Indeed, but it's showing a few worrying signs of becoming a bit more like them recently, what with privacy issues and the Apple Watch.
What privacy issues?
What does the Watch have to do with anything Google did?
Rumours have been flying that Apple will start giving personal data to advertisers. Wake up at the back.
The Apple Watch is Apple's Google Glass. Not as offensive, but redundant nonetheless. Wearables are not the future, at least, not in their current incarnation. The only wearable that would lure me, at the moment, is one that has no screen, but just sensors and haptic feedback.
There could certainly be a link between options expiration dates and short-term stock prices/volatility. But that's not manipulation. That's par for the course being a publicly listed company. Happens to a lot of stocks. If you take a longer-term view with your investing decisions, all of that sort of thing is noise (or an occasional buying opportunity).
Sog, glad you're doing good on the swings, but I think most would agree with Anantks that this is not considered manipulation but simply cyclical trading (similar to ex-div dates). I know it's much more complicated than that and again, cheers to you for doing well with AAPL.
I will be the first to admit that I've never figured out some of the crazy drops in share price...could be manipulation of sorts. Awhile ago, many of us at TMO forum (now defunct) were pulling hairs on price drops....result...less hair.
I think we are in agreement. I agree that price manipulation is only in the short term.
But don't under estimate the power of the options market as regards to Apple. The amount of $ traded in Apple options is much much higher than any other name on Wall Street. When this type of short term drops happen I do buy shares.
I do think WSJ/Reuters does get some influence from Wall Street. This was especially true when Samsung was giving these websites/newspapers a TON of adverstising revenue. But again all short term.
Actually, I don't think that we're in agreement at all on whether there is manipulation, or regarding the ability of markets and advertisers to influence media outlets like the WSJ or Reuters.
I don't remotely define the volatility associated with options expiration -- even if it really exists and is meaningful if it exists -- as 'manipulation.' As I said, it's par for the course for a publicly traded company.
Incidentally, I don't understand why you actually buy the stock instead of call options when the stock goes down in the short term. One would think that the benefits of 'putting your money where your mouth is' would be amplified with options?
Indeed, but it's showing a few worrying signs of becoming a bit more like them recently, what with privacy issues and the Apple Watch.
I couldn't disagree more, on both points.
The 'privacy issues' thing is a New York Post (that's about as good as toilet paper, imho) rumor, and even if it were true, it seemed to be talking about aggregated and anonymized data. Re. the AppleWatch, you've been on a relentless tirade against it since the very beginning, and it's pretty much speculation on your part (combined with your sense of aesthetics, which is totally subjective).
So it's pointless to engage in a discussion on either issue.
plus or minus 5 million. Either way they will sell 10 million watches. Comparing that to GoogleGlass is beyond ridiculous and even poor for a troll to bring out.
Just look at how the competitors are already reeling because of the Watch. Swiss is on full alert and Android Watch makers are already dumping their old models. Nothing of the sort happenned when GoogleGlass came out.
1) 10 MM is still your guess.
2) You just dropped your 15 MM mark a 33% variance!!!
3) I agree that we're seeing a lot of reaction from others because of ?Watch, despite them pooh poohing ?Watch, and that's it's not unlike what we've seen from every dusrupticr product category from Apple, but that is not proof of anything.
4) I agree that comparing it to Google Glass is ridilcous but it's still an opinion and at this point the only facts we have is Glassholes outnumber ?Watch owners. It could even be by about 100k, but even that I can reasonably state as fact because we don't know how many Apple has distributed at this point, only that it's not available for retail sales until next month.
What about when Apple dipped from $700 in Sept 2012 to $380 in Jan 2013? Losing 45% of its value in 4 months is ridiculous.
That was definetly manipulation and not simply cyclical.
I'm not grumbling because I took advantage of the manipulation and bought a ton of stock during that time.
