Panicked selling of AAPL lets Apple buy back billions cheaply

124

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 97
    sjworld said:
    Would have been a great time to sell when high a few days ago, and buy again when it crashed.
    In general, not great advice. Playing at day trader isn’t a good investment strategy. When I was a lead dev at MarketWatch, the content SMEs instilled that point on us — find good investments for the long haul, and don’t try to play the market. Unless you have the money to lose and just like the adrenaline rush, that is. 
    lolliver
  • Reply 62 of 97
    Apple isn't buying back billions of shares.   Apple may be buying Billions of $$ worth of shares.   If they bought 1B shares at $265/share, that is $265B.  I don't think they would be buying more the 100 million shares, tops right now.    
  • Reply 63 of 97
    hexclockhexclock Posts: 1,076member
    sirozha said:
    hexclock said:
    sirozha said:
    mdirvin said:
    The whole trick is timing.  I bought a bit early Dec. 2018, but still made over 450K.  I'm thinking its still a bit early we have several more legs down, maybe.  Who really knows you just take  your best guess and go with it.  I would ask my 3 year old grandson but he's a few states over right now. I could get as good of advice from him as I any of the "Experts".

    Mike
    Mike, there's this new invention called "telephone". It's very cool. You can talk to people miles away; sometimes even in another city. Soon, you will be able to speak to your grandson who is 3 states away. Actually, Apple makes a few of these new amazing devices; they call it iPhone. 
    So after you spew out a long post filled with abject speculation, with no actual factual evidence, you come back with a pointless, sarcastic attack on Mike for no apparent reason.

    How is this an attack? This was a good-humored joke. As for my long post (not nearly as long as DED's numerous theses), I have been warning on this forum for nearly a month that the big AAPL drop was coming. Read my post history. I was questioned on many an occasion what my ulterior motives were. The only motive I had was to forewarn AAPL shareholders to stop drinking the Kool-Aid that DED was selling. Fortunately, I sold $2 million worth of stock before the correction. Continue reading this fanboy bullsh*t that DED keeps putting out. 

    It didn't take a brain surgeon or a rocket scientist to understand that the Coronavirus pandemic will affect AAPL dramatically due to Tim Cook's stubborn  reliance on China. Apple barely avoided the Trade War fallout (they got lucky Trump needed the stock market to stay high for his re-election). But, the Coronavirus delivered a one-two punch that Tim Cook could no longer avoid by cozying up to Trump. The investors who are blinded by their Apple fanboyism will have to ride this down or take a 20% hit. 

    We will know which way this goes by next Monday. I predict we will be having a full-blown epidemic in early stages over the weekend, and this will take the entire market down like we haven't seen since 2008. Is Apple doomed? Of course, it's not doomed. Apple will survive and will rise from the ashes, but the stock portfolios will be in the red for a long time. Those who hold cash will get rich. Those who hold AAPL will lose years of gains.  
    Well you know how jokes in print come across sometimes, so fair enough. 
    You can count me among those who have lost some gains on Apple stock, but it’s only a loss if I sell it. Apple has had an incredible run the last few years, far above the rest of the market. It’s losses present a buying opportunity for us, and I’m am no big investor. I buy a few shares here and there when I can. The virus thing will sort itself out eventually and life will return to “normal”, despite the media’s best efforts to make everyone crazy. 
    edited February 2020 lolliver
  • Reply 64 of 97
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 9,233member
    sjworld said:
    Would have been a great time to sell when high a few days ago, and buy again when it crashed.
    Hindsight is always easy, but nobody can time the market.

    I remember reading something a while back about a comparison between 2 investors over a period of 10 years I think it was.

    Investor #1 attempted to time the market and would sell off whenever there was a big drop and they would eventually buy back in again when things started turning around.

    Investor #2 did absolutely nothing, they basically slept for 10 years and didn't touch anything.

    Investor #2 beat Investor #1 by a nice margin.
    Arszy
  • Reply 65 of 97
    carnegiecarnegie Posts: 1,007member
    gatorguy said:
    carnegie said:
    gatorguy said:
    FWIW six months ago the same author wrote this:
    "But why is Apple buying back shares seemingly regardless of their price? It appears clear that Apple expects its share price to grow much higher in the future. So rather than carefully timing its repurchases to only occur when the stock price hits its lowest levels, Apple continues to buy shares back nearly as fast as it can all the time, even as the stock price jumps up and down as it continues to increment higher."

    As for jumping on this unexpectedly low stock price I would assume that at the moment Apple would be in one of their "blackout periods" where they are not permitted to buy back stock except under a predefined/prearranged schedule that ignores what the stock price is at a point in time and instead picks a date for the transaction to occur. Of course they are not obligated to complete a pre-scheduled buyback, they can choose to hold on to the cash instead, but they also can't create one at their whim during a blackout period. Have I got that right?
    Even if Apple has a self-imposed blackout period where it doesn't buy back shares, it likely isn't in that period now. Apple routinely buys back large numbers of shares during the last 4 weeks of its quarters, and we aren't even in the last 4 weeks yet. Also, the last time Apple issued a guidance revision it bought back a substantial number of shares between when it issued that revision and when it reported earnings.

    Also, a Rule 10b5-1 Trading Plan doesn't have to ignore the stock price. It can pick specific dates on which shares will be bought or sold. But it can also specify prices at which they will be bought or sold. It can even specify that X number of shares will be bought if the share price drops Y% from a peak. The plan just has to be, speaking practically, self-executing - it has to provide an algorithm which determines when or for how much shares are bought or sold. It can't require further decision making from someone who, at that point, has material non-public information. Whoever does the buying or selling just follows the rules set forth in the plan.

