I suspect he is closer to the truth than many will credit him with. Perhaps the $1000 is a few years out but it's coming. Look at the speed Apple is closing in on M$s market cap. They have gone from half to within striking distance in a very short time. I haven't done the graph but they should pass M$ within a year or two I'd guess. Any math people here that could graph this closing gap to see the intersection point date on current projections?
regarding the video, didn't you see the rose color in his glasses?!
It's a psychological move, but it does have a real long term effect as people do think the stock is easier to obtain. I know people that won't buy GOOG because it's priced too high despite them asking my opinion back when GOOG went public that it will grow very quickly. It's all relative, but it has a real effect on purchase habits.
The bottom line is if stock splits and reverse stock splits had no effect then they wouldn't exist in the first place.
Almost three-quarters of Apple is owned by institutional investors, and on top of that, another serious chunk by insiders and large/wealthy shareholders. The mom-and-pop owner (I would put myself in that category, even though it is not a trivial number for me) accounts for a very small portion. They also tend to be buy-and-hold investors, who do not trade much at the margin, and are hence likely to affect market prices all that much is a heavily traded, liquid stock like Apple.
Thus, the incremental demand and volume from a split for a company like Apple is likely to be trivial, at best. Like I said, it won't hurt, but it won't help much either.
That gets to your second point: lots of things exist as 'neutral mutations.' My appendix for example.
Groan. We've been through this 'split' thing dozens of times. It amounts to a hill of beans. It doesn't hurt, but it has nothing whatsoever to do with valuation. A 4-1 split is no more, no less than your giving me a $20 bill, and my giving you four $5 bills in return.
That is not true.
Rationally, it SHOULD be true, but time after time, it has been shown that a well-timed split causes the PE ratio to go up - resulting in an increase in total market capitalization.
Investing is partly rational and party emotional. For a lot of people (particularly middle class individual investors), a three digit stock price is a turn-off.
Which would make them all smartphones. Unless there's some, you know, distinction.
Yeah - in Japan "smartphone" is not quite as defined as it is elsewhere - or I'd like to see what the specific differences are. Remember we're talking a country in which the toilets have heated seats, music players - and I last I heard - can transform into electric cars.
It smells like NeXT's old "personal workstation" designation which attempted to invent a category for NeXT computers so their sales didn't look horrifying. One amusing note - they never placed number one - in the category that they themselves invented.
Sun's response was they still could consider themselves first in workstations painted black.
It's a psychological move, but it does have a real long term effect as people do think the stock is easier to obtain. I know people that won't buy GOOG because it's priced too high despite them asking my opinion back when GOOG went public that it will grow very quickly. It's all relative, but it has a real effect on purchase habits.
The bottom line is if stock splits and reverse stock splits had no effect then they wouldn't exist in the first place.
Companies who reverse split their stock are usually doing it to avoid being delisted by exchanges, which require a greater than minimum stock price to continue listing. Regular stock splits, on the other hand, just give math challenged stock holders a taller pile of stock certificates worth the same amount as the pre-split short pile. Before the days of easy access to information about companies, a stock split would attract sudden attention, which might cause a short-term price bump. Today the administrative costs of doing splits don't seem to be justified by any benefit.
as someone who lived in japan for six years up until last year, let me point out to you all that the (closed) japanese cellphone market is full of pieces of plastic rubbish with a million poorly integrated features and a user interface straight out of a unix console from the 70s
the ipod is extremely popular, it's not surprising that the japanese showed an interest in the iphone, and it's not surprising that they found a lot to like in comparison to the phones they had been using
as someone who lived in japan for six years up until last year, let me point out to you all that the (closed) japanese cellphone market is full of pieces of plastic rubbish with a million poorly integrated features and a user interface straight out of a unix console from the 70s
the ipod is extremely popular, it's not surprising that the japanese showed an interest in the iphone, and it's not surprising that they found a lot to like in comparison to the phones they had been using
That's what I've notice too. The cream always rises!
Something tells me that the Japanese will go absolutely crazy for the 4G model we've been shown.
And as I've said before, if sales start to lag because the iPhone doesn't present enough tech crazy buzzing and flashing and blinking and barking noises, someone can just write an app for that.
In fact, I wish someone would just on general principles. Call it "Japan!", and it presents an ever changing array of colored lights, shouting heads, animated text, explosion animations and novelty sounds.
