You are naive or not educated in finance/clueless.
P/E, pushing $200 billion in the bank, historic low interest rates SCREAM FOR BUY BACK N O W.
Who is long term and who is short term thinking?
Here is my first purchase .. .keep in mind my positions exploded about 2 years before SJ died - since I had 100% faith in the company and what he was doing (long term) - and I rolled over options that were out of the money until they were deep in the money for years - have around 60 right this second - and a lot of stock. I am a long term thinker and I agree with the guy that you are arguing with and Carl … Carl is thinking long term with this investment, its not a take over or quick buck you can clearly see from his statements to Mr. Cook (who we both admire)
Think larger like buying Motorolla for $12B and then selling it for $3B?
Or buying a thermostat company for $3B?
Very large acquisitions rarely ever work and its not Apple's style to do so anyway. At this point they have way too much money than they could ever spend smartly in acquistions. Some of the best possible acquisitions would be shutdown by the Dept of Justice for anti trust anyway.
Apple will have $200B at the end of this year.
Do they really need more than $150B (after $50B Ichan buyback)?
This is conventional thinking. Do you think Apple got where it is by conventional thinking?
I'm sure there are better ways to finagle cash than what they are currently doing,but perhaps they are at a crossroads?
Suppose they wanted to do something entirely on their own?again? Things that cost 80B to set up?
Lots of things come to mind.
<<< space left for your imagination. >>>
Will they do robotic gaming or medical equipment...or cars? We don't know. And they don't want to tip their hand.
Perhaps they know what comes next but the time isn't right,regulations, deals, tech...
Point is, I trust the company. BTW I own actual shares not options.
The wait is frustrating for many, especially for us. At some point we have to start using our own profit, but I think this is one company that knows how to make money. I trust them to make money with PRODUCTS AND SERVICES in addition to fiddling with their accounting and substitution of collateral ideas.
By the way - in addition to owning about $800K of Apple shares, I own around $300K in Disney Shares (you know, the company that SJ sold Pixar to? - brilliantly to - which now makes Disney movies like Frozen with the SJ Pixar talent?).
I posted my first purchase hours ago - I bet you I have owned Apple years before you.
I was one of the first to embrace Steve Jobs and Apple - and to be LIVID when he was forced out.
If you had some degree of financial education, experience and smarts - you would not do "black white" comparisons. There is no one size fits all analysis - that is what differentiates the mediocre from the great - such as Steve Jobs - Tim Cook - and Carl.
With an account approaching $200 Billion "Mr. Smarts", Apple is no longer the company run on a shoe string that SJ started. That $200B to be number ignores the positive cash flow.
Apple has plenty of cash to buy whatever business it wants, start whatever production it wants, and deal with whatever event comes up. Why? $200 Billion is a lot more than $50 Billion. If Apple were to pile up $500 Billion you would have the same ignorant nonsensical remark! make it a Trillion - 10 Trillion ……… just stupid.
The point is genius - a company is what its team is. In addition to owning a ton of stock bought under $100, I bought options out of the money and kept rolling them as they became deep in the money calls - on and on. The only thing that could hurt Apple (since Jobs did a great job picking Mr. Cook, Ives, and the team -and setting the mindset_ .. is Apple not investing in the future "team". The young engineers coming out of school. I guarantee you that if Apple does not take care of its stock price, that talent will not go to Apple. Last year was a crummy year - and it was entirely because Apple unfortunately did not take care of its shareholders (and employees) by doing buy-backs.
You think this is BS ???? Just walk into an Apple Store and ask employees. Just call the Apple care center (like I have as a major an interested life long shareholder) - ask the employees how they felt like myself.
Key shareholders (like me on "small" $1 million level, Carl et al) count big time. Employees and their stock, options et al count because it is key to their portfolio.
What does not matter is idiotic statements from morons at CalPers who have lost their members HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS:
CalPers is a horrible organization - that is messing up the retirement for likely millions in my great state. They are horrible. They blew a fortune of retirees (and taxpayers) - there is no excuse for ignorance today when you an spend 1 minute literally and see how inept an organization is - just do a search for "CalPers" and ""CalPers" and "huge losses" - see what comes up!!!!
When you speak of great things in America, don't think of CalPers, and government, think entrepreneurs, Steve Jobs, Walt Disney, Engineers, working parents -
Use your brain, a pencil. $200 Billion and a P/E under 12 for a great growth company like apple - is STUPID if you want to retain Engineers and key employees of the future. Sure you can keep the old ones who have millions in stock, but we (me included - I am long term Apple big time) shareholders want Apple to continue with the youth/brains of the future!!!!!!!! You don't do it with a stock that goes up a couple percent a year!!