Give me a break. Apple's growth in revenue, cash flows, profits were all negative during that period. The market did over-react, but to call it manipulation -- instead of a flawed narrative that swung widely from optimism to pessimism -- is silly, and you know it. (You yourself have cited those changes in fundamentals n the past). You really should be a bit consistent in your views.
?This stuff about 'manipulation' is no more than the equivalent of a boogeyman under your bed.
Mine is market makers artificially pushing the price of a stock up or down. I think that clearly happenned at the beginning of 2013
Yes, artificially pushing stock up/down is part of the definition but also it's important to question whether or not any "one group" CAN sell or buy to influence the stock is also a factor in that definition. One cannot manipulate if they cannot pragmatically influence.
I don't think the drop from $700 was manipulation. Instead it was a combination of: quick rise to $700, revenue growth numbers and a little FUD from the media which made it ripe for shorts and those just looking to take profits.
Contrastly, in late 2009 there were wild swings of prices on any given day (or a few days), fluctuations of 10% - 20%. At that time Apple was more susceptible (AAPL was less institutionally owned along with Apple's instability and largely influenced by media rumors and FUD) to houses instigating a move down. I'd guess that those large investors/houses were making money both ways (up and down)...and so if any, those trades were made to manipulate ("artificially" as you mentioned). Even Steve Jobs was heard responding to screams of manipulation and I believe concerned about the negative media, but he quickly extinguished the flames... knowing that in the long run none of those artificial swings mattered to Apple.
Sog, glad you're doing good on the swings, but I think most would agree with Anantks that this is not considered manipulation but simply cyclical trading (similar to ex-div dates). I know it's much more complicated than that and again, cheers to you for doing well with AAPL.
I will be the first to admit that I've never figured out some of the crazy drops in share price...could be manipulation of sorts. Awhile ago, many of us at TMO forum (now defunct) were pulling hairs on price drops....result...less hair.
Short term movements can be the result of all sorts of technical causes, and non-news items that cannot be explained in simple terms (least of all, by "manipulation"). Option expirations could be one of those, program trading could be another. Investors placing stop orders at nice round numbers is another. Any of them and especially all of them working together can result in both cascade buying and selling. Anyone who worries too much about what a stock does on a daily (or even weekly or monthly) basis should not be buying individual stocks because it will make them nuts. Worst of all, it will probably cause them to make bad investment decisions.
2) You just dropped your 15 MM mark a 33% variance!!!
3) I agree that we're seeing a lot of reaction from others because of ?Watch, despite them pooh poohing ?Watch, and that's it's not unlike what we've seen from every dusrupticr product category from Apple, but that is not proof of anything.
4) I agree that comparing it to Google Glass is ridilcous but it's still an opinion and at this point the only facts we have is Glassholes outnumber ?Watch owners. It could even be by about 100k, but even that I can reasonably state as fact because we don't know how many Apple has distributed at this point, only that it's not available for retail sales until next month.
My point is comparing Glass to a product that will sell millions is ridiculous.
The first order of watches is 5 million so I'm pretty sure they will hit at least 10 million in the first 12 months
Amazing how you've reduced your sales targets!
You once said 50 million units in the first year. Since then, you've gradually reduced it, until you're down to 10 million.
10 million would be disappointing, and the jury would be out. Fewer than 10 million would be a failure.
You need to learn a thing or two about the market.
Just look at the last few months. Near the end of November the stock was at $119.
Then in Dec/Jan it dropped big time for no reason at all. All the way down to $105. That 12% drop is not normal market movements. It dropped because of Annual Options Expiration. There was litterally TENS of BILLIONS on the line if the stock closed above $120 on Jan 16th.
But right after Jan 16th expiration the stock went back up. I wonder why? So obvious.
We see this same pattern during Quarterly expiration and Monthly expiration. So much pressure for the stock to go down so call options expire worthless.
You still don't understand the concept of manipulation.