    Apple could also give someone - e.g., a broker - the authority to make decisions about when to buy or sell shares based on changing circumstances so long as that person doesn't have material non-public information. They might be told to buy shares as efficiently as they can - e.g., when there are price dips. So longs as they are making the decisions about individual buys and they don't have material non-public information, Apple isn't opening itself up to insider trading accusations.

    All that said, it is all but certain that Apple at all times - not just, e.g., near the end of quarters - either buys back shares in accordance with a trading plan or has someone making the short-term buyback decisions who is effectively firewalled from any material non-public information.
    Apple did at one time use a broker(s), but they abandoned that sometime back in favor of self-managing. As for Apple likely being in a black-out period that would be due to a significant material change with the announcement of revised guidance a couple of days ago, a rare event for Apple. 
    It wouldn’t have to be a broker. Apple could, e.g., have a team within the company that was in charge of making day-to-day decisions about share purchases. Those people wouldn’t have anything to do with the company’s operations and wouldn’t have access to material non-public information. Or Apple could, of course, buy shares based on a 10b5-1 plan.

    If Apple was going to impose a blackout period on itself related to a guidance revision, that period would likely come before the announcement rather than afterward, or only for a short period afterward - e.g., a couple days. Before the announcement is when Apple would have that big piece of information which was non-public.

    When Apple revised in January 2019, it had not bought any shares in the 4 weeks prior to the end of the quarter. Apple announced the revision the first trading day after the quarter ended. Then it bought 28 million shares in the first 5 weeks of the following quarter. It announced earnings for the previous quarter - the quarter which it had revised for - 3 days before the end of those 5 weeks. (Apple breaks out its open market share purchases into 3 periods for each quarter - one for the first 5 weeks, one for the next 4 weeks, and one for the last 4 weeks.) Apple had also bought a small amount of shares in the 4 week period before the 4 week period in which it didn’t buy any shares. So it looks like it stopped buying shares sometime in the middle of the quarter that it revised for.

    Maybe Apple imposed a blackout period on itself because it realized it was going to have to revise its guidance and didn’t want to trade shares until it made that information public. Or maybe it just stopped buying shares because it knew that it would be able to buy them at lower prices after it announced the revision. Either way, the point is that it was before the revision was announced that Apple stopped buying shares.
    Bart Y
  • Reply 66 of 97
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,471member
    carnegie said:
    gatorguy said:
    carnegie said:
    gatorguy said:
    FWIW six months ago the same author wrote this:
    "But why is Apple buying back shares seemingly regardless of their price? It appears clear that Apple expects its share price to grow much higher in the future. So rather than carefully timing its repurchases to only occur when the stock price hits its lowest levels, Apple continues to buy shares back nearly as fast as it can all the time, even as the stock price jumps up and down as it continues to increment higher."

    As for jumping on this unexpectedly low stock price I would assume that at the moment Apple would be in one of their "blackout periods" where they are not permitted to buy back stock except under a predefined/prearranged schedule that ignores what the stock price is at a point in time and instead picks a date for the transaction to occur. Of course they are not obligated to complete a pre-scheduled buyback, they can choose to hold on to the cash instead, but they also can't create one at their whim during a blackout period. Have I got that right?
    Even if Apple has a self-imposed blackout period where it doesn't buy back shares, it likely isn't in that period now. Apple routinely buys back large numbers of shares during the last 4 weeks of its quarters, and we aren't even in the last 4 weeks yet. Also, the last time Apple issued a guidance revision it bought back a substantial number of shares between when it issued that revision and when it reported earnings.

    Also, a Rule 10b5-1 Trading Plan doesn't have to ignore the stock price. It can pick specific dates on which shares will be bought or sold. But it can also specify prices at which they will be bought or sold. It can even specify that X number of shares will be bought if the share price drops Y% from a peak. The plan just has to be, speaking practically, self-executing - it has to provide an algorithm which determines when or for how much shares are bought or sold. It can't require further decision making from someone who, at that point, has material non-public information. Whoever does the buying or selling just follows the rules set forth in the plan.

    Apple could also give someone - e.g., a broker - the authority to make decisions about when to buy or sell shares based on changing circumstances so long as that person doesn't have material non-public information. They might be told to buy shares as efficiently as they can - e.g., when there are price dips. So longs as they are making the decisions about individual buys and they don't have material non-public information, Apple isn't opening itself up to insider trading accusations.

    All that said, it is all but certain that Apple at all times - not just, e.g., near the end of quarters - either buys back shares in accordance with a trading plan or has someone making the short-term buyback decisions who is effectively firewalled from any material non-public information.
    Apple did at one time use a broker(s), but they abandoned that sometime back in favor of self-managing. As for Apple likely being in a black-out period that would be due to a significant material change with the announcement of revised guidance a couple of days ago, a rare event for Apple. 
    It wouldn’t have to be a broker. Apple could, e.g., have a team within the company that was in charge of making day-to-day decisions about share purchases. Those people wouldn’t have anything to do with the company’s operations and wouldn’t have access to material non-public information. Or Apple could, of course, buy shares based on a 10b5-1 plan.