All for no reason - Cook and company are doing a great job except for managing the $200Billion stock pile - and the stock price (which should be split - to let the Apple product buyers own the stock like Disney did with its youth/buyers of the future with its $30-80 price range stock).
Buying back shares does decrease dilution and raise EPS and Revenue Per Share, but there are two problems.
The important problem is: a share buyback requires constant buyback (i.e. consistently maintaining number of shares bought back each year). The immediate growth in EPS after buyback is only temporary on a year-on-year basis. The removal of shares increases EPS as compared to the prior year, but if there is no buyback, at a higher or equal level, the EPS growth the next year will drop, unless organic earnings growth next year meets or exceeds the year-on-year change in the buyback rate. So if Apple does not also increase their dollar value in buyback next year (assuming stock price rises), Apple should not currently buyback shares at a rate (year-on-year % change in share count) faster than they can increase their organic earnings growth next year at the rate that makes up for the decline in buyback rate next year.
For example, if Apple wants to buyback 60B in shares (on average at 512.51) this year (decreasing share count by 13.12% to 775m shares assuming 457.15B Market Cap. [892m shares] at the beginning of the year), and 40B in shares (on average at 637.72) next year (decreasing share count by 8.09% to 707m shares assuming shares rise 24.43% (13.12%*10% [10%=organic growth rate]) by next year [494.23 Market Cap.]), then Apple will have to increase their organic earnings growth rate by 38.3% (100-100*8.09/13.12), since Apple will be decreasing their artificial [buyback] earnings growth rate by 38.3%. [I assume shareholders want to warrant a higher PE multiple with higher net earnings growth]
Second, a share buyback uses cash and as a result, dilute Apple’s Cash Per Share and Book Value.
Having Carl on our (shareholder) side is a golden opportunity. I love the man - so do my kids - "Uncle Carl". Carl has bent over backwards to show that he fully believes in <<snip>>.
Before Carl, the stock was being manipulated by disgusting shorts and the press that love to say idiotic things because <<snip>>
YES!! Dear Uncle Carlpants!!
Ahahahaha! What a coincidence you are related to him..:p
BTW, just curious, who is 'Mr. Smarts' that you keep replying to?
Saying that all buy backs are a gimmick shows your absolute ignorance about finance.
I'm absolutely shocked how many people in this forum have close to zero knowledge about finance. And the worst part is there are a bunch of finance professionals here, yet people refuse to listen to us. As a finance professional I advise all the Ichan haters to separate the man from the plan.
Of course they aren't. They increase individual shareholders proportional ownership and earnings per share, and reduce the dividend liability. Neither of those results are gimmicky.
Comments
You are naive or not educated in finance/clueless.
P/E, pushing $200 billion in the bank, historic low interest rates SCREAM FOR BUY BACK N O W.
Who is long term and who is short term thinking?
Here is my first purchase .. .keep in mind my positions exploded about 2 years before SJ died - since I had 100% faith in the company and what he was doing (long term) - and I rolled over options that were out of the money until they were deep in the money for years - have around 60 right this second - and a lot of stock. I am a long term thinker and I agree with the guy that you are arguing with and Carl … Carl is thinking long term with this investment, its not a take over or quick buck you can clearly see from his statements to Mr. Cook (who we both admire)
$85.64
I'm sure there are better ways to finagle cash than what they are currently doing,but perhaps they are at a crossroads?
Suppose they wanted to do something entirely on their own?again? Things that cost 80B to set up?
Lots of things come to mind.
<<< space left for your imagination. >>>
Will they do robotic gaming or medical equipment...or cars? We don't know. And they don't want to tip their hand.
Perhaps they know what comes next but the time isn't right,regulations, deals, tech...
Point is, I trust the company. BTW I own actual shares not options.
The wait is frustrating for many, especially for us. At some point we have to start using our own profit, but I think this is one company that knows how to make money. I trust them to make money with PRODUCTS AND SERVICES in addition to fiddling with their accounting and substitution of collateral ideas.
By the way - in addition to owning about $800K of Apple shares, I own around $300K in Disney Shares (you know, the company that SJ sold Pixar to? - brilliantly to - which now makes Disney movies like Frozen with the SJ Pixar talent?).
I posted my first purchase hours ago - I bet you I have owned Apple years before you.
I was one of the first to embrace Steve Jobs and Apple - and to be LIVID when he was forced out.
If you had some degree of financial education, experience and smarts - you would not do "black white" comparisons. There is no one size fits all analysis - that is what differentiates the mediocre from the great - such as Steve Jobs - Tim Cook - and Carl.