Seriously, whenever I get disgusted with forums I simply walk away from them. When it happened long enough ago for me to forget exactly why I left, sometimes I will come back -- and hope I am not reminded.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismY
@Dr Millmoss, where were you for the last 3 years? Incarceration? Coma? Deep cover for the government?
Comments
Rumours have been flying that Apple will start giving personal data to advertisers. Wake up at the back.
The Apple Watch is Apple's Google Glass. Not as offensive, but redundant nonetheless. Wearables are not the future, at least, not in their current incarnation. The only wearable that would lure me, at the moment, is one that has no screen, but just sensors and haptic feedback.
The way you constantly state your desire as fact is amazing.
There could certainly be a link between options expiration dates and short-term stock prices/volatility. But that's not manipulation. That's par for the course being a publicly listed company. Happens to a lot of stocks. If you take a longer-term view with your investing decisions, all of that sort of thing is noise (or an occasional buying opportunity).
Sog, glad you're doing good on the swings, but I think most would agree with Anantks that this is not considered manipulation but simply cyclical trading (similar to ex-div dates). I know it's much more complicated than that and again, cheers to you for doing well with AAPL.
I will be the first to admit that I've never figured out some of the crazy drops in share price...could be manipulation of sorts. Awhile ago, many of us at TMO forum (now defunct) were pulling hairs on price drops....result...less hair.
I think we are in agreement. I agree that price manipulation is only in the short term.
But don't under estimate the power of the options market as regards to Apple. The amount of $ traded in Apple options is much much higher than any other name on Wall Street. When this type of short term drops happen I do buy shares.
I do think WSJ/Reuters does get some influence from Wall Street. This was especially true when Samsung was giving these websites/newspapers a TON of adverstising revenue. But again all short term.
Actually, I don't think that we're in agreement at all on whether there is manipulation, or regarding the ability of markets and advertisers to influence media outlets like the WSJ or Reuters.
I don't remotely define the volatility associated with options expiration -- even if it really exists and is meaningful if it exists -- as 'manipulation.' As I said, it's par for the course for a publicly traded company.
Incidentally, I don't understand why you actually buy the stock instead of call options when the stock goes down in the short term. One would think that the benefits of 'putting your money where your mouth is' would be amplified with options?
The only wearable that would lure me, at the moment, is one that has no screen, but just sensors and haptic feedback.
Hey sunshine...no screen, eh? Further evidence as to how disconnected you are with reality and with the masses.
It's been entertaining, but now tiring...another added to the blocked list.
Indeed, but it's showing a few worrying signs of becoming a bit more like them recently, what with privacy issues and the Apple Watch.
I couldn't disagree more, on both points.
The 'privacy issues' thing is a New York Post (that's about as good as toilet paper, imho) rumor, and even if it were true, it seemed to be talking about aggregated and anonymized data. Re. the AppleWatch, you've been on a relentless tirade against it since the very beginning, and it's pretty much speculation on your part (combined with your sense of aesthetics, which is totally subjective).
So it's pointless to engage in a discussion on either issue.
1) 10 MM is still your guess.
2) You just dropped your 15 MM mark a 33% variance!!!
3) I agree that we're seeing a lot of reaction from others because of ?Watch, despite them pooh poohing ?Watch, and that's it's not unlike what we've seen from every dusrupticr product category from Apple, but that is not proof of anything.
4) I agree that comparing it to Google Glass is ridilcous but it's still an opinion and at this point the only facts we have is Glassholes outnumber ?Watch owners. It could even be by about 100k, but even that I can reasonably state as fact because we don't know how many Apple has distributed at this point, only that it's not available for retail sales until next month.
We agree, but those are still our opinions. Also, isn't the 5 MM order just a rumour?
I would love to wake up one day and read "Apple replaces AT&T" as the second largest broadband provider.
They would have to start providing any broadband before they could overtake anyone...
What about when Apple dipped from $700 in Sept 2012 to $380 in Jan 2013? Losing 45% of its value in 4 months is ridiculous.
