You must not be a stock owner. If you aren't, you should think now about buying as much as you can afford. Regardless of Steve's position in the company in the near and far term, AAPL is way undervalued right now.
Why do you ask- because I don't like Walmart??
And- like what isn't undervalued these days (besides Microsoft & real estate)?
I guess if Apple decided to sell at the Piggly Wiggly you'd go for it too.
It's not that complicated really:
I don't have the hang up about where Apple chooses to sell their products like some folks seem to.
I hope for Apple's continued success because I think they make great products and so I hope they'll be around to continue making more great products. I also hope that more people will be exposed to and be able to own and use their great products because I don't think great products should be limited to some elite group of people.
I don't have the hang up about where Apple chooses to sell their products like some folks seem to.
I hope for Apple's continued success because I think they make great products and so I hope they'll be around to continue making more great products. I also hope that more people will be exposed to and be able to own and use their great products because I don't think great products should be limited to some elite group of people.
Thanks for your honesty.
It's ethics like yours that have helped totally screwed up the economy.
I don't have the hang up about where Apple chooses to sell their products like some folks seem to.
I hope for Apple's continued success because I think they make great products and so I hope they'll be around to continue making more great products. I also hope that more people will be exposed to and be able to own and use their great products because I don't think great products should be limited to some elite group of people.
Looking into the future 2 or 3 years... I believe if Apple has a great rollout at Walmart they will also be able to convince them to host Apple iTunes kiosks that sell music, movies and apps all in one stop.
Folks, this deal could get a LOT bigger with Walmart very quickly if the demand is there, which would be outstanding news for both companies.
Imagine the benefit to Walmart if they opened up all that wasted space dedicated to CDs and DVDs, and they could get a cut off of every sale in-store. This would be a tremendous way to initiate a worldwide iTunes kiosk concept making Apple digital downloads available anywhere at any time for consumers.
If Apple truly wants to gain marketshare, Wal-Mart being able to sell items is good. If they've already sunk to Best Buy, Wal-Mart is not going to tarnish their appeal any. (Why does Best Buy not sell Mac Minis?)
Hey, next month is my TEN YEAR ANNIVERSARY!!!! First one there!
Ship a crate to Osama and let him sell iPhones to the Taliban from his cave. I'm sure they would appreciate your philosophy.
This is the childishest comeback I've heard all week. Anyway, if the Taliban did buy iPhones, then we can find out their hiding place and listen to what they're saying.
You must not be a stock owner. If you aren't, you should think now about buying as much as you can afford. Regardless of Steve's position in the company in the near and far term, AAPL is way undervalued right now.
I'd be interested in buying stock in Apple. I don't know anything about the Stock Market though. How does one go about this if interested? (Sorry to be off topic)
I rarely take the time to post here, especially in response to off-topic discussions, but I feel the need to butt in here.
Chris_CA and those of you hanging your hats on the tired old outsourcing banter, give it a rest. At least with respect to economic arguments. What you are stating are tired old sound bits emitted by desperate politicians trying to tap into the fear/anger of lower-middle class America. Arguing that Wal-Mart is the disruptor of the American economy, or any other individual company for that matter, shows a fundamental misunderstanding of economics and a very poor grasp of business and financial concepts.
Let me be clear: Certainly people in Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, etc . . ., who used to make money in the manufacturing sector are currently undergoing a massive shift from their once-safe jobs to either unemployment or minimum-wage employment. This is, indeed, a tragedy. But this is NOT something to be blamed on one company, or even something that is necessarily "bad." This is the natural progression of a free-market economy -- and more specifically -- of a globalized free market.
To summarize, when companies "outsource," it is because it is more economically efficient to do so. By virtue of this simple fact, it is better for our economy to outsource. I can sit here and summarize a textbook on macroeconomics, or you can just take my word for it. Moreover, there are far MORE jobs (even currently in our present economic slump) than there ever were in America even 10 years ago. Moreover, our unemployment rate is still substantially lower that it was even during the tech-bubble bursting.
