SpamSandwich

melgross said:

SpamSandwich said:

melgross said:

radarthekat said:

cg27 said:

Rayz2016 said:

Nice problem to have …

Why not keep as much net cash as possible?  Keep the powder dry for acquisitions, rainy days, dividend increases, or whatever.  Getting net cash to zero sounds dangerous should the economy really go south.  Maybe they’re just saying they’d like to get to zero but know that will never happen, because they won’t let it.

By removing unproductive cash from the balance sheet and using it to reduce the share count, a business increases the percentage of each dollar invested representing the operating business.  And at the same time increases the ownership percentage represented by each remaining outstanding share.  As a potential investor you want your invested dollars [capital] to purchase an operating business that produces outsized returns, not static and unproductive cash.  

There was a time a few years ago, back when Icahn was carping, that each dollar invested in Apple shares represented only 75 cents invested in the operating business and 25 cents invested to buy a bit of Apple’s cash hoard.  Most casual investors don’t think about that.  But what if you said to your broker, “please invest $100,000 from my account in this company I feel is a good business” and your broker replied, “sure, but I’m going to invest only $75,000 in the company’s shares and let the other $25,000 sit and do nothing for you.”  You’d question his action, and yet that’s exactly the decision that all of us investors faced, and made, when we bought Apple shares back in those days.  Get unproductive cash off the balance sheet, and put it to good use. 

That’s all nonsense! There are never proven theories about that. But none of them works in the real world.

as long as cash is earning enough to maintain a small positive direction, it’s not non productive. But buying massive amounts of shares back, and then cancelling them is destructive. The company has literally thrown well over $100 billion in the garbage over the years, and accumulated over $110 billion in debt, which is subject to interest.

There’s another point to be made about holding cash. The unchecked spending by the current AND prior administrations (yes, I’m including the recently voted out administration here also) and the Federal Reserve’s mandate for promoting full employment continue to wreak havoc on the US Dollar. And the COVID cash being sent out as a remedy for stagnant and collapsing consumer earning and spending will only hasten the devaluation of that cash on hand for Apple.

It’s more complex-lex than that. But the only way to get out of a recession is to spend. We got that ridiculous tax bill in 2018 which caused a vast amount of deficit, and added $1.5 trillion to the national debt. That concerned me more. People need that money. Maybe if that idiot in the White Hoyse and his cronies treated the pandemic like intelligent people would have, we wouldn’t be in this position now. I don’t care if the dollar goes down. It’s good for exports, and discourages peo-le from buying non US made products. Get rid of the tariffs too, as that’s caused a slowdown in economic activity, as it always does.

melgross said:

radarthekat said:

cg27 said:

Rayz2016 said:

Nice problem to have …

Why not keep as much net cash as possible?  Keep the powder dry for acquisitions, rainy days, dividend increases, or whatever.  Getting net cash to zero sounds dangerous should the economy really go south.  Maybe they’re just saying they’d like to get to zero but know that will never happen, because they won’t let it.

By removing unproductive cash from the balance sheet and using it to reduce the share count, a business increases the percentage of each dollar invested representing the operating business.  And at the same time increases the ownership percentage represented by each remaining outstanding share.  As a potential investor you want your invested dollars [capital] to purchase an operating business that produces outsized returns, not static and unproductive cash.  

There was a time a few years ago, back when Icahn was carping, that each dollar invested in Apple shares represented only 75 cents invested in the operating business and 25 cents invested to buy a bit of Apple’s cash hoard.  Most casual investors don’t think about that.  But what if you said to your broker, “please invest $100,000 from my account in this company I feel is a good business” and your broker replied, “sure, but I’m going to invest only $75,000 in the company’s shares and let the other $25,000 sit and do nothing for you.”  You’d question his action, and yet that’s exactly the decision that all of us investors faced, and made, when we bought Apple shares back in those days.  Get unproductive cash off the balance sheet, and put it to good use. 

That’s all nonsense! There are never proven theories about that. But none of them works in the real world.

as long as cash is earning enough to maintain a small positive direction, it’s not non productive. But buying massive amounts of shares back, and then cancelling them is destructive. The company has literally thrown well over $100 billion in the garbage over the years, and accumulated over $110 billion in debt, which is subject to interest.

larryjw said:

Before Tim, us stockholders didn't receive any dividends. We bought based upon the expected value of the company, which would be reflected in their stock price. 

That proved to be correct. 

As for the dividends, it ain't that much for us small timers. Keeps us in coffee and a sweet roll, but that's about it. 

lkrupp said:

Apple, proudly failing and racing toward bankruptcy since April 1, 1976!