all the short term self-styled short term "investors" in the market are in fact simply plain old speculators. looking for a quick buck. sometimes on the up, sometimes on the short down. f*ck all of you. day traders etc. that "market" is just a big time money game. it's not about the company, it's all about the hype, the play.
real "investors" buy for the long haul. or put there money into equity investments with real risk. folks looking for a "growth stock" are thinking years out from where a company is now to where it might go. and right, Apple is no longer a growth stock. when it actually was 10 years ago, almost everyone missed it! haha, so much for you "investors" back then!! you all blew it.
so by all means buy Alphabet and Amazon. but be sure to dump it before the chickens come to roost, when the growth proves to be always just over the horizon.
Apple's building this new campus and buying up real estate in SV like crazy. For FY16 Apple's cap ex spending is expected to be $15B. That's a lot of real estate buying and cap ex spending for a so-called one trick pony that's doomed unless it pivots to whatever's the flavor of the month on Wall Street.
This is an excellent point, but unfortunately, I think it does point to the serious strategic mistake that Tim Cook made several years ago and is paying dearly for today.
Apple's MO is pretty simple; go into a market, bleed it for every last cent of profit, and then move on: they are the Independence Day aliens of the tech world. Now while, the short-term thinkers and the amateur investors think that the company is just spinning its wheels, Apple is spending billions to make sure it has the infrastructure in place for its next growth spurt – and that will most probably be for a new product or a new service. But as with all Apple products, these plans take many years and many setbacks to come to fruition, and even then there is no guarantee of success. How many of these Wall Street idiots know that iPad development started before the iPhone?
So with Wall Street's obsession with short term profits and growth through acquisitions (and you have already pointed out, quite rightly, that most tech acquisitions lead to huge write-downs and little else), then I'm baffled as to why Cook thought it was a good idea to start paying dividends. This basically opened the back door and let the wolves into the kitchen. Now he has to spend his time answering to the people (like Sog35) who don't care about Apple products and don't have a clue that sustainable growth takes product development, planning, money and time; it cannot be achieved by panic-buying every company you can get your hands on without having any clue as to how it will fit into your company or long term strategy.
Apple plays its cards very close to its chest; this gives them an advantage when the product hits the market. Wall Street wants them to reveal every detail of everything they're working on up until 2020. This is just dumb, but that's Wall Street, and because he's decided to put Apple at a disadvantage by playing that game, Cook will have no choice but to start revealing their plans (competitors get their first), and start making dumb acquisitions to keep Wall Street happy (was the Beats acquisition the first of these? I'm starting to think perhaps it was).
And now, he's stuck with it. Apple is now a Wall Street party trick, so the question is does he have what it takes to undo his mistake? He needs to win back the narrative, and put Apple back in charge with Wall Street begging then to join the party, instead of creeping around these charlatans, looking for a friendly word.
Sog35 would Apple to blow their cash pile and useless acquisitions just so he can make up some of the money he lost; that's exactly what Wall Street wants to. Sog35 wants Apple to beg and scrape and reveal their plans to the competition just so he doesn't have to accept responsibility for his poor investment decisions.
I'd like to see Cook do the exact opposite: I'd like him to say there is a plan; we're confident it will work; if that's not enough for you then sell your shares.
Sog, you really should keep track of your stock. Wasn't it only a year ago, perhaps a few months longer, that you said you had around 800 shares total? Now you've "sold a ton" and still have 900?
The amount of shares I've owned has fluctuated from 400 to 1800 since 2012. But I just sold 500 shares in the last week, with only 900 remaining. I do have shares in two accounts (Roth and investment acct) so maybe that's why the confusion.
I've posted screen shots of my investment account before so I have no need to prove anything.
The only reason I'm holding the 900 shares is in hopes that they fire Tim Cook soon. If they fired Tim Cook tomorrow I'd probably buy 800 shares right away. Yes that is how strongly I feel about the 'CEO' of Apple. Cause really Apple has no CEO right now. It is run by a bean counter without any vision.
Real investors don't base their decisions on hope.
You really are very bad at this.
