I was fortunate to buy in the teens, as well. If I had had more money available, I would have been willing to risk it all, I was so certain this was going to happen.
It's not scientific by any means, but Apple is headed higher. There are things in the works for long term growth. BIG growth. Personally, I wonder what the data center they bought from MCI is for, and what will be housed on the new campus that's going to be built. They are confident in what's coming. So am I. Big time.
How about Lucent? Following its upswing in the late 90s, if you waited a few years, your investment could have dropped from almost $100 to $2.50. And in this case, history tells you nothing, except what you've lost. Or Apple-- price is high-ish, trend is up (good) and stock history is a tad scary, unless you ignore the 90s. Your formula has some aspects right, I think, but fool-proof? I'm not convinced.
Educated guessing is all there is. Your formula is the same sort of guessing, with your own favorite criteria-- I'd just personally advise against it being done this way. I hope it works for you, though. We all have our view. But, if this is yours, I'd bet there's more to it that you haven't explained. Not exactly disagreeing with you, but wondering what else plays into your equation...
Here's a bit of mine:
One of the things I take into account is how well a company is doing relative to the rest of the field-- within its industry and without. If a company has the attention of investors (like Apple), and it has a recent proven track record (like Apple), with prospects above and beyond its competitors (like Apple), it's a good bet. Investing is often about the psychology of those investing, as much as it is about the fundamentals of the companies being invested in. If the ones with the money are attracted, there's money to be made. No attention, no movement. Great company with no attention = potential growth, but nothing assured.
In the end, it's still a gamble. So, don't invest in anything you don't really understand, or you won't know when to get out, or when to dive in. And don't make huge profits your only goal-- that kind of focus will make you only look at a small subsection of what's out there.
May we all have toilet paper made out of $100 bills. The anti-chafing versions, or course.
I was long AAPL in the 1990s but I was no fool. When the stock plunged 50% at the end of September, 2000, I sold most of my other stocks at a profit and bought lots more shares of AAPL. I've done quite well as a result. Every chance I got, I kept adding more shares of AAPL.
Apple has to restate earnings before the end of the year so there will probably be some sort of hiccup in the stock when that happens. Just another buying opportunity.
Sure, Jobs could retire and the stock could take a brief hit but Apple has great people onboard so I don't see that as a problem for the long term investor.
A bigger long range concern is the economy with a recession looming a couple years or so down the road. Before that happens, Apple could split and again rise up to current levels.
I bought in at the bottom of that rather tall water fall and nearly bailed whe it went well into the teens. Bought more at 55 and 75. Its all up from here. Why does it trade at such a low forward PE? I wonder whether Apple's typical consevative guidance affects the forward PE multiple???
The difference this time is that this isn't a spike. We're in a trend that'll keep going for some time. There will be hiccups along the way, for sure, but the trend is definitely up long term. One hiccup could come at Macworld if Jobs doesn't announce the iPhone. Another could come at earnings if Q2 guidance is disappointing.
..................
AAPL could well go up into the 100+ range within the next 3 to 6 months and there could be a stock split as Apple's products get more popular. Lots of great stuff to look forward to like the true video iPod, iPhone, and Santa Rosa portables. Next year could Apple's biggest yet.
Yes, it will be a spike if Macworld SF2007 Jan disappoints the very high expectations placed on it. Also, it may slip downward after the Financial Q1 results exuberance dies down.
My prediction is Stevie J is gonna blowout 2007 with a clear, progressive, dominating strategy. Post-January Q1 results, the stock will slide a bit down to $70+ as things cool a bit, it will be March to August that will be the key period to convince investors that Apple is going long term on consumer electronics AND personal computers. I like your optimism Rolo (the infamous Rolo!!!!! Plasmas where art thou? ) it will be the "great stuff" that proves that this time it is a trend NOT a spike, otherwise, we'll see a repeat of Jan 2006 - to present, with a dip in the middle and frenzy towards Christmas 2007.
