Since84
Moderator
To infinity and beyond!
Posts: 3,933
|
Post by Since84 on May 13, 2015 2:40:18 GMT -8
Good morning everyone. AAPL is GREEN trading at 126.27 +0.40 (0.32%) as of 6:29 in pre-market. Major indices are GREEN as well. Hopefully it will be a GREEN Day. Nada in the news. Not even FUD. Oh, there is speculation on what Uncle Carl will say over at Forbes -- but don't we already know? Have a great day. Let's make money.
|
|
|
Post by phoebear611 on May 13, 2015 3:44:26 GMT -8
The dividend gets paid tomorrow (I believe) which should hopefully provide more green from (at least) the DRPs that are out there - or just folks with more cash that want to reinvest in a solid company.
|
|
|
Post by artman1033 on May 13, 2015 4:01:09 GMT -8
If made a drone, this is what it would do: www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMfTHHLbj5gIMAGINE: it is October 2016. You are at an outdoor concert. Or you are at a political rally. Or you are at a football game. How many will you SEE?
|
|
|
Post by rickag on May 13, 2015 4:11:02 GMT -8
Some one thought it through, liked the ad also.
|
|
|
Post by CdnPhoto on May 13, 2015 4:25:47 GMT -8
I want!! I'm not sure why, or what I'd use if for, but I want!! hmm, isn't that kinda like new Apple products? You're not sure why you need it, but you do?
|
|
|
Post by qualitywte on May 13, 2015 4:26:46 GMT -8
My ProBoard app crashes every time I try to launch AFB. This started since I downloaded the latest iOS on my 5S.
|
|
Since84
Moderator
To infinity and beyond!
Posts: 3,933
|
Post by Since84 on May 13, 2015 4:37:18 GMT -8
I want!! I'm not sure why, or what I'd use if for, but I want!! hmm, isn't that kinda like new Apple products? You're not sure why you need it, but you do? Go to the website. You can pre-order online for $499 with delivery in February 2016. I'm tempted as well.
|
|
|
Post by incorrigible on May 13, 2015 4:41:58 GMT -8
I want!! I'm not sure why, or what I'd use if for, but I want!! hmm, isn't that kinda like new Apple products? You're not sure why you need it, but you do? Me too. I shoot USPSA matches and this would blow the hat-cams out of the water.
|
|
|
Post by redinaustin on May 13, 2015 4:50:42 GMT -8
My ProBoard app crashes every time I try to launch AFB. This started since I downloaded the latest iOS on my 5S. Get Tapatalk - also free and works better
|
|
|
Post by phoebear611 on May 13, 2015 5:02:51 GMT -8
My ProBoard app crashes every time I try to launch AFB. This started since I downloaded the latest iOS on my 5S. Get Tapatalk - also free and works better I had issues with the latest iOS upgrade and my devices - had to wipe them out and reinstall each one of them - nightmare. Ms. "I don't use Watches or any other watch" Congeniality told me yesterday that there seems to be a bug within the devices in general after you upgrade. Being completely tech unsavvy as I am I didn't understand what it was all about but these upgrades seem to be helping some bugs and generating others. ugh.
|
|
|
Post by Odd-Lot Richard on May 13, 2015 5:30:30 GMT -8
My ProBoard app crashes every time I try to launch AFB. This started since I downloaded the latest iOS on my 5S. I still haven't updated yet. I don't know if I can even remember my password.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 13, 2015 5:56:14 GMT -8
I had issues with the latest iOS upgrade and my devices - had to wipe them out and reinstall each one of them - nightmare. Ms. "I don't use Watches or any other watch" Congeniality told me yesterday that there seems to be a bug within the devices in general after you upgrade. Being completely tech unsavvy as I am I didn't understand what it was all about but these upgrades seem to be helping some bugs and generating others. ugh. You're on the east coast --don't you mean consigliere? Here on the west coast, we call them concierges.
|
|
|
Post by dmiller on May 13, 2015 6:21:03 GMT -8
I got Tapatalk (Proboards was accidentally deleted from my iPhone and has also been removed from the App Store);
but;
I can't log in to Tapatalk. I've tried my username/password and email/password and it won't take them, even though they're correct. It recognizes that my account exists (for instance, if I try to create a new account with my username) but it still won't let me log in.