I think the main problem is that you failed to observe how Apple operates, which lead you to believe it would be a good opportunity for a short terms. You failed to do your due diligence; the fault is entirely your own.
you realize apple has had expensive computers since the 1980s, right?
that being said, the starting prices are quite inexpensive:
ipod: $50
ipad: $269
mac: $499
macbook: $899
...the apple tax is a myth these days.
Lying doesn't get you any further, mini starts from €570, iMac from €1280, iPhone from €750 (+ from €850!!!). Prices are astronomical compared to the build cost, people are not buying because of it. Like I said: unsustainable.
"lying"? what horseshit are you on about -- i just pulled those prices from the apple website.
apple is an US company, this is a US website, and my quotes are in US dollars. get over yourself. i proved you wrong and now you're butthurt about it.
the apple tax is a myth. their products have low starting prices. especially when TCO is taken into account -- most apple products get used until they no longer function. i have an iPhone 4 still in use in my household.
Google's stock future is brighter right now, not the company.
That's a reach. Look at Google's semi-recent release of Tensor Flow. They've published one of their most valuable technologies for anyone to use. This is the basis for speech recognition, AR translation, ad selection, etc. Google has gone from a handful of deep-learning AI projects 5 years ago to 1000s now, all based on Tensor Flow. So they release this to the world to use. Why? Well, if anyone does anything significant with it, they will simply buy that company and add it to their 1000s of deep learning AI projects. FB and Amazon won't base any tech on Tensor Flow, so it's not going to enable any competition.
This is pretty forward thinking. They're basing their future on AI, and it's amazing. Inbox for Gmail offers automated replies for me (at least the first sentence), and it's a useful response more than half the time. It's really amazing, even offering a "Haha, thanks!" if there's a joke with a useful answer in an email I receive.
There's a tone of future with Alphabet.
I'd be more concerned about Apple as they now show us they can count to 7.
Google has never had a problem with great ideas and talent. The problem is Google doesn't have the discipline to turn those cool projects into cash machines. Take self-driving cars for example. It's a cool concept. But a year or so ago (I can't remember when), Google remarked that it had no idea how it was going to monetize the self-driving car. That's just insane. Google has been working on that project for close to 10 years and it has no idea how it's going to make money on it? That should be one of the earliest questions any business should ask when pursuing a project.
So if the market holds for today Apple may go back to being most valuable company. Just shows how all this noise about them losing it is nonsense.
But it makes for good clickbait so...
The guy on top always has a bullseye on their back. Let’s see if Google starts getting negative press now. Will Mike Daisey write a one man show about Google? Will we start seeing articles about slave labor and suicide nets at Google’s Nexus factories? Will Greenpeace start hanging banners at Google’s headquarters? Will Google’s tax evasions become front and center news? Just asking.
1. stock price is not the reason I buy Apple product; 2. I like Apple being a underdog; 3. Wall Street, well, is crazy/irrational
Underdog, Apple is one of the most valuable companies in the world, as well as largest. They can buy and sell almost every company on the planet, underdog, yea.
So if the market holds for today Apple may go back to being most valuable company. Just shows how all this noise about them losing it is nonsense.
But it makes for good clickbait so...
The guy on top always has a bullseye on their back. Let’s see if Google starts getting negative press now. Will Mike Daisey write a one man show about Google? Will we start seeing articles about slave labor and suicide nets at Google’s Nexus factories? Will Greenpeace start hanging banners at Google’s headquarters? Will Google’s tax evasions become front and center news? Just asking.
Interestingly Google's tax avoidance schemes hit the news well before Apple ever became part of the conversation, and they were almost universally criticized in both the press and in tech site discussions. In hindsight Apple would probably have preferred Bloomberg had never raised the subject of Google and taxes. The taxes they avoided were a molehill in comparison to Apple's, and so of course shifted the focus. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2010-10-21/google-2-4-rate-shows-how-60-billion-u-s-revenue-lost-to-tax-loopholes
By the way, everyone can relax now since it's profit-taking day on Google stock, making the AI article a non-story. Apple will return to it's rightful place.
Apple's building this new campus and buying up real estate in SV like crazy. For FY16 Apple's cap ex spending is expected to be $15B. That's a lot of real estate buying and cap ex spending for a so-called one trick pony that's doomed unless it pivots to whatever's the flavor of the month on Wall Street.