Groan. We've been through this 'split' thing dozens of times. It amounts to a hill of beans. It doesn't hurt, but it has nothing whatsoever to do with valuation. A 4-1 split is no more, no less than your giving me a $20 bill, and my giving you four $5 bills in return.
We both know that a split does not, in itself, change the valuation of the stock.
But, often a split does change the perception of a stock:
-- it's more affordable
-- it becomes attractive to new investors (less of a commitment to buy 10 @ $70 than at $270)
-- it was in limited supply, now it's more abundant
-- the company has big plans to do (whatever)
-- it gives the impression of growth
-- it stimulates interest in the investment community... lots of articles
... If you bought a share of IBM in 1968 at $XX. it would be worth $Y,YYY when adjusted for splits.
Apple split 2 for one in 2005 to $40... 1 year later it was at $80.
iI know, I know, it's all pixie dust, but it usually causes a bump in price!
Something tells me that the Japanese will go absolutely crazy for the 4G model we've been shown.
I agree, but I also I think the 3G iPad will be huge in Asian markets. I think the iPad will be Apple 2nd most profitable leg within 2 years.
PS I want to know when Android-based phones are going to start selling more units than the iPhone. Maybe they have, but I have seen no evidence of that yet.
PPS: I was hoping that space/line at the top of the next generation iPhone was an IR Tx. While being old tech it's going anywhere and it would make for a great remote control. Those high-end programmable remotes are expensive while very limited.
I agree, but I also I think the 3G iPad will be huge in Asian markets. I think the iPad will be Apple 2nd most profitable leg within 2 years.
PS I want to know when Android-based phones are going to start selling more units than the iPhone. Maybe they have, but I have seen no evidence of that yet.
PPS: I was hoping that space/line at the top of the next generation iPhone was an IR Tx. While being old tech it's going anywhere and it would make for a great remote control. Those high-end programmable remotes are expensive while very limited.
I agree with all this, except I expect the iPad (line) to be the most profitable segment.
Yeah, re Android... really hard to get any idea of sales.
IR would be great... lacking that an inexpensive ($29.99) standalone box with WiFi/BT/NFC in and [multidirectional, amplified] IR Out.
With all the stock market expertise on this thread, does anyone know if Apple could offer a "piece of APPL" as part of a promotional, e.g:
"Get your bite of the Apple"
Buy an Apple iPad by Aug 29, 2010, and get a Free share of Apple stock! ($70 after the 4 for 1 split)
Thoughts?
.
Why? Some people would not be interested in receiving a single $70 share certificate - since it would probably cost you at least $20-30 to sell it. For most people, it would be far better to simply get a discount - which would cost Apple the same as buying back the stock and distributing it.
But since they're selling every iPad they can make at list price, why offer a promotion at all?
Why? Some people would not be interested in receiving a single $70 share certificate - since it would probably cost you at least $20-30 to sell it. For most people, it would be far better to simply get a discount - which would cost Apple the same as buying back the stock and distributing it.
But since they're selling every iPad they can make at list price, why offer a promotion at all?
I see your points. However, someone buying an iPad for a kid, would also be starting an investment in the kid's future (and encouraging the kid to invest).
Apple could offer the stock or equivalent mail-in rebate of the price of the stock on the day of the offering).
The upside, is that any people who opt for the stock would, likely, profit... and become interested in Apple profiting, too!
This could be used to goose iPad sales when supply catches up with demand.
I lived in Japan for several years and continue to do business there. My experience with Japanese is that they are lovers of feature-laden gadgets but they equally like beautiful and clean designs that are highly functional. The iPhone fits perfectly into that category, both in respect to hard- and software.
Do people realise that aesthetic and design is very japanese and northern european inclined, very austere and stripped of nonsense?
Japanese companies sold themselves to the West aesthetic in order to sell.
Just look at traditional furniture and architecture from Japan and countries like Denmark (you do not have to live there just watch movies from those countries).
I love because of its design and boldness, for a capitalist venture they value their vision more than money ( they do not sell their soul to "features" in order to please buyers, they build things they will use. Because of that it becomes art ), and that is to Have BIG ball (sorry girls).
Comments
I suspect he is closer to the truth than many will credit him with. Perhaps the $1000 is a few years out but it's coming. Look at the speed Apple is closing in on M$s market cap. They have gone from half to within striking distance in a very short time. I haven't done the graph but they should pass M$ within a year or two I'd guess. Any math people here that could graph this closing gap to see the intersection point date on current projections?
regarding the video, didn't you see the rose color in his glasses?!