So I've given up; just using the mobile version of the site now on the iPhone.
|
|
|
Post by Luckychoices on May 13, 2015 10:38:27 GMT -8
If made a drone, this is what it would do: www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMfTHHLbj5gIMAGINE: it is October 2016. You are at an outdoor concert. Or you are at a political rally. Or you are at a football game. How many will you SEE? My best guess? 0I’ve owned a DJI Phantom 1 quadcopter for almost two years and can attest to it being very fun to fly and photograph/video from the air. This is a photo I took last year after I was able to launch the quadcopter from our kitchen floor after our roof was removed during the first stages of our remodel. The Lily Drone Camera doesn't seem to require anyone to fly it because the flying is all programed into the software of the unit and the tracker. But any mechanized flying device can fail (motor, battery, electronics, etc) while flying and be dangerous to anyone below who could be hit. The Lily weighs 2.8 lbs so image the consequences of that falling into a crowd from any height whatever, let alone falling into a crowd with props rotating. As a result of the bad press quadcopters have already received (usually as a result of unsafe flying by the operators) the FAA is in the process of providing rules for quadcopter operation. www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/media/021515_sUAS_Summary.pdfThe most relevant item is this one: Small unmanned aircraft may not operate over any persons not directly involved in the operation. Quadcopters have already been banned from National Parks because of the potential dangers to others and because the associated noise and visuals detract from the park experience. The Lily Drone Camera may be turn out to be a really fun device to track and record photos and videos of one's outdoor activities but don't expect to see them flying legally over any crowd of people. And frankly, after reading of the idiotic behavior of some quadcopter operators over the last two years (flying in an airport's final approach path, etc), that can only be a good thing.
|
|
bud777
fire starter
Posts: 1,352
|
Post by bud777 on May 13, 2015 10:39:42 GMT -8
I posted this in Braeburn in response to the usual mindless blather about growth;
I am always mystified by discussion of growth that are based on the size of the company and ignore basics like market penetration and production capacity. If Apple had 60% of a market, like they did in iPads, these arguments might have some credibility, but when Apple has a 20% market share in iPhones and a superior product along with the ability so scale production, I don’t care how big they are, they can double, maybe more. The same holds true for Macs. I cannot claim to know what will happen, but I am tired of these mindless assertions that Apple’s sheer size is a sufficient argument that it cannot grow. We have been hearing it for years and it has been proven false. I would like to hear one valid reason why Apple cannot double the top and bottom lines. And if you use the phase “Law of Large Numbers” I will hunt you down with dogs.
I don't know, maybe I am just getting crotchety in my old age.
|
|
|
Post by tuffett on May 13, 2015 10:41:00 GMT -8
Apple Watch "stand" tracking needs some serious adjustment. Apparently I've only been standing for one hour so far today, despite being out of my seat several times.
|
|
4aapl
Moderator
Posts: 3,635
|
Post by 4aapl on May 13, 2015 12:05:54 GMT -8
Hmmm, seems like it's being held down again. This time I decided to purchase a little.
Jan '17 115-150 BCS @ 13.7 with the stock at 126 That puts the break-even below 129 (just a few points from here), 100% gain at about 142.5, and potentially up to a 150% gain
The trade filled instantly even though just 5 minutes to close...often it sits for at least a few seconds if priced at the borderline of acceptable to the writer. Looks like I didn't negotiate well enough, but with time short I didn't try to save a nickel or dime. Too bad....no free dinner out of the deal.
Looking at the past 2 weeks, AAPL has matched the market fairly well. When that changes, or the market recovers, we should see some gain. And with WWDC coming up, that could be a lift too....but I didn't feel like buying any near term options today.
Good luck all.
|
|
|
Post by The Big Toe on May 13, 2015 12:31:01 GMT -8
I posted this in Braeburn in response to the usual mindless blather about growth; I am always mystified by discussion of growth that are based on the size of the company and ignore basics like market penetration and production capacity. If Apple had 60% of a market, like they did in iPads, these arguments might have some credibility, but when Apple has a 20% market share in iPhones and a superior product along with the ability so scale production, I don’t care how big they are, they can double, maybe more. The same holds true for Macs. I cannot claim to know what will happen, but I am tired of these mindless assertions that Apple’s sheer size is a sufficient argument that it cannot grow. We have been hearing it for years and it has been proven false. I would like to hear one valid reason why Apple cannot double the top and bottom lines. And if you use the phase “Law of Large Numbers” I will hunt you down with dogs. I don't know, maybe I am just getting crotchety in my old age. I will give it my rookie and"Dumb Bunny" try. When I look at AAPL, I see several companies in one. The products are growing very well. The issue I see is that 20-25% of the company is an investment firm / mutual fund (cash & equivalents). The iProducts portion is growing at 20%+, but the investment portion is limited to probably around 10% or lower on average. I think the cash is what is holding back the PE ratio. I could be totally wrong on this as I have yet to start drinking today, and I function much better after a few brews.
