chinacat
Moderator
AAPL Long since 2006
Posts: 4,431
|
Post by chinacat on Nov 25, 2023 8:47:03 GMT -8
|
|
coma
Member
Posts: 522
Member is Online
|
Post by coma on Nov 25, 2023 9:04:50 GMT -8
I bought into APPLE after the OSX beta in 2000 and never looked back . . . 😁
|
|
|
Post by hledgard on Nov 25, 2023 15:26:32 GMT -8
Ditto. I used Apple computers since the early 90's and some, especially university, people laughed at me. It wasn't IBM or Microsoft, but I thought my Apple computer was easier to use. I also bought some stock at that time. Whew ! !
|
|
Dave
Member
"It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future." Yogi Berra
Posts: 4,111
|
Post by Dave on Nov 26, 2023 2:20:35 GMT -8
|
|
Dave
Member
"It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future." Yogi Berra
Posts: 4,111
|
Post by Dave on Nov 26, 2023 2:32:34 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Lstream on Nov 26, 2023 5:37:24 GMT -8
Altman is going back to OpenAI, so the part about Microsoft hiring him is outdated.
|
|
chinacat
Moderator
AAPL Long since 2006
Posts: 4,431
|
Post by chinacat on Nov 26, 2023 8:16:02 GMT -8
Anyone who thinks that Apple has no AI strategy knows nothing about Apple.
|
|
4aapl
Moderator
Posts: 3,648
|
Post by 4aapl on Nov 26, 2023 8:27:22 GMT -8
While investments put into MSFT could be instead of into AAPL, I mostly don't see it as a zero sum game. Instead, it is partly a "rising tide raises all boats", but also a "the top companies are worth X". By having some others in the same ballpark, the pricing is a little easier to justify, and so there is less pushback to a large valuation. We may feel that the P/E and other ratios should be more important, and a certain company valuation shouldn't matter, just as a certain dollar value on the stock shouldn't matter. And yet in practice, we know that at least some investors are drawn to or away from a big round number, and that while the timing of a stock split during an upswing and good positive gains for the company may play a big part of it, a stock split does seem to help more than the underlying "Two $50's for your $100" comparison would predict. Currently MSFT has a P/E of about 36.6 with a dividend of about .8%, vs AAPL's P/E of just below 31 and a dividend of around .5%. They are around the same, though the pricing difference might be due to the current growth rate or that MSFT does better at having a wider reach into the corporate market and with subscriptions, both seen as a bit more steady to the sometimes fickle consumer. I don't know how strong MSFT's lock on office is considered these days, but I can say that personally while I made the push over from Word to Text Edit, BBEdit, Pages, SimpleText, or even Terminal, after intensively using Excel nearly 30 years ago and using it from everything from standard spreadsheets, creating web pages, or 3d temperature modeling for a chemical reactor, I just haven't found a good alternative. All of the open office type alternates that I tried were just different enough that I didn't like them, even though my use these days would be much less intensive. But apparently my need hasn't been that high, since I've yet to have excel on this 27" iMac, now 4 years old. I welcome MSFT making it up to this level. I expect that with an additional player at around the same level, it will be easier for AAPL to advance upwards when company news and investors are ready to support such a push.