    If Apple was going to impose a blackout period on itself related to a guidance revision, that period would likely come before the announcement rather than afterward, or only for a short period afterward - e.g., a couple days. Before the announcement is when Apple would have that big piece of information which was non-public.

    When Apple revised in January 2019, it had not bought any shares in the 4 weeks prior to the end of the quarter. Apple announced the revision the first trading day after the quarter ended. Then it bought 28 million shares in the first 5 weeks of the following quarter. It announced earnings for the previous quarter - the quarter which it had revised for - 3 days before the end of those 5 weeks. (Apple breaks out its open market share purchases into 3 periods for each quarter - one for the first 5 weeks, one for the next 4 weeks, and one for the last 4 weeks.) Apple had also bought a small amount of shares in the 4 week period before the 4 week period in which it didn’t buy any shares. So it looks like it stopped buying shares sometime in the middle of the quarter that it revised for.

    Maybe Apple imposed a blackout period on itself because it realized it was going to have to revise its guidance and didn’t want to trade shares until it made that information public. Or maybe it just stopped buying shares because it knew that it would be able to buy them at lower prices after it announced the revision. Either way, the point is that it was before the revision was announced that Apple stopped buying shares.
    Thanks Carnegie. You put some effort into researching that which is appreciated. 
    SpamSandwichBart Y
  • Reply 67 of 97
    Rayz2016 said:
    My my, the modern media does bring out the worry warts. 

    So far, this virus has killed 3000 people. 

    The flu dispatches 650,000 people every year. 

    Like the flu, it only kills the very young, the very old, or people with a compromised immune system. 

    The doctors’ are giving the same advice for flu.  Don’t go to a hospital where you will probably infect people who’re already sick, stay hydrated, stay at home and rest. 

    This virus isn’t going anywhere. 

    Like flu, it won’t be cured. 
    Like the flu, it will continue to kill people every year. 
    Like the flu, it’ll fade from the global consciousness. 


    It's not really "like the flu" though. The seasonal flu is like 0.1% lethal. This is more like 3%, give or take, and as transmissible if not moreso. You're likely going to know people who die from this if it continues to spread "like the flu". Not a reason to panic, but a reason to be prepared.

    Listen to this:
    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/27/podcasts/the-daily/coronavirus.html


    tmayFileMakerFeller
  • Reply 68 of 97
    sjworld said:
    Would have been a great time to sell when high a few days ago, and buy again when it crashed.
    In general, not great advice. Playing at day trader isn’t a good investment strategy. When I was a lead dev at MarketWatch, the content SMEs instilled that point on us — find good investments for the long haul, and don’t try to play the market. Unless you have the money to lose and just like the adrenaline rush, that is. 
    This is one strategy. Another strategy is invest part of your money for retirement and use another part to learn how to trade. People who know how to trade do not have to work in the corporate world. They make a living from the comfort of their home or anywhere else they want to be and are able to do something in life they like instead of being in the office 8 to 5 and then spending 2 more hours in traffic the entire adult life. 

    If you are frugal, work hard when you are young, invest in good stock long term, etc., you can leave the corporate world in your 30s or 40s and have enough money to set aside a chunk of it for trading, thus regularly making money to live on, while the rest of your money is continuing to be invested long term for retirement. 

    However, even if you have long-term positions in AAPL in your retirement accounts, there is nothing wrong in getting out when it's obvious the market is about to crash, like what happened this past Monday. Then, sit in cash or bonds and wait for the market to come down before jumping back in. You can never time the top and the bottom exactly, but you can surely take advantage of a 20% drop even if you can only realize 10% or 15% of that drop.

    I'm not advocating day trading with retirement accounts, but the Coronavirus was well anticipated by anyone who cared to read sources like SCMP, which provided accurate coverage of Coronavirus and all the implications  for the Chinese economy and the supply chains. It was obvious to anyone who bothered to spend time getting information from reliable sources instead of watching CNN/Foxnews garbage or reading DED's fanboy essays on Apple Insider. 

    Stop drinking the Kool-Aid that DED supplies. There is nothing wrong in being an Apple fan without being an Apple fanboy so that you can exercise critical thinking. DED's articles remind me of the communist propaganda that I was fed with when I was growing up in the Soviet Union.  It makes you dumb and blind because it is devoid of any critical thinking. 
    edited February 2020 avon b7
  • Reply 69 of 97

    hexclock said:
    sirozha said:
    hexclock said:
    sirozha said:
    mdirvin said:
    The whole trick is timing.  I bought a bit early Dec. 2018, but still made over 450K.  I'm thinking its still a bit early we have several more legs down, maybe.  Who really knows you just take  your best guess and go with it.  I would ask my 3 year old grandson but he's a few states over right now. I could get as good of advice from him as I any of the "Experts".

    Mike
    Mike, there's this new invention called "telephone". It's very cool. You can talk to people miles away; sometimes even in another city. Soon, you will be able to speak to your grandson who is 3 states away. Actually, Apple makes a few of these new amazing devices; they call it iPhone. 
    So after you spew out a long post filled with abject speculation, with no actual factual evidence, you come back with a pointless, sarcastic attack on Mike for no apparent reason.

    How is this an attack? This was a good-humored joke. As for my long post (not nearly as long as DED's numerous theses), I have been warning on this forum for nearly a month that the big AAPL drop was coming. Read my post history. I was questioned on many an occasion what my ulterior motives were. The only motive I had was to forewarn AAPL shareholders to stop drinking the Kool-Aid that DED was selling. Fortunately, I sold $2 million worth of stock before the correction. Continue reading this fanboy bullsh*t that DED keeps putting out. 

