It just seems like another apt opportunity for stock buy-back. I think people forget the reasons why China is devaluing it's currency - specifically that it's in reaction to it's appreciation, which continues to be an on-going pressure.
What’s bad is the delusion that the cloth we carry has worth.
Originally Posted by e1618978
If that happens my bitcoins will be worth more than the Apple stock I lose, not a problem. 8-)
In the collapse of physical fiat currency, you think that nonexistent fiat currency will magically remain safe?
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
Oh, stop. You've been on this forever.
You're confusing your hope with your expectation.
Pretty sure that when Tesla was told to stop he kept going. I’m not about to stop hoping or working toward fixing something broken.
Originally Posted by Danox
He has no money. A person with no money.
I have money, which is what virtually everyone lacks. Do you know what money is?
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer
How does it feel to be delusional? The entire system? They will shut down the market far earlier than that.
“OH NO IT’S FALLING.” “JUST MAKE TRADING ILLEGAL.” “YAY! NOW THE STOCK IS AT THE SAME PRICE FOREVER AND IT CAN NEVER CRASH! WE’RE SAVED!”
I imagine you’re joking; you’re far too smart to suggest that seriously. Otherwise explain why they wouldn’t just make it illegal to sell below any given level at any given time, thus perpetually forcing the value upward.
How does it feel to be delusional? The entire system? They will shut down the market far earlier than that. They have ranges upon which the market will go into a free fall. This isn't 1928 and Rockefeller, Vanderbilt, Rothschild and Morgan colluding together to crash the globe and buy it back pennies on the dollar.
Tin-foil Hat
ON: no... the names have only changed and there's a few more of them.
OFF: my gut-feeling has always been that never-ending growth expectations is a pipe-dream (literally!).
Apple might sell a lot of stuff in China but, in general, the US is a net importer from China isn't it? All those products in Walmart?
So I don't think a recession in China need cause a big worry for the US. It will cause a worry for Canada and Australia and other countries that sell a lot of iron, gold and other resources to China. I was watching a documentary yesterday about the Bordeaux region in France that sells nearly all their wine to China now. Wouldn't want to be them. Also New Zealand sells a lot of dairy products to China, high quality milk, meat and cheese. They might be in for a recession.
Interesting that you mention raw materials and agricultural products. We should add clean drinking water and water ownership/management/distribution to that list of (sad to say!) "growth opportunities".
Back to tech and Apple and their attempts to pivot into a Luxury Lifestyle brand. It's currently working out well for Apple because the competition is sitting on it's thumbs waiting to see "what Apple's doing or going to do next". People in the know are spending more... to get more life and value out of their gadgets... which is "luxurious" to be able to afford at this time. But for how much longer.
When I ask people these days (and for the last year or so) what they NEED, would like to see in new tech gadgets to make their lives easier, or what they would immediately purchase with their "luxury" i.e. dispensable income... to a person they come up blank. It was the genius of Steve Jobs to realize and have the chutzpah early on to identify what people would "need" before they knew they needed it. Where's the next visionary to help the people too busy with their lives and trying to survive financially, that will make them "line up to give a company their hard-earned money"?
Even I have a hard time finding things that I can't do today with the tech gadgets I already own, that I "wish" they could do and be willing to jump on something new as soon as it hits the market. Also, what "wishes that I have" could be done in software rather than needing to purchase a new device? I'm holding out on the Apple Watch for just this pragmatic reason, because I know I will want it some day (possibly soon)... but it's not necessary... yet.
I ask everyone here to take a look around you and see what tech devices (including TV's, stereos, cameras, etc.) that you already own, and ask yourselves:
a) "what am I missing";
b) what can't I do now with the devices at my disposal either for my job or my free-time now";
c) "what would I stand in line to purchase if it hit the market in the next few weeks";
What I'm seeing "on the ground", is that people and businesses are holding on to what they have longer, trying to actually find the time to really learn and make use of what they have, and find small purchases that add new functions to what they already have... this in the way of apps or software... but naturally could be extended to Apple TV, or a personal Home Cloud Server(!!!)
Which brings me to my biggest pet-peeve: it is the software on all of our devices that needs serious concern in upgrading and truly making it useful, intelligent, and enabling.
The hardware that we have in our pockets sent a man to the moon... and syncing photos, music, or small steps towards intelligent assistant AI is flummoxing the world's and Apple's engineers??? :no:
Reality says that you can't make serious (Apple levels of) money in software any longer unless you tie it to an eco-system and hardware. Should that be the only reason why people should purchase new tech, because a) the company making the tech ties new advances in software to the device; and b) there's no other way to monetize software that WOULD, SHOULD and COULD make the devices we already own... up to 10x better?
