Using the buy and never sell method... MSFT dwarfs all other companies over the last 25 years when it comes to gains.
That's not a realistic investment strategy and anyone can selectively pick a high-performance stock in hindsight.
If you picked twenty random Fortune 100 companies 10-20-30 years ago, you'd expect to see roughly the same performance as the S&P 500 index. If you picked twenty random high tech companies 10-20-30 years ago, you'd expect to see roughly the same performance as the Nasdaq-400. For every Microsoft, there's an SGI.
If there's something that you think would outperform one of your existing investments and you're willing to absorb the higher risk, you'd sell it and buy the new thing.
Up until ten years ago, early MSFT investors looked like geniuses. Today, not so much.
Let's say you invested $1000 in high-risk newcomer Microsoft on January 1, 1987. Today, taking account of stock splits & dividends, your MSFT would be worth $284,250. Very nice ROI.
Now let's say you decided by late 2004 that Microsoft was stalling out. On December 31, 2004 you dump your MSFT shares at a value of $132K, pay the 30% capital gains tax and use the resulting $92K to buy AAPL. Today, those AAPL shares would be $2.07 million.
No, wait, you decide Apple isn't The One, you decide to buy Netflix instead. Today your NFLX holdings are worth $2.63 million.
Or maybe you invest half of the $92K in AAPL and the other half in a little known sapphire manufacturer called GT Advanced Technologies. Today, you have $1.035M.
(The red line is MSFT, and the blue line is...another famous company, compared over the last 25 years, exactly.)
Well, I've run MSFT against AAPL on 4 different chart systems and MSFT always comes ahead.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bageljoey
So you are saying that an investment bank with scads of highly paid specialists do serious research into a company and offer their professional opinion that "the stock will either go way up, stay about the same, or go way down" (to paraphrase) and you defend their analysis by saying "well, their stock has gone up and down in the past" (to paraphrase again).
They are not really "forecasting" if they just point to the last 4 years...
WTF are you talking about? Maybe you should read the other comment from Spam.
What I was saying is that wild swings are not uncommon with AAPL, so saying that AAPL could swing from 140 down to 80 is not improbable.
That's not a realistic investment strategy and anyone can selectively pick a high-performance stock in hindsight.
If you picked twenty random Fortune 100 companies 10-20-30 years ago, you'd expect to see roughly the same performance as the S&P 500 index. If you picked twenty random high tech companies 10-20-30 years ago, you'd expect to see roughly the same performance as the Nasdaq-400. For every Microsoft, there's an SGI.
If there's something that you think would outperform one of your existing investments and you're willing to absorb the higher risk, you'd sell it and buy the new thing.
Up until ten years ago, early MSFT investors looked like geniuses. Today, not so much.
Let's say you invested $1000 in high-risk newcomer Microsoft on January 1, 1987. Today, taking account of stock splits & dividends, your MSFT would be worth $284,250. Very nice ROI.
Now let's say you decided by late 2004 that Microsoft was stalling out. On December 31, 2004 you dump your MSFT shares at a value of $132K, pay the 30% capital gains tax and use the resulting $92K to buy AAPL. Today, those AAPL shares would be $2.07 million.
No, wait, you decide Apple isn't The One, you decide to buy Netflix instead. Today your NFLX holdings are worth $2.63 million.
Or maybe you invest half of the $92K in AAPL and the other half in a little known sapphire manufacturer called GT Advanced Technologies. Today, you have $1.035M.
Hahahahahaha... OFFS... read my other comments. I'm not the one saying to buy and hold forever. It's something I keep hearing from other members. Had someone bought AAPL in 1979 and held it through 1995 then I'm sure they would be crying their eyes out watching big gains slip away.
I would never hold anything too long. Personally, I feel that AAPl is getting to that stage. If this sucker gets to even $125 in the next couple of months, I'm gone for quite a while. I don't care it it reaches $175 after that because I fully expect to pick it back up under $90 at some point. If I'm wrong, no big deal. I got some gains and I'll move along to something else. (like when I sold at $550 and it went to $700... a few months later and it was below $400)
Capitalize on mass panics and irrational drops, then never sell.
Apparently Xiaomi mocked the iPhone 6 camera bump when they announced their new phone yesterday (it's thinner than iPhone but doesn't have one). Does anybody have class anymore?
But one thing this tells me is the iPhone's camera bulge isn't due to Apple's obsession with thinness. I'll bet any money iPhone takes much better photos that Xiaomi's phone does.