|
|
mark
fire starter
Posts: 1,552
|
Post by mark on May 13, 2015 12:59:03 GMT -8
Hmmm, seems like it's being held down again. This time I decided to purchase a little. Jan '17 115-150 BCS @ 13.7 with the stock at 126 That puts the break-even below 129 (just a few points from here), 100% gain at about 142.5, and potentially up to a 150% gain That's almost exactly the same potential gain as the Jan '17 120/140 BCS @ 7.95 that I entered a few days ago. Also pretty close to the same breakeven. Ha. I said the same thing last week when the order filled immediately just a few minutes before the close. Could've saved a nickel or a dime probably. But I wanted that position, and I wanted it THAT DAY, so I was willing to eat the nickel or the dime. I am a little leery of "the market". First of all, this incredible volatility in bonds can't be a good thing - except perhaps for bond traders. Second of all, the Greek thing is probably going to blow up pretty soon and that's sure to spook "the market" a bit. Third of all, it's May and we're entering the period of "sell in May and go away".
|
|
mark
fire starter
Posts: 1,552
|
Post by mark on May 13, 2015 13:04:14 GMT -8
When I look at AAPL, I see several companies in one. The products are growing very well. The issue I see is that 20-25% of the company is an investment firm / mutual fund (cash & equivalents). The iProducts portion is growing at 20%+, but the investment portion is limited to probably around 10% or lower on average. I think the cash is what is holding back the PE ratio. If Apple could get a return on their cash (investments) of 10%, that would be awesome (it would add $17B in earnings this year!). But they aren't. I think it's yielding about 1% or perhaps a bit less. I'm not sure what mechanism would cause the cash to reduce P/E. Just value the company as if it had no cash at all and the P/E is still the same more or less (because the cash doesn't generate [much] profit).
|
|
|
Post by 2centsplus on May 13, 2015 17:28:54 GMT -8
Consider this:
Suppose you know of a company that you think has a good probability of growing at 20-25% for the next couple of years. After that you are not sure what will happen to it, but you think it will probably be at least some kind of average company. Yet the market for whatever reason currently values the company at a PE of 10-15 after cash and has done this for years. What is the best way to profit from this situation? Short-term options? LEAPS? Stock?
|
|
|
Post by 2centsplus on May 13, 2015 17:48:05 GMT -8
When I look at AAPL, I see several companies in one. The products are growing very well. The issue I see is that 20-25% of the company is an investment firm / mutual fund (cash & equivalents). The iProducts portion is growing at 20%+, but the investment portion is limited to probably around 10% or lower on average. I think the cash is what is holding back the PE ratio. If Apple could get a return on their cash (investments) of 10%, that would be awesome (it would add $17B in earnings this year!). But they aren't. I think it's yielding about 1% or perhaps a bit less. I'm not sure what mechanism would cause the cash to reduce P/E. Just value the company as if it had no cash at all and the P/E is still the same more or less (because the cash doesn't generate [much] profit). It would be nice to get some return on that cash. Personally I would like to see them get the 10% by investing in shares of GOOG and FB, with the bonus that after a number of years they will come to own both companies.
|
|
|
Post by archibaldtuttle on May 13, 2015 17:51:56 GMT -8
2centplus: It all depends on your risk tolerance. The potential rewards from each method differ, and decrease as the risk decreases.
AAPL stock is a very good bet over the next few years and quite low risk in my opinion. But in a conservative scenario it may *only* increase 15-20% or so over the next couple years. In that conservative scenario, LEAPS would increase more but come with greater risk, and may not work out at all depending on what strike you choose.