This is an excellent point, but unfortunately, I think it does point to the serious strategic mistake that Tim Cook made several years ago and is paying dearly for today.
Apple's MO is pretty simple; go into a market, bleed it for every last cent of profit, and then move on: they are the Independence Day aliens of the tech world. Now while, the short-term thinkers and the amateur investors think that the company is just spinning its wheels, Apple is spending billions to make sure it has the infrastructure in place for its next growth spurt – and that will most probably be for a new product or a new service. But as with all Apple products, these plans take many years and many setbacks to come to fruition, and even then there is no guarantee of success. How many of these Wall Street idiots know that iPad development started before the iPhone?
So with Wall Street's obsession with short term profits and growth through acquisitions (and you have already pointed out, quite rightly, that most tech acquisitions lead to huge write-downs and little else), then I'm baffled as to why Cook thought it was a good idea to start paying dividends. This basically opened the back door and let the wolves into the kitchen. Now he has to spend his time answering to the people (like Sog35) who don't care about Apple products and don't have a clue that sustainable growth takes product development, planning, money and time; it cannot be achieved by panic-buying every company you can get your hands on without having any clue as to how it will fit into your company or long term strategy.
Apple plays its cards very close to its chest; this gives them an advantage when the product hits the market. Wall Street wants them to reveal every detail of everything they're working on up until 2020. This is just dumb, but that's Wall Street, and because he's decided to put Apple at a disadvantage by playing that game, Cook will have no choice but to start revealing their plans (competitors get their first), and start making dumb acquisitions to keep Wall Street happy (was the Beats acquisition the first of these? I'm starting to think perhaps it was).
And now, he's stuck with it. Apple is now a Wall Street party trick, so the question is does he have what it takes to undo his mistake? He needs to win back the narrative, and put Apple back in charge with Wall Street begging then to join the party, instead of creeping around these charlatans, looking for a friendly word.
Sog35 would Apple to blow their cash pile and useless acquisitions just so he can make up some of the money he lost; that's exactly what Wall Street wants to. Sog35 wants Apple to beg and scrape and reveal their plans to the competition just so he doesn't have to accept responsibility for his poor investment decisions.
I'd like to see Cook do the exact opposite: I'd like him to say there is a plan; we're confident it will work; if that's not enough for you then sell your shares.
"so the question is does he have what it takes to undo his mistake? He needs to win back the narrative, and put Apple back in charge with Wall Street begging then to join the party, instead of creeping around these charlatans, looking for a friendly word. "
This is where some of the brilliance of SJ came in. He actually had the balls to stand up to Wall St. and make them realize that even though Apple had shareholders, Apple, in his mind, was still "his company". And they had two options: 1) stay along for the ride or 2) or jump off board.
So if the market holds for today Apple may go back to being most valuable company. Just shows how all this noise about them losing it is nonsense.
But it makes for good clickbait so...
The guy on top always has a bullseye on their back. Let’s see if Google starts getting negative press now. Will Mike Daisey write a one man show about Google? Will we start seeing articles about slave labor and suicide nets at Google’s Nexus factories? Will Greenpeace start hanging banners at Google’s headquarters? Will Google’s tax evasions become front and center news? Just asking.
Lying doesn't get you any further, mini starts from €570, iMac from €1280, iPhone from €750 (+ from €850!!!). Prices are astronomical compared to the build cost, people are not buying because of it. Like I said: unsustainable.
"lying"? what horseshit are you on about -- i just pulled those prices from the apple website.
apple is an US company, this is a US website, and my quotes are in US dollars. get over yourself. i proved you wrong and now you're butthurt about it.
the apple tax is a myth. their products have low starting prices. especially when TCO is taken into account -- most apple products get used until they no longer function. i have an iPhone 4 still in use in my household.
Apple products are quality products but you are really underestimating the importance of foreign sales to Apple. Yes Apple is a US company but the majority of its sales have come from outside the US. If you want to become an international standard you can't simply convert prices from US dollars, for various countries, using the exchange rate of the time. With a high US $ this will probably result in a real drop of income and, more importantly, market share. This is a problem Apple has being the sole supplier of hardware and system software. In many ways this did in the Mac in the days on MS-DOS and win95.