So how is it, you ask, that we can have entire industries literally shipped off to overseas, and yet our economy is stronger than it was 15 years ago (even with teh current slump, our GDP is still massively higher, the stock market is still massively higher, etc . . .)?
This is for two fundamental reasons:
1) Companies profit more when they ship work off to foriegn nations where it is cheaper to produce.
2) New jobs are steadily created with the capital freed up in America.
The fundamental problem is that these new jobs are inaccessible to most unskilled labor. They are taken by young, college-educated individuals. Yet, this is the inevitable cost of economic progress. This SAME DEBATE took place in the early 1900's during the peak of the industrial revolution, when old farmers were put out of business and made "obsolete" due to the mass economic and social boom in cities. The difference then was that our nation became economically unified (via steam trains and boats), whereas now we are becoming internationally unified.
Make no mistake about it: Forcing American companies to employ over-paid midwestern manufacturing employees would be a D I S A S T E R for the USA. Let's completely forget about the fact that products would cost a whole lot more (which they would). However, our corporations (GM, Chevrolet, Chrysler, etc . . . ) would still have to compete internationally for sales, and while (perhaps) Americans might be willing to pay more for American-made products, the international market surely would not. Again, disasterous.
The world is a changing place and we must change or slowly shrivel and die. The moral of the story is that Joe Sixpack and Jean Hockeymom's jobs manufacturing tractors in Central Michigan are gone forever. Perhaps our government should do more to help re-educate these people. But the fact is that Wal-Mart or no Wal-Mart, their jobs are obsolete.
Moreover, if you're young, the best investment you can make for your future is a good education. It will prevent you, as well as possible, from becoming obsolete.
For those who have no knowledge of American history before the 1930's. for literally a century America was the home of cheap labor. It came in two forms:
1) Slaves.
2) (later on) Underpaid factory workers.
American used to export all kinds of textiles, chemicals, and other manufactured goods. We produced refined cotton for the world. And we produced and exported all kinds of agriculture (which we still do today).
Even then, in the 1800's, it was the same crap in England where people were losing their jobs in cotton mills because "those cheap americans" with their "cotton gins" were stealing all their "jobs."
Yet, as it turned out, this shipping out of jobs and changing of economies is what led Britain to its industrial revolution, and eventually led America to its industrial revolution.
The notion that outsourcing is bad for an economy is, in general, a fallacy propogated by politicians eager to use people's anger and fear for their benefit. The correct statement is that outsourcing causes a great deal of harm to a small subset of workers for an even greater benefit to the economy is a whole.
Again, there is nothing a government can do to prevent outsourcing. A government can make laws to alleviate it for short periods of time, but it is a natural progression of free markets. The best option is for government to re-educate and re-train it's workforce.
...Make no mistake about it: Forcing American companies to employ over-paid midwestern manufacturing employees would be a D I S A S T E R for the USA...
I think there is a middle-ground, something like taxing some of the imports and services to offset the price differences, then re-investing the taxes back in markets where the US has some difficulties competing.
I already lost a bid to India, my bid $1,400, India's bid $270.
I don't live in India so I can never justify spending 20 hours for $270. I don't know... maybe in two years I could
Comments
I'm aware of the state of their web site. I'm also aware of this.
They are changing the Walmart logo but they are not changing the Wal-Mart name.
In the mean time, those who are choosing to shop there will now have iPhones to buy there if they want.
You must not be a stock owner. If you aren't, you should think now about buying as much as you can afford. Regardless of Steve's position in the company in the near and far term, AAPL is way undervalued right now.
Why do you ask- because I don't like Wal
And- like what isn't undervalued these days (besides Microsoft & real estate)?
Chris_CA, teckstud, you don't have to shop at Wal-Mart. You can also convince your friends and family to no shop there. Knock yourselves out.
In the mean time, those who are choosing to shop there will now have iPhones to buy there if they want.
Go for it- you maverick, you.
I guess if Apple decided to sell at the Piggly Wiggly you'd go for it too.
Go for it- you maverick, you.
I guess if Apple decided to sell at the Piggly Wiggly you'd go for it too.
