|
Post by rickag on Aug 20, 2015 13:14:17 GMT -8
If we don't bounce on spx 2040 back to 2100 it is potentially possible we are starting primary wave iv. Buckle up. I am no good at EW, so I have ask is primary wave iv up or down, I'm guessing down.
|
|
mark
fire starter
Posts: 1,555
|
Post by mark on Aug 20, 2015 13:18:06 GMT -8
Conversely, a couple of large purchases of other companies that are valued at a higher multiples (Netflix, Disney, etc), might have done more for the stock price. I'm not convinced. Let's say Apple makes an offer for Netflix, say $140/share. What would very likely happen is that Netflix shares would pop up to 140 or even higher if the market assumes there may be other bidders or some sort of negotiation that will take place. And, most likely, Apple shares would drop because they are paying a huge multiple for a company that is growing, but whose revenues are still quite a bit lower than Apple's, and when consolidated into Apple, that growth will be diluted. And then of course there is the period of time between offer and finalization of the deal; that could be many months or even more than a year.
|
|
|
Post by archibaldtuttle on Aug 20, 2015 13:22:01 GMT -8
Conversely, a couple of large purchases of other companies that are valued at a higher multiples (Netflix, Disney, etc), might have done more for the stock price. I'm not convinced. Let's say Apple makes an offer for Netflix, say $140/share. What would very likely happen is that Netflix shares would pop up to 140 or even higher if the market assumes there may be other bidders or some sort of negotiation that will take place. And, most likely, Apple shares would drop because they are paying a huge multiple for a company that is growing, but whose revenues are still quite a bit lower than Apple's, and when consolidated into Apple, that growth will be diluted. And then of course there is the period of time between offer and finalization of the deal; that could be many months or even more than a year. I wasn't saying they should buy Netflix now -- way too late. I was saying they should have done it 2 years ago. It was less than half the price then. instead of spending 90B on a buyback that's done little for the stock, they could have spent 25b on Netflix.
|
|
JDSoCal
Member
Aspiring oligarch
Posts: 4,186
|
Post by JDSoCal on Aug 20, 2015 13:55:24 GMT -8
I'm all for increasing the divy, but doubling it is probably not sustainable until we get some real tax reforms (Apple can't just borrow for eternity to send people checks and worry about the consequences later, they aren't the US government). But if the carriers and oil companies can pay 4-5% yields, why can't Apple? It would make AAPL a must-have in all the dividend funds. All the AARP'rs not earning squat on their cash need yield... As for acquisitions, some pretty dopey ideas. Why on earth would Apple want to pay all that money for Netflix instead of just out Netflixing them? And don't even get me started on them buying a car company.
|
|
|
Post by incorrigible on Aug 20, 2015 14:15:17 GMT -8
I'm all for increasing the divy, but doubling it is probably not sustainable until we get some real tax reforms (Apple can't just borrow for eternity to send people checks and worry about the consequences later, they aren't the US government). Easily done with existing cash flow. Edit: typo. Thx chinacat
|
|
|
Post by mace on Aug 20, 2015 14:32:04 GMT -8
I don't know... I'm skeptical that the buyback has done anything for shareholders, honestly. Sure, the buyback has raised Earnings per share by ~10%. But the PE has contracted by at least 10% as well, leading to limited share price appreciation. Is my view about share buy back in general. Good only short to medium term. Long term doesn't make sense.
|
|
Since84
Moderator
To infinity and beyond!
Posts: 3,933
|
Post by Since84 on Aug 20, 2015 14:33:11 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by mace on Aug 20, 2015 14:34:58 GMT -8
Holding large cash hoard could be a negative... subject to stealing by governments and currency headwinds... how good is Luca?
|
|
|
Post by mace on Aug 20, 2015 14:45:31 GMT -8
I'm all for increasing the divy... Second that.
|
|
|
Post by mace on Aug 20, 2015 14:49:11 GMT -8
...As for acquisitions, some pretty dopey ideas. Why on earth would Apple want to pay all that money for Netflix instead of just out Netflixing them? How about can't find enough dedicated software engineers willing to sacrifice their time with lowly rewards... if can do it why not just startups or join Netflix to reap a much higher pay?
|
|
|
Post by mace on Aug 20, 2015 14:52:49 GMT -8
... I was saying they should have done it 2 years ago. It was less than half the price then. instead of spending 90B on a buyback that's done little for the stock, they could have spent 25b on Netflix. Agree. So many companies are very cheap then... guess financial knowledge of TC is not there yet... no worries, opportunities are coming back.
|
|
|
Post by hledgard on Aug 20, 2015 17:48:16 GMT -8
I don't know... I'm skeptical that the buyback has done anything for shareholders, honestly. Sure, the buyback has raised Earnings per share by ~10%. But the PE has contracted by at least 10% as well, leading to limited share price appreciation. Is my view about share buy back in general. Good only short to medium term. Long term doesn't make sense. Count me in this camp too. Apple is throwing money away. Also, I am not sure Apple has the edge it once had.
|
|
|
Post by hledgard on Aug 20, 2015 18:12:37 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by macwire on Aug 20, 2015 18:42:59 GMT -8
-15 spoos handles here overnight.
|
|
|
Post by chasmac on Aug 20, 2015 18:44:27 GMT -8
|
|
mark
fire starter
Posts: 1,555
|
Post by mark on Aug 20, 2015 19:35:21 GMT -8
I'm not convinced. Let's say Apple makes an offer for Netflix, say $140/share. What would very likely happen is that Netflix shares would pop up to 140 or even higher if the market assumes there may be other bidders or some sort of negotiation that will take place. And, most likely, Apple shares would drop because they are paying a huge multiple for a company that is growing, but whose revenues are still quite a bit lower than Apple's, and when consolidated into Apple, that growth will be diluted. And then of course there is the period of time between offer and finalization of the deal; that could be many months or even more than a year. I wasn't saying they should buy Netflix now -- way too late. I was saying they should have done it 2 years ago. It was less than half the price then. instead of spending 90B on a buyback that's done little for the stock, they could have spent 25b on Netflix. Maybe Netflix would have been a good purchase. But waze was a huge miss in my opinion. We talked about it here and other places for months, even years, before Google swept in and took them. I was a user of waze from the start, I mean I was paving roads for them, and KNEW it was one of "the next big things".
|
|
|
Post by sponge on Aug 20, 2015 20:52:46 GMT -8
If apple continues the buyback and dividends at the same pace by 2022 they will save $14 billion that year alone in less dividends. Buybacks also provide for great appreciation with less shares if one looks decades into the future.
|
|
bud777
fire starter
Posts: 1,353
|
Post by bud777 on Aug 21, 2015 0:28:40 GMT -8
My current theory is that the more widely a stock is held, the greater the percentage of owners who buy based on the "greater fool" premise. They don't really care about fundamentals or TA, they just buy hoping that some else will be a greater fool and buy at a higher price later. We have seen evidence of this in the irrational way that the market ignores solid fundamentals, but moves on something like a tweet from Uncle Carl. This kind of investor jumps in, usually too late as the stock is rising, then holds for a while if there is a setback and finally gets impatient and sells, driving the stock down. The decisions are emotional and not based on any particular theory of investing. As I think of it, it may be that the primary value of any investment theory is that it distracts you from the emotion and keeps you in the stock longer.
|
|