    It didn't take a brain surgeon or a rocket scientist to understand that the Coronavirus pandemic will affect AAPL dramatically due to Tim Cook's stubborn  reliance on China. Apple barely avoided the Trade War fallout (they got lucky Trump needed the stock market to stay high for his re-election). But, the Coronavirus delivered a one-two punch that Tim Cook could no longer avoid by cozying up to Trump. The investors who are blinded by their Apple fanboyism will have to ride this down or take a 20% hit. 

    We will know which way this goes by next Monday. I predict we will be having a full-blown epidemic in early stages over the weekend, and this will take the entire market down like we haven't seen since 2008. Is Apple doomed? Of course, it's not doomed. Apple will survive and will rise from the ashes, but the stock portfolios will be in the red for a long time. Those who hold cash will get rich. Those who hold AAPL will lose years of gains.  
    Well you know how jokes in print come across sometimes, so fair enough. 
    You can count me among those who have lost some gains on Apple stock, but it’s only a loss if I sell it. Apple has had an incredible run the last few years, far above the rest of the market. It’s losses present a buying opportunity for us, and I’m am no big investor. I buy a few shares here and there when I can. The virus thing will sort itself out eventually and life will return to “normal”, despite the media’s best efforts to make everyone crazy. 
    Apple did NOT have an amazing run in the past few years. Apple was stagnant until August 2018, when the price started rising quickly. However, on October 7,  2018, AAPL started sliding, and by the end of 2018, AAPL lost over 40% of its value. It took AAPL until mid September 2019 to get back to where it was in early October of 2018. So, there was an entire year of no gains. AAPL again took off in September of 2019 and had an incredible run from about $205 to $338 or so between September 2019 and February 2020. And now, AAPL is again down 20%, and this is just the beginning. So, unless you sold on October 6 2018, then bought in early January 2019, then sold again in February 2020, you are really only about 22% up from where you were 1.5 years ago. This is not such a great return from AAPL. My prediction is that AAPL will retest its January 2019 lows in the $140-$150 range. Now, compare the returns from AMZN or MSFT in the same 1.5 years, and you will realize what you are missing with AAPL. I was 100% in AAPL until very recently. I finally got rid of it, as I no longer believe in the leadership or the direction that the leadership has taken in the past 5 years or so. Apple still can't figure out how to share folders between family members in iCloud, whereas Amazon AWS and Microsoft Azure run mission-critical data centers for Fortune 500 companies in their clouds. This is how dysfunctional Apple has become. 
    edited February 2020
  • Reply 70 of 97
    dedgecko said:
    sirozha said:
    tzmmtz said:
    larryjw said:
    There’s no media induced panic. It is more like computer algorithm triggered panic selling that explains stock drops.

    Why anyone would sell due to the Coronavirus is beyond me. If you buy stocks long, why would this disease outbreak affect your stock holdings?

    if you had unrealized gain from Apple stock, why sell now; losing on the downside value of the stock today, and paying 15% capital gains tax in addition. 
    I sold a little less then half my AAPL at $310 last week as I saw this coming from non-traditional media sources. I expect to buy back around $225 or even in the 100’s range as this gets a lot worse. Which unfortunately it will in my opinion.  I don’t mind paying cap gains if I can get a bargain. Assuming I survive this. 
    IMHO, AAPL is on track to retest its late 2018 lows, that is in the $140 range. 
    Is there going to be a credit freeze in China again?  Or somewhere else in the world!?

    If Apple goes down to $140 anytime in the next six months (highly unlikely), it’s time to take out loans and load up.

    The Apple Is Doomed machination is strong with you.
    I never said Apple was doomed. I don't know where you got it from. 
  • Reply 71 of 97
    sjworld said:
    Would have been a great time to sell when high a few days ago, and buy again when it crashed.
    In general, not great advice. Playing at day trader isn’t a good investment strategy. When I was a lead dev at MarketWatch, the content SMEs instilled that point on us — find good investments for the long haul, and don’t try to play the market. Unless you have the money to lose and just like the adrenaline rush, that is. 
    First off, I never said anything about day-trading. And secondly, I know plenty that do it and do pretty well, so speak for yourself.
  • Reply 72 of 97
    carnegiecarnegie Posts: 1,007member
    gatorguy said:
    carnegie said:
    gatorguy said:
    carnegie said:
    gatorguy said:
    FWIW six months ago the same author wrote this:
    "But why is Apple buying back shares seemingly regardless of their price? It appears clear that Apple expects its share price to grow much higher in the future. So rather than carefully timing its repurchases to only occur when the stock price hits its lowest levels, Apple continues to buy shares back nearly as fast as it can all the time, even as the stock price jumps up and down as it continues to increment higher."

    As for jumping on this unexpectedly low stock price I would assume that at the moment Apple would be in one of their "blackout periods" where they are not permitted to buy back stock except under a predefined/prearranged schedule that ignores what the stock price is at a point in time and instead picks a date for the transaction to occur. Of course they are not obligated to complete a pre-scheduled buyback, they can choose to hold on to the cash instead, but they also can't create one at their whim during a blackout period. Have I got that right?
    Even if Apple has a self-imposed blackout period where it doesn't buy back shares, it likely isn't in that period now. Apple routinely buys back large numbers of shares during the last 4 weeks of its quarters, and we aren't even in the last 4 weeks yet. Also, the last time Apple issued a guidance revision it bought back a substantial number of shares between when it issued that revision and when it reported earnings.