It's not that complicated really:
I don't have the hang up about where Apple chooses to sell their products like some folks seem to.
I hope for Apple's continued success because I think they make great products and so I hope they'll be around to continue making more great products. I also hope that more people will be exposed to and be able to own and use their great products because I don't think great products should be limited to some elite group of people.
It's not that complicated really:
I don't have the hang up about where Apple chooses to sell their products like some folks seem to.
I hope for Apple's continued success because I think they make great products and so I hope they'll be around to continue making more great products. I also hope that more people will be exposed to and be able to own and use their great products because I don't think great products should be limited to some elite group of people.
Thanks for your honesty.
It's ethics like yours that have helped totally screwed up the economy.
No they aren't. Through much greater retail and distribution efficiency, Wal-Mart has helped to lower prices for many people.
Wrong!
You need to watch WalMart: The High Cost of Low Price.
Thanks for your honesty.
It's ethics like that that have totally screwed up the economy.
Now you're questioning my ethics? Geez.
That must be due to my desire for more great products for more people. How evil.
Now you're questioning my ethics? Geez.
That must be due to my desire for more great products for more people. How evil.
NO-
I don't have the hang up about where Apple chooses to sell their products
Ship a crate to Osama and let him sell iPhones to the Taliban from his cave. I'm sure they would appreciate your philosophy.
It's not that complicated really:
I don't have the hang up about where Apple chooses to sell their products like some folks seem to.
I hope for Apple's continued success because I think they make great products and so I hope they'll be around to continue making more great products. I also hope that more people will be exposed to and be able to own and use their great products because I don't think great products should be limited to some elite group of people.
Looking into the future 2 or 3 years... I believe if Apple has a great rollout at Walmart they will also be able to convince them to host Apple iTunes kiosks that sell music, movies and apps all in one stop.
Folks, this deal could get a LOT bigger with Walmart very quickly if the demand is there, which would be outstanding news for both companies.
Imagine the benefit to Walmart if they opened up all that wasted space dedicated to CDs and DVDs, and they could get a cut off of every sale in-store. This would be a tremendous way to initiate a worldwide iTunes kiosk concept making Apple digital downloads available anywhere at any time for consumers.
Thanks for your honesty.
It's ethics like yours that have helped totally screwed up the economy.
So now you want to convice us that meeting consumer demand is a bad thing for businesses and the economy? That's just being argumentative.
So now you want to convice us that meeting consumer demand is a bad thing for businesses and the economy? That's just being argumentative.
Not at all- Look at Walmart's history and ethics. That's all. Plain and simple.
You're either close-minded or just naive.
Hey, next month is my TEN YEAR ANNIVERSARY!!!! First one there!
Hey, next month is my TEN YEAR ANNIVERSARY!!!! First one there!
You old man you
Isn't it also the Mac's 25th year anniversary come this January.
Ship a crate to Osama and let him sell iPhones to the Taliban from his cave. I'm sure they would appreciate your philosophy.
This is the childishest comeback I've heard all week. Anyway, if the Taliban did buy iPhones, then we can find out their hiding place and listen to what they're saying.
This is the childishest comeback I've heard all week.
Hang around here more and I'm sure he'll easily trump that in no time.
Anyway, if the Taliban did buy iPhones, then we can find out their hiding place and listen to what they're saying.
I can't get a decent signal inside my home with only 3 walls between me and the outside, so I hate to see how well an iPhone would work in a cave.
You must not be a stock owner. If you aren't, you should think now about buying as much as you can afford. Regardless of Steve's position in the company in the near and far term, AAPL is way undervalued right now.
I'd be interested in buying stock in Apple. I don't know anything about the Stock Market though. How does one go about this if interested? (Sorry to be off topic)
Chris_CA and those of you hanging your hats on the tired old outsourcing banter, give it a rest. At least with respect to economic arguments. What you are stating are tired old sound bits emitted by desperate politicians trying to tap into the fear/anger of lower-middle class America. Arguing that Wal-Mart is the disruptor of the American economy, or any other individual company for that matter, shows a fundamental misunderstanding of economics and a very poor grasp of business and financial concepts.
