Posted on 09/13/2010 5:16:04 PM PDT by Swordmaker
“No, that’s not inflammatory at all! Be careful, stripes1776 will be along to report you to the moderators”
I doubt it.
“It’s simple math”
Then it should be easy for you to post.
Yes, it would be easy, practically trivial.
Yeah you’re a saint swordmaker, you never call anyone a liar.
No, he just loves to through out the charge of “spreading FUD” with reckless abandon...
Microsoft makes ZERO notebooks, Puget. They do not "own" that market. . . they cannot "own" that market because they do not even compete in that market. Your claim is false on its face.
There is no "reckless abandon" about it... it always intended and specific and well reasoned with proofs attached... with links to that proof. You spread FUD. I stand on that judgment.
Not a single ounce of integrity. Must be subliminal messages coming over the screen.
iOS changed the definition for a smart phone. We are now in a new market, with RIM and Nokia running on momentum (people are already asking for the Nokia CEO's head, asking when they'll switch to Android). iOS did not enter a market already filled, it entered an empty one for its paradigm and took sales from the existing market. Android succeeded because it was a "good enough" alternative people who wanted a phone using the new paradigm, but didn't want or couldn't afford an iPhone. So now you have the original and the cheaper copy (which is constantly getting better). Where is the room for another inferior copy?
Best Buy does not represent the market. And the laptop and desktop - the PC - market is still growing at 24% annually.
Best Buy is a good representative of the retail market, being the largest in the East and expanding internationally. Your 24% growth figure does not count the iPad, or Android copies (which as you know will sell more due to being cheaper). Face it, tablets are cannibalizing notebooks, and that will only increase. That means Microsoft's market for Windows will shrink.
Let the phone hardware experts do the hardware, let the software experts do the software. NO COMPANY is expert at everything.
Really? Apple makes the best hardware and has the operating systems Microsoft always aims to copy. Apparently one company is capable of it.
Closed, locked-in, non-competitive markets are typically stagnant; dynamic, competitive markets are where you get innovation.
Apple is spurred to innovation because Apple needs to always stay ahead of the copiers or else the company will become a producer of commodity products. Apple begins the death watch when the innovation stops.
Microsoft and Apple are more profitable on a margin basis, and Microsoft is considerably more profitable on an absolute dollar basis as well.
Microsoft's profits will keep rolling on in momentum for quite a long time. Still looking for a solid history of innovation and growth in new markets to support a high valuation. Chirp... chirp....
Have you seen the recent FR post?
"The top five publicly-traded companies, based on full market values, are:"
1. Exxon Mobil (XOM) - $310.45B
2. Apple (AAPL) - $252.66B
3. Microsoft (MSFT) - $219.19B
4. Berkshire-Hathaway (BRKA) - 206.70B
5. Wal-Mart (WMT) - $193.28B
Passing Wal-Mart happened a while ago. Apple hit $200B back in March. $100B was only three years ago. It's only a matter of keeping up the rate, and even a much slower rate would still do it within a couple years. Whether Apple can sustain that kind of growth is the question.
Hey Sword,
How many notebooks ship WITHOUT Windows installed?
Go into Best Buy, or Office Depot. Go to HP or Dell's site. Visit NewEgg. You'll find they come with Windows. Not OSX, not Linux - Windows.
That's called owning a market. You totally dominate the market that you service. In this case, Microsoft is THE market for notebook operating systems.
Give up trying to play cute words games - you really suck at it...
And I stand on the judgment that you are a liar.
Never could admit that Microsoft has higher margins than Apple, could you? Never could admit that Google has higher margins than Apple, could you?
You cannot even acknowledge PROVEN FACTS, can you?
I guess we can change that from liar to delusional liar...
Really? Then why does Microsoft spend MORE on R&D (meaning not copying), and yet still has a higher profit margin than Apple?
Maybe Apple doesn't execute on their ideas very well, and it takes Microsoft to make them profitable and attractive. After all, when you sell 20 copies of Windows for every copy of OSX, you must be doing something right for your customers.
Microsoft's profits will keep rolling on in momentum for quite a long time. Still looking for a solid history of innovation and growth in new markets to support a high valuation. Chirp... chirp....
Hmmm... You hold up Apple as the paragon of innovation and design, and Microsoft as a company that doesn't innovate, just copies. Yet who makes more money? Heck, who SPENDS more money on R&D? Who makes more profit?
Maybe your assumption is flawed - maybe it's not the flashy "innovator" that is a successful company, but the mundane, just-get-it-done company that dominates its markets that is successful?
Bottom line: Microsoft sells more, makes more, and keeps a higher percentage of what they make, as compared to Apple. They're financially more successful than Apple. Can't really deny that at all, can you?
Apple's revenue and margins have not sustained that kind of growth - classic sign it's a bubble. It may inflate a lot more, but it shows all the signs of a bubble, and the pop will be loud and harsh...
Even you admitted you see know sane reason why Apple should be higher valued than XOM, that it should be the most valuable company in the world. If it closes in on that point, it's bubble all the way!
Lower revenue, smaller profit margins, and declining market share relative to its competitors - those aren't the signs of a company poised to take over the world!
Good time to but their stock then eh.
Good time to BUY, not but
I mean they are THE MOST VALUABLE COMPANY IN THE WORLD!!!!!
A good time was in the late 90s when I was thinking of buying as Jobs came back, but I was just starting a family so didn’t put down the ~$2,000 on Apple that I wanted to around $6 a share and several stock splits ago.
Very. Dumb. Mistake.
hind sight and the stock market go hand in hand.
IMO their price is a bubble. They don’t have the numbers to justify that price. Someone is paying it though, probably those that haven’t learned the value of hindsight.
A twelve year long bubble for one company?
Even you admitted you see know sane reason why Apple should be higher valued than XOM
I didn't see how Apple could become higher-valued than XOM. But the market will decide. I've been wrong before.
Lower revenue, smaller profit margins, and declining market share relative to its competitors - those aren't the signs of a company poised to take over the world!
Constant, successful, highly profitable branching out into new markets. Almost constant high growth in profits and sales in all markets year after year for a decade. That is the sign of a company poised to take over the world. Because ONE (and only one) product on one carrier per market isn't growing as fast as usually lower-priced, commodity competitors from several different companies on all carriers is not a reason to worry.
Look at the iPhone's actual competitors. Your great success stories were the Droid X with 150K sales in the first week, the EVO 4g with 150K the first weekend, the Samsung Galaxy with a million in 45 days. The iPhone 4 shipped 1.7 million in the first weekend, 3 million in 3 weeks.
“The iPhone 4 shipped 1.7 million in the first weekend, 3 million in 3 weeks.”
And yet their market share is on the decline.
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.