Overall, good on Apple, and despite the dip that will certainly follow the current frenzy, dip occuring along Feb-August, I suspect, they could sustain a gentle rise past $100 by mid-2007.
So hard to advise people not to buy AAPL because it is so overpriced but in the past two years it's always been that case! My advice armchair style is, wait for a $65, $70 max. DIP before getting in. And be prepared to wait 6 months to a year for AAPL to return to $80+ after that.......
To those new to things (not saying you're new to things Rolo)
Most importantly do not PLAY SHARES like it was the fracking Roulette or Poker...!! Have an overall strategy of investment -- this means low-risk and high-risk diversification, and adjusting your risk profile alongside your age, income and retirement strategy....!
I bought in at the bottom of that rather tall water fall and nearly bailed whe it went well into the teens. Bought more at 55 and 75. Its all up from here. Why does it trade at such a low forward PE? I wonder whether Apple's typical consevative guidance affects the forward PE multiple???
The forward P/E multiple does seem low to me, too. I'm sure that'll change as the stock goes up but future earnings estimates are too low, too. The stock can go up sharply once more people realize it's a bargain. Who wouldn't buy a stock that could go up $30 per share?
Like rick'sbrain, I too wonder what Apple will use that data center for. Isn't that one of four? Do they have to do with the iPhone? iTV? HD movie downloads? Call center to replace the one that was going to be built in Bangalore? Real time streaming of video content to iTV?
....Like rick'sbrain, I too wonder what Apple will use that data center for. Isn't that one of four? Do they have to do with the iPhone? iTV? HD movie downloads? Call center to replace the one that was going to be built in Bangalore? Real time streaming of video content to iTV?
We should keep in mind that Apple's growth strategy is going to take more resources on-the-ground. Not nett financial resources because the profit margins are still high. But just look at what would be needed as iTunes Store grows. Apple Store global grows. Apple retail and managing that.
As a company grows it will need more managers, more staff, more office space, more IT resources, etc. What is and has been amazing about Apple is how it has been able to grow while managing and maintaining such good profit margins and sustainably (?) increasing profits quarter-over-quarter, in general. This is mostly due to a very clear and focused vision (Steve Jobs and a few select others) on what Apple is about and where they want to diversify into. The iPhone will not do everything people want it to do, but it *will* be a big hit.... IF it comes out
Admittedly, there has been complaints about quality control which suffers as a company grows, I'll leave that for another debate.
The story is factually accurate, but people are interpreting it out of context.
On January 12, 2006, during mid-day trading, the stock reached 86.40.
However, the closing price on that date was was 84.29.
This article states that yesterday, AAPL closed at 85.61, which is the highest ever closing price.
If the headline leaves that critical piece of information out, then I think it's understandable if mistakes are made in reading the article itself. I would not call the recent peak an all-time high because an all-time high closing price is not the all-time high price.
Sure, Jobs could retire and the stock could take a brief hit but Apple has great people onboard so I don't see that as a problem for the long term investor.
Apple without Steve Jobs is like a horse without a rider. It's a company with boat loads of talent but no vision. Without the guidance of a Steve Jobs, Apple would simply continue to improve on what it has already done. Nothing wrong with that, but it's not innovation. It's not pulling rabbits out of a hat the way Steve does.
Apple is obviously going great guns and can keep making lots of money for a long time. But once the inspiration is gone, Apple's star is bound to slowly fade. Who knows? That future commodity-oriented Apple might make even more money than the innovative, risk-taking Apple of today, but the spell will have been broken.
Apple without Steve Jobs is like a horse without a rider. It's a company with boat loads of talent but no vision. Without the guidance of a Steve Jobs, Apple would simply continue to improve on what it has already done. Nothing wrong with that, but it's not innovation. It's not pulling rabbits out of a hat the way Steve does.
Apple is obviously going great guns and can keep making lots of money for a long time. But once the inspiration is gone, Apple's star is bound to slowly fade. Who knows? That future commodity-oriented Apple might make even more money than the innovative, risk-taking Apple of today, but the spell will have been broken.