Let me be clear: Certainly people in Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, etc . . ., who used to make money in the manufacturing sector are currently undergoing a massive shift from their once-safe jobs to either unemployment or minimum-wage employment. This is, indeed, a tragedy. But this is NOT something to be blamed on one company, or even something that is necessarily "bad." This is the natural progression of a free-market economy -- and more specifically -- of a globalized free market.
To summarize, when companies "outsource," it is because it is more economically efficient to do so. By virtue of this simple fact, it is better for our economy to outsource. I can sit here and summarize a textbook on macroeconomics, or you can just take my word for it. Moreover, there are far MORE jobs (even currently in our present economic slump) than there ever were in America even 10 years ago. Moreover, our unemployment rate is still substantially lower that it was even during the tech-bubble bursting.
So how is it, you ask, that we can have entire industries literally shipped off to overseas, and yet our economy is stronger than it was 15 years ago (even with teh current slump, our GDP is still massively higher, the stock market is still massively higher, etc . . .)?
This is for two fundamental reasons:
1) Companies profit more when they ship work off to foriegn nations where it is cheaper to produce.
2) New jobs are steadily created with the capital freed up in America.
The fundamental problem is that these new jobs are inaccessible to most unskilled labor. They are taken by young, college-educated individuals. Yet, this is the inevitable cost of economic progress. This SAME DEBATE took place in the early 1900's during the peak of the industrial revolution, when old farmers were put out of business and made "obsolete" due to the mass economic and social boom in cities. The difference then was that our nation became economically unified (via steam trains and boats), whereas now we are becoming internationally unified.
Make no mistake about it: Forcing American companies to employ over-paid midwestern manufacturing employees would be a D I S A S T E R for the USA. Let's completely forget about the fact that products would cost a whole lot more (which they would). However, our corporations (GM, Chevrolet, Chrysler, etc . . . ) would still have to compete internationally for sales, and while (perhaps) Americans might be willing to pay more for American-made products, the international market surely would not. Again, disasterous.
The world is a changing place and we must change or slowly shrivel and die. The moral of the story is that Joe Sixpack and Jean Hockeymom's jobs manufacturing tractors in Central Michigan are gone forever. Perhaps our government should do more to help re-educate these people. But the fact is that Wal-Mart or no Wal-Mart, their jobs are obsolete.
Moreover, if you're young, the best investment you can make for your future is a good education. It will prevent you, as well as possible, from becoming obsolete.
For those who have no knowledge of American history before the 1930's. for literally a century America was the home of cheap labor. It came in two forms:
1) Slaves.
2) (later on) Underpaid factory workers.
American used to export all kinds of textiles, chemicals, and other manufactured goods. We produced refined cotton for the world. And we produced and exported all kinds of agriculture (which we still do today).
Even then, in the 1800's, it was the same crap in England where people were losing their jobs in cotton mills because "those cheap americans" with their "cotton gins" were stealing all their "jobs."
Yet, as it turned out, this shipping out of jobs and changing of economies is what led Britain to its industrial revolution, and eventually led America to its industrial revolution.
The notion that outsourcing is bad for an economy is, in general, a fallacy propogated by politicians eager to use people's anger and fear for their benefit. The correct statement is that outsourcing causes a great deal of harm to a small subset of workers for an even greater benefit to the economy is a whole.
Again, there is nothing a government can do to prevent outsourcing. A government can make laws to alleviate it for short periods of time, but it is a natural progression of free markets. The best option is for government to re-educate and re-train it's workforce.
...Make no mistake about it: Forcing American companies to employ over-paid midwestern manufacturing employees would be a D I S A S T E R for the USA...
I think there is a middle-ground, something like taxing some of the imports and services to offset the price differences, then re-investing the taxes back in markets where the US has some difficulties competing.
I already lost a bid to India, my bid $1,400, India's bid $270.
I don't live in India so I can never justify spending 20 hours for $270. I don't know... maybe in two years I could