    Also, a Rule 10b5-1 Trading Plan doesn't have to ignore the stock price. It can pick specific dates on which shares will be bought or sold. But it can also specify prices at which they will be bought or sold. It can even specify that X number of shares will be bought if the share price drops Y% from a peak. The plan just has to be, speaking practically, self-executing - it has to provide an algorithm which determines when or for how much shares are bought or sold. It can't require further decision making from someone who, at that point, has material non-public information. Whoever does the buying or selling just follows the rules set forth in the plan.

    Apple could also give someone - e.g., a broker - the authority to make decisions about when to buy or sell shares based on changing circumstances so long as that person doesn't have material non-public information. They might be told to buy shares as efficiently as they can - e.g., when there are price dips. So longs as they are making the decisions about individual buys and they don't have material non-public information, Apple isn't opening itself up to insider trading accusations.

    All that said, it is all but certain that Apple at all times - not just, e.g., near the end of quarters - either buys back shares in accordance with a trading plan or has someone making the short-term buyback decisions who is effectively firewalled from any material non-public information.
    Apple did at one time use a broker(s), but they abandoned that sometime back in favor of self-managing. As for Apple likely being in a black-out period that would be due to a significant material change with the announcement of revised guidance a couple of days ago, a rare event for Apple. 
    It wouldn’t have to be a broker. Apple could, e.g., have a team within the company that was in charge of making day-to-day decisions about share purchases. Those people wouldn’t have anything to do with the company’s operations and wouldn’t have access to material non-public information. Or Apple could, of course, buy shares based on a 10b5-1 plan.

    If Apple was going to impose a blackout period on itself related to a guidance revision, that period would likely come before the announcement rather than afterward, or only for a short period afterward - e.g., a couple days. Before the announcement is when Apple would have that big piece of information which was non-public.

    When Apple revised in January 2019, it had not bought any shares in the 4 weeks prior to the end of the quarter. Apple announced the revision the first trading day after the quarter ended. Then it bought 28 million shares in the first 5 weeks of the following quarter. It announced earnings for the previous quarter - the quarter which it had revised for - 3 days before the end of those 5 weeks. (Apple breaks out its open market share purchases into 3 periods for each quarter - one for the first 5 weeks, one for the next 4 weeks, and one for the last 4 weeks.) Apple had also bought a small amount of shares in the 4 week period before the 4 week period in which it didn’t buy any shares. So it looks like it stopped buying shares sometime in the middle of the quarter that it revised for.

    Maybe Apple imposed a blackout period on itself because it realized it was going to have to revise its guidance and didn’t want to trade shares until it made that information public. Or maybe it just stopped buying shares because it knew that it would be able to buy them at lower prices after it announced the revision. Either way, the point is that it was before the revision was announced that Apple stopped buying shares.
    Thanks Carnegie. You put some effort into researching that which is appreciated. 
    You're welcome.

    I keep spreadsheets on Apple which contain all kinds of information so that I can quickly find numbers or calculate different metrics. How much money has Mr. Cook given up by declining the dividend equivalents on his RSUs? (Unfortunately perhaps) I can tell you that.
    SpamSandwich
  • Reply 73 of 97
    knowitallknowitall Posts: 1,648member
    dedgecko said:
    knowitall said:
    Apple seems to act like a national bank, buying its currency to keep devaluation low.
    I think this situation shows that it is not wise to be dependent on one area and country for your products.
    A company like Tesla is doing it the modern way, positioning its production in several distinct areas in the words (the U.S.A. being one of them) to combat all sorts of problems concerning one area.
    I would adapt Apples policy regarding this immediately and start building factories on US soil immediately, using the 100 billion or so for this years share buybacks that are effectively the same as burning the money.
    Apple should think big again, maybe look at Tesla what that means.
    Apple has been doing this longer and better than $TSLA. This strategy is long-term, decades out. 

    DED, you sure do bring out the crazies.
    TSLA just started, better makes no sense now.
    Having ‘a strategy’ for decades has no implications for it fitting the future.
    It’s perhaps lucky that Apples all eggs in one basket (China) strategy didn't give more problems earlier on, but it is clear that China has very big problems concerning its state regime.
    I understood that China has about a million prisoners in huge concentration camps because of it capturing east Turkestan (an area bigger than Turkey) in 1949 and subsequent repression of opinion and religion in this area.
    Don't believe me, look it up, you can find satellite pictures of the camps, even with and without guard  towers (without when a public visit was allowed).
    Also, China is busy to ‘detain’ the rest of its population with ‘cameras all over the place’ (as was done in Turkestan) to ensure everyone behaves. 
    Also Hong Kong is going to be ‘captured’ in the near future, invalidating all investments in TSMC.
    Clearly Apples position must change, and if it doesn’t people will demand it.
    It’s best to diversify before this all is a fact and make Apple products in Europe, US and Asia.
    This will make Apple immune (pun intended) to trade wars and other mishap and ensure local buyers can buy a local product.
    It will even make Apple (even) more green because of local transport of goods, instead of international.
    It will also give Apple the opportunity to extend its computer technology to robotics and advanced automation (in case of building in the US and Europe) which is very fitting (as a computer company) I think.
    edited February 2020
  • Reply 74 of 97
    knowitall said:
    dedgecko said:
    knowitall said:
    Apple seems to act like a national bank, buying its currency to keep devaluation low.
    I think this situation shows that it is not wise to be dependent on one area and country for your products.
    A company like Tesla is doing it the modern way, positioning its production in several distinct areas in the words (the U.S.A. being one of them) to combat all sorts of problems concerning one area.
    I would adapt Apples policy regarding this immediately and start building factories on US soil immediately, using the 100 billion or so for this years share buybacks that are effectively the same as burning the money.
    Apple should think big again, maybe look at Tesla what that means.
    Apple has been doing this longer and better than $TSLA. This strategy is long-term, decades out. 