That's my take on why it's inevitable that tech companies like Apple, Samsung, Microsoft, Google, etc. are going to have a tough dose of reality hitting them in the face... unless they can find a way to make tech "desirable and worth standing in line for" again soon... AND finding ways to monetize those devices after they've been purchased. Apple has the best chance of pulling this off, but the rest of the bunch? I think they're in for some very hard times indeed.
Note: apologies that this became far longer than anticipated(!)
Interesting that you mention raw materials and agricultural products. We should add clean drinking water and water ownership/management/distribution to that list of (sad to say!) "growth opportunities".
Yep, any country with over a billion people is surely going to be a net importer of food and raw materials. Even given economic cycles, with China and India both coming out of poverty, it mustn't be a bad time to be a farmer and/or miner in the west.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc
Back to tech and Apple and their attempts to pivot into a Luxury Lifestyle brand. It's currently working out well for Apple because the competition is sitting on it's thumbs waiting to see "what Apple's doing or going to do next". People in the know are spending more... to get more life and value out of their gadgets... which is "luxurious" to be able to afford at this time. But for how much longer.
When I ask people these days (and for the last year or so) what they NEED, would like to see in new tech gadgets to make their lives easier, or what they would immediately purchase with their "luxury" i.e. dispensable income... to a person they come up blank. It was the genius of Steve Jobs to realize and have the chutzpah early on to identify what people would "need" before they knew they needed it. Where's the next visionary to help the people too busy with their lives and trying to survive financially, that will make them "line up to give a company their hard-earned money"?
Even I have a hard time finding things that I can't do today with the tech gadgets I already own, that I "wish" they could do and be willing to jump on something new as soon as it hits the market. Also, what "wishes that I have" could be done in software rather than needing to purchase a new device? I'm holding out on the Apple Watch for just this pragmatic reason, because I know I will want it some day (possibly soon)... but it's not necessary... yet.
I ask everyone here to take a look around you and see what tech devices (including TV's, stereos, cameras, etc.) that you already own, and ask yourselves:
a) "what am I missing";
b) what can't I do now with the devices at my disposal either for my job or my free-time now";
c) "what would I stand in line to purchase if it hit the market in the next few weeks";
Good point about Steve. I think his gift was the ability to see the potential in new technologies. That is, he didn't come up with ideas for new products out of thin air, he would e.g. see a half-working touch screen on a lab bench and his mind immediately make the leap to the iPhone. Or see an experimental GUI interface at PARC and his mind leaps to the finished product of the Mac.
If you have someone like that at your company, and you need an idea for a new product, it's self-evident what to do: bundle him/her up on a plane and send them of a tour of world labs/universities. Or open a research division of your own. If you don't have someone like that at your company, well, I guess you can always try transitioning to a luxury brand :-)
I love it when stock analysts ignore the bigger picture. They are going "Apple is moving into bear territory" when it's actually "the entire DOW is moving into bear territory"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple Head
Exactly. I was going to say the same thing, but you beat me to it.
Generally a 10% drop is considered a "correction", while a 20% drop is considered a bear market. The DOW is moving into correction territory, while APPL is moving into bear market territory. So there's a reasonable distinction to be made. For whatever it's worth. Although I imagine the DOW will be in bear territory soon enough.
As I've written before, (and this is not investing advice...for anyone) I have a buy order in for $95, just in case the market panics/engineers panic that continues to spread. I consider anything close to or below $100 for AAPL absolutely nuts and a great buy.
Agreed. My intuition is saying mid $90 as a bottom. We might even get a spike down, so setting up a buy order is a good idea. I'll set mine at $95.01(ha!)
Of course, all bets are off if China's heavily engineered economy unwinds. Still, Apple has lost 10X in market cap vs all of its China rev. Or pretty close to that math. Even if China unwinds, it's not Greece. Behind the government's manipulation is a billion people that love to work and make money. China will come roaring back at some point.
Human existance. We have about 45 minutes and then it is all over. I hope you reading this soon after I post it or it is all for naught. Soon the "Mad Max" phase will begin....
3. Luxury goods usually get hit hard during an economic crisis, but iPhones seem to not follow that rule - at least iPhone sales held up well in 2008/2009.