Apparently Xiaomi mocked the iPhone 6 camera bump when they announced their new phone yesterday (it's thinner than iPhone but doesn't have one). Does anybody have class anymore?
But one thing this tells me is the iPhone's camera bulge isn't due to Apple's obsession with thinness. I'll bet any money iPhone takes much better photos that Xiaomi's phone does.
Let 'em eat Samsung's lunch. They're the ripoff company of the moment, but there is no way they'll ever be able to bring their stolen IP designs to the US.
Let 'em eat Samsung's lunch. They're the ripoff company of the moment, but there is no way they'll ever be able to bring their stolen IP designs to the US.
Sad thing is they've got a number of good analysts like Ben Bajarin and Ben Thompson drinking the kool-aid. Just check out their tweets today.
Not even worth reporting, but AI loves it for the clickbait.
In less than two months AAPL has gone from 119.00 on Nov 26 to 106.82. Over 10% in 7 weeks. If this was about Samsung this thread would have 200 post by now.
In less than two months AAPL has gone from 119.00 on Nov 26 to 106.82. Over 10% in 7 weeks. If this was about Samsung this thread would have 200 post by now.
Hahahahahaha... OFFS... read my other comments. I'm not the one saying to buy and hold forever. It's something I keep hearing from other members. Had someone bought AAPL in 1979 and held it through 1995 then I'm sure they would be crying their eyes out watching big gains slip away.
I would never hold anything too long. Personally, I feel that AAPl is getting to that stage. If this sucker gets to even $125 in the next couple of months, I'm gone for quite a while. I don't care it it reaches $175 after that because I fully expect to pick it back up under $90 at some point. If I'm wrong, no big deal. I got some gains and I'll move along to something else. (like when I sold at $550 and it went to $700... a few months later and it was below $400)
I'm with you, bro. I've had my AAPL shares for a while, was tempted to dump half of them a few years ago, but didn't pull the trigger (oh well).
Heck, at this point, BABA is trading around $96. If it tumbles down in to the eighties, I might just dump the AAPL in my Roth IRA (about half of my position) to free up cash and buy in. I won't pay a dime in capital gains taxes.
I think AAPL has a positive long-term future, but my AAPL holdings are now nearly 10% of my total portfolio, it would be wiser if I diversified some.
A range of $80 to $140? That looks like some lousy forecasting... although it should be noted that AAPL was at $96.26 a mere 3 months ago (unfairly).
I disagree. I think the range is about right. @ $80 that would give a P/E of 12.44 which isn't even that low by Apple's standards. But need to take into consideration that this quarter will be a blowout so the EPS will be higher, which would make the P/E in the region of about 10.5. Which is about where I would personally position my downside guidance.
yes, do you think AAPL will be here in year 2032 in full power like it is now? It can be history at that time, same like Kodak, Nokia.
It isn't beyond possibility. If you time Apple from the second coming, which you may as well in terms of this discussion, that would be 1998. So 2032 is only 34 years. There is no reason why Apple could not stay and indeed continue to expand (Bernoulli's Law be dammed) for that long.
It isn't beyond possibility. If you time Apple from the second coming, which you may as well in terms of this discussion, that would be 1998. So 2032 is only 34 years. There is no reason why Apple could not stay and indeed continue to expand (Bernoulli's Law be dammed) for that long.
Who at Apple is most likely to follow Cook as CEO? Or would an outside candidate be more likely?
I was pretty sour on Apple Watch until this month when I went to buy a smart watch (I just don't have 350$ for an Apple Watch, and I wanted it now).
This sector despite being chunky with other makers, is a huge opportunity... the devices are terrible. They're big. Their chargers are not at all elegant. The default bands are insanely uncomfortable. Software is painfully limited. Slow.
I saw this out of all of the big dual-OS phones - Pebble, Metron, metaWatch, all of these had some major issues with some grouping of quality, battery, interface and apps.
Pebble won because it had the fewest problems. It was NOT a blow out victory, and none really did what I truly wanted. I like it, it's a nice product but there's so much room to improve I can't believe it.
Now might Samsung's watches have done it? maybe. But they still were big, clunky, poor battery and didn't run on my iPhone. I'm eager to see how much Apple can improve on this, and how we will see them move on.
Oh, and I also will not buy first release apple tech. I got bit on an early and underpowered 6100 Power Mac, bad Rev A Bondi iMac, and the quickly outmoded iPad original. I'll wait for revision 2.