    DED, you sure do bring out the crazies.
    TSLA just started, better makes no sense now.
    Having ‘a strategy’ for decades has no implications for it fitting the future.
    It’s perhaps lucky that Apples all eggs in one basket (China) strategy didn't give more problems earlier on, but it is clear that China has very big problems concerning its state regime.
    I understood that China has about a million prisoners in huge concentration camps because of it capturing east Turkestan (an area bigger than Turkey) in 1949 and subsequent repression of opinion and religion in this area.
    Don't believe me, look it up, you can find satellite pictures of the camps, even with and without guard  towers (without when a public visit was allowed).
    Also, China is busy to ‘detain’ the rest of its population with ‘cameras all over the place’ (as was done in Turkestan) to ensure everyone behaves. 
    Also Hong Kong is going to be ‘captured’ in the near future, invalidating all investments in TSMC.
    Clearly Apples position must change, and if it doesn’t people will demand it.
    It’s best to diversify before this all is a fact and make Apple products in Europe, US and Asia.
    This will make Apple immune (pun intended) to trade wars and other mishap and ensure local buyers can buy a local product.
    It will even make Apple (even) more green because of local transport of goods, instead of international.
    It will also give Apple the opportunity to extend its computer technology to robotics and advanced automation (in case of building in the US and Europe) which is very fitting (as a computer company) I think.
    AAPL has no future in China. Once the virus is contained, the Chinese government will embark on a patriotic campaign under the slogan "Buy Chinese". The only way they can jump-start their economy is by stimulating the demand, and if they decide to stimulate the demand by government subsidies, they will sure as hell want the demand to be for Chinese brands. Huawei is a serious competitor to Apple in China. The stickiness of the Apple's ecosystem doesn't exist in China. They are not using iCloud, and now they are transitioning away from Google services and building their own national cloud service for mobile devices shared by several Chinese phone manufacturers. Eventually, they will jettison Android as well. The fact that the Chinese languages are so difficult for anyone else to learn will help build the Cyber Great Wall of China by the Chinese government to completely isolate China's web from the rest of the world. Fortunately for them, they have reached the point where they make more inventions and get more patents than Western companies. Huawei is leaps and bounds ahead of anyone else in 5G, and is competing with Cisco on everything else. Huawei phones are direct competitors to the iPhone in China. If China wants to maintain their totalitarian form of government, they can completely shut their cyber border and continue to develop the technology internally without any cooperation with the West. They will sell their technology to at least half of the world, which includes Russia, Africa, India, etc. Any country that wants to propel itself technologically at a fraction of the cost compared to buying Western technologies will gladly buy Chinese tech. The world is splitting into two global spheres of influence. One of them is the Russia-China economic and military alliance, and the other one is the Western alliance. The developing countries stuck in the middle will have to choose one alliance or the other. 

    Apple should use their remaining cash pile to get the hell out of China now while others are also affected by the stoppage of the Chinese economy. Samsung was smart to get out of China last year. Losing 15% of the sales is a small price to pay for the business continuity system that would allow them not to be affected by such a contingency in the future. Tim Cook keeps saying that the future of Apple is in services. China will not be using any Apple services ever.

    Once China starts recovering, there will be no demand for iPhones in China. The Communist Party will make sure that it is considered unpatriotic and even treasonous to buy iPhones instead of Chinese-made smart phones. Few will dare enrage the Communist Party representatives, which will be plastered on every street corner to make sure that Chinese citizens buy Chinese products. The fact that Huawei phones are really good and may be superior to the iPhone in some respects, while costing hundreds of dollars less, will only add to the decreasing market share of the iPhone in China. Unless you are a rich Chinese citizen who wants to flash his wealth by buying iPhones and Teslas, there is little incentive for the Chinese citizen to buy an iPhone, as Huawei gives him/her the same of better features at much lower cost. 

    Tesla may not have this challenge yet because there is no viable Chinese alternative to Tesla yet. However, within a few years, Tesla will be having the same problems. 
    edited February 2020
  • Reply 75 of 97
    What’s amazing to me is how few shares (relative to the massive float) it took to pull stocks down 20%. Indeed, yesterday’s relatively hefty 100+ M share volume spike was mainly impressive because, in spite of the volume, the stock had barely dropped in price by the market’s close. On a percent of float basis, ~100 M shares of AAPL is decidedly small potatoes compared to, say, what happened during the Great Recession.

    BTW, It looks for all the world like someone had jerked a chain to create a pullback and then rushed in yesterday to collect the jackpot. I’m just sayin’....

    Folks that sold at the lows yesterday are going to look pretty sheepish if the stock now starts to reverse direction.

    That is not to discount the COVID-19 issue. But other than a production hit that fortuitously happened just when Apple had shut down manufacturing for the Chinese New Year, and just before the annual low sales quarter to boot, I frankly don’t expect a material impact on Apple’s business - certainly not enough to justify a 20% pullback in valuation.

