Skip to comments.Apple market value: We may need a bigger chart
Posted on 11/02/2017 11:00:34 AM PDT by fireman15
Apple Inc (AAPL.O) Chief Executive Tim Cook quashed concerns recently about muted demand for the iPhone X, saying pre-orders for the 10th anniversary smartphone were off the charts, but it might be the companys market capitalization that needs a bigger graph.
Positive reviews for the new device and expectations that many users are on the verge of upgrading from older iPhones have sent Apples stock to record highs, pushing it closer to becoming the first publicly listed company with a stock market value above $1 trillion.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
Looks like a great stock - to short.
Sooner or later, the Apple stock will be the biggest single stock crash ever seen from the stock market. Then, the stockholders will be blaming everybody, including Tim Cook and Trump for their losses and misery.
Looks like a great stock - to short.
Go ahead.... do it!
No one has ever made money shorting AAPL. The strike price is always beaten. . . it's too easy to raise the stock above the limits. . . so no one makes anything. It would take a real disaster for the stock to actually tank.
The latest Apple/Mac/iOS Pings can be found by searching Keyword "ApplePingList" on FreeRepublic's Search.
If you want on or off the Mac Ping List, Freepmail me
Even the Apple iOS moniker was in use by Cisco system as IOS (Internetwork Operating System) long before Apple used it. Cisco has consequently licensed the trademark to Apple.
Hopefully, you didn’t take my “joking/taunting” advice to short the stock today. If you had you’d have taken a financial bath.
It is cute the way people caught up in modern mythologies come up with “clever” labels to combat those of us who can see through their nonsense. Al Gore and company call anyone who doesn't go along 100% with his brand of “anthropogenic global warming” a “denier”. Swordmaker calls those of us who do not buy into the Apple mythology, “Apple haters”.
I have been an electronics enthusiast since I was growing up the 1960s and 1970s starting first with electronics kits and plans and moving onto digital micro-computer components as they became available. I remember how exciting it was to move from sliderules to calculators. I was thoroughly enamored with “home computers” when they started coming on the market. I still have a large collection of early home computers and software.
Apple mythologists twist their historical facts and reality at about the same proportion that global warmists do. Those of us who have witnessed the evolution of electronics and computer technology find this kind of revisionist history to be irritating, especially since the most valuable corporation in the world has been spreading this kind of inaccurate cow manure for years and a lot of it has become ingrained in our culture and accepted as truth.
The only ones posting revisionist history here are fireman15 and adorno. . . but they are not very good at it. they have ZERO facts on their side. they only have facturds, i.e., myths to posts. I have rebutted every single one of their fractured facturds. They don't like it.
Oh Swordmaker, you know that much of the time I appreciate you and the cute terminology that you come up with... what fun! Unfortunately, much of the time you do not actually do a very good job refuting what is said here because the facts are often not on your side only your seemingly heartfelt devotion to Apple mythology.
I do admire your knowledge of Apple devices. And because of competition from other innovators these devices have continuously been improved to the point that the modern iPhone and many other Apple devices have become technological marvels.
Where you nearly always run completely afoul of the facts is when you start comparing Apple devices with those which came before them. You simply have very limited knowledge of non-Apple devices. You do not know their history; you do not know how to use them; and you do not know what their capabilities were. So instead you try to completely deny their worth if not their very existence. It would be entirely comical if you were not acting as a mouthpiece for the most valuable corporation in the and doing it in a way that is almost completely malevolent.
Instead of constantly attacking Apples competition, you and the rest of those who admire Apple's products should be thanking Samsung, HTC, Microsoft, and all of the other corporations whose competition has caused Apple to reach for greater and greater technological achievements. Instead yours and Apple's mottoes have been, “All is fair in Love and war.” and “A good offense is the best defense.” This shows through in your posts here and often causes me to wonder whether you merely have a tenuous grasp on reality or if you are just a rude and dishonest person at your core.
Like moths drawn irresistibly to the light, so Apple haters are drawn mindlessly, with little self-awareness, to Apple threads to compulsively make their inane comments and otherwise flit about such threads.
What an ad hominem you start your post with, Fireman15. You denigrate me before you even start, making me "cute." to belittle anything I said. Nice try.
I post actual facts, often with links to the those factual data. You do not, posting your unsupported opinion ex cathedra. You claim your history from the sixties and seventies as proof of your expertise. I pre-date you in technology. . . and have owned a tech business for over 40 years supporting both Apple and Windows tech. I have followed it far closer than you.