Sorry for interrupting the main thread topic.
It's a psychological move, but it does have a real long term effect as people do think the stock is easier to obtain. I know people that won't buy GOOG because it's priced too high despite them asking my opinion back when GOOG went public that it will grow very quickly. It's all relative, but it has a real effect on purchase habits.
The bottom line is if stock splits and reverse stock splits had no effect then they wouldn't exist in the first place.
Almost three-quarters of Apple is owned by institutional investors, and on top of that, another serious chunk by insiders and large/wealthy shareholders. The mom-and-pop owner (I would put myself in that category, even though it is not a trivial number for me) accounts for a very small portion. They also tend to be buy-and-hold investors, who do not trade much at the margin, and are hence likely to affect market prices all that much is a heavily traded, liquid stock like Apple.
Thus, the incremental demand and volume from a split for a company like Apple is likely to be trivial, at best. Like I said, it won't hurt, but it won't help much either.
That gets to your second point: lots of things exist as 'neutral mutations.' My appendix for example.
Groan. We've been through this 'split' thing dozens of times. It amounts to a hill of beans. It doesn't hurt, but it has nothing whatsoever to do with valuation. A 4-1 split is no more, no less than your giving me a $20 bill, and my giving you four $5 bills in return.
That is not true.
Rationally, it SHOULD be true, but time after time, it has been shown that a well-timed split causes the PE ratio to go up - resulting in an increase in total market capitalization.
Investing is partly rational and party emotional. For a lot of people (particularly middle class individual investors), a three digit stock price is a turn-off.
Which would make them all smartphones. Unless there's some, you know, distinction.
Yeah - in Japan "smartphone" is not quite as defined as it is elsewhere - or I'd like to see what the specific differences are. Remember we're talking a country in which the toilets have heated seats, music players - and I last I heard - can transform into electric cars.
It smells like NeXT's old "personal workstation" designation which attempted to invent a category for NeXT computers so their sales didn't look horrifying. One amusing note - they never placed number one - in the category that they themselves invented.
Sun's response was they still could consider themselves first in workstations painted black.
It's a psychological move, but it does have a real long term effect as people do think the stock is easier to obtain. I know people that won't buy GOOG because it's priced too high despite them asking my opinion back when GOOG went public that it will grow very quickly. It's all relative, but it has a real effect on purchase habits.
The bottom line is if stock splits and reverse stock splits had no effect then they wouldn't exist in the first place.
Companies who reverse split their stock are usually doing it to avoid being delisted by exchanges, which require a greater than minimum stock price to continue listing. Regular stock splits, on the other hand, just give math challenged stock holders a taller pile of stock certificates worth the same amount as the pre-split short pile. Before the days of easy access to information about companies, a stock split would attract sudden attention, which might cause a short-term price bump. Today the administrative costs of doing splits don't seem to be justified by any benefit.
the ipod is extremely popular, it's not surprising that the japanese showed an interest in the iphone, and it's not surprising that they found a lot to like in comparison to the phones they had been using
as someone who lived in japan for six years up until last year, let me point out to you all that the (closed) japanese cellphone market is full of pieces of plastic rubbish with a million poorly integrated features and a user interface straight out of a unix console from the 70s
the ipod is extremely popular, it's not surprising that the japanese showed an interest in the iphone, and it's not surprising that they found a lot to like in comparison to the phones they had been using
That's what I've notice too. The cream always rises!
(Time to update your profile, I guess.)
That is not true.
Rationally, it SHOULD be true, but time after time, it has been shown that a well-timed split causes the PE ratio to go up .....
Show me one credible bit (e.g., refereed journal article) of evidence.
What you are saying is simply impressionistic and anecdotal.
And as I've said before, if sales start to lag because the iPhone doesn't present enough tech crazy buzzing and flashing and blinking and barking noises, someone can just write an app for that.
In fact, I wish someone would just on general principles. Call it "Japan!", and it presents an ever changing array of colored lights, shouting heads, animated text, explosion animations and novelty sounds.
Groan. We've been through this 'split' thing dozens of times. It amounts to a hill of beans. It doesn't hurt, but it has nothing whatsoever to do with valuation. A 4-1 split is no more, no less than your giving me a $20 bill, and my giving you four $5 bills in return.