    Yes, there are some who will declare that Apple was overvalued in the first place. I don’t share that opinion. For that matter, I haven’t shared that opinion for over a decade.

    As in the past, the future will show who was right.
    edited February 2020 SpamSandwichtmay
  • Reply 76 of 97
    knowitallknowitall Posts: 1,648member
    sirozha said:
    knowitall said:
    dedgecko said:
    knowitall said:
    Apple seems to act like a national bank, buying its currency to keep devaluation low.
    I think this situation shows that it is not wise to be dependent on one area and country for your products.
    A company like Tesla is doing it the modern way, positioning its production in several distinct areas in the words (the U.S.A. being one of them) to combat all sorts of problems concerning one area.
    I would adapt Apples policy regarding this immediately and start building factories on US soil immediately, using the 100 billion or so for this years share buybacks that are effectively the same as burning the money.
    Apple should think big again, maybe look at Tesla what that means.
    Apple has been doing this longer and better than $TSLA. This strategy is long-term, decades out. 

    DED, you sure do bring out the crazies.
    TSLA just started, better makes no sense now.
    Having ‘a strategy’ for decades has no implications for it fitting the future.
    It’s perhaps lucky that Apples all eggs in one basket (China) strategy didn't give more problems earlier on, but it is clear that China has very big problems concerning its state regime.
    I understood that China has about a million prisoners in huge concentration camps because of it capturing east Turkestan (an area bigger than Turkey) in 1949 and subsequent repression of opinion and religion in this area.
    Don't believe me, look it up, you can find satellite pictures of the camps, even with and without guard  towers (without when a public visit was allowed).
    Also, China is busy to ‘detain’ the rest of its population with ‘cameras all over the place’ (as was done in Turkestan) to ensure everyone behaves. 
    Also Hong Kong is going to be ‘captured’ in the near future, invalidating all investments in TSMC.
    Clearly Apples position must change, and if it doesn’t people will demand it.
    It’s best to diversify before this all is a fact and make Apple products in Europe, US and Asia.
    This will make Apple immune (pun intended) to trade wars and other mishap and ensure local buyers can buy a local product.
    It will even make Apple (even) more green because of local transport of goods, instead of international.
    It will also give Apple the opportunity to extend its computer technology to robotics and advanced automation (in case of building in the US and Europe) which is very fitting (as a computer company) I think.
    AAPL has no future in China. Once the virus is contained, the Chinese government will embark on a patriotic campaign under the slogan "Buy Chinese". The only way they can jump-start their economy is by stimulating the demand, and if they decide to stimulate the demand by government subsidies, they will sure as hell want the demand to be for Chinese brands. Huawei is a serious competitor to Apple in China. The stickiness of the Apple's ecosystem doesn't exist in China. They are not using iCloud, and now they are transitioning away from Google services and building their own national cloud service for mobile devices shared by several Chinese phone manufacturers. Eventually, they will jettison Android as well. The fact that the Chinese languages are so difficult for anyone else to learn will help build the Cyber Great Wall of China by the Chinese government to completely isolate China's web from the rest of the world. Fortunately for them, they have reached the point where they make more inventions and get more patents than Western companies. Huawei is leaps and bounds ahead of anyone else in 5G, and is competing with Cisco on everything else. Huawei phones are direct competitors to the iPhone in China. If China wants to maintain their totalitarian form of government, they can completely shut their cyber border and continue to develop the technology internally without any cooperation with the West. They will sell their technology to at least half of the world, which includes Russia, Africa, India, etc. Any country that wants to propel itself technologically at a fraction of the cost compared to buying Western technologies will gladly buy Chinese tech. The world is splitting into two global spheres of influence. One of them is the Russia-China economic and military alliance, and the other one is the Western alliance. The developing countries stuck in the middle will have to choose one alliance or the other. 

    Apple should use their remaining cash pile to get the hell out of China now while others are also affected by the stoppage of the Chinese economy. Samsung was smart to get out of China last year. Losing 15% of the sales is a small price to pay for the business continuity system that would allow them not to be affected by such a contingency in the future. Tim Cook keeps saying that the future of Apple is in services. China will not be using any Apple services ever.

    Once China starts recovering, there will be no demand for iPhones in China. The Communist Party will make sure that it is considered unpatriotic and even treasonous to buy iPhones instead of Chinese-made smart phones. Few will dare enrage the Communist Party representatives, which will be plastered on every street corner to make sure that Chinese citizens buy Chinese products. The fact that Huawei phones are really good and may be superior to the iPhone in some respects, while costing hundreds of dollars less, will only add to the decreasing market share of the iPhone in China. Unless you are a rich Chinese citizen who wants to flash his wealth by buying iPhones and Teslas, there is little incentive for the Chinese citizen to buy an iPhone, as Huawei gives him/her the same of better features at much lower cost. 

    Tesla may not have this challenge yet because there is no viable Chinese alternative to Tesla yet. However, within a few years, Tesla will be having the same problems. 
    You get ahead of yourself.
  • Reply 77 of 97
    BTW, a lot of bad information in this thread today, along with a spattering of good information. DED’s article has the basics right on buybacks: Just like every other investor, Apple automatically gets more bang per buck when the share price drops.

