Well, there are the old time investors and the new investors. Old time investors buy stocks for the dividends and modest growth in stock prices. Newer stock investors buy for the speculation on stock prices. 

Like much of the market, the Trump effect was speculation on the exponential growth of stock prices. Apple stock prices certainly grew exponentially along with the rest of the market (exceptions like GE, Toy's R Us, Sears, etc -- being run into the ground by poor management or rape by their CEOs and vulture capitalists). Key point, exponential growth is NEVER sustainable -- it has to collapse.

Apple stock price started 2017 at $121.35, and rose exponentially to $227.63 on Aug 1 2018. There was never a fundamental economic reason for a near 200% rise in Apple stock in two years, even given Apple's buyback of stock over the last two years. Apple stock price today ($148) is about 20 points below its January 2018 price, but from a linear growth perspective, even this is quite acceptable from an investment standpoint -- a 22% increase over 2 years -- compare that to your bank savings account. 

ktappe said:

I wonder if a legal expert could answer this Q:   If the requisite evidence has already been presented in U.S. court, isn't it therefore available to the German court? Or are German courts willfully blind to previously available discovery? If the latter, that seems like a pretty f---ed up "justice" system Germany has.

I'm retired attorney who had one case which crossed international boundaries (with India). I'm certainly no expert here and would be interested in the opinion of attorneys who have practiced in the international arena, particularly in intellectual property.

Nonetheless, I can point to a recent (June 14, 2018) SCOTUS decision on Comity (this is the legal term for what we are discussing).

In this particular case, the Federal Second Circuit (an Appeals Court) said that when a foreign government submits an official statement on the meaning and interpretation of its laws, federal courts are “bound to defer” to the foreign government’s construction of its laws, whenever that construction is “reasonable.” [

See Animal Science Products, Inc., et al., v. Hebei Welcome Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., et al. 

On appeal of this decision to the Supreme Court, Justice Ginsberg, writing for the unanimous court, found that when determining foreign law under FRCP 44.1, “[a] federal court should accord respectful consideration to a foreign government’s submission, but is not bound to accord conclusive effect to the foreign government’s statements.” (FRCP is Federal Rules of Civil Procedure). 

You should infer from this SCOTUS decision that it is highly likely the German courts would similarly view foreign court decisions (i.e., US court decisions). 

From this I, and you, would be wise to conclude that the German justice system is not thereby "f---ed up". 

maciekskontakt said:

MplsP said:

Funny how a feature the rest of the world thinks is convenient is suddenly an antitrust issue. Maybe they add a slide switch in the wallet settings to turn it off?

You are no the "rest of the world". You shoud realize you are minority. Europe does not give damn about Apple. Start travelling. I am here but I am from Europe. Your judgement is from small yard and it does not scale to "the rest of the world". Start travelling and open eyes.

Funny. I spent two weeks in several Eastern European countries last year -- everyone accepted Apple Pay and accepted payment via Apple Watch. I'm talking not only retail stores but pa&ma bars, and storefronts. Eastern European is far ahead of the US in acceptance of Apple Pay and perhaps other NFC payment systems. 

Maybe your Europe is simply backward. 

And this is in spite of WI Gov Walker and the Republicans giving Foxconn $4B in tax payer money, eliminating all environmental regulations, violating the Great Lakes water compact, etc. 

Addendum:
But isn't it the case in all instances that Apple suppliers noting cuts or softness in their outlooks are at best merely reflections of Apple's soft outlook for the next quarter? That is, Apple's stock price and doom reporting is the result of double, triple, quadruple counting of Apple's previous announcement of a soft Q2, not even taking into account Apple's supply chain complexity. 

I just attended a night of truth and humor from Monty Python alum John Cleese. 

There are many examples from his experience and from research that that most of those who hold themselves out as experts like predictors of economic trends, what is funny, what is not. 

Cleese likes to cite the Dunning-Kruger syndrome. Methinks those reporting on Apple suffer greatly.