I always thought luxury goods usually did better than other products during times of economic downturn, then again, an iPhone can't really be compared to a Bentley or a $M mansion. Maybe I misremembered something I heard once. Very likely.
In the collapse of physical fiat currency, you think that nonexistent fiat currency will magically remain safe?
Yes - bitcoin will remain safe. Government issued fiat currency is subject to infinite debasement and bitcoin isn't - bitcoin is really a better store of value even than physical metals since it is more deflationary and you can hide it or transmit it across borders easily.
Bitcoin isn't tied to the existence of government at all, just the internet and electrical grid. If we get to a place where the internet and electrical grid no longer work then I would rather be dead.
Gold is a fiat currency as well, btw - it only has value because people say it does. There is no situation where gold is the best investment, if we go to a mad max scenario then a strong farming community is the best investment - a bunker full of gold and guns will be raided and everything taken.
I always thought luxury goods usually did better than other products during times of economic downturn, then again, an iPhone can't really be compared to a Bentley or a $M mansion. Maybe I misremembered something I heard once. Very likely.
During the 2008 crisis luxury real estate dropped more than middle class real estate. Also people often stop buying luxury goods because they no longer want to show off wealth.
Government issued fiat currency is subject to infinite debasement and bitcoin isn't
I don’t understand the protections that allow for this. Could you explain? I know that there is “a set number” of bitcoins in existence, but what, physically, prevents an increase?
The analysts, and the market, have their heads so far up their ass when it comes to Apple that it's laughable. Icahn and Apple are both feeding heavily on this trough in share price. The slowdown in China's economy has been going on for a very long time - it didn't just happen overnight. And yet, last quarter Apple's outperformance in China was more than amazing %u2014 while the overall smartphone market contracted by 4% there, Tim Cook announced iPhone unit growth of 87% in China last quarter. The iPhone is much more than a "middle class" purchase, as even below average wage earners will save up for months to buy one - it is often their primary computing device, and their all important connection to their inner circle and beyond. This is a huge buying opportunity!
I don’t understand the protections that allow for this. Could you explain? I know that there is “a set number” of bitcoins in existence, but what, physically, prevents an increase?
In order to allow an increase, a software update would be required - and all the mining nodes in the world would have to agree to that update and start using the software. The miners have no incentive to do this, since it would destroy trust and therefore destroy all value in the bitcoin economy - every vested interest that is built on top of bitcoin would fight it.
You could never get a consensus big enough to implement the change.
Gold is a fiat currency as well, btw - it only has value because people say it does.
That's not what fiat currency means, which wraps its concept of value in government guarantee and law. Gold is very definitely not a fiat currency, it is a commodity currency, probably the definitive commodity currency.
Bitcoins only have value because people say they do. Moreno that gold even, because at least you can make some things out of gold.
If the value of gold was based on its manufacturing utility, it would be worth very little. Gold is worth what it is because people think it is worth that much.
Comments
What’s bad is the delusion that the cloth we carry has worth.
In the collapse of physical fiat currency, you think that nonexistent fiat currency will magically remain safe?
You're confusing your hope with your expectation.
Pretty sure that when Tesla was told to stop he kept going. I’m not about to stop hoping or working toward fixing something broken.
I have money, which is what virtually everyone lacks. Do you know what money is?
“OH NO IT’S FALLING.” “JUST MAKE TRADING ILLEGAL.” “YAY! NOW THE STOCK IS AT THE SAME PRICE FOREVER AND IT CAN NEVER CRASH! WE’RE SAVED!”
I imagine you’re joking; you’re far too smart to suggest that seriously. Otherwise explain why they wouldn’t just make it illegal to sell below any given level at any given time, thus perpetually forcing the value upward.
Tin-foil Hat
ON: no... the names have only changed and there's a few more of them.
OFF: my gut-feeling has always been that never-ending growth expectations is a pipe-dream (literally!).
Interesting that you mention raw materials and agricultural products. We should add clean drinking water and water ownership/management/distribution to that list of (sad to say!) "growth opportunities".
Back to tech and Apple and their attempts to pivot into a Luxury Lifestyle brand. It's currently working out well for Apple because the competition is sitting on it's thumbs waiting to see "what Apple's doing or going to do next". People in the know are spending more... to get more life and value out of their gadgets... which is "luxurious" to be able to afford at this time. But for how much longer.
