Being that the guy clearly discloses his company holds a significant amount of Apple, I fail to see the reason why the checking should go further than that. Holding Apple stock doesn't undermine the point of his article. Further, he has done more then folks like Jim Crammer has done.
Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality
Wow.....amazing what you get here on these interwebs....financial advice on a Apple fanboy site...
Someone should check how much Apple stock this Zaky guy owns, and what his vested interests are in this...
It's unfortunate that no one but the British will properly parse the sarcasm pasted all over this article. Without a doubt the best AI article I've read in a long time.
The market's heading down. Apple's along for the ride like everyone else. Buy it back on the upswing.
If the share price doesn't go up, in another few years AAPL will have accumulated more earnings per share than its stock price. That is, it will have accumulated $400 billion in cash and other assets. The stock price is obviously going to start going up before that happens, so it's just a question of when. It could be soon. So I wouldn't be so sure the stock will keep going down with the market.
I agree the stock is completely undervalued, as the article points out again, and again, and again. And as anyone who is so inclined can see for themselves if they analyzed Apple's 10q/k's (tip of the hat to Andy for doing the extensive amount of legwork, though).
I'd be much more interested in a discussion of just WHY apple is so undervalued and why the CNBC-types are so useless (the story that iPod sales are slowing is a tragic miscarriage of journalism and the reporters / producers of that segment should be fired). So, why are they so bad? Why is the stock so undervalued?
and? Citigroup trades at less than book value and so is Bank of America and many other stocks...investor look ahead not at present and the world economy is in a slump and Stock markets will continue to fall..live with that..
I've been an Apple investor for a few years and the facts in the article hold water.. Apple is still experiencing amazing growth, and despite the "high price" of Apple stock near $400, IMO the shares are still very cheap.
The PE Compression concept is huge and could lead to a major run in the stock price once it bottoms around 10.
Anyone who thinks AAPL is a bad investment, or expensive, or a good short opportunity is a fool IMO.
It's impossible to take anything you say, ever, seriously when you say complete nonsense like this. It indicates that either you are here to dishonestly propagandize or that you are utterly clueless.
Somebody claiming that is simply trolling and/or lying. Reality and all of the facts contradict what they claim.
Sprint today reported its best ever day of sales in retail, web and telesales for a device family in Sprint history with the launch of iPhone 4S and iPhone 4.
Come on...this article isn't going to help Apple...various companies had got their peak era and then fell down...Apple days are over...the 'i' is soon going to be replaced.
Why are all these newcomers posting here? Was this thread linked from somewhere?
I wonder how you define newcomer?
...
As I reread "Hackers: heroes of the computer revolution" I can't help but think of Apple and its origins. Very, very few people got it then (in the Homebrew Computer Club Days), very few get it now. As some from the early hackers from MITs day..but much more so from the later Stanford's labs times...grokked "it" - so does the common person grok "it" - the "it" which Apple offers....the simple experience of working with electronics..manifesting in a very simple, human-oriented way. Analysts and the general market look at Apple and think "no way" - simply because they can't get where Apple is coming from..and somehow continue to believe that Apple's performance..Apple's appeal to the regular person..well, they think it's some sort of anomaly. They never got that computers are desired by people who don't really want to own a computer..or anything recognizable as such. Yet, still, MS and every other corporation out there continue to build devices and tech as if people really, really want to spend all day messing about with complexity. Well, they don't. Not at all. But, for some reason, this punch-card, IBM mainframe worshipping mentality simply can't believe that simple fact and, therefore, continue to look at Apple's performance like it's Moses parting the Red Sea. People want "machines of loving grace" not complicated devices with non-human oriented interfaces. As long as Apple continues to build machines for the masses who don't want machines..they will continue to do very, very well.
Why does this stock booster article (by a company that owns stock) claim P/E of 8.25 on the front page when the actual P/E is 13? No self interest in making it look even more "undervalued"?
Microsoft isn't growing like Apple but they have still doubled earning over years ago, yet their stock is exactly where it was at half the earnings such that Microsoft's P/E is actually around 8.
First, I myself am long Apple. I'm an enthusiastic user and an aggressive investor. That said, I'm not sure what the signs of slowing growth will be, when in fact Apple's growth does slow. And it does have to slow eventually, right? If the growth continues at its current rate, AAPL is going to suck up all the money in the stock market, and that's not actually possible. I suspect that when the growth does slow, it's going to come in the form of bad news at a quarterly report.
So while it's true that we probably can't find any other companies with comparably high growth rates AND such a low P/E, I don't think we can find many companies with comparably high market caps and such a HIGH P/E. Yahoo Finance says Apple's PE is now 13. If we order the publicly traded companies by market cap, how far below Apple do we have to go to find the next company with a P/E of 13? I see that Exon's around 9.