Comments
Using the buy and never sell method... MSFT dwarfs all other companies over the last 25 years when it comes to gains.
That's not a realistic investment strategy and anyone can selectively pick a high-performance stock in hindsight.
If you picked twenty random Fortune 100 companies 10-20-30 years ago, you'd expect to see roughly the same performance as the S&P 500 index. If you picked twenty random high tech companies 10-20-30 years ago, you'd expect to see roughly the same performance as the Nasdaq-400. For every Microsoft, there's an SGI.
If there's something that you think would outperform one of your existing investments and you're willing to absorb the higher risk, you'd sell it and buy the new thing.
Up until ten years ago, early MSFT investors looked like geniuses. Today, not so much.
Let's say you invested $1000 in high-risk newcomer Microsoft on January 1, 1987. Today, taking account of stock splits & dividends, your MSFT would be worth $284,250. Very nice ROI.
Now let's say you decided by late 2004 that Microsoft was stalling out. On December 31, 2004 you dump your MSFT shares at a value of $132K, pay the 30% capital gains tax and use the resulting $92K to buy AAPL. Today, those AAPL shares would be $2.07 million.
No, wait, you decide Apple isn't The One, you decide to buy Netflix instead. Today your NFLX holdings are worth $2.63 million.
Or maybe you invest half of the $92K in AAPL and the other half in a little known sapphire manufacturer called GT Advanced Technologies. Today, you have $1.035M.
Weeeellll....
Not exactly:
(The red line is MSFT, and the blue line is...another famous company, compared over the last 25 years, exactly.)
Well, I've run MSFT against AAPL on 4 different chart systems and MSFT always comes ahead.
So you are saying that an investment bank with scads of highly paid specialists do serious research into a company and offer their professional opinion that "the stock will either go way up, stay about the same, or go way down" (to paraphrase) and you defend their analysis by saying "well, their stock has gone up and down in the past" (to paraphrase again).
They are not really "forecasting" if they just point to the last 4 years...
WTF are you talking about? Maybe you should read the other comment from Spam.
What I was saying is that wild swings are not uncommon with AAPL, so saying that AAPL could swing from 140 down to 80 is not improbable.
That's not a realistic investment strategy and anyone can selectively pick a high-performance stock in hindsight.
If you picked twenty random Fortune 100 companies 10-20-30 years ago, you'd expect to see roughly the same performance as the S&P 500 index. If you picked twenty random high tech companies 10-20-30 years ago, you'd expect to see roughly the same performance as the Nasdaq-400. For every Microsoft, there's an SGI.
If there's something that you think would outperform one of your existing investments and you're willing to absorb the higher risk, you'd sell it and buy the new thing.
Up until ten years ago, early MSFT investors looked like geniuses. Today, not so much.
Let's say you invested $1000 in high-risk newcomer Microsoft on January 1, 1987. Today, taking account of stock splits & dividends, your MSFT would be worth $284,250. Very nice ROI.
Now let's say you decided by late 2004 that Microsoft was stalling out. On December 31, 2004 you dump your MSFT shares at a value of $132K, pay the 30% capital gains tax and use the resulting $92K to buy AAPL. Today, those AAPL shares would be $2.07 million.
No, wait, you decide Apple isn't The One, you decide to buy Netflix instead. Today your NFLX holdings are worth $2.63 million.
Or maybe you invest half of the $92K in AAPL and the other half in a little known sapphire manufacturer called GT Advanced Technologies. Today, you have $1.035M.
Hahahahahaha... OFFS... read my other comments. I'm not the one saying to buy and hold forever. It's something I keep hearing from other members. Had someone bought AAPL in 1979 and held it through 1995 then I'm sure they would be crying their eyes out watching big gains slip away.
I would never hold anything too long. Personally, I feel that AAPl is getting to that stage. If this sucker gets to even $125 in the next couple of months, I'm gone for quite a while. I don't care it it reaches $175 after that because I fully expect to pick it back up under $90 at some point. If I'm wrong, no big deal. I got some gains and I'll move along to something else. (like when I sold at $550 and it went to $700... a few months later and it was below $400)
Apparently Xiaomi mocked the iPhone 6 camera bump when they announced their new phone yesterday (it's thinner than iPhone but doesn't have one). Does anybody have class anymore?
But one thing this tells me is the iPhone's camera bulge isn't due to Apple's obsession with thinness. I'll bet any money iPhone takes much better photos that Xiaomi's phone does.
