Apple has bled more than $500B in market value in September

Posted:
in General Discussion
Amid a broad tech industry selloff, Apple stock has lost more than $500 billion in market value since an intraday high of $137.98 on Sept. 2.

Credit: WikiMedia
Credit: WikiMedia


Since that day, the Cupertino tech giant's share price has plunged 22.6%, shaving off about $532 billion in market value. It follows months of surge leading up to a four-for-one stock split that completed on Aug. 31.

Shares of AAPL are currently trading at $106.84 on the NASDAQ, down 3.17% in intraday trading. That leaves Apple with a market capitalization of $1.85 trillion.

Apple's plunge comes amid a broader tech industry selloff in September. Earlier this month, Apple lost more market value than any other company in history during a one-day plummet.

According to CNBC, investors believe the selloff resulted from concerns over rich and lofty valuations that have surged too high and too fast.

In August alone, Apple's share price rose 21.4% in the wake of better-than-expected earnings results during coronavirus and the announcement of the four-for-one stock split.

Apple became the first publicly traded U.S. company to hit a $2 trillion market valuation on Aug. 24. It first lost its $2 trillion market cap on Sept. 3.

On Tuesday, Apple released new Apple Watch models, iPads and services, but some analysts told CNBC that the event was "underwhelming." The company did not announce new iPhones at the keynote.

New "iPhone 12" and "iPhone 12 Pro" models are still on the horizon, and may be unveiled at a keynote conference in early October.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 34
    BeatsBeats Posts: 3,073member
    Does it even mean anything?

    How can Apple be worth almost a quarter less than a few weeks ago?
    dysamoriacornchipwatto_cobra
  • Reply 2 of 34
    Beats said:
    Does it even mean anything?

    How can Apple be worth almost a quarter less than a few weeks ago?
    They had a stock split. 
    flyingdp
  • Reply 3 of 34
    jbilgihan said:
    Beats said:
    Does it even mean anything?

    How can Apple be worth almost a quarter less than a few weeks ago?
    They had a stock split. 
    Completely unrelated as that had no direct effect on the valuation of the stock. 
    elijahgBeatsmuthuk_vanalingamqwerty52cornchipflyingdpStrangeDayspscooter63watto_cobra
  • Reply 4 of 34
    It just shows how close the stock market is to gambling. And most of us depend on it for our retirement...
    DAalsethBeatsmuthuk_vanalingamdysamoriacornchipflyingdpwatto_cobra
  • Reply 5 of 34
    jbilgihan said:
    Beats said:
    Does it even mean anything?

    How can Apple be worth almost a quarter less than a few weeks ago?
    They had a stock split. 
    A stock split has nothing to do with anything valuation-wise.

    (Ah, @Fastasleep beat me to it).
    edited September 2020 Beatsmuthuk_vanalingamwatto_cobra
  • Reply 6 of 34
    If my portfolio didn't have too much AAPL in it already, I would be buying.
    flyingdppscooter63SpamSandwichwatto_cobra
  • Reply 7 of 34
    “The market” understands Apple (not AAPL) as well now as when it was trading at 5x earnings. I.e. not at all. 
    patchythepirateBeatscornchipflyingdpwatto_cobra
  • Reply 8 of 34
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 5,978member
    If my portfolio didn't have too much AAPL in it already, I would be buying.
    I have quite a bit in AAPL as well, and happily going long on it.

    Waiting for the bottom and will be loading up on more.

    Beatscornchippscooter63watto_cobra
  • Reply 9 of 34
    And yet it's a 2 Trillion dollar company.

    Seems to me that the stockmarket is full of complete and utter morons.
    Beatsmac_dogcornchipStrangeDayswatto_cobra
  • Reply 10 of 34
    BeatsBeats Posts: 3,073member
    sflocal said:
    If my portfolio didn't have too much AAPL in it already, I would be buying.
    I have quite a bit in AAPL as well, and happily going long on it.

    Waiting for the bottom and will be loading up on more.


    Isn't this the bottom? I mean how much lower can it go?

    Then again this is AAPL......
    cornchipwatto_cobra
  • Reply 11 of 34
    Beats said:
    sflocal said:
    If my portfolio didn't have too much AAPL in it already, I would be buying.
    I have quite a bit in AAPL as well, and happily going long on it.

    Waiting for the bottom and will be loading up on more.


    Isn't this the bottom? I mean how much lower can it go?