I agree with this. Microsoft has been a floundering fish without Bill, and the years Apple went Steve-less were bad years. Without Steve or a rock-solid long, long term plan in place, Apple will slowly become consumed with the usual bullshit that comes from people who only look forward to their next paycheck... this is perhaps an overly simplistic, but reality-based observation.
I agree with this. Microsoft has been a floundering fish without Bill, and the years Apple went Steve-less were bad years. Without Steve or a rock-solid long, long term plan in place, Apple will slowly become consumed with the usual bullshit that comes from people who only look forward to their next paycheck... this is perhaps an overly simplistic, but reality-based observation.
The big question is Is Steve Grooming Successors? I think the WWDC '06 keynote was a big step in him handing-off bits to others. He's handed-off to Phil S. quite a bit in the past in certain situations, but bringing on Bertrand Serlet was an important step.
I think Steve would like to see things through to 2010, but he'll have to be grooming people for the next few years and spotting "The Next Steve" --- big shoes to fill indeed. Who's going to invent "The Next iPod"???
The forward P/E multiple does seem low to me, too. I'm sure that'll change as the stock goes up but future earnings estimates are too low, too. The stock can go up sharply once more people realize it's a bargain. Who wouldn't buy a stock that could go up $30 per share?
Yes, but, AAPL has been a shining light for some time now. How long will it take for people that AAPL has sustained and substantial growth? Even Yahoo has a better forward PE and it's not doing that well.
Attention on AAPL has been going on for a few years now. Investors would rather seek the next AAPL. Apple's an oldish company in many peoples' eyes, even if it's really young and revitalized. When they find the next best thing is still AAPL, they will come back. Apple has growth potential and has given signs that it's taking advantage of the situation.
I think Steve would like to see things through to 2010, but he'll have to be grooming people for the next few years and spotting "The Next Steve" --- big shoes to fill indeed. Who's going to invent "The Next iPod"???
Looking for the next Steve Jobs is like looking for the next Babe Ruth!
The story is factually accurate, but people are interpreting it out of context.....On January 12, 2006, during mid-day trading, the stock reached 86.40.
However, the closing price on that date was was 84.29.
This article states that yesterday, AAPL closed at 85.61, which is the highest ever closing price.
"Investors may trade in the Pre-Market (8:00-9:30 a.m. ET) and the After Hours Market (4:00-6:30 p.m. ET). Participation from Market Makers and ECNs is strictly voluntary and as a result, these sessions may offer less liquidity and inferior prices. Stock prices may also move more quickly in this environment. Investors who anticipate trading during these times are strongly advised to use limit orders"
Funnily enough the last entry (top most on page) shows 19:33\tET with a price of $85.82
The story is factually accurate, but people are interpreting it out of context.
On January 12, 2006, during mid-day trading, the stock reached 86.40.
However, the closing price on that date was was 84.29.
This article states that yesterday, AAPL closed at 85.61, which is the highest ever closing price.
C'mon AAPL hit $87.00 on Monday during normal trading and we'll have a true all-time high by all means and measures....!!! $87!!! go go go go go woooooooooooo
The big question is Is Steve Grooming Successors? I think the WWDC '06 keynote was a big step in him handing-off bits to others. He's handed-off to Phil S. quite a bit in the past in certain situations, but bringing on Bertrand Serlet was an important step.
I think Steve would like to see things through to 2010, but he'll have to be grooming people for the next few years and spotting "The Next Steve" --- big shoes to fill indeed. Who's going to invent "The Next iPod"???
I think the next "Steve" can only come from someone disenfranchised by Apple's culture, who then is fired or goes off to create a competing company or product. I don't recall anyone in recent memory who didn't create greatness without a fight. You won't find a great push forward from people who are content with their positions in the company.
Comments
It's not scientific by any means, but Apple is headed higher. There are things in the works for long term growth. BIG growth. Personally, I wonder what the data center they bought from MCI is for, and what will be housed on the new campus that's going to be built. They are confident in what's coming. So am I. Big time.