That was definetly manipulation and not simply cyclical.
I'm not grumbling because I took advantage of the manipulation and bought a ton of stock during that time.
Give me a break. Apple's growth in revenue, cash flows, profits were all negative during that period. The market did over-react, but to call it manipulation -- instead of a flawed narrative that swung widely from optimism to pessimism -- is silly, and you know it. (You yourself have cited those changes in fundamentals n the past). You really should be a bit consistent in your views.
?This stuff about 'manipulation' is no more than the equivalent of a boogeyman under your bed.
What is your defintion of manipulation?
Mine is market makers artificially pushing the price of a stock up or down. I think that clearly happenned at the beginning of 2013
Yes, artificially pushing stock up/down is part of the definition but also it's important to question whether or not any "one group" CAN sell or buy to influence the stock is also a factor in that definition. One cannot manipulate if they cannot pragmatically influence.
I don't think the drop from $700 was manipulation. Instead it was a combination of: quick rise to $700, revenue growth numbers and a little FUD from the media which made it ripe for shorts and those just looking to take profits.
Contrastly, in late 2009 there were wild swings of prices on any given day (or a few days), fluctuations of 10% - 20%. At that time Apple was more susceptible (AAPL was less institutionally owned along with Apple's instability and largely influenced by media rumors and FUD) to houses instigating a move down. I'd guess that those large investors/houses were making money both ways (up and down)...and so if any, those trades were made to manipulate ("artificially" as you mentioned). Even Steve Jobs was heard responding to screams of manipulation and I believe concerned about the negative media, but he quickly extinguished the flames... knowing that in the long run none of those artificial swings mattered to Apple.
Sog, glad you're doing good on the swings, but I think most would agree with Anantks that this is not considered manipulation but simply cyclical trading (similar to ex-div dates). I know it's much more complicated than that and again, cheers to you for doing well with AAPL.
I will be the first to admit that I've never figured out some of the crazy drops in share price...could be manipulation of sorts. Awhile ago, many of us at TMO forum (now defunct) were pulling hairs on price drops....result...less hair.
Short term movements can be the result of all sorts of technical causes, and non-news items that cannot be explained in simple terms (least of all, by "manipulation"). Option expirations could be one of those, program trading could be another. Investors placing stop orders at nice round numbers is another. Any of them and especially all of them working together can result in both cascade buying and selling. Anyone who worries too much about what a stock does on a daily (or even weekly or monthly) basis should not be buying individual stocks because it will make them nuts. Worst of all, it will probably cause them to make bad investment decisions.
N
1) 10 MM is still your guess.
2) You just dropped your 15 MM mark a 33% variance!!!
3) I agree that we're seeing a lot of reaction from others because of ?Watch, despite them pooh poohing ?Watch, and that's it's not unlike what we've seen from every dusrupticr product category from Apple, but that is not proof of anything.
4) I agree that comparing it to Google Glass is ridilcous but it's still an opinion and at this point the only facts we have is Glassholes outnumber ?Watch owners. It could even be by about 100k, but even that I can reasonably state as fact because we don't know how many Apple has distributed at this point, only that it's not available for retail sales until next month.
My point is comparing Glass to a product that will sell millions is ridiculous.
The first order of watches is 5 million so I'm pretty sure they will hit at least 10 million in the first 12 months
Amazing how you've reduced your sales targets!
You once said 50 million units in the first year. Since then, you've gradually reduced it, until you're down to 10 million.
10 million would be disappointing, and the jury would be out. Fewer than 10 million would be a failure.
You still don't understand the concept of manipulation.
I could tell you, but then I'd have to shoot you.
Seriously, whenever I get disgusted with forums I simply walk away from them. When it happened long enough ago for me to forget exactly why I left, sometimes I will come back -- and hope I am not reminded.
@Dr Millmoss, where were you for the last 3 years? Incarceration? Coma? Deep cover for the government?