    Regarding buybacks, I made this comment on ped30.com a few days ago:

    Below are some interesting numbers that I just calculated out of my master spreadsheet. They may seen unconnected, but I see a very deep and meaningful connection:

    0.65 B
    0.34 B
    0.28 B
    0.25 B
    0.38 B
    0.38 B

    [These are] the approximate numbers of shares Apple has bought per fiscal year since they started their buybacks. Note that the first fiscal year, fy ‘14, was by far the biggest buyback. Also, note the major jump commencing in fy ‘18. The reason for that jump, simply put, was the repatriation of foreign-generated cash.

    I submit that, with the pullback in stock prices, Apple’s buyback power is going to be supercharged. And the further the pullback, the more supercharged it’s going to be.

    I’d further submit that few if any other companies in the world will be able to match Apple’s supercharger capacity and will to supercharge. Consequently, I view ANY economic slowdown short of a major world war as beneficial to long-term Apple shareholders.

    Edit: For those who don’t understand the profound positive impact this has for long term stockholders, consider that buybacks in fact increase the percentage ownership of Apple for each remaining share. Thus, if you hold shares from before buybacks began, then when Apple buys back half it’s float, each share you still own will be worth twice the percentage ownership of Apple the company. Note that Apple has grown since buybacks started, so you effectively will own twice the shares in a larger, more profitable company. And furthermore, you didn’t have to pay any additional taxes to “acquire” those shares!

    For my wife and I, being retired and elderly, Apple is essentially investing for us when our investing days are over. Pretty sweet!
    edited February 2020 SpamSandwichtmaypscooter63Bart Y
  • Reply 78 of 97
    knowitallknowitall Posts: 1,648member
    sacto joe said:
    BTW, a lot of bad information in this thread today, along with a spattering of good information. DED’s article has the basics right on buybacks: Just like every other investor, Apple automatically gets more bang per buck when the share price drops.

    Regarding buybacks, I made this comment on ped30.com a few days ago:

    Below are some interesting numbers that I just calculated out of my master spreadsheet. They may seen unconnected, but I see a very deep and meaningful connection:

    0.65 B
    0.34 B
    0.28 B
    0.25 B
    0.38 B
    0.38 B

    [These are] the approximate numbers of shares Apple has bought per fiscal year since they started their buybacks. Note that the first fiscal year, fy ‘14, was by far the biggest buyback. Also, note the major jump commencing in fy ‘18. The reason for that jump, simply put, was the repatriation of foreign-generated cash.

    I submit that, with the pullback in stock prices, Apple’s buyback power is going to be supercharged. And the further the pullback, the more supercharged it’s going to be.

    I’d further submit that few if any other companies in the world will be able to match Apple’s supercharger capacity and will to supercharge. Consequently, I view ANY economic slowdown short of a major world war as beneficial to long-term Apple shareholders.

    Edit: For those who don’t understand the profound positive impact this has for long term stockholders, consider that buybacks in fact increase the percentage ownership of Apple for each remaining share. Thus, if you hold shares from before buybacks began, then when Apple buys back half it’s float, each share you still own will be worth twice the percentage ownership of Apple the company. Note that Apple has grown since buybacks started, so you effectively will own twice the shares in a larger, more profitable company. And furthermore, you didn’t have to pay any additional taxes to “acquire” those shares!

    For my wife and I, being retired and elderly, Apple is essentially investing for us when our investing days are over. Pretty sweet!
    A bigger percentage of nothing is ... wait for it: nothing.
  • Reply 79 of 97
    tmaytmay Posts: 5,812member
    knowitall said:
    dedgecko said:
    knowitall said:
    Apple seems to act like a national bank, buying its currency to keep devaluation low.
    I think this situation shows that it is not wise to be dependent on one area and country for your products.
    A company like Tesla is doing it the modern way, positioning its production in several distinct areas in the words (the U.S.A. being one of them) to combat all sorts of problems concerning one area.
    I would adapt Apples policy regarding this immediately and start building factories on US soil immediately, using the 100 billion or so for this years share buybacks that are effectively the same as burning the money.
    Apple should think big again, maybe look at Tesla what that means.
    Apple has been doing this longer and better than $TSLA. This strategy is long-term, decades out. 

    DED, you sure do bring out the crazies.
    TSLA just started, better makes no sense now.

    TSLA was founded in 2003; "just started" isn't accurate, nor was it founded by Elon. More to the point, TSLA hasn't had a profitable year yet.

    "Jan 29, 2020 - Tesla, which has never had a profitable year, ended 2019 with a loss of $862 million, less than its two previous annual losses. Revenue was $7.4 billion in the fourth quarter, the company said, up from $6.3 billion in the third quarter."

    Given that there are large, profitable Automobile manufacturers, do you really think that Tesla is going to be profitable this year, competing against many more EV models in the market, in a year when car sales are in a recession, and with fewer government incentives?
  • Reply 80 of 97
    doggonedoggone Posts: 326member
    Apple should be allowed to buyback shares ad hoc now since they have already issued a warning for this quarter.  I am sure they are buying bucket loads now to take advantage of the relatively low price.  
    The thing that really sucks is that Apple's dividend was issued on 2/13.  The stock tanked right after that.  So shareholders like myself who reinvested lost out on cheap stock (and 20% more stock).

    Over the last few years Apple has retired about a third of its outstanding stock.  Sooner or later it will be 50%.  So essentially the stock will represent 2 times of amount of the company that it did.  That is good news for long term holders of the stock and must have had some impact on the stock price (since 2013 AAPL is up 230%)
Sign In or Register to comment.