Point being, there are already a lot of speculative dollars in AAPL. Sure, companies like Google and Amazon also have a lot of speculative dollars in them, I for one wouldn't touch them with a 10 foot pole. I still like AAPL, even if the P/E continues to decline as the E goes up.
part of the problem is the stock market has long since drifted from a place to invest money. Investing means contributing money to a company to help it grow and to benefit from that "investment" if the company does in fact grow. Now, however, with the concept of short selling (and all the off shoots of that) the stock market has become nothing more than legalized gambling. You short the stock if you are gambling the stock will go down. Those who short the stock have a build in incentive to drive the price of a stock down. That is not investing. Further, it directly hurts businesses to have forces purposely rooting for its stock to go down, in turn, hurting real investors. What really stinks is those who short stocks are allowed to borrow the stocks of those who are so called investing of the stocks to work against the investors to try and drive the price down.
Moreover, this article nicely shows why the concept of investing is dead. If the markets were investment driven by any calculation apple's stock price would be significantly higher.
Apple will probably be around in 30 years, but it's an open question whether it is the next IBM or the next Zenith. There is absolutely no way to be sure. It is luck. The people in charge of Apple are human beings. None of them are Apple founders. Steve died. Apple's brass are business leaders exactly like every other business leader. They will emulate Steve's philosophy exactly like every other trendy company will attempt to do. Many of which are younger and hungrier -- more visionary -- than Apple.
-- Apple shareholder for >10 years. 25 year Mac user.
What I am about to say isn't new but its important to add...
The analysis of Apple's stock and valued perforance was, in this story, fantastic.
I would VERY much like to have the same author work equally as hard on analysing WHY Apple's stock is being "ignored".
Do some fear an Apple bubble? Or does Apple care at all? IF Apple continues to perform and out-perform as it has in the last 4 years, and IF their cash base continues to grow they could start buying back their shares, no? Then what?
I would like to know the WHY and HOW if this WHAT subject.
Why does this stock booster article (by a company that owns stock) claim P/E of 8.25 on the front page when the actual P/E is 13? No self interest in making it look even more "undervalued"?
Microsoft isn't growing like Apple but they have still doubled earning over years ago, yet their stock is exactly where it was at half the earnings such that Microsoft's P/E is actually around 8.
The P/E of 13 is the current price to earnings ratio and the 8.25 P/E number is the forward-looking ratio. The stock price should move towards where earnings will be over the next few quarters, which is how most stock prices are valued.
As for Microsoft, their leadership sucks, have no direction and are squeezing every dollar from Windows and Office. Their sales will begin to slow if they have nothing new to offer in the future.
Comments
Wow.....amazing what you get here on these interwebs....financial advice on a Apple fanboy site...
Someone should check how much Apple stock this Zaky guy owns, and what his vested interests are in this...
The market's heading down. Apple's along for the ride like everyone else. Buy it back on the upswing.
If the share price doesn't go up, in another few years AAPL will have accumulated more earnings per share than its stock price. That is, it will have accumulated $400 billion in cash and other assets. The stock price is obviously going to start going up before that happens, so it's just a question of when. It could be soon. So I wouldn't be so sure the stock will keep going down with the market.
I agree the stock is completely undervalued, as the article points out again, and again, and again. And as anyone who is so inclined can see for themselves if they analyzed Apple's 10q/k's (tip of the hat to Andy for doing the extensive amount of legwork, though).
I'd be much more interested in a discussion of just WHY apple is so undervalued and why the CNBC-types are so useless (the story that iPod sales are slowing is a tragic miscarriage of journalism and the reporters / producers of that segment should be fired). So, why are they so bad? Why is the stock so undervalued?
and? Citigroup trades at less than book value and so is Bank of America and many other stocks...investor look ahead not at present and the world economy is in a slump and Stock markets will continue to fall..live with that..
I've been an Apple investor for a few years and the facts in the article hold water.. Apple is still experiencing amazing growth, and despite the "high price" of Apple stock near $400, IMO the shares are still very cheap.
The PE Compression concept is huge and could lead to a major run in the stock price once it bottoms around 10.
Anyone who thinks AAPL is a bad investment, or expensive, or a good short opportunity is a fool IMO.
DISCLAIMER: I'm very long AAPL.
It's impossible to take anything you say, ever, seriously when you say complete nonsense like this. It indicates that either you are here to dishonestly propagandize or that you are utterly clueless.
Somebody claiming that is simply trolling and/or lying. Reality and all of the facts contradict what they claim.
Sprint today reported its best ever day of sales in retail, web and telesales for a device family in Sprint history with the launch of iPhone 4S and iPhone 4.
http://newsroom.sprint.com/article_d...rticle_id=2073
“We are on track to double single day record for activations.This may produce slower activations for some: systems continue at record levels.”
http://twitter.com/#!/ATT/status/124966650196930560
Yep, that's the classic definition of an underwhelming launch.
Did you see Michael Phelps win all those medals in the Olympics? That was a pretty underwhelming feat too.
