Interesting - whatever institutions are purchasing the shares for Apple score when crazy "experts" say Apple did not meet "expectations" .. which are nuts. They are making Apple very pleased .. actually me since I have $2M invested in Apple ... about 8 years now (options and stock).
I have been waiting for a very serious break-out. .. then the Barron's story comes out this weekend saying stock should be 50% higher in their analysis (short term /now - much greater in couple years).
Investors have been scoring as Apple has soaked up its shares .. at cheap prices .. thanks to many negative comment "analysts" .. and CNBC nonsense.
I think that we will see a total breakout shortly - with China numbers that are showing explosive growth is happening now .. the apple phone program .. outstanding new phones and new products .. its a perfect storm for now/this Christmas. I do expect Barron's prediction to pan out this year ... as the truth comes out in the next couple weeks.. on to October with the new products.
Apple has backed this up by the "surprise" bond issuance last week for I believe a few more billion.... Apple knows the stock is breaking out and is buying up shares quickly as we speak.
"Given that Apple is really the only tech company to have any real success in selling products in China..."
Doesn't he mean 'non-Chinese' company? I thought a couple of their home-grown ones were doing okay...?
Depends on the definition of "success". Most of these companies receive some sort of subsidies (which are completely intransparent) and operating profits of 1-2% are considered an achievement. If they were facing the same investor expectations as Apple (where y-o-y growth of 50% causes the stock to drop), they would not even exist. It is (for now) a different economy with different rules, comparisons don't really work.
Also think great article.But the point about Amazon's stock,and earnings, doesn't seem right.While Amazon has a very high price relative to earnings,there is a lot of leverage there.It is easier for Amazon to multiply it's earnings,since it is starting from a much lower earnings base.Of course earnings may not pan out,but this a speculation on that.
fishbert wrote: »
I agree that Street reaction to Apple is twisted and atypical, but, remind me, how many years,
say, Amazon was a Street success and a ledger disaster...?
AppleInsider wrote: »
If Apple were actually facing a upcoming barrier of slowing growth and a collapse of demand in China, rather than buying back its own stock it would be scrambling to acquire other companies with an actual, apparent strategy the way Google has been almost blindly gobbling up its Alphabet soup over the past several years as Android has done nothing and every one of its hardware efforts have all imploded into embarrassing ruin.
This seems to sum up the general stock market feeling about Apple.
sog35 wrote: »
The low on August 24th was $92. The high this year was about 134.50.
So it was down about 32% from its high
You want to explain this disruption to us?
Middle class are growing, and they have used to paying comparatively larger percentage of their salary for Smartphones. Which is slightly different to US or many other Western countries, i.e different valuation of things.
Once Apple worked out how to do finance across the globe, they will have a Phone as Services around the world, especially in places where Carrier dont offer much subsidies. ( Again China )
radarthekat wrote: »
The whole narrative about Apple's growth shines light on analysts' myopia with regard to which metrics to measure.
A company that has no profits needs to show that it is growing revenue and cash flow such that it will one day get out ahead of fixed costs and begin to see money flowing to the bottom line. For such companies, PROFITS are the goal post, and growth in revenue and cash flow are the yard markers.
A company that is profitable, but not yet sufficiently profitable to be able to scale its business, expand into adjacent markets, fend off competition, and retain the best employees needs to show growth to ensure the ongoing viability of the business. For such companies, market reach, a moat against competition is the goal post and profits are the yard markers.
Then there's a company like Apple, with sufficient cash and equivalents for any reasonable acquisition it can imagine, sufficient cash flow to fully fund operations, R&D, marketing, dividends, buybacks, and even environmental initiatives, with any profits generated only adding to the already too large cash pile. A cash pile that only detracts from the share value by diluting the percentage of each dollar paid for a share of the stock associated with the operating business. Cash is poison for such a company and growth of profits only makes the problem worse. So all the goal posts have been cleared, and yet analysts apply the same metrics to Apple as they do to companies for which growth is still relevant and necessary to the viability of their business.
If there is any reason to criticize Apple, it should be with respect to the company's mounting pile of unproductive cash and equivalents. Not for profit growth stalling at an already obscene level, beyond an amount the company is able to productively put to use.
What a weird conception of what constitutes a 'valid' price. The price that sellers offer for any product, including shares of stock, is still the price, even if there were no trades, which I seriously doubt in the first place. In a market with high speed computerized trading, it's highly unlikely that none of those programs pounced automatically.
I agree. Smartphones are much more of a status good in the third world than they are here in the US. The normal status goods here, probably cars is No. 1, are just too pricey for Chinese incomes. And as a culture newly converted to the religion of consumerism, the Chinese, like the Japanese in the 80s, are just completely dazzled by luxury brand names.
And that's why phrases such as "...price collapse of about 1/3...." should NEVER BE USED.
It's a useless fact.
More importantly, what is the time weighted or volume weighted price(s)?