Apparently Xiaomi mocked the iPhone 6 camera bump when they announced their new phone yesterday (it's thinner than iPhone but doesn't have one). Does anybody have class anymore?
But one thing this tells me is the iPhone's camera bulge isn't due to Apple's obsession with thinness. I'll bet any money iPhone takes much better photos that Xiaomi's phone does.
Let 'em eat Samsung's lunch. They're the ripoff company of the moment, but there is no way they'll ever be able to bring their stolen IP designs to the US.
Sad thing is they've got a number of good analysts like Ben Bajarin and Ben Thompson drinking the kool-aid. Just check out their tweets today.
Not even worth reporting, but AI loves it for the clickbait.
Why is it not worth reporting?
Not even worth reporting, but AI loves it for the clickbait.
In less than two months AAPL has gone from 119.00 on Nov 26 to 106.82. Over 10% in 7 weeks. If this was about Samsung this thread would have 200 post by now.
In less than two months AAPL has gone from 119.00 on Nov 26 to 106.82. Over 10% in 7 weeks. If this was about Samsung this thread would have 200 post by now.
... and 3 separate articles.
A blindfolded man throwing a dart backwards at a dartboard is going to have a higher hit rate.
Hahahahahaha... OFFS... read my other comments. I'm not the one saying to buy and hold forever. It's something I keep hearing from other members. Had someone bought AAPL in 1979 and held it through 1995 then I'm sure they would be crying their eyes out watching big gains slip away.
I would never hold anything too long. Personally, I feel that AAPl is getting to that stage. If this sucker gets to even $125 in the next couple of months, I'm gone for quite a while. I don't care it it reaches $175 after that because I fully expect to pick it back up under $90 at some point. If I'm wrong, no big deal. I got some gains and I'll move along to something else. (like when I sold at $550 and it went to $700... a few months later and it was below $400)
I'm with you, bro. I've had my AAPL shares for a while, was tempted to dump half of them a few years ago, but didn't pull the trigger (oh well).
Heck, at this point, BABA is trading around $96. If it tumbles down in to the eighties, I might just dump the AAPL in my Roth IRA (about half of my position) to free up cash and buy in. I won't pay a dime in capital gains taxes.
I think AAPL has a positive long-term future, but my AAPL holdings are now nearly 10% of my total portfolio, it would be wiser if I diversified some.
"Relatively high"? With a P/E of less than 17?
A range of $80 to $140? That looks like some lousy forecasting... although it should be noted that AAPL was at $96.26 a mere 3 months ago (unfairly).
I disagree. I think the range is about right. @ $80 that would give a P/E of 12.44 which isn't even that low by Apple's standards. But need to take into consideration that this quarter will be a blowout so the EPS will be higher, which would make the P/E in the region of about 10.5. Which is about where I would personally position my downside guidance.
"Relatively high"? With a P/E of less than 17?
yes, do you think AAPL will be here in year 2032 in full power like it is now? It can be history at that time, same like Kodak, Nokia.
It isn't beyond possibility. If you time Apple from the second coming, which you may as well in terms of this discussion, that would be 1998. So 2032 is only 34 years. There is no reason why Apple could not stay and indeed continue to expand (Bernoulli's Law be dammed) for that long.
Who at Apple is most likely to follow Cook as CEO? Or would an outside candidate be more likely?
I was pretty sour on Apple Watch until this month when I went to buy a smart watch (I just don't have 350$ for an Apple Watch, and I wanted it now).
This sector despite being chunky with other makers, is a huge opportunity... the devices are terrible. They're big. Their chargers are not at all elegant. The default bands are insanely uncomfortable. Software is painfully limited. Slow.
I saw this out of all of the big dual-OS phones - Pebble, Metron, metaWatch, all of these had some major issues with some grouping of quality, battery, interface and apps.
Pebble won because it had the fewest problems. It was NOT a blow out victory, and none really did what I truly wanted. I like it, it's a nice product but there's so much room to improve I can't believe it.
Now might Samsung's watches have done it? maybe. But they still were big, clunky, poor battery and didn't run on my iPhone. I'm eager to see how much Apple can improve on this, and how we will see them move on.
Oh, and I also will not buy first release apple tech. I got bit on an early and underpowered 6100 Power Mac, bad Rev A Bondi iMac, and the quickly outmoded iPad original. I'll wait for revision 2.