I suppose you could have Apple retreat and only sell in the US but then Android would do in iOS.
I really don't know what Apple should do in the face of the casino currency system. They are selling communications' tools. Could they survive as a US company with only a US market? Yes, but their products would be far less important.
Apple, and many other US companies, have a real problem with the currency situation and many seem to think this is a minor and temporary annoyance. Once people change platforms they don't come back easily.
I have this really bad feeling about the ability of Apple to deal with this issue. They didn't with the Mac and that platform became a footnote ( and the alternatives of the day were terrible).
Apple spent over 40 billion (that is, 40 thousand million) per year the last 2 years to retire its shares. If its share prices stayed the same then it would have reduced its market cap by 80 billion.
I have noticed in the past few weeks all these "bad news" articles suddenly came out. Feels like a repeat of January 18th, 2013:
I'll quote Gruber so you don't have to follow the link:
Remember the piece I linked to earlier this week, wherein Joe Springer pointed out (all the way back in November) that large institutional investors who’d sold options on Apple’s stock back in the summer stood to profit by billions if AAPL closed today at $500 or under? It closed at $500.00.
I still have that bridge to sell you if you don’t think the fix was in on this.
Compelling piece by Joe Springer on Apple’s stock price, from back in November:
So here is our logic to being patient. It is threefold:
Apple had an enormous amount of call options speculation related to its Summer surge
A huge share of this was calls with a strike of around the current price of $550 and higher that expire January 19 2013
The institutional money managers that wrote those call options and bought common stock to cover will make a lot of money if a) those options expire worthless, and then b) Apple runs after that expiration date
Billions of dollars at stake if AAPL stays near or under $500 a share until January 19 and then makes a run after that. No tinfoil hat required to see the motivation here. (Via Loren Brichter.)
This is an excellent point, but unfortunately, I think it does point to the serious strategic mistake that Tim Cook made several years ago and is paying dearly for today.
Apple's MO is pretty simple; go into a market, bleed it for every last cent of profit, and then move on: they are the Independence Day aliens of the tech world. Now while, the short-term thinkers and the amateur investors think that the company is just spinning its wheels, Apple is spending billions to make sure it has the infrastructure in place for its next growth spurt – and that will most probably be for a new product or a new service. But as with all Apple products, these plans take many years and many setbacks to come to fruition, and even then there is no guarantee of success. How many of these Wall Street idiots know that iPad development started before the iPhone?
So with Wall Street's obsession with short term profits and growth through acquisitions (and you have already pointed out, quite rightly, that most tech acquisitions lead to huge write-downs and little else), then I'm baffled as to why Cook thought it was a good idea to start paying dividends. This basically opened the back door and let the wolves into the kitchen. Now he has to spend his time answering to the people (like Sog35) who don't care about Apple products and don't have a clue that sustainable growth takes product development, planning, money and time; it cannot be achieved by panic-buying every company you can get your hands on without having any clue as to how it will fit into your company or long term strategy.
Apple plays its cards very close to its chest; this gives them an advantage when the product hits the market. Wall Street wants them to reveal every detail of everything they're working on up until 2020. This is just dumb, but that's Wall Street, and because he's decided to put Apple at a disadvantage by playing that game, Cook will have no choice but to start revealing their plans (competitors get their first), and start making dumb acquisitions to keep Wall Street happy (was the Beats acquisition the first of these? I'm starting to think perhaps it was).
And now, he's stuck with it. Apple is now a Wall Street party trick, so the question is does he have what it takes to undo his mistake? He needs to win back the narrative, and put Apple back in charge with Wall Street begging then to join the party, instead of creeping around these charlatans, looking for a friendly word.
Sog35 would Apple to blow their cash pile and useless acquisitions just so he can make up some of the money he lost; that's exactly what Wall Street wants to. Sog35 wants Apple to beg and scrape and reveal their plans to the competition just so he doesn't have to accept responsibility for his poor investment decisions.