Apple is SO mistreated!
The press doesn't treat them very well. Nobody love them. Not even the stock market appreciates Apple!
It isn't FAIR!
What happened? Did you just take a 'teenager pill'?
Would prefer not to have the thread degenerate into fanboy/anti-fanboy flames.
Heh. You're new here.
Why are all these newcomers posting here? Was this thread linked from somewhere?
I wonder how you define newcomer?
...
As I reread "Hackers: heroes of the computer revolution" I can't help but think of Apple and its origins. Very, very few people got it then (in the Homebrew Computer Club Days), very few get it now. As some from the early hackers from MITs day..but much more so from the later Stanford's labs times...grokked "it" - so does the common person grok "it" - the "it" which Apple offers....the simple experience of working with electronics..manifesting in a very simple, human-oriented way. Analysts and the general market look at Apple and think "no way" - simply because they can't get where Apple is coming from..and somehow continue to believe that Apple's performance..Apple's appeal to the regular person..well, they think it's some sort of anomaly. They never got that computers are desired by people who don't really want to own a computer..or anything recognizable as such. Yet, still, MS and every other corporation out there continue to build devices and tech as if people really, really want to spend all day messing about with complexity. Well, they don't. Not at all. But, for some reason, this punch-card, IBM mainframe worshipping mentality simply can't believe that simple fact and, therefore, continue to look at Apple's performance like it's Moses parting the Red Sea. People want "machines of loving grace" not complicated devices with non-human oriented interfaces. As long as Apple continues to build machines for the masses who don't want machines..they will continue to do very, very well.
Microsoft isn't growing like Apple but they have still doubled earning over years ago, yet their stock is exactly where it was at half the earnings such that Microsoft's P/E is actually around 8.
I wonder how you define newcomer?
As somebody who has one post to their name?
and the company?s growth rate percentage ? defying all laws of gravity ? continues to accelerate without any sign of abating.
[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]
First, I myself am long Apple. I'm an enthusiastic user and an aggressive investor. That said, I'm not sure what the signs of slowing growth will be, when in fact Apple's growth does slow. And it does have to slow eventually, right? If the growth continues at its current rate, AAPL is going to suck up all the money in the stock market, and that's not actually possible. I suspect that when the growth does slow, it's going to come in the form of bad news at a quarterly report.
So while it's true that we probably can't find any other companies with comparably high growth rates AND such a low P/E, I don't think we can find many companies with comparably high market caps and such a HIGH P/E. Yahoo Finance says Apple's PE is now 13. If we order the publicly traded companies by market cap, how far below Apple do we have to go to find the next company with a P/E of 13? I see that Exon's around 9.
Point being, there are already a lot of speculative dollars in AAPL. Sure, companies like Google and Amazon also have a lot of speculative dollars in them, I for one wouldn't touch them with a 10 foot pole. I still like AAPL, even if the P/E continues to decline as the E goes up.
part of the problem is the stock market has long since drifted from a place to invest money. Investing means contributing money to a company to help it grow and to benefit from that "investment" if the company does in fact grow. Now, however, with the concept of short selling (and all the off shoots of that) the stock market has become nothing more than legalized gambling. You short the stock if you are gambling the stock will go down. Those who short the stock have a build in incentive to drive the price of a stock down. That is not investing. Further, it directly hurts businesses to have forces purposely rooting for its stock to go down, in turn, hurting real investors. What really stinks is those who short stocks are allowed to borrow the stocks of those who are so called investing of the stocks to work against the investors to try and drive the price down.
Moreover, this article nicely shows why the concept of investing is dead. If the markets were investment driven by any calculation apple's stock price would be significantly higher.
^^^^ this ^^^^
-- Apple shareholder for >10 years. 25 year Mac user.
The analysis of Apple's stock and valued perforance was, in this story, fantastic.
I would VERY much like to have the same author work equally as hard on analysing WHY Apple's stock is being "ignored".
Do some fear an Apple bubble? Or does Apple care at all? IF Apple continues to perform and out-perform as it has in the last 4 years, and IF their cash base continues to grow they could start buying back their shares, no? Then what?
I would like to know the WHY and HOW if this WHAT subject.
Thanks.
Why does this stock booster article (by a company that owns stock) claim P/E of 8.25 on the front page when the actual P/E is 13? No self interest in making it look even more "undervalued"?
Microsoft isn't growing like Apple but they have still doubled earning over years ago, yet their stock is exactly where it was at half the earnings such that Microsoft's P/E is actually around 8.
The P/E of 13 is the current price to earnings ratio and the 8.25 P/E number is the forward-looking ratio. The stock price should move towards where earnings will be over the next few quarters, which is how most stock prices are valued.
As for Microsoft, their leadership sucks, have no direction and are squeezing every dollar from Windows and Office. Their sales will begin to slow if they have nothing new to offer in the future.