When I ask people these days (and for the last year or so) what they NEED, would like to see in new tech gadgets to make their lives easier, or what they would immediately purchase with their "luxury" i.e. dispensable income... to a person they come up blank. It was the genius of Steve Jobs to realize and have the chutzpah early on to identify what people would "need" before they knew they needed it. Where's the next visionary to help the people too busy with their lives and trying to survive financially, that will make them "line up to give a company their hard-earned money"?
Even I have a hard time finding things that I can't do today with the tech gadgets I already own, that I "wish" they could do and be willing to jump on something new as soon as it hits the market. Also, what "wishes that I have" could be done in software rather than needing to purchase a new device? I'm holding out on the Apple Watch for just this pragmatic reason, because I know I will want it some day (possibly soon)... but it's not necessary... yet.
I ask everyone here to take a look around you and see what tech devices (including TV's, stereos, cameras, etc.) that you already own, and ask yourselves:
a) "what am I missing";
b) what can't I do now with the devices at my disposal either for my job or my free-time now";
c) "what would I stand in line to purchase if it hit the market in the next few weeks";
What I'm seeing "on the ground", is that people and businesses are holding on to what they have longer, trying to actually find the time to really learn and make use of what they have, and find small purchases that add new functions to what they already have... this in the way of apps or software... but naturally could be extended to Apple TV, or a personal Home Cloud Server(!!!)
Which brings me to my biggest pet-peeve: it is the software on all of our devices that needs serious concern in upgrading and truly making it useful, intelligent, and enabling.
The hardware that we have in our pockets sent a man to the moon... and syncing photos, music, or small steps towards intelligent assistant AI is flummoxing the world's and Apple's engineers??? :no:
Reality says that you can't make serious (Apple levels of) money in software any longer unless you tie it to an eco-system and hardware. Should that be the only reason why people should purchase new tech, because a) the company making the tech ties new advances in software to the device; and b) there's no other way to monetize software that WOULD, SHOULD and COULD make the devices we already own... up to 10x better?
That's my take on why it's inevitable that tech companies like Apple, Samsung, Microsoft, Google, etc. are going to have a tough dose of reality hitting them in the face... unless they can find a way to make tech "desirable and worth standing in line for" again soon... AND finding ways to monetize those devices after they've been purchased. Apple has the best chance of pulling this off, but the rest of the bunch? I think they're in for some very hard times indeed.
Note: apologies that this became far longer than anticipated(!)
Interesting that you mention raw materials and agricultural products. We should add clean drinking water and water ownership/management/distribution to that list of (sad to say!) "growth opportunities".
Yep, any country with over a billion people is surely going to be a net importer of food and raw materials. Even given economic cycles, with China and India both coming out of poverty, it mustn't be a bad time to be a farmer and/or miner in the west.
Back to tech and Apple and their attempts to pivot into a Luxury Lifestyle brand. It's currently working out well for Apple because the competition is sitting on it's thumbs waiting to see "what Apple's doing or going to do next". People in the know are spending more... to get more life and value out of their gadgets... which is "luxurious" to be able to afford at this time. But for how much longer.
When I ask people these days (and for the last year or so) what they NEED, would like to see in new tech gadgets to make their lives easier, or what they would immediately purchase with their "luxury" i.e. dispensable income... to a person they come up blank. It was the genius of Steve Jobs to realize and have the chutzpah early on to identify what people would "need" before they knew they needed it. Where's the next visionary to help the people too busy with their lives and trying to survive financially, that will make them "line up to give a company their hard-earned money"?
Even I have a hard time finding things that I can't do today with the tech gadgets I already own, that I "wish" they could do and be willing to jump on something new as soon as it hits the market. Also, what "wishes that I have" could be done in software rather than needing to purchase a new device? I'm holding out on the Apple Watch for just this pragmatic reason, because I know I will want it some day (possibly soon)... but it's not necessary... yet.
I ask everyone here to take a look around you and see what tech devices (including TV's, stereos, cameras, etc.) that you already own, and ask yourselves:
a) "what am I missing";
b) what can't I do now with the devices at my disposal either for my job or my free-time now";
c) "what would I stand in line to purchase if it hit the market in the next few weeks";
Good point about Steve. I think his gift was the ability to see the potential in new technologies. That is, he didn't come up with ideas for new products out of thin air, he would e.g. see a half-working touch screen on a lab bench and his mind immediately make the leap to the iPhone. Or see an experimental GUI interface at PARC and his mind leaps to the finished product of the Mac.
