Apple is my religion and Steve is my holy crusader, You unholy devil worshiper.
With out Steve there would be no Apple Computer.
Apple will continue one day in the future with out Steve but he did saved it from death after NEXT.
Go buy some MS stock you stinking son of satan
As I type this with my very unsuccessful apple phone product ... Ballmer (ouragan), what are you doing in an Apple rumor site? Aren't the cheap MS ads on this site enough? .
I agree Retiarius did give a highly plausible answer. I was hoping someone knew for sure. It would be interesting to know.
Besides the Disney/Pixar merger was a fairly recent development. How did he cover his life expenses before the merger? Was he receiving a substantial salary from Pixar prior to the merger? Is he now receiving a salary from Disney?
According to Investor.com/MSN Money, Steve jobs owns 138million shares of Disney. In Dec, 06, they paid a $0.31 per share dividend, which would have been $42,780,000 to Stevo.
It was $0.27, $0.24, $0.21, & $0.21 in the previous 4 years. So even at the belt tightening $0.21/share, that's $30 million. Hopefully he can eke out an existance on that. By the way, that's just one investment and it doesn't look like he reinvests his dividends(in Disney). He wouldn't have a nice round number of shares if he did.
It looks like Disney has been doing year-end dividends since 1999, prior to that it was quarterly. A company like Disney will pay continue to pay dividends for as long as it can, or its stock will get hammered. Failure to pay a dividend will be seen as severe financial weakness.
Edit: BTW, his Disney is about $4.5Billion, versus only $925Million for his Apple stock.
Poor company results? What the hell are you smoking? My stock shows exceptional growth thanks to Jobs. He can stay right where he is and continue making me a wealthy man.
Those companies have to sell more computers in order to turn a profit because they have chosen to sell cheap, throw-away boxes with little profit due to the competitive market of selling to bottom dwellers. That isn't the market Apple caters to. In the consumer market they own a great deal more than the 5% you give them. I love how asshats bring up the national average of Apple's OS saturation among all computers when talking about hardware sales. They aren't the same. Some of the most desirable items are from companies that cater to the top echelon. You probably scoffed when ou heard Apple was going to open retail outlets. After all, Dell and Gateway failed miserably. Funny that Apple's retail stores have increased Mac sales so dramatically and that per square foot Apple retail stores out sell every other retailer.
The problem with stock market valuations is that they don't always reflect the true value of a company which can be undervalued or, most of the time, overvalued. But, over time, the true value emerges, often after a big correction.
I am concerned when stock values do not reflect a company output, its production, its market share, as I know that any imbalance will get corrected over time.
If you take 4 computer companies, say IBM, Hewlett Packard, Dell, and Apple, how can you determine the value of their shares? I like the market value of shares to be supported by revenues, profits, market share and the number of employees. Otherwise, you could say that the smallest company is worth more than its competitors, for no reason at all, a perillous situation.
I believe that there is far too much speculation on the shares of Apple because of this difference between share value and company output (revenues, profits, employees, market share). Beware of the correction!
..., how can you determine the value of their shares?
...
I believe that there is far too much speculation on the shares of Apple because of this difference between share value and company output (revenues, profits, employees, market share). Beware of the correction
That is simple. To determine the value of Apple shares we merely have to look at the current price of the shares. That is the value of the shares. To look at the vlaue of the company we merely have to look at Apple's profits and earnings. Since Job's return Apple has profited a great deal more than any time in its history. There is no denying it.
The company is now also controlled by 30,336 shareholders, of whom CEO Steve Jobs is only second with over 5.5 million shares; the biggest investor is Fidelity Investments, which owns nearly 56.6 million shares.
Doesn't Forrest Gump own a large portion of Apple?
Steve originally sold all but one single share of Apple when he was ousted. He used that money to start NeXT, but there are no real records of how much, etc...
It was mostly symbolic, he has always remained Apple's rightful owner, so to speak, even when ousted, he still owned Apple.
Overall, Apple's performance as a company in fiscal 2007 was stellar, having achieved sales of more than 7 million Macs worldwide and boosting its working capital to nearly $12.7 billion. As a result, expenses also increased..........
Comments
Apple is my religion and Steve is my holy crusader, You unholy devil worshiper.
With out Steve there would be no Apple Computer.
Apple will continue one day in the future with out Steve but he did saved it from death after NEXT.
