Since84
Moderator
To infinity and beyond!
Posts: 3,933
|
Post by Since84 on Dec 20, 2018 3:45:06 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by incorrigible on Dec 20, 2018 5:31:16 GMT -8
That's just ridiculous. Unacceptable IMO.
|
|
Since84
Moderator
To infinity and beyond!
Posts: 3,933
|
Post by Since84 on Dec 20, 2018 6:59:04 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by sponge on Dec 20, 2018 8:33:45 GMT -8
Well I am typing this on miy new iPad Pro. I have to admit that the FaceID is working much better then I expected. This is a very solid and much improved iPad from last year. They should sell a boat load of these babies.
I think that if we had a major correction to the bottom, today or tomorrow will be the days. My target is between 150-152.
|
|
|
Post by archibaldtuttle on Dec 20, 2018 8:59:13 GMT -8
For those who support Apple’s decision to have their cash go towards buyback and dividends. If they had kept all their cash, they would currently have around $410B. Today's market cap is 755B.
From 2005-2012, in the days when AAPL kept its cash and its value was "discounted," Apple was valued around 5x times cash. Surely Apple would still be valued at least 2x cash now...
Thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by hledgard on Dec 20, 2018 9:03:52 GMT -8
To appeal to the emerging markets like India and Africa, perhaps Apple will introduce an "iPhone Lite".
|
|
|
Post by audiosculpture12 on Dec 20, 2018 9:37:15 GMT -8
For those who support Apple’s decision to have their cash go towards buyback and dividends. If they had kept all their cash, they would currently have around $410B. Today's market cap is 755B. From 2005-2012, in the days when AAPL kept its cash and its value was "discounted," Apple was valued around 5x times cash. Surely Apple would still be valued at least 2x cash now... Thoughts? That's...actually kinda shocking
|
|
4aapl
Moderator
Posts: 3,632
|
Post by 4aapl on Dec 20, 2018 9:41:29 GMT -8
From 2005-2012, in the days when AAPL kept its cash and its value was "discounted," Apple was valued around 5x times cash. Surely Apple would still be valued at least 2x cash now... Thoughts? It seems there never is a "surely" or absolute value in the stock valuation of a company. One can get pissed off as much as they want that another company is valued differently than Apple (I know I have, mostly in the past), and exclaim "It's not right" or "It's not fair!" as much as they want. In the end, each company is different, and it's investors that give it that valuation are different. Like now, I would have through 16 or 15 would have been the trailing P/E floor. In 2008 I believe it got down to the mid-9's, where the big oil companies (XOM previously had the largest market cap) had been. But that was actually during a big downturn/recession, the largest we're likely to live through. That time was different. Right? With decreasing revenue and everything. Personally, I never felt much or any extra value was given to AAPL based on Apple's cash pile. Maybe there's always a way to feel "It's not fair!". AAPL is down a third from it's intraday top now, setting it back to levels put in 13-14 months ago. While I'd like to think this is the low, I'd feel much more secure about that if the market as a whole was down that much. Instead, the S&P is "only" down 16%, or a touch less than half of AAPL's decline. If it were instead down 22-26%, I could see this being the big drop before/during a minor recession, and then take a couple years to dig out. AAPL should recover some once results are in, but that's not for another month and a half. If the don't give any updates before then, we can hope that the likes of UPS/Fedex, Visa/MC, or Amazon/Target/Walmart can come out and say that data is up X% YOY. Combined with other potential positive news in the future, the dig-out can begin before Apple gives it's numbers.
|
|
|
Post by rickag on Dec 20, 2018 9:47:16 GMT -8
For those who support Apple’s decision to have their cash go towards buyback and dividends. If they had kept all their cash, they would currently have around $410B. Today's market cap is 755B. From 2005-2012, in the days when AAPL kept its cash and its value was "discounted," Apple was valued around 5x times cash. Surely Apple would still be valued at least 2x cash now... Thoughts? I think part of Apple’s concern was all the global taxing athorities looking to take a large chunk of their profits.
