Institutional ownership of Apple stock reaches new 5-year low

245

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 95

    I totally understand the fund managers' perspective and might even do the same thing if I were in their shoes. Apple is a huge company, with big profit margins, and without any monopoly power (as its traditionally understood, anyway). Take away the name Apple, call it "company X", and 9 times out of 10, you'd expect to see stagnant profits *at best*. And more likely, declining profits as other firms compete with you and drive down your margins and/or take market share. 

     

    To argue that Apple is different than Company X is radical. To take other people's money and invest it in Apple - -based on that radical argument -- could seem very risky for fund managers who want to keep their jobs. Far safer to stick with the conventional wisdom and invest your customers' money elsewhere. If you're wrong about Apple -- so what? So were all your competitors. You won't lose your job if you don't buy AAPL and it goes up, because that's what everyone else is doing too. But if you're the one guy who does buy it and it goes down, you're screwed. 

     

    But as an individual investor who is answerable only to myself, and who actually believes the radical notion that Apple really is fundamentally different from Company X, I continue to hold my AAPL shares. And I thank the herd-following fund managers for creating this nice opportunity for Apple to buy back its own shares at a discounted (relative to what I think its true value is) price (I'd buy more shares myself, but I'm tapped out right now). 

  • Reply 22 of 95
    That means it has lot of room to move higher. Cook and board should not forget and behave as if it is earnings conference call during shareholders meeting :lol: Need to hide ego :p.
    Jobs wanted useless board so that he can focus on the products but now as he is gone, useless board is meaningless and of no good. Few need to go :err:
  • Reply 23 of 95
    rogifan wrote: »
    Doesn't help that Apple has decided to go long periods of time without product announcements. No, I'm not suggesting they follow someone else's timeline or release things before they're ready but it would be nice if they could get on a schedule where they didn't have these long gaps in between announcements. Once again it looks there will be 6-7 months where Apple has gone quiet. Maybe we'll get something before WWDC but if there was some product announcement coming in March or April wouldn't we be hearing rumors about it?

    Apple should never again get into a position of having to beg for money from a company like Microsoft or act to satiate a person like Carl Icahn. Let them take their time and form new markets and products in a manner that makes sense.
  • Reply 24 of 95
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 7,149member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

     

    Here we go... another 80 comments about how AAPL is being manipulated.


     

    Well maybe not manipulated but I do think the reduction in institutional investors relieves a lot of pressure on Apple do to something they do not want to do (sell cheap, no profit phones to increase market share for example). If the stock settles in a certain range then so be it. The price of a stock does not indicate the success of a company, only the ability of investors to cash in. What’s good for investors and what’s good for a company are often at odds. By any measurement Apple is a large, influential, innovative, successful company. The fact that some hedge fund isn’t able to make tons of money on AAPL doesn’t change that fact.

  • Reply 25 of 95
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post

     

     

    Well maybe not manipulated but I do think the reduction in institutional investors relieves a lot of pressure on Apple do to something they do not want to do (sell cheap, no profit phones to increase market share for example). If the stock settles in a certain range then so be it. The price of a stock does not indicate the success of a company, only the ability of investors to cash in. What’s good for investors and what’s good for a company are often at odds. By any measurement Apple is a large, influential, innovative, successful company. The fact that some hedge fund isn’t able to make tons of money on AAPL doesn’t change that fact.


     

    Hedge fund?

  • Reply 26 of 95
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,293member
    Here we go... another 80 comments about how AAPL is being manipulated.

    http://appleinsider.com/articles/09/03/13/jon_stewart_exposes_apple_stock_manipulation
  • Reply 27 of 95

    Suck on your pacifiers. Bought 1024 Apple back in April 1993 @ US$12.50 each, when I got an unexpected bonus. Played several other .com's after that but was contend to hang on to my Apples. Yes several ups and down and a divorce where the ex wanted either half the stock or the T-Bird in 1999. Needless to say she got the older bird. So after ups and downs,- still a happy owner today with 4096 shares.

  • Reply 28 of 95

     

    Oh, yes... because I always go to Jon Stewart for my investment advice.

  • Reply 29 of 95
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,293member
    Apple should never again get into a position of having to beg for money from a company like Microsoft or act to satiate a person like Carl Icahn. Let them take their time and form new markets and products in a manner that makes sense.

    Let's just get this accurate ...

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericjackson/2012/03/01/steve-jobs-used-patents-to-get-bill-gates-to-make-1997-investment-in-apple/
  • Reply 30 of 95
    rob53 wrote: »
    Not surprising because they know AAPL is being manipulated and they need a long term growth stock to be successful. This analysis points out the magnitude of the manipulation. I don't think it has to do with analysts views about lack of new products from Apple.

    Nonsense. Institutional shareholding horizons are much shorter than those of individuals.