With an account approaching $200 Billion "Mr. Smarts", Apple is no longer the company run on a shoe string that SJ started. That $200B to be number ignores the positive cash flow.
Apple has plenty of cash to buy whatever business it wants, start whatever production it wants, and deal with whatever event comes up. Why? $200 Billion is a lot more than $50 Billion. If Apple were to pile up $500 Billion you would have the same ignorant nonsensical remark! make it a Trillion - 10 Trillion ……… just stupid.
The point is genius - a company is what its team is. In addition to owning a ton of stock bought under $100, I bought options out of the money and kept rolling them as they became deep in the money calls - on and on. The only thing that could hurt Apple (since Jobs did a great job picking Mr. Cook, Ives, and the team -and setting the mindset_ .. is Apple not investing in the future "team". The young engineers coming out of school. I guarantee you that if Apple does not take care of its stock price, that talent will not go to Apple. Last year was a crummy year - and it was entirely because Apple unfortunately did not take care of its shareholders (and employees) by doing buy-backs.
You think this is BS ???? Just walk into an Apple Store and ask employees. Just call the Apple care center (like I have as a major an interested life long shareholder) - ask the employees how they felt like myself.
Key shareholders (like me on "small" $1 million level, Carl et al) count big time. Employees and their stock, options et al count because it is key to their portfolio.
What does not matter is idiotic statements from morons at CalPers who have lost their members HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS:
http://articles.latimes.com/2009/jul/21/business/fi-calpers21
That is a joke - are you for real????
CalPers is a horrible organization - that is messing up the retirement for likely millions in my great state. They are horrible. They blew a fortune of retirees (and taxpayers) - there is no excuse for ignorance today when you an spend 1 minute literally and see how inept an organization is - just do a search for "CalPers" and ""CalPers" and "huge losses" - see what comes up!!!!
If you are too lazy here's one:
http://articles.latimes.com/2009/jul/21/business/fi-calpers21
When you speak of great things in America, don't think of CalPers, and government, think entrepreneurs, Steve Jobs, Walt Disney, Engineers, working parents -
Use your brain, a pencil. $200 Billion and a P/E under 12 for a great growth company like apple - is STUPID if you want to retain Engineers and key employees of the future. Sure you can keep the old ones who have millions in stock, but we (me included - I am long term Apple big time) shareholders want Apple to continue with the youth/brains of the future!!!!!!!! You don't do it with a stock that goes up a couple percent a year!!
All for no reason - Cook and company are doing a great job except for managing the $200Billion stock pile - and the stock price (which should be split - to let the Apple product buyers own the stock like Disney did with its youth/buyers of the future with its $30-80 price range stock).
Buying back shares does decrease dilution and raise EPS and Revenue Per Share, but there are two problems.
The important problem is: a share buyback requires constant buyback (i.e. consistently maintaining number of shares bought back each year). The immediate growth in EPS after buyback is only temporary on a year-on-year basis. The removal of shares increases EPS as compared to the prior year, but if there is no buyback, at a higher or equal level, the EPS growth the next year will drop, unless organic earnings growth next year meets or exceeds the year-on-year change in the buyback rate. So if Apple does not also increase their dollar value in buyback next year (assuming stock price rises), Apple should not currently buyback shares at a rate (year-on-year % change in share count) faster than they can increase their organic earnings growth next year at the rate that makes up for the decline in buyback rate next year.
For example, if Apple wants to buyback 60B in shares (on average at 512.51) this year (decreasing share count by 13.12% to 775m shares assuming 457.15B Market Cap. [892m shares] at the beginning of the year), and 40B in shares (on average at 637.72) next year (decreasing share count by 8.09% to 707m shares assuming shares rise 24.43% (13.12%*10% [10%=organic growth rate]) by next year [494.23 Market Cap.]), then Apple will have to increase their organic earnings growth rate by 38.3% (100-100*8.09/13.12), since Apple will be decreasing their artificial [buyback] earnings growth rate by 38.3%. [I assume shareholders want to warrant a higher PE multiple with higher net earnings growth]
Second, a share buyback uses cash and as a result, dilute Apple’s Cash Per Share and Book Value.
YES!! Dear Uncle Carlpants!!
Ahahahaha! What a coincidence you are related to him..:p
BTW, just curious, who is 'Mr. Smarts' that you keep replying to?
Saying that all buy backs are a gimmick shows your absolute ignorance about finance.
I'm absolutely shocked how many people in this forum have close to zero knowledge about finance. And the worst part is there are a bunch of finance professionals here, yet people refuse to listen to us. As a finance professional I advise all the Ichan haters to separate the man from the plan.
Stock buybacks are a gimmick.