Personally I am invested in in-the-money Jan 2016s and 2017 Leaps but I am still in my 30s so am not close to retirement. For someone with a shorter time horizon and lower risk tolerance, a different decision may be appropriate.
|
|
|
Post by 2centsplus on May 13, 2015 18:06:56 GMT -8
2centplus: It all depends on your risk tolerance. The potential rewards from each method differ, and decrease as the risk decreases. AAPL stock is a very good bet over the next few years and quite low risk in my opinion. But in a conservative scenario it may *only* increase 15-20% or so over the next couple years. In that conservative scenario, LEAPS would increase more but come with greater risk, and may not work out at all depending on what strike you choose. Personally I am invested in in-the-money Jan 2016s and 2017 Leaps but I am still in my 30s so am not close to retirement. For someone with a shorter time horizon and lower risk tolerance, a different decision may be appropriate. Thanks for the reply. I agree with everything you say and am invested the same - in 2016 and 2017 Leaps. Bit of a crapshoot, but you gotta like the odds! Glad to know someone else is thinking the same.
|
|
4aapl
Moderator
Posts: 3,635
|
Post by 4aapl on May 13, 2015 19:58:26 GMT -8
I agree with everything you say and am invested the same - in 2016 and 2017 Leaps. Bit of a crapshoot, but you gotta like the odds! Glad to know someone else is thinking the same. If you can tie down a range that you expect the stock to be in just a little, spreads can return even more than just buying calls. You sell off the lottery ticket of having the stock beat your wildest dreams, but you also get a lower cost basis and thus earn a higher percentage in this range plus out of it a little. For example (making up numbers here, but you get the idea) Let's say you can buy ITM 2017 leaps at 120 for 30 each But you expect AAPL will go up no more than 20% per year. Using today's price, and approximating this year to be half over, you get 126 * 1.1 * 1.2 =$166 Let's say you could write jan '17 calls with a strike of 170 for $5 each, making a 120-170 spread for $25. Comparing the two choices (straight calls vs a spread) Breakeven price $150 vs $145 100% gain at $180 vs $170 So at a price of $180 or lower, you'd be better off with the spread. And the price at which the trade breaks even is lower. You would want to take into account that you had to pay 20% more for the straight leap. You either have that lower cost upfront, or you roll it into your purchase, thus instead of just buying 5 leaps you could buy 6 spreads. Most of the time it makes sense, if you're ok getting rid of the lottery ticket side of things (unlimited upside!!!). When I first got into options I used straight calls, and at the time AAPL was gaining wonderfully. I would normally shoot for 300% gains, and often made that. And occasionally other posters made as much as the mythical 1000% gain. Since switching to spreads for most of my options trades, probably 10-12 years ago, I also sometimes made 300% gains, though these days I normally shoot for closer to the money spreads that can potentially give gains of 80-150%. They are slightly more difficult since you have to pick both sides of the spread, but the range of choices (from those ones that might gain 300%, down to ones that potentially give gains of less than 100%, but often do so even if the stock doesn't move up from the current price) lets you pick and choose quite a bit towards your risk/reward ratio that you want.
|
|
4aapl
Moderator
Posts: 3,635
|
Post by 4aapl on May 13, 2015 20:14:06 GMT -8
That's almost exactly the same potential gain as the Jan '17 120/140 BCS @ 7.95 that I entered a few days ago. Also pretty close to the same break-even. Yep, I bought some '17 120-160's that day in the Roth. To me these last 2 weeks have been some bouncing with higher lows, that have generally matched the market. I think pretty soon one of these bounces will break out a bit, and so wanted to pick up a bit more. I'm ready to switch some stock over and go bigger, but just didn't have the time or conviction today. Ha. I said the same thing last week when the order filled immediately just a few minutes before the close. Could've saved a nickel or a dime probably. But I wanted that position, and I wanted it THAT DAY, so I was willing to eat the nickel or the dime. Exactly! This was on 40, so a dime would add up to $400. But I was happy to just get the trade done, since the past 2 weeks makes me expect a 1.5-2.5 point bounce tomorrow. And IMO it's just a matter of time until AAPL moves out of this range, whether that's before or part of a small run-up to WWDC. I am a little leery of "the market". First of all, this incredible volatility in bonds can't be a good thing - except perhaps for bond traders. Second of all, the Greek thing is probably going to blow up pretty soon and that's sure to spook "the market" a bit. Third of all, it's May and we're entering the period of "sell in May and go away". There's always things going on. Sometimes they get enough shock or attention to cause some spooking. More often they are the scapegoat for normal market moves. I thought someone (Ken Fisher?) put the Greek debt into perspective a while ago, and it turned out it really was small potatoes in the grand scheme of things. It's a worry wall thing, but not anywhere near the order of a black swan problem. I wonder if those oil storage problems that were expected to happen around June will come about. I haven't followed too closely lately, though I still have some BP from a while ago, and have been thinking about purchasing a good chunk of Chevron, though COP and XOM are sometimes tempting. I expect them to come back eventually, and currently pay a good dividend. But it would partially be a hedge on higher energy costs.