You don't use Apple products and don't know them intimately at all. You repeat myths and false reports as if they were absolute truth despite them being debunked multiple times and frequently by authoritative sources.
You claim things for your predecessor devices that are simply not the same as what the Apple does. . . equating tech that is completely different merely because you want it to be the same, while all reviewers say it is NOT, pointing out the degrees of improvements Apple has made, so much so that Apple was awarded a patent for the improvements. YOU, and you alone, claim it does not deserve that patent, wanting desperately for it to be a mere slight improvement, not a technological change. You denigrate the work and the invention that had to occur for multiple inputs to be sensed simultaneously and for software to take action differently than a single sensed touch. "Oh," you say, "its easy to do." It was not, or everyone would have done it. They didn't. They'd been trying to perfect a system for two decades and had not been successful. Apple was.
I challenged you to come up with a predecessor phone that had a large multitouch screen. You point to a MP3 player/DVD player with a 4.1" single touch resistive screen. Right, sure. It was NOT responsive to the challenge. It was not a phone and it was not multitouch. You point out Multitouch NON-SCREEN PADS as if they were somehow responsive to the challenge. . . when they are not. . . even though that was a technology bought by Apple and used on their laptops. It was still NOT a transparent screen that linked the multitouch to the image beneath it which is at least an order or two magnitude of technological difficulty to accomplish that you, in your ignorance, called "simple."
You live in the delusional world of extreme Apple hate. It makes you believe anything negative about Apple without considering the actual facts. You will ignore those actual facts in support of your version of events, no matter how irrational your versions are, or the fact that evidence from the period, and contemporary commentary from authorities in the field do not support your version of history.
I've been maintaining the FreeRepublic Apple Ping List far longer than the iPhone has been in existence, fireman. I posted and pinged the list to articles on the history of the iPhone during the time before you started posting on these threads and am intimately familiar with ALL of the articles, reviews, and commentary on the tech that was available and the complaints and features of the other phones that were available before, during, and after the introduction of the iPhone. I HAD smartphones before the iPhone. . . I helped clients with their smartphones. So don't tell me about my degree of expertise on these devices.
I've programmed a complete accounting package including payroll from scratch and designed and programmed a client intake and management database package, as well as inventory control packages, also from scratch. And, in response to another attack question you posed in another thread, I've built computers from components up, and in fact, back in the mid-1960s as a high school student, I've actually made my own transistor from the silicon, doing the doping by hand, working on a project with Bell Labs. YOU are a dilettante in comparison.
Instead of constantly attacking Apples competition, you and the rest of those who admire Apple's products should be thanking Samsung, HTC, Microsoft, and all of the other corporations whose competition has caused Apple to reach for greater and greater technological achievements. Instead yours and Apple's mottoes have been, All is fair in Love and war. and A good offense is the best defense.
Excuse me, but I am not "constantly attacking Apples (sic) competition. . .", nor do I see Apple enthusiasts constantly doing it, but you and a few other Apple haters are constantly attacking Apple. I have been rebutting YOUR constant invasions of Apple threads.
You don't find me making attacks on the competition in dayglored's Windows threads or ThunderSleep's Android threads bad mouthing those platforms, yet here you are, day-in-and-day-out bad mouthing and attacking Apple with everything you can throw at the wall, true or not, in Apple threads. In fact, you find a lot of people attacking Apple users with epithets like "fanbois," "Apple sheep," "Stupid Apple-Sheeple," "true believers", and "Apple idiots," merely for our choice of what platform or phone we choose to use.
I've been a publisher, an editor, and a published author, writing reviews on computers, mobile devices, and software . . . so, fireman15, I do know the history and the capabilities and the limitations of these predecessor devices.
The Apple's competition are those who have taken the idea that a A good offense is the best defense, not Apple. That is the one Apple originate patent infringement suit. The rest have been the other direction, usually from non-practicing patent trolls who have usually bought non-useful, marginal patents and are trying to monetizing them by stretching one or more of their claims into something that Apple is actually using under one of their or another licensed patent.
Here is a link to the BGR article with a SCRBD of the entire 132 page Samsung Memo of instructions from management to their designers on how to copy the iPhone, proof positive that resulted in the original patent infringement judgements that are STILL wending their way through our glacial courts, and Judge Lucy Koh's blockades to Apple ever getting the case finished:
The original jury judgement was $1.3 billion. Judge Lucy Koh, a South Korean American, on her own keeps trimming that judgement, after originally arbitrarily forcing Apple to cut the number of infringed patents from over 60 down to just 6. . . just because she did not want to try that many, not because Samsung had not infringed them. Now Koh, again on her own, has determined the case has to be retried despite the US Supreme Court ruling in Apple's favor apparently because she did not like the Supreme Court's decision.