    Then again this is AAPL......
    The lowest it goes is the point when it switches to more willing to buy than there are to sell. And after these new buyers arrive the price goes a little higher and those that shorted are forced to buy back the shares at a higher price than they borrowed them for. Then those that feel they made a mistake in selling their shares at less than the current price buy them back again and it goes higher still. Then the new buyers tell their friends how much they made and that encourages more buyers sending the price higher still. This carries on until some people decide they have made enough and start to sell, and then when there are more sellers than buyers the price falls again. The media like to relate these changes in price to something that happened and quite often they need to look a few days back to find something believable but the reality is the change in trend has nothing to do with that and is all about fear vs greed.
    Beatspscooter63watto_cobra
  • Reply 12 of 34
    "According to CNBC, investors believe the selloff resulted from concerns over rich and lofty valuations that have surged too high and too fast."

    Keyword being 
    believe.

    The lowest it goes is usually when enough of you decide now is the time to invest for the first time and there becomes more buyers than sellers. And the sellers then need to take action to adjust for this change.
  • Reply 13 of 34
    Beats said:
    sflocal said:
    If my portfolio didn't have too much AAPL in it already, I would be buying.
    I have quite a bit in AAPL as well, and happily going long on it.

    Waiting for the bottom and will be loading up on more.


    Isn't this the bottom? I mean how much lower can it go?

    Then again this is AAPL......
    A long time ago, I worked at Lucent Technologies, the descendant of Bell Labs.  When the stock was going up and up and up, there was a guy that walked around the place like he owned it, and in fact, he did own quite a bit in his 401(k) and stock purchase plan (ESPP).  When it went to $89/share, he laughed and said that he would retire at 40, after the next doubling of the stock.
    It went above $110/share (all values are normalized in this story)
    There was news that there were financial misdeeds 
    It dropped to $80, and he was confident.
    "It'll never go below 80."
    Then, it went to 60, and he was less confident.  
    "It'll never go below 60."
    Then, it went to 40, and he was shaken.
    "It'll never go below 40."
    He was frazzled, but held on.
    "It'll never go below 20."
    Dreams of retirement in two years disappeared.  80% of his net worth disappeared.
    I asked him how he was doing, and when he said it will never go below 20, I responded with, "you know, it'll never go below zero."
    He held on, with 100% of his investments in LU.
    He finally got out when the stock hit $5/share, losing over 95% of his nest egg.

    In retrospect, it's easy to see where he went wrong, putting all his eggs in one basket, trying to dance on a collapsing building, using metaphors that never existed, but even at the time, he could have recovered from a 50% loss, but he had to start over at 40, saving for retirement.

    The rule is:  It can never go below zero.

    cornchipBeatsdysamoriapscooter63watto_cobra
  • Reply 14 of 34

    j2fusion said:
    It just shows how close the stock market is to gambling. And most of us depend on it for our retirement...
    I'll take 8-12% (S&P500) on my investment over 1.75-5% every day of the week.  It have a stomach for the ups and downs, though, and many people (including my wife) do not.

    To me, working and setting aside 15% of my income for delayed gratification is far less risky than living now, and hoping that politicians in the future don't think I'm "rich" so they can not give me benefits that others get because of my past earnings.

    https://dqydj.com/is-social-security-a-good-investment/
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 15 of 34
    nceencee Posts: 857member
    And as we expect, once they announce the new iPhones (and who knows what else), and then there is the upcoming Holiday season (it will be very interesting to see what this brings?), and than there's the next reporting quarter where they will show a real nice quarter (Considering everything) and the stock will be above where it is now:). 

    They can't wait to long to do this (although, the lower it goes, the more stock I get to buy), before folks with think and say "The (sky) "Apple" is falling.


    cornchipwatto_cobra
  • Reply 16 of 34

    j2fusion said:
    It just shows how close the stock market is to gambling. And most of us depend on it for our retirement...
    I'll take 8-12% (S&P500) on my investment over 1.75-5% every day of the week.  It have a stomach for the ups and downs, though, and many people (including my wife) do not.