If you have someone like that at your company, and you need an idea for a new product, it's self-evident what to do: bundle him/her up on a plane and send them of a tour of world labs/universities. Or open a research division of your own. If you don't have someone like that at your company, well, I guess you can always try transitioning to a luxury brand :-)
I love it when stock analysts ignore the bigger picture. They are going "Apple is moving into bear territory" when it's actually "the entire DOW is moving into bear territory"
Exactly. I was going to say the same thing, but you beat me to it.
Generally a 10% drop is considered a "correction", while a 20% drop is considered a bear market. The DOW is moving into correction territory, while APPL is moving into bear market territory. So there's a reasonable distinction to be made. For whatever it's worth. Although I imagine the DOW will be in bear territory soon enough.
Ummm no Apple didn't. Apple's stocks wiped out a theoretical number based on some convoluted maths that no one can really understand.
Isn't the "convoluted math" just the multiplication of two numbers? Number of outstanding shares times the last trade price?
Of course, all bets are off if China's heavily engineered economy unwinds. Still, Apple has lost 10X in market cap vs all of its China rev. Or pretty close to that math. Even if China unwinds, it's not Greece. Behind the government's manipulation is a billion people that love to work and make money. China will come roaring back at some point.
Human existance. We have about 45 minutes and then it is all over. I hope you reading this soon after I post it or it is all for naught. Soon the "Mad Max" phase will begin....
I always thought luxury goods usually did better than other products during times of economic downturn, then again, an iPhone can't really be compared to a Bentley or a $M mansion. Maybe I misremembered something I heard once. Very likely.
...into bear territory for the first time in years
'Oh, help!’ said Pooh. ‘I’d better go back.’
‘Oh, bother!’ said Pooh. ‘I shall have to go on.’
‘I can’t do either!’ said Pooh. ‘Oh, help and bother!”
'Oh, help!’ said Pooh. ‘I’d better go back.’
‘Oh, bother!’ said Pooh. ‘I shall have to go on.’
‘I can’t do either!’ said Pooh. ‘Oh, help and bother!”
“Silly old bear,” said Christopher Robin, “It’s time for QE4.”
“What’s... QE4?” asked Pooh.
“It was necessary,” said Christopher Robin.
“If it was necessary, Christopher,” began Pooh as he slipped further into the abyss, “why is it only forthcoming?”
“Oh, I’m just practicing my last words before being executed,” said Christopher Robin.
“Bother,” said Pooh.
In the collapse of physical fiat currency, you think that nonexistent fiat currency will magically remain safe?
Yes - bitcoin will remain safe. Government issued fiat currency is subject to infinite debasement and bitcoin isn't - bitcoin is really a better store of value even than physical metals since it is more deflationary and you can hide it or transmit it across borders easily.
Bitcoin isn't tied to the existence of government at all, just the internet and electrical grid. If we get to a place where the internet and electrical grid no longer work then I would rather be dead.
Gold is a fiat currency as well, btw - it only has value because people say it does. There is no situation where gold is the best investment, if we go to a mad max scenario then a strong farming community is the best investment - a bunker full of gold and guns will be raided and everything taken.
I always thought luxury goods usually did better than other products during times of economic downturn, then again, an iPhone can't really be compared to a Bentley or a $M mansion. Maybe I misremembered something I heard once. Very likely.
During the 2008 crisis luxury real estate dropped more than middle class real estate. Also people often stop buying luxury goods because they no longer want to show off wealth.
Government issued fiat currency is subject to infinite debasement and bitcoin isn't
I don’t understand the protections that allow for this. Could you explain? I know that there is “a set number” of bitcoins in existence, but what, physically, prevents an increase?
I don’t understand the protections that allow for this. Could you explain? I know that there is “a set number” of bitcoins in existence, but what, physically, prevents an increase?
In order to allow an increase, a software update would be required - and all the mining nodes in the world would have to agree to that update and start using the software. The miners have no incentive to do this, since it would destroy trust and therefore destroy all value in the bitcoin economy - every vested interest that is built on top of bitcoin would fight it.
You could never get a consensus big enough to implement the change.
Gold is a fiat currency as well, btw - it only has value because people say it does.
That's not what fiat currency means, which wraps its concept of value in government guarantee and law. Gold is very definitely not a fiat currency, it is a commodity currency, probably the definitive commodity currency.
Bitcoins only have value because people say they do. Moreno that gold even, because at least you can make some things out of gold.
at least you can make some things out of gold.
If the value of gold was based on its manufacturing utility, it would be worth very little. Gold is worth what it is because people think it is worth that much.