    Moreover, they're most of the marginal traders (and hence, drivers of volatility) in the market.
  • Reply 31 of 95
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post



    Doesn't help that Apple has decided to go long periods of time without product announcements. No, I'm not suggesting they follow someone else's timeline or release things before they're ready but it would be nice if they could get on a schedule where they didn't have these long gaps in between announcements. Once again it looks there will be 6-7 months where Apple has gone quiet. Maybe we'll get something before WWDC but if there was some product announcement coming in March or April wouldn't we be hearing rumors about it?

     

    Sorry, but I disagree.  We can't have it both ways.  Either Apple caters to Wall Street or it follows its own schedule.  Apple would no longer be Apple if it released a product prematurely.  Wall Street can F$%!! itself, and I'm speaking as a guy who holds his fair share of AAPL.

  • Reply 32 of 95
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by manicakes View Post

     

    This is bullish data. The institutional ownership "pendulum" was at the opposite end when AAPL was 700 and we should have been bearish. As an AAPL long I want to see as many shares as possible liquidated by institutions (in order to buy GOOG, TSLA, etc) and end up retired by Pete Oppenheimer, never to be traded again.

     

    Weeks, months, or maybe years from now the pendulum will swing the other way, and the reduced share count will act as jet fuel for the stock price. Patience will be rewarded. Hard numbers prove that these institutions are not smarter than the likes of Carl Icahn, not even close.


     

    I heartily agree; I admire and share your long-term attitude.

     

    On a related subject, there's a good article I read today about how we're not going to see Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) in the iWatch.  At first I disagreed, because for the first 3/4ths of the article the author makes his arguments and it sounds like he's saying the iWatch will never see CGM.  Then in the end, he clarifies and tells us that it's very unlikely we'll see CGM in iWatch V1, but that today Apple is doing exactly what it needs to do for us to see CGM in a 2nd or 3rd generation iWatch.  I think he's right.

     

    Five to ten years is a good time frame.  Five to ten months is short-sighted and five to ten weeks is insane.

  • Reply 33 of 95
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    Another thing that blows my mind is how other companies are essentially given a free pass and the benefit of the doubt but everything Apple does is questioned and doubted. Case in point, Samsung's new fingerprint scanner. I have seen very few articles inquiring on exactly how it's implemented, where the data is stored, how secure it is, etc. Since Samsung has developer APIs for this you would think the media would be especially interested in how secure it is. But so far nothing, just crickets. Such a double standard.
  • Reply 34 of 95
    The dumb guys. I mean the stocks falling over nothing. Really I mean what's gone wrong with Apple this year? NOTHING!!! Invest your not gonna loose anything!!! Seriously and people invest in ssinh when there always getting suided by Apple or Vacum Cleaner company!!! Copies.
  • Reply 35 of 95
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,293member
    Oh, yes... because I always go to Jon Stewart for my investment advice.

    I couldn't care less if it was the Sara Palin show, it was what Cramer said that matters.
  • Reply 36 of 95
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,293member
    Sorry, but I disagree.  We can't have it both ways.  Either Apple caters to Wall Street or it follows its own schedule.  Apple would no longer be Apple if it released a product prematurely.  Wall Street can F$%!! itself, and I'm speaking as a guy who holds his fair share of AAPL.

    100% agree and I am in the same boat.
  • Reply 37 of 95
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    Sorry, but I disagree.  We can't have it both ways.  Either Apple caters to Wall Street or it follows its own schedule.  Apple would no longer be Apple if it released a product prematurely.  Wall Street can F$%!! itself, and I'm speaking as a guy who holds his fair share of AAPL.
    I never said Apple should release products prematurely. But I would like to see them get on a schedule where there aren't long gaps that create a vacuum that can be filled with FUD and D&G. Apple used to release iPads in the March quarter. Then with the iPad mini they got moved to the October quarter. Now the March quarter is basically empty, and most of the June quarter is too. Is there no way for Apple to space stuff out so they're not announcing everything in basically one quarter?
  • Reply 38 of 95
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    Apple should never again get into a position of having to beg for money from a company like Microsoft or act to satiate a person like Carl Icahn. Let them take their time and form new markets and products in a manner that makes sense.
    So announcing products all in one quarter makes sense? I don't think so. Last year when Cook was asked about new products/categories he said Apple would be releasing stuff in the fall of 2013 and across 2014. To me "across 2014" doesn't mean Q4. That's why I hope we get some big announcements at WWDC.
  • Reply 39 of 95
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post





    I couldn't care less if it was the Sara Palin show, it was what Cramer said that matters.

     

    Oh, good. Now I at least know which analyst you trust.

  • Reply 40 of 95
    I'm curious to see where the stock will be in a year or so. After the next bigger iPhone, iWatch, and whatever else that might get released. It does seem like bad news comes from analysts, or, "people that get paid to guess". I wouldn't say it's to manipulate the stock but it seems like people are trading AAPL short term while other people with weak hands get scared.
Sign In or Register to comment.