? A snake? Easy? Stuck-up? A thief? A liar? A murderer? Dumb? An old hag?
I can keep going with this because the moment you stop responding, we'll all have the "truth."
Comments
They are doing nothing when it comes to defending the stock price from a constant barrage of specious negative articles about Apple. Cook, Oppenheimer and the Boards boss are the shareholders. Apple underperformed the stock market's 30% return considerably in 2012. Apple appreciated only 5%. Most people in business lose their jobs for that kind of underperformance.
It's interesting you picked an arbitrary point. I can do you one better, 10 years ago Apple was at 11 (split adjusted) and now it's at 544. All w/o crazy Carl's help.
That does't mean Carl can't help now. Apple wasn't a 500 billion market cap company 10 years ago. It's a much different story now than it was back then. Apple has a huge market cap and everyone is gunning for Apple.
You're saying their quarterly financial earnings improved with Icahn's involvement? I doubt it. You must be talking about their stock price rising, which has nothing to do with the success of Apple's business. The stock price changed with the buyback, which they set out long before Carl got involved:
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2012/03/19Apple-Announces-Plans-to-Initiate-Dividend-and-Share-Repurchase-Program.html
Maybe Carl has some influence over other traders' confidence but again that's got nothing to do with Apple's business operation.
The buy-back was not set out before Einhorn got involved -- nor would it have been.
And the perception of those who know nothing is worth what compared to the perception of those who know everything?
The "amount" of what one knows is irrelevant as it pertains to perception. The only thing that is variable is the amount of power (capital) one has to act with. So, those who know less can have a much more dramatic impact on a stock price if they have the power to move the stock one way or the other. Which I believe is the case. Very few institutional investors really understand the Apple story. David Einhorn is one of the very few and he has 20% of his entire fund's capital in Apple stock. More in relative percentage terms than any other hedge fund.
And 5 years ago Blackberry was on top of the world. You need to deal with the NOW and not the past. The Wall street environment now is what it is. There is no need for a great company like this to lose 40% in value and sit and do nothing.
I am surprised just at how naive people are here, do you people actually own shares and participate in the markets ?
LOL, I don't think a lot of these posters actually hold shares or they wouldn't have the attitudes they do.
Sure we do. We absolutely do. Are you insane? We know it wouldn’t go to $1. This is known. We know it wouldn’t go to $10. Or $50, or even $100. It would stay above these numbers.
The magical dividend and buyback didn’t “save” the stock. There was nothing to save.
It’s not Superman. It’s Superman breaking through the wall and finding not only no danger, but the owner furious for the damage done to his home.
Oh, this we know.
Sounds far more like Google is setting itself up for the coolest crash of all time.
Yeah? Are they? Guess what they aren’t, though. They aren’t involved in daily, weekly, monthly, or yearly operations. They aren’t privy to the parts deals, don’t know the
Proof, please. And no, “they haven’t been giving me the returns on my stock that I demand for absolutely no reason other than I demand them” is not a reason.
‘Kay. And?
Nah. Sorry. You’re wrong. They are not bad for managing money wisely. They are not bad for operating like a startup. They are not bad for deciding not to waste their money on things they don’t care about and which would lead to worse products.
Is that second sentence just a second ending to the first sentence, or are you implying that specifically what Icahn thinks is best as a shareholder will inherently benefit other shareholders?
Yes, we’re well aware that you’re incapable of understanding what an analogy is.
If you are too obtuse to understand that the shareholders own Apple, then there is no need to respond to the rest of your nonsensical replies.
I think we have a much better picture of who you are and what you think now.
Who says? You? What right do you have to say that?
Yes, you do. I am someone who understands how the PUBLIC equity markets work -- unlike you.
I say so. Yes, that's right. I am entitled to my opinion on where Apple should be fairly valued. Astonishing, isn't it?
Chart for posterity. Jobs’ return to death (black line) to today.
Seems that almost half the stock price was, at one time, generated after his death. And it keeps going up.
Exactly. They’re listening to Steve Jobs himself. No one cares about defending the stock price. It will defend itself.
Most people are idiots. They aren’t.
That couldn’t be further from the truth. I’m not going to listen to 100 idiots if 10 people actually know what they’re talking about.
Yeah. Icahn. Knows nothing but has money.
Man, you guys are hilarious. Again, gonna just keep repeating it until you shut up, give up, and do it: sell AAPL, go away. You don’t understand the company, you don’t understand what it means, you don’t understand how to handle this kind of stock.
You buy it, you sit on it, you cash in later. If you bought at $700, quit whining.
Einhorn sued them in February 2013, the buyback proposal was in March 2012.
You sure are clueless.
No you are clueless. What is the board doing right now to defend the stock? Any other company getting a 750 million people Chinese contract drop 40 bucks in a week?
What is board doing to respond to a downgrade to a phantom Iphone 6 by Wells Fargo.?
This is exactly the same pattern from Jan to May last year, are you really that stupid or just pretending?
They can't and should not respond. They have more important things to do. The news is out there easy for anyone with a brain to read. They can't help it if analysts are stupid. So take your grubby hands out of my portfolio and sell.
Nothing. Doing nothing, by definition, defends the stock.
Go watch the WWDC 1997 keynote. Don’t comment on the stock again until you have watched it.
What is board doing to respond to a downgrade to a phantom Iphone 6 by Wells Fargo.?
Nothing. Just like they should. Because anything else is the wrong decision.
EDIT: Wrong year (of course).
They should not respond to lies that affects shareholder value?
If I call your mom a whore and it's not true? And it's affecting your mom's reputation? You should not respond? Do you have more important things to do?
So if Apple doesn't respond to something, does that inherently make it true? So Apple has to respond to everything then. Again, time would be wasted on that. And what's worse , analysts lying about Apple or Apple lying about something?
If you don't respond to my lies about your mom being a whore, people will start wondering if it's true or not and act accordingly towards her would they not? You answered your own question.
On a broader point, no, Apple should not respond to unsubstantiated gossip. If they do, they'll set a precedent and then they'll have to respond to all unsubstantiated gossip.
Great. Is your mom a whore? A b1tch? A money grubber? A snake? Easy? Stuck-up? A thief? A liar? A murderer? Dumb? An old hag?
I can keep going with this because the moment you stop responding, we'll all have the "truth."
Nope. Why should they legitimize things?
See, lies don’t affect reputation. Thanks for the ad-homs, though. They affect yours.
Go watch the WWDC 1997 keynote. Do not comment on the stock again until you have watched it.
Its called an analogy and a very good one which your people have no answer for.