I'm new to the investing game. How do you know when it's a trend or a spike?
Well, there is one foolproof method in three easy steps:
1) look at the current price and trend.
2) wait several years.
3) review the stock prices history.
Any other answer is guessing to some extent or another...
How about Lucent? Following its upswing in the late 90s, if you waited a few years, your investment could have dropped from almost $100 to $2.50. And in this case, history tells you nothing, except what you've lost. Or Apple-- price is high-ish, trend is up (good) and stock history is a tad scary, unless you ignore the 90s. Your formula has some aspects right, I think, but fool-proof? I'm not convinced.
Educated guessing is all there is. Your formula is the same sort of guessing, with your own favorite criteria-- I'd just personally advise against it being done this way. I hope it works for you, though. We all have our view. But, if this is yours, I'd bet there's more to it that you haven't explained. Not exactly disagreeing with you, but wondering what else plays into your equation...
Here's a bit of mine:
One of the things I take into account is how well a company is doing relative to the rest of the field-- within its industry and without. If a company has the attention of investors (like Apple), and it has a recent proven track record (like Apple), with prospects above and beyond its competitors (like Apple), it's a good bet. Investing is often about the psychology of those investing, as much as it is about the fundamentals of the companies being invested in. If the ones with the money are attracted, there's money to be made. No attention, no movement. Great company with no attention = potential growth, but nothing assured.
In the end, it's still a gamble. So, don't invest in anything you don't really understand, or you won't know when to get out, or when to dive in. And don't make huge profits your only goal-- that kind of focus will make you only look at a small subsection of what's out there.
May we all have toilet paper made out of $100 bills. The anti-chafing versions, or course.
I was long AAPL in the 1990s but I was no fool. When the stock plunged 50% at the end of September, 2000, I sold most of my other stocks at a profit and bought lots more shares of AAPL. I've done quite well as a result. Every chance I got, I kept adding more shares of AAPL.
Apple has to restate earnings before the end of the year so there will probably be some sort of hiccup in the stock when that happens. Just another buying opportunity.
Sure, Jobs could retire and the stock could take a brief hit but Apple has great people onboard so I don't see that as a problem for the long term investor.
A bigger long range concern is the economy with a recession looming a couple years or so down the road. Before that happens, Apple could split and again rise up to current levels.
I bought in at the bottom of that rather tall water fall and nearly bailed whe it went well into the teens. Bought more at 55 and 75. Its all up from here. Why does it trade at such a low forward PE? I wonder whether Apple's typical consevative guidance affects the forward PE multiple???
The difference this time is that this isn't a spike. We're in a trend that'll keep going for some time. There will be hiccups along the way, for sure, but the trend is definitely up long term. One hiccup could come at Macworld if Jobs doesn't announce the iPhone. Another could come at earnings if Q2 guidance is disappointing.
..................
AAPL could well go up into the 100+ range within the next 3 to 6 months and there could be a stock split as Apple's products get more popular. Lots of great stuff to look forward to like the true video iPod, iPhone, and Santa Rosa portables. Next year could Apple's biggest yet.
Yes, it will be a spike if Macworld SF2007 Jan disappoints the very high expectations placed on it. Also, it may slip downward after the Financial Q1 results exuberance dies down.
My prediction is Stevie J is gonna blowout 2007 with a clear, progressive, dominating strategy. Post-January Q1 results, the stock will slide a bit down to $70+ as things cool a bit, it will be March to August that will be the key period to convince investors that Apple is going long term on consumer electronics AND personal computers. I like your optimism Rolo (the infamous Rolo!!!!! Plasmas where art thou?
Overall, good on Apple, and despite the dip that will certainly follow the current frenzy, dip occuring along Feb-August, I suspect, they could sustain a gentle rise past $100 by mid-2007.