I'd like to see Cook do the exact opposite: I'd like him to say there is a plan; we're confident it will work; if that's not enough for you then sell your shares.
"so the question is does he have what it takes to undo his mistake? He needs to win back the narrative, and put Apple back in charge with Wall Street begging then to join the party, instead of creeping around these charlatans, looking for a friendly word. "
This is where some of the brilliance of SJ came in. He actually had the balls to stand up to Wall St. and make them realize that even though Apple had shareholders, Apple, in his mind, was still "his company". And they had two options: 1) stay along for the ride or 2) or jump off board.
Apple's cash pile is like an overflowing toilet. It was only a matter of time before Apple had to do start distributing some of that cash. No CEO would have gotten away with hoarding $100 billion+, not even Steve Jobs.
"so the question is does he have what it takes to undo his mistake? He needs to win back the narrative, and put Apple back in charge with Wall Street begging then to join the party, instead of creeping around these charlatans, looking for a friendly word. "
This is where some of the brilliance of SJ came in. He actually had the balls to stand up to Wall St. and make them realize that even though Apple had shareholders, Apple, in his mind, was still "his company". And they had two options: 1) stay along for the ride or 2) or jump off board.
Apple's cash pile is like an overflowing toilet. It was only a matter of time before Apple had to do start distributing some of that cash. No CEO would have gotten away with hoarding $100 billion+, not even Steve Jobs.
By the way, everyone can relax now since it's profit-taking day on Google stock, making the AI article a non-story. Apple will return to it's rightful place.
I'm not sure "relax" is the right word. There's a sizable gulf between #3 and the top 2 spots on this list. The fact Apple now has an "inferior" company breathing down its neck for the top spot, is definitely cause for concern to the extent this kind of valuation is of real concern to anyone.
Comments
all the short term self-styled short term "investors" in the market are in fact simply plain old speculators. looking for a quick buck. sometimes on the up, sometimes on the short down. f*ck all of you. day traders etc. that "market" is just a big time money game. it's not about the company, it's all about the hype, the play.
real "investors" buy for the long haul. or put there money into equity investments with real risk. folks looking for a "growth stock" are thinking years out from where a company is now to where it might go. and right, Apple is no longer a growth stock. when it actually was 10 years ago, almost everyone missed it! haha, so much for you "investors" back then!! you all blew it.
so by all means buy Alphabet and Amazon. but be sure to dump it before the chickens come to roost, when the growth proves to be always just over the horizon.
there's a sucker born every minute.
This is an excellent point, but unfortunately, I think it does point to the serious strategic mistake that Tim Cook made several years ago and is paying dearly for today.
Apple's MO is pretty simple; go into a market, bleed it for every last cent of profit, and then move on: they are the Independence Day aliens of the tech world. Now while, the short-term thinkers and the amateur investors think that the company is just spinning its wheels, Apple is spending billions to make sure it has the infrastructure in place for its next growth spurt – and that will most probably be for a new product or a new service. But as with all Apple products, these plans take many years and many setbacks to come to fruition, and even then there is no guarantee of success. How many of these Wall Street idiots know that iPad development started before the iPhone?
So with Wall Street's obsession with short term profits and growth through acquisitions (and you have already pointed out, quite rightly, that most tech acquisitions lead to huge write-downs and little else), then I'm baffled as to why Cook thought it was a good idea to start paying dividends. This basically opened the back door and let the wolves into the kitchen. Now he has to spend his time answering to the people (like Sog35) who don't care about Apple products and don't have a clue that sustainable growth takes product development, planning, money and time; it cannot be achieved by panic-buying every company you can get your hands on without having any clue as to how it will fit into your company or long term strategy.
Apple plays its cards very close to its chest; this gives them an advantage when the product hits the market. Wall Street wants them to reveal every detail of everything they're working on up until 2020. This is just dumb, but that's Wall Street, and because he's decided to put Apple at a disadvantage by playing that game, Cook will have no choice but to start revealing their plans (competitors get their first), and start making dumb acquisitions to keep Wall Street happy (was the Beats acquisition the first of these? I'm starting to think perhaps it was).