    To me, working and setting aside 15% of my income for delayed gratification is far less risky than living now, and hoping that politicians in the future don't think I'm "rich" so they can not give me benefits that others get because of my past earnings.

    https://dqydj.com/is-social-security-a-good-investment/
    Like you, my risk tolerance was much higher when I was working.  After retirement, you begin to realize your time to make up for the “downs” is much less.  I have yet to have a financial planner give me the answer to “when is it time to switch from long term goals to short team goals.” I also am worried like you the political establishment will decide I was too responsible when I skipped buying things to save for the future.  They may think, now that I have a considerable amount saved, some portion of it should go to the “less fortunate.”  While I truly believe there are some less fortunate people who deserve help, many of those I know are really ones that lived by the moment and spent beyond their means not thinking about the future.
    edited September 2020 jeffythequickwatto_cobra
  • Reply 17 of 34

    Like you, my risk tolerance was much higher when I was working.  After retirement, you begin to realize your time to make up for the “downs” is much less.  I have yet to have a financial planner give me the answer to “when is it time to switch from long term goals to short team goals.” I also am worried like you the political establishment will decide I was too responsible when I skipped buying things to save for the future.  They may think, now that I have a considerable amount saved, some portion of it should go to the “less fortunate.”  While I truly believe there are some less fortunate people who deserve help, many of those I know are really ones that lived by the moment and spent beyond their means not thinking about the future.
    The only option you have is to vote for those who you "hope" will represent your values.  There are a lot of politicians who believe you don't deserve to keep your wealth, no matter how you earned it.  Worked hard all your life, saved every year, avoided unnecessary spending.  Now you have a nice nest egg saved up.  But you're evil because you have accumulated that wealth and now we want to tax you to give to the less fortunate.  Completely backwards thinking in my opinion.  November 3rd is a very important date.
    cornchipBeatsSpamSandwichjeffythequickwatto_cobra
  • Reply 18 of 34
    j2fusion said:

    j2fusion said:
    It just shows how close the stock market is to gambling. And most of us depend on it for our retirement...
    I'll take 8-12% (S&P500) on my investment over 1.75-5% every day of the week.  It have a stomach for the ups and downs, though, and many people (including my wife) do not.

    To me, working and setting aside 15% of my income for delayed gratification is far less risky than living now, and hoping that politicians in the future don't think I'm "rich" so they can not give me benefits that others get because of my past earnings.

    https://dqydj.com/is-social-security-a-good-investment/
    Like you, my risk tolerance was much higher when I was working.  After retirement, you begin to realize your time to make up for the “downs” is much less.  I have yet to have a financial planner give me the answer to “when is it time to switch from long term goals to short team goals.” I also am worried like you the political establishment will decide I was too responsible when I skipped buying things to save for the future.  They may think, now that I have a considerable amount saved, some portion of it should go to the “less fortunate.”  While I truly believe there are some less fortunate people who deserve help, many of those I know are really ones that lived by the moment and spent beyond their means not thinking about the future.

    While nobody is even thinking about thinking about redistributing your savings to the poor, they are currently being redistributed to the wealthy by means of the Fed's ZIRP (Zero Interest Rate Policy) that pays nothing on savings and pushes those savings into risk assets that benefit the rich.  It also enables the government to finance tax cuts with trillion dollar deficits.
    flyingdpStrangeDaysdysamoriawatto_cobra
  • Reply 19 of 34
    Beats said:
    Does it even mean anything?

    How can Apple be worth almost a quarter less than a few weeks ago?
    j2fusion said:
    It just shows how close the stock market is to gambling. And most of us depend on it for our retirement...
    No. It doesn’t mean anything. It’s all just an opinion of worth.

    Yes, the stock market is gambling. This is not an economic system. It’s a bunch of BS foisted upon us by the few who can play with millions of dollars of valuation per month/week/day/minute. It’s all imaginary value. The fact that it has real world consequences on us is utterly ludicrous craziness and shows how utterly insane our culture is to treat this gambling show like an economy.
    cornchipwilliamlondonBeatsflyingdpmuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 20 of 34
    This has far more to do with Jerome Powell than it does Tim Cook

    In 2008 the Fed initiated its ZIRP (Zero Interest Rate Policy) along with Trillion dollar QE (Quantitative Easing -- aka printing money) program.   That pushed investments out of bond markets and into risk assets like stocks.   The result was a soaring stock market where even the weak players did well.

    Now, in 2020 they repeated the same maneuver.  But, this time, because the core economy had been decimated, instead of the entire stock market soaring, only a few sectors of the market did so -- mostly the tech sector.    The result is that Apple soared along with the other FAANG stocks. 

    That's not to take anything away from Tim.   Rather, to point out that Jerome has more control over the price of Apple stock than Tim does.

    Wise investors know:  "Don't fight the Fed" because, the Fed ALWAYS wins.
    cornchipFileMakerFeller
Sign In or Register to comment.