So hard to advise people not to buy AAPL because it is so overpriced but in the past two years it's always been that case! My advice armchair style is, wait for a $65, $70 max. DIP before getting in. And be prepared to wait 6 months to a year for AAPL to return to $80+ after that.......
To those new to things (not saying you're new to things Rolo)
Most importantly do not PLAY SHARES like it was the fracking Roulette or Poker...!! Have an overall strategy of investment -- this means low-risk and high-risk diversification, and adjusting your risk profile alongside your age, income and retirement strategy....!
I bought in at the bottom of that rather tall water fall and nearly bailed whe it went well into the teens. Bought more at 55 and 75. Its all up from here. Why does it trade at such a low forward PE? I wonder whether Apple's typical consevative guidance affects the forward PE multiple???
The forward P/E multiple does seem low to me, too. I'm sure that'll change as the stock goes up but future earnings estimates are too low, too. The stock can go up sharply once more people realize it's a bargain. Who wouldn't buy a stock that could go up $30 per share?
Like rick'sbrain, I too wonder what Apple will use that data center for. Isn't that one of four? Do they have to do with the iPhone? iTV? HD movie downloads? Call center to replace the one that was going to be built in Bangalore? Real time streaming of video content to iTV?
....Like rick'sbrain, I too wonder what Apple will use that data center for. Isn't that one of four? Do they have to do with the iPhone? iTV? HD movie downloads? Call center to replace the one that was going to be built in Bangalore? Real time streaming of video content to iTV?
We should keep in mind that Apple's growth strategy is going to take more resources on-the-ground. Not nett financial resources because the profit margins are still high. But just look at what would be needed as iTunes Store grows. Apple Store global grows. Apple retail and managing that.
As a company grows it will need more managers, more staff, more office space, more IT resources, etc. What is and has been amazing about Apple is how it has been able to grow while managing and maintaining such good profit margins and sustainably (?) increasing profits quarter-over-quarter, in general. This is mostly due to a very clear and focused vision (Steve Jobs and a few select others) on what Apple is about and where they want to diversify into. The iPhone will not do everything people want it to do, but it *will* be a big hit.... IF it comes out
Admittedly, there has been complaints about quality control which suffers as a company grows, I'll leave that for another debate.
The story is factually accurate, but people are interpreting it out of context.
On January 12, 2006, during mid-day trading, the stock reached 86.40.
However, the closing price on that date was was 84.29.
This article states that yesterday, AAPL closed at 85.61, which is the highest ever closing price.
If the headline leaves that critical piece of information out, then I think it's understandable if mistakes are made in reading the article itself. I would not call the recent peak an all-time high because an all-time high closing price is not the all-time high price.
Sure, Jobs could retire and the stock could take a brief hit but Apple has great people onboard so I don't see that as a problem for the long term investor.
Apple without Steve Jobs is like a horse without a rider. It's a company with boat loads of talent but no vision. Without the guidance of a Steve Jobs, Apple would simply continue to improve on what it has already done. Nothing wrong with that, but it's not innovation. It's not pulling rabbits out of a hat the way Steve does.
Apple is obviously going great guns and can keep making lots of money for a long time. But once the inspiration is gone, Apple's star is bound to slowly fade. Who knows? That future commodity-oriented Apple might make even more money than the innovative, risk-taking Apple of today, but the spell will have been broken.
Apple without Steve Jobs is like a horse without a rider. It's a company with boat loads of talent but no vision. Without the guidance of a Steve Jobs, Apple would simply continue to improve on what it has already done. Nothing wrong with that, but it's not innovation. It's not pulling rabbits out of a hat the way Steve does.
Apple is obviously going great guns and can keep making lots of money for a long time. But once the inspiration is gone, Apple's star is bound to slowly fade. Who knows? That future commodity-oriented Apple might make even more money than the innovative, risk-taking Apple of today, but the spell will have been broken.
I agree with this. Microsoft has been a floundering fish without Bill, and the years Apple went Steve-less were bad years. Without Steve or a rock-solid long, long term plan in place, Apple will slowly become consumed with the usual bullshit that comes from people who only look forward to their next paycheck... this is perhaps an overly simplistic, but reality-based observation.