And now, he's stuck with it. Apple is now a Wall Street party trick, so the question is does he have what it takes to undo his mistake? He needs to win back the narrative, and put Apple back in charge with Wall Street begging then to join the party, instead of creeping around these charlatans, looking for a friendly word.
Sog35 would Apple to blow their cash pile and useless acquisitions just so he can make up some of the money he lost; that's exactly what Wall Street wants to. Sog35 wants Apple to beg and scrape and reveal their plans to the competition just so he doesn't have to accept responsibility for his poor investment decisions.
I'd like to see Cook do the exact opposite: I'd like him to say there is a plan; we're confident it will work; if that's not enough for you then sell your shares.
Real investors don't base their decisions on hope.
You really are very bad at this.
I think the main problem is that you failed to observe how Apple operates, which lead you to believe it would be a good opportunity for a short terms. You failed to do your due diligence; the fault is entirely your own.
ICBC (Industrial and Commercial Bank of China) dwarfs google and apple:
2015 Revenue/Assests/Profits:
ICBC: 166 /44 / 3322
Google: 66 /13.7 / 131
Apple: 200 /44.5 / 261.9
General Electric and Toyota are both more valuable than Apple and Google
apple is an US company, this is a US website, and my quotes are in US dollars. get over yourself. i proved you wrong and now you're butthurt about it.
the apple tax is a myth. their products have low starting prices. especially when TCO is taken into account -- most apple products get used until they no longer function. i have an iPhone 4 still in use in my household.
The guy on top always has a bullseye on their back. Let’s see if Google starts getting negative press now. Will Mike Daisey write a one man show about Google? Will we start seeing articles about slave labor and suicide nets at Google’s Nexus factories? Will Greenpeace start hanging banners at Google’s headquarters? Will Google’s tax evasions become front and center news? Just asking.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2010-10-21/google-2-4-rate-shows-how-60-billion-u-s-revenue-lost-to-tax-loopholes
By the way, everyone can relax now since it's profit-taking day on Google stock, making the AI article a non-story. Apple will return to it's rightful place.
This is where some of the brilliance of SJ came in. He actually had the balls to stand up to Wall St. and make them realize that even though Apple had shareholders, Apple, in his mind, was still "his company". And they had two options: 1) stay along for the ride or 2) or jump off board.
Apple products are quality products but you are really underestimating the importance of foreign sales to Apple. Yes Apple is a US company but the majority of its sales have come from outside the US. If you want to become an international standard you can't simply convert prices from US dollars, for various countries, using the exchange rate of the time. With a high US $ this will probably result in a real drop of income and, more importantly, market share. This is a problem Apple has being the sole supplier of hardware and system software. In many ways this did in the Mac in the days on MS-DOS and win95.
I suppose you could have Apple retreat and only sell in the US but then Android would do in iOS.
I really don't know what Apple should do in the face of the casino currency system. They are selling communications' tools. Could they survive as a US company with only a US market? Yes, but their products would be far less important.
Apple, and many other US companies, have a real problem with the currency situation and many seem to think this is a minor and temporary annoyance. Once people change platforms they don't come back easily.
I have this really bad feeling about the ability of Apple to deal with this issue. They didn't with the Mac and that platform became a footnote ( and the alternatives of the day were terrible).
I have noticed in the past few weeks all these "bad news" articles suddenly came out. Feels like a repeat of January 18th, 2013:
I'll quote Gruber so you don't have to follow the link:
---
http://daringfireball.net/linked/2013/01/18/500
AAPL: $500.00
Remember the piece I linked to earlier this week, wherein Joe Springer pointed out (all the way back in November) that large institutional investors who’d sold options on Apple’s stock back in the summer stood to profit by billions if AAPL closed today at $500 or under? It closed at $500.00.
I still have that bridge to sell you if you don’t think the fix was in on this.
★ Friday, 18 January 2013
---
http://daringfireball.net/linked/2013/01/15/suppressing-aaplSUPPRESSING AAPL
Compelling piece by Joe Springer on Apple’s stock price, from back in November:
Billions of dollars at stake if AAPL stays near or under $500 a share until January 19 and then makes a run after that. No tinfoil hat required to see the motivation here. (Via Loren Brichter.)
★ Tuesday, 15 January 2013