Go buy some MS stock you stinking son of satan
As I type this with my very unsuccessful apple phone product
I agree Retiarius did give a highly plausible answer. I was hoping someone knew for sure. It would be interesting to know.
Besides the Disney/Pixar merger was a fairly recent development. How did he cover his life expenses before the merger? Was he receiving a substantial salary from Pixar prior to the merger? Is he now receiving a salary from Disney?
According to Investor.com/MSN Money, Steve jobs owns 138million shares of Disney. In Dec, 06, they paid a $0.31 per share dividend, which would have been $42,780,000 to Stevo.
It was $0.27, $0.24, $0.21, & $0.21 in the previous 4 years. So even at the belt tightening $0.21/share, that's $30 million. Hopefully he can eke out an existance on that. By the way, that's just one investment and it doesn't look like he reinvests his dividends(in Disney). He wouldn't have a nice round number of shares if he did.
It looks like Disney has been doing year-end dividends since 1999, prior to that it was quarterly. A company like Disney will pay continue to pay dividends for as long as it can, or its stock will get hammered. Failure to pay a dividend will be seen as severe financial weakness.
Edit: BTW, his Disney is about $4.5Billion, versus only $925Million for his Apple stock.
Poor company results? What the hell are you smoking? My stock shows exceptional growth thanks to Jobs. He can stay right where he is and continue making me a wealthy man.
Those companies have to sell more computers in order to turn a profit because they have chosen to sell cheap, throw-away boxes with little profit due to the competitive market of selling to bottom dwellers. That isn't the market Apple caters to. In the consumer market they own a great deal more than the 5% you give them. I love how asshats bring up the national average of Apple's OS saturation among all computers when talking about hardware sales. They aren't the same. Some of the most desirable items are from companies that cater to the top echelon. You probably scoffed when ou heard Apple was going to open retail outlets. After all, Dell and Gateway failed miserably. Funny that Apple's retail stores have increased Mac sales so dramatically and that per square foot Apple retail stores out sell every other retailer.
The problem with stock market valuations is that they don't always reflect the true value of a company which can be undervalued or, most of the time, overvalued. But, over time, the true value emerges, often after a big correction.
I am concerned when stock values do not reflect a company output, its production, its market share, as I know that any imbalance will get corrected over time.
If you take 4 computer companies, say IBM, Hewlett Packard, Dell, and Apple, how can you determine the value of their shares? I like the market value of shares to be supported by revenues, profits, market share and the number of employees. Otherwise, you could say that the smallest company is worth more than its competitors, for no reason at all, a perillous situation.
I believe that there is far too much speculation on the shares of Apple because of this difference between share value and company output (revenues, profits, employees, market share). Beware of the correction!
..., how can you determine the value of their shares?
...
I believe that there is far too much speculation on the shares of Apple because of this difference between share value and company output (revenues, profits, employees, market share). Beware of the correction
That is simple. To determine the value of Apple shares we merely have to look at the current price of the shares. That is the value of the shares. To look at the vlaue of the company we merely have to look at Apple's profits and earnings. Since Job's return Apple has profited a great deal more than any time in its history. There is no denying it.
The company is now also controlled by 30,336 shareholders, of whom CEO Steve Jobs is only second with over 5.5 million shares; the biggest investor is Fidelity Investments, which owns nearly 56.6 million shares.
Doesn't Forrest Gump own a large portion of Apple?
It was mostly symbolic, he has always remained Apple's rightful owner, so to speak, even when ousted, he still owned Apple.
Also, could the Jet's number be a play on words?
N2N = End to End? Mean anything?
Doesn't Forrest Gump own a large portion of Apple?
Forrest's shares were sold by Captain Dan in the late 80's I believe. He got rich off Apple, but is no longer an owner.
I think he invested a lot of it in a methane farm harvesting pig droppings...
N2N = End to End? Mean anything?
Already covered earlier in the thread, N2N is the registration number of the airplane.
Only middle-class schmucks like us live off our salaries.
Who are you calling 'middle-class'?
Overall, Apple's performance as a company in fiscal 2007 was stellar, having achieved sales of more than 7 million Macs worldwide and boosting its working capital to nearly $12.7 billion. As a result, expenses also increased..........
[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]
Just a minor point, but this portion of the report makes absolutely no sense from any financial analysis standpoint.......