I agree with this. Microsoft has been a floundering fish without Bill, and the years Apple went Steve-less were bad years. Without Steve or a rock-solid long, long term plan in place, Apple will slowly become consumed with the usual bullshit that comes from people who only look forward to their next paycheck... this is perhaps an overly simplistic, but reality-based observation.
The big question is Is Steve Grooming Successors? I think the WWDC '06 keynote was a big step in him handing-off bits to others. He's handed-off to Phil S. quite a bit in the past in certain situations, but bringing on Bertrand Serlet was an important step.
I think Steve would like to see things through to 2010, but he'll have to be grooming people for the next few years and spotting "The Next Steve" --- big shoes to fill indeed. Who's going to invent "The Next iPod"???
What is after-trading-hours? Does that mean trades still occur outside of the usual Nasdaq times?
Try this link. I think this will give you the answer you're looking for
http://quotes.nasdaq.com/aspxcontent...&mkttype=AFTER
The forward P/E multiple does seem low to me, too. I'm sure that'll change as the stock goes up but future earnings estimates are too low, too. The stock can go up sharply once more people realize it's a bargain. Who wouldn't buy a stock that could go up $30 per share?
Yes, but, AAPL has been a shining light for some time now. How long will it take for people that AAPL has sustained and substantial growth? Even Yahoo has a better forward PE and it's not doing that well.
Yahoo-- not so much.
I think Steve would like to see things through to 2010, but he'll have to be grooming people for the next few years and spotting "The Next Steve" --- big shoes to fill indeed. Who's going to invent "The Next iPod"???
Looking for the next Steve Jobs is like looking for the next Babe Ruth!
The story is factually accurate, but people are interpreting it out of context.....On January 12, 2006, during mid-day trading, the stock reached 86.40.
However, the closing price on that date was was 84.29.
This article states that yesterday, AAPL closed at 85.61, which is the highest ever closing price.
Wow, more semantics:
Apple Computer, Inc.
After Hours Market\t \t
Nov. 16, 2006
Market Close: $ 85.85
After Hours Last: $ 85.82\t
http://quotes.nasdaq.com/aspxcontent...&selected=aapl
Try this link. I think this will give you the answer you're looking for
http://quotes.nasdaq.com/aspxcontent...&mkttype=AFTER
Interesting:
"Investors may trade in the Pre-Market (8:00-9:30 a.m. ET) and the After Hours Market (4:00-6:30 p.m. ET). Participation from Market Makers and ECNs is strictly voluntary and as a result, these sessions may offer less liquidity and inferior prices. Stock prices may also move more quickly in this environment. Investors who anticipate trading during these times are strongly advised to use limit orders"
Funnily enough the last entry (top most on page) shows 19:33\tET with a price of $85.82
The story is factually accurate, but people are interpreting it out of context.
On January 12, 2006, during mid-day trading, the stock reached 86.40.
However, the closing price on that date was was 84.29.
This article states that yesterday, AAPL closed at 85.61, which is the highest ever closing price.
C'mon AAPL hit $87.00 on Monday during normal trading and we'll have a true all-time high by all means and measures....!!! $87!!! go go go go go woooooooooooo
The big question is Is Steve Grooming Successors? I think the WWDC '06 keynote was a big step in him handing-off bits to others. He's handed-off to Phil S. quite a bit in the past in certain situations, but bringing on Bertrand Serlet was an important step.
I think Steve would like to see things through to 2010, but he'll have to be grooming people for the next few years and spotting "The Next Steve" --- big shoes to fill indeed. Who's going to invent "The Next iPod"???
I think the next "Steve" can only come from someone disenfranchised by Apple's culture, who then is fired or goes off to create a competing company or product. I don't recall anyone in recent memory who didn't create greatness without a fight. You won't find a great push forward from people who are content with their positions in the company.