We both know that a split does not, in itself, change the valuation of the stock.
But, often a split does change the perception of a stock:
-- it's more affordable
-- it becomes attractive to new investors (less of a commitment to buy 10 @ $70 than at $270)
-- it was in limited supply, now it's more abundant
-- the company has big plans to do (whatever)
-- it gives the impression of growth
-- it stimulates interest in the investment community... lots of articles
... If you bought a share of IBM in 1968 at $XX. it would be worth $Y,YYY when adjusted for splits.
Apple split 2 for one in 2005 to $40... 1 year later it was at $80.
iI know, I know, it's all pixie dust, but it usually causes a bump in price!
.
Something tells me that the Japanese will go absolutely crazy for the 4G model we've been shown.
I agree, but I also I think the 3G iPad will be huge in Asian markets. I think the iPad will be Apple 2nd most profitable leg within 2 years.
PS I want to know when Android-based phones are going to start selling more units than the iPhone. Maybe they have, but I have seen no evidence of that yet.
PPS: I was hoping that space/line at the top of the next generation iPhone was an IR Tx. While being old tech it's going anywhere and it would make for a great remote control. Those high-end programmable remotes are expensive while very limited.
Show me one credible bit (e.g., refereed journal article) of evidence.
What you are saying is simply impressionistic and anecdotal.
http://www.stock4today.com/stock-splits.htm
Or maybe this one:
http://www.rightline.net/splits/index.html
Sorry, I'll go with an unending series of published reports rather than your "waaaah waaaah waaah. I don't like what you say so I'll throw a tantrum"
I agree, but I also I think the 3G iPad will be huge in Asian markets. I think the iPad will be Apple 2nd most profitable leg within 2 years.
PS I want to know when Android-based phones are going to start selling more units than the iPhone. Maybe they have, but I have seen no evidence of that yet.
PPS: I was hoping that space/line at the top of the next generation iPhone was an IR Tx. While being old tech it's going anywhere and it would make for a great remote control. Those high-end programmable remotes are expensive while very limited.
I agree with all this, except I expect the iPad (line) to be the most profitable segment.
Yeah, re Android... really hard to get any idea of sales.
IR would be great... lacking that an inexpensive ($29.99) standalone box with WiFi/BT/NFC in and [multidirectional, amplified] IR Out.
PS Your magic number hit $26.85 a moment ago!
.
"Get your bite of the Apple"
Buy an Apple iPad by Aug 29, 2010, and get a Free share of Apple stock! ($70 after the 4 for 1 split)
Thoughts?
.
With all the stock market expertise on this thread, does anyone know if Apple could offer a "piece of APPL" as part of a promotional, e.g:
"Get your bite of the Apple"
Buy an Apple iPad by Aug 29, 2010, and get a Free share of Apple stock! ($70 after the 4 for 1 split)
Thoughts?
.
Why? Some people would not be interested in receiving a single $70 share certificate - since it would probably cost you at least $20-30 to sell it. For most people, it would be far better to simply get a discount - which would cost Apple the same as buying back the stock and distributing it.
But since they're selling every iPad they can make at list price, why offer a promotion at all?
PS Your magic number hit $26.85 a moment ago!
¿Que?
¿Que?
Needed increase in Apple share price to overtake MSFT in market value.
.
Why? Some people would not be interested in receiving a single $70 share certificate - since it would probably cost you at least $20-30 to sell it. For most people, it would be far better to simply get a discount - which would cost Apple the same as buying back the stock and distributing it.
But since they're selling every iPad they can make at list price, why offer a promotion at all?
I see your points. However, someone buying an iPad for a kid, would also be starting an investment in the kid's future (and encouraging the kid to invest).
Apple could offer the stock or equivalent mail-in rebate of the price of the stock on the day of the offering).
The upside, is that any people who opt for the stock would, likely, profit... and become interested in Apple profiting, too!
This could be used to goose iPad sales when supply catches up with demand.
And, it certainly would get a lot of press!
.
Japanese companies sold themselves to the West aesthetic in order to sell.
Just look at traditional furniture and architecture from Japan and countries like Denmark (you do not have to live there just watch movies from those countries).
I love because of its design and boldness, for a capitalist venture they value their vision more than money ( they do not sell their soul to "features" in order to please buyers, they build things they will use. Because of that it becomes art ), and that is to Have BIG ball (sorry girls).
Now pardon my crappy English.