Why is it that most stock analysts state the AAPL is actually UNDERVALUED? For its performance, it is way undervalued compared to Amazon, which has made very little in the way of profits in its history.
Amazon's current Price Earnings ratio is 282.13 times earnings but its stock is currently selling for $1111.60. Yet it offers ZERO dividends.
Apple's current price earnings ratio is only 19.6 with a forward looking P/E of 15.2, and is currently selling for $172.50 AND pays dividends, as well as buying back shares.
Apple is a cash machine with $270 Billion in cash more cash than the US treasury has on handand generated a $48 billion profit in fiscal 2017. Yet YOU claim AAPL as a stock with those figures is a BUBBLE? The true bubble is Amazon and TSLA which has NO P/E. . . yet people are speculating on a business that is constantly losing money.
I guess your claims that the iPhone is the only thing that is making money for Apple is just plain wrong!
There is no way that any stock analyst can cause a stock the with the number of AAPL's outstanding shares to go up by merely talking it up. You are completely delusional. Now you seem to think that ALL stock analysts are somehow working in concert to talk up one stock in particular? And they've been doing it for almost twenty years, building one company into the most valuable company in the world? That is really delusional, adorno
BTW, who does that Apple cash stash belong to? Is it discretionary money? It is "cash on hand" that can be spent as the Apple management wishes? So, again, who does that cash belong to?
Do you really not comprehend the concept of a corporation? A fictitious corporate (read literally "in the body") individual? The cash that Apple has belongs to Apple, no one else until Apple's board of directors makes the decision to distribute it to the investors. It does NOT belong to the investors who own shares of Apple Inc., which is obviously what you are getting at. . . but you are wrong. . . just as the investors do not have the right to walk into any Apple inc. properties and walk off with a stapler or an Apple computer sitting on a desk. It is not theirs. The Board of Directors can spend that money as they see fit for the benefit of the corporation. . . within certain explicit constraints of law.
YOU mention Amazon and it's earnings vs stock market valuation. But, Amazon is also a stock bubble, and earnings reflect the true value of the company. IOW, Amazon should not be valued as high as the stockholders have made it. Same with Apple. Yeah,for now, Apple's products are producing decent earnings, but the stock is still way overpriced.
There are certain acceptable and expected price/earnings ratios and some indicate what are termed "bubbles." Amazon's P/E is representative of a classic bubble. Apple's P/E is exactly in the normal range for it's industry. Ergo, it is NOT anywhere close to a bubble. Apple's forward looking P/E of 15 shows it is going in the other direction, not toward a bubble as you seem to think. Amazon is heading in the wrong direction, towards even more danger.
This demonstrates you really don't understand what you are blithering about, or you would never be claiming that investors making Apple at a P/E of 19.5 being a bubble. That is someone who is deranged making insane claims. A bubble is based on valuations with no justification for the valuation placed on the company. With Apple, one third of the valuation is in CASH. . . and another third in actual plant and equipment. . . but YOU claim its valuation is a bubble?!?!? Delusional.
Amazon has no products that are productive in the long run. The hardware they produce is designed to promote the sales of their retail goods and services, nothing more and is sold at a loss. They are a RETAILER who produces NOTHING; they retail other people's products with extremely LOW or non-existent margins, and pays ZERO back to their investors and never has.
Apple, on the other hand, produces actual hardware products, software, and services with high, close to averaging 40% margins, aiming for HIGH PROFITS and in addition pays its investors the biggest dividends in the market (they just passed Exxon in May 2017) having returned more than $220 BILLION to investors at the same time they have built a $269 BILLION cash reserve in just five years. No other business in history has done such a thing. . . and YOU, in your ignorance of financial matter delusions, claim Apple's undervalued stock price is a BUBBLE????!!!! YOU ARE TRULY OFF THE DEEP END.
In other words, you are saying:
"DON'T BOTHER ME WITH FACTS, MY BRAIN IS PERMANENTLY SHUT DOWN DUE TO LACK OF USE."
Got it. Just go on peddling your ignorant propaganda and lies, adorno.
Just because you are inarticulate does not mean that I have to be so you can grasp the nuances of the subject.
My post wasn't for idiotic closed minded asshats like you who post such tripe as you do. The rebuttal evidentiary facts were for the people who might possibly believe your lies, thinking you know what you are talking about when it is so easy to demonstrate you haven't got a clue about the subject.
I am the one that started the thread not the one who "drawn to it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.