|
|
|
Post by longsince98 on Dec 20, 2018 9:47:53 GMT -8
For those who support Apple’s decision to have their cash go towards buyback and dividends. If they had kept all their cash, they would currently have around $410B. Today's market cap is 755B. From 2005-2012, in the days when AAPL kept its cash and its value was "discounted," Apple was valued around 5x times cash. Surely Apple would still be valued at least 2x cash now... Thoughts? I actually don’t totally understand the value of a company buyng back its shares, beyond the theoretical value of less shares increasing the price in supply vs demand. But I don’t think investors buy that way - they buy based on price vs fundimental, news or tech information. The part I don’t totally comprehend is how it benefits Apple. If they had the cash, they could do significant things with it. If their aim is to arrive at little/no cash, I dont see what that gets them. They loose that liquidity, and if they ever needed the cash again and had to raise thru equity, the stock would likely be in pretty bad shape. If anyone has insight into this stuff, I’d like to learn. Thanks
|
|
4aapl
Moderator
Posts: 3,632
|
Post by 4aapl on Dec 20, 2018 10:04:51 GMT -8
To appeal to the emerging markets like India and Africa, perhaps Apple will introduce an "iPhone Lite". We're helping a friend look at cell plans for her and her daughter. Currently at Target or Walmart, you can get an iPhone 6 with 64GB for $180, or a refurbished one for $160. This isn't quite the $50 level that some phone plans are selling a cheap android smartphone for, but it seems like it's in the right ballpark. OTOH, about a month ago there was an article (by someone from India) saying that Apple had the wrong attitude there, that "they" didn't want old technology. While I see the point, I also don't see Apple selling a device that costs, say, $600 to make (with an ASP of around $850 for a ~40% margin), for only $200. That just won't make sense. I would like to see lower cost models too, if they maintain a double digit margin (that may mean 10% instead of 40%, but could be worth it by adding to the platform and services) and don't cannibalize higher end sales too much. But the differentiation is tough. With the iPods, they managed it by size, making a smaller screen for a smaller footprint, or even axing the screen entirely. I put "they" in quotes because I think it's hard for someone to fully appreciate the variety of views over a billion people must have. Obviously there are a lot of differences in that huge group, and one method isn't right for everyone. But having just received an iPhone 5C from my parents for my son to use (after they upgraded), I'm reminded of Apple trying a Lite version before. While it didn't sell as well as some hoped, and wasn't priced as low as some hoped, some still bought it. Nothing is going to be the perfect solution for "everyone", but like was said here the other day, I'm sure Apple is putting a lot of thought into this.
|
|
|
Post by gtrplyr on Dec 20, 2018 12:03:19 GMT -8
For those who support Apple’s decision to have their cash go towards buyback and dividends. If they had kept all their cash, they would currently have around $410B. Today's market cap is 755B. From 2005-2012, in the days when AAPL kept its cash and its value was "discounted," Apple was valued around 5x times cash. Surely Apple would still be valued at least 2x cash now... Thoughts? I think part of Apple’s concern was all the global taxing athorities looking to take a large chunk of their profits. That is pretty shocking ..... I think many of on us on this boards would have been fine with several acquisitions that never happened: Netflix, Waze, Spotify,YouTube ... but Apple's management has shown a consistent lack of interest in growing AAPL through purchases .... Even if you look at what they have in the bank now ... which I believe is above $200 Billion that's still WAY undervalued .... it's criminal how this stock is treated.
|
|
|
Post by gtrplyr on Dec 20, 2018 12:17:47 GMT -8
I'd bet Buffett is buying shares like crazy right now ..... the man knows how to spot a bargain.
As much as I love Apple buying back at these levels .... I'm ready to bottom.
|
|
|
Post by hledgard on Dec 20, 2018 13:17:45 GMT -8
Thanks 4aapl for a superb assessment ! !
|
|
stub
Member
The fix is in. Be patient. Don't panic.
Posts: 300
|
Post by stub on Dec 20, 2018 14:20:16 GMT -8
AH action is up .71% & 1.2M volume.
hmmm...
|
|
stub
Member
The fix is in. Be patient. Don't panic.
Posts: 300
|
Post by stub on Dec 20, 2018 14:27:08 GMT -8
look at it this way... how many more excuses for shocks do the EO's have at this point? They pretty much pulled out all the stops (I think). Phoney trade war Fed didn't NOT raise int rate The ususal iPhone FUD various Wash DC political hyjinx ummm, what else... anybody? So perhaps this IS the bottom. I tkought the Fed did raise interest rates? "Fed didn't NOT raise int rate" meaning they did, sorry about the double negative, my database programmer is showing. ... but isn't it funny how they're milking that one, as in some people just got the news today. LOL! Games friends, games. It's always darkest before the dawn.
|
|
|
Post by hledgard on Dec 20, 2018 14:44:31 GMT -8
I enjoyed the double negative. Thought it characterized the situation nicely.
|
|
|
Post by rickag on Dec 20, 2018 17:15:08 GMT -8
I tkought the Fed did raise interest rates? "Fed didn't NOT raise int rate" meaning they did, sorry about the double negative, my database programmer is showing. ... but isn't it funny how they're milking that one, as in some people just got the news today. LOL! Games friends, games. It's always darkest before the dawn. Ooppps my embarrassment is showing.
|
|
ono
Member
compensation
Posts: 537
|
Post by ono on Dec 20, 2018 17:18:56 GMT -8
I think part of Apple’s concern was all the global taxing athorities looking to take a large chunk of their profits. That is pretty shocking ..... I think many of on us on this boards would have been fine with several acquisitions that never happened: Netflix, Waze, Spotify, YouTube ... All good examples. Waze seemed like a no-brainer. I would like to think they were outbid. Tivo (at that time for some patents and commited installed base). Even Roku. Maybe some of those that Amazon acquired. Maybe not.
|
|
|
Post by rickag on Dec 21, 2018 11:08:01 GMT -8
That is pretty shocking ..... I think many of on us on this boards would have been fine with several acquisitions that never happened: Netflix, Waze, Spotify, YouTube ... All good examples. Waze seemed like a no-brainer. I would like to think they were outbid. Tivo (at that time for some patents and commited installed base). Even Roku. Maybe some of those that Amazon acquired. Maybe not. Agree with Waze. For any large US companies like Netflix, they would either have to borrow more or repatriate overseas cash at a 35% tax rate.
|
|