|
|
JDSoCal
Member
Aspiring oligarch
Posts: 4,183
|
Post by JDSoCal on May 13, 2015 23:04:30 GMT -8
I agree with everything you say and am invested the same - in 2016 and 2017 Leaps. Bit of a crapshoot, but you gotta like the odds! Glad to know someone else is thinking the same. If you can tie down a range that you expect the stock to be in just a little, spreads can return even more than just buying calls. You sell off the lottery ticket of having the stock beat your wildest dreams, but you also get a lower cost basis and thus earn a higher percentage in this range plus out of it a little. For example (making up numbers here, but you get the idea) Let's say you can buy ITM 2017 leaps at 120 for 30 each But you expect AAPL will go up no more than 20% per year. Using today's price, and approximating this year to be half over, you get 126 * 1.1 * 1.2 =$166 Let's say you could write jan '17 calls with a strike of 170 for $5 each, making a 120-170 spread for $25. Comparing the two choices (straight calls vs a spread) Breakeven price $150 vs $145 100% gain at $180 vs $170 So at a price of $180 or lower, you'd be better off with the spread. And the price at which the trade breaks even is lower. You would want to take into account that you had to pay 20% more for the straight leap. You either have that lower cost upfront, or you roll it into your purchase, thus instead of just buying 5 leaps you could buy 6 spreads. Most of the time it makes sense, if you're ok getting rid of the lottery ticket side of things (unlimited upside!!!). When I first got into options I used straight calls, and at the time AAPL was gaining wonderfully. I would normally shoot for 300% gains, and often made that. And occasionally other posters made as much as the mythical 1000% gain. Since switching to spreads for most of my options trades, probably 10-12 years ago, I also sometimes made 300% gains, though these days I normally shoot for closer to the money spreads that can potentially give gains of 80-150%. They are slightly more difficult since you have to pick both sides of the spread, but the range of choices (from those ones that might gain 300%, down to ones that potentially give gains of less than 100%, but often do so even if the stock doesn't move up from the current price) lets you pick and choose quite a bit towards your risk/reward ratio that you want. I agree with your take on this long-debated topic. However, correct me if I am wrong, but spreads are never taxed as long-term cap gains, unlike straight options, not even LEAPs... And I agree, I am also looking at the supermajors.
|
|
|
Post by mace on May 14, 2015 0:33:17 GMT -8
However, correct me if I am wrong, but spreads are never taxed as long-term cap gains, unlike straight options, not even LEAPs... Long LEAPS is long after 1 year. Short LEAPS is always short.
|
|
mark
fire starter
Posts: 1,552
|
Post by mark on May 14, 2015 4:09:29 GMT -8
However, correct me if I am wrong, but spreads are never taxed as long-term cap gains, unlike straight options, not even LEAPs... Long LEAPS is long after 1 year. Short LEAPS is always short. I discovered this fact recently and it really doesn't make sense. But I'll take it. I have an old 400/500 BCS (now 57.14/71.43) with massive gains in the [long] 400 and massive losses in the [short] 500. Since those massive gains are long-term, and the massive losses are short-term, it means that I can take as much short-term gain as I want this year and balance it against that huge short-term loss (after I dispose of those 500s, 71.43s now). Then after balancing the remainder of short-term and long-term, the remainder is taxed at long-term CG rates. Kind of crazy.
|
|
mark
fire starter
Posts: 1,552
|
Post by mark on May 14, 2015 4:12:25 GMT -8
There's always things going on. Sometimes they get enough shock or attention to cause some spooking. More often they are the scapegoat for normal market moves. For regular stock holdings, I wouldn't worry about spooky short-term events. But for options, there's always the time issue, if the spook happens at an inopportune time, you can get slaughtered. I bought some XOM and XLE when oil was in the 40s and "everyone" was saying it's going back down to 20. I figure oil's got to come back someday and I may as well have some sort of way to ride it up.
|
|