|
|
|
Post by Luckychoices on Nov 26, 2023 12:19:16 GMT -8
Apple Is Dangerously Close To Losing Its Spot As The Most Valuable StockSupercharged by its AI chops, Microsoft's market value is now $2.8 trillion — just 5.7% shy of Apple's at $2.98 trillion. That means Microsoft's share price only needs to hit 400.53 — it's already at 377.80 — to dethrone Apple as the most valuable S&P 500 company. And given Apple's reliance on now-ubiquitous smartphones, it's only a matter of time when it bows out to faster-growing Microsoft, analysts say. And make no mistake, if Microsoft pulls the jump off, it's due to two letters: AI. Generative AI is already revolutionizing industries. And Microsoft's position with Open AI founder Sam Altman puts it in a class of its own. The fact that Microsoft so quickly moved to hire Altman when he left Open AI signals Microsoft's big bet on the technology, Colas says. Microsoft's profit is seen rising more than 14% in the current fiscal year, topping the anemic 6.9% profit growth expected from Apple. Apple still has no AI strategy. While investments put into MSFT could be instead of into AAPL, I mostly don't see it as a zero sum game. Instead, it is partly a "rising tide raises all boats", but also a "the top companies are worth X". By having some others in the same ballpark, the pricing is a little easier to justify, and so there is less pushback to a large valuation. We may feel that the P/E and other rations should be more important, and a certain company valuation shouldn't matter, just as a certain dollar value on the stock shouldn't matter. And yet in practice, we know that at least some investors are drawn to or away from a big round number, and that while the timing of a stock split during an upswing and good positive gains for the company may play a big part of it, a stock split does seem to help more than the underlying "Two $50's for your $100" comparison would predict. I welcome MSFT making it up to this level. I expect that with an additional player at around the same level, it will be easier for AAPL to advance upwards when company news and investors are ready to support such a push. AAPL/Apple has been an absolutely amazing investment for many of us over the years...it's done much better, for much longer, than most investments. But, is it the #1 investment over the last 20+ years? Heck no! And it's missed being #1 by a lot. Some time ago, I got tired of hearing how *fortunate* Apple investors were...that they just happened to pick a great stock...as if no other stocks would have given such great returns. So I searched and found a stock I'd never heard of previously...Monster Beverage Corporation (MNST). It's done *much* better than AAPL over the last 20 years and gained 132,275% since the first market day of 2001...while AAPL has gained a *relatively* puny 71,587%. Do I regret being invested in AAPL instead of MNST over the years? Not one bit. And I feel the same way about the possibility that Microsoft will soon "dethrone Apple as the most valuable S&P 500 company". In fact, the statements, "Microsoft's profit is seen rising more than 14% in the current fiscal year, topping the anemic 6.9% profit growth expected from Apple. Apple still has no AI strategy." sound like comments an AAPL Bear might make on Seeking Alpha...6.9% growth is *anemic* when compared to 14%? Less than half...sure...anemic?...I don't think so. In any case, check the table below to see the different results from investing $10,000 in each of four stocks 22 years ago. MNST is the winner by far...but I'm still very happy with what AAPL has done in the same time period. If I've made any serious math or entry mistakes in the table, please let me know and I'll fix them. BTW, I am *not* suggesting MNST has given the best return of any stock over the last 22 years...just much more than AAPL.
|
|
4aapl
Moderator
Posts: 3,648
|
Post by 4aapl on Nov 26, 2023 22:13:43 GMT -8
AAPL/Apple has been an absolutely amazing investment for many of us over the years...it's done much better, for much longer, than most investments. Thanks Lucky! If posting this somewhere else, I'm sure a TSLA investor might like to see annualized returns, since TSLA has something like 9 fewer years. I'm always amazed at the annualized returns from AAPL, though they haven't always been steady. Looking at your spreadsheet, if I buy a time machine I see I can do even better if I dumped all of my AAPL when TSLA came about, and moved it to TSLA. Until that time, I'm more than happy that AAPL has yielded something like 30% annualized returns (I think it's actually around 34%) over the past almost 26 years since my first purchase. Anytime you can beat Buffet's long term average for a couple decades shows you are doing pretty well. Thanks AAPL and Apple!
|
|
mark
fire starter
Posts: 1,554
|
Post by mark on Nov 28, 2023 7:13:54 GMT -8
While investments put into MSFT could be instead of into AAPL, I mostly don't see it as a zero sum game. Instead, it is partly a "rising tide raises all boats", but also a "the top companies are worth X". By having some others in the same ballpark, the pricing is a little easier to justify, and so there is less pushback to a large valuation. We may feel that the P/E and other rations should be more important, and a certain company valuation shouldn't matter, just as a certain dollar value on the stock shouldn't matter. And yet in practice, we know that at least some investors are drawn to or away from a big round number, and that while the timing of a stock split during an upswing and good positive gains for the company may play a big part of it, a stock split does seem to help more than the underlying "Two $50's for your $100" comparison would predict. I welcome MSFT making it up to this level. I expect that with an additional player at around the same level, it will be easier for AAPL to advance upwards when company news and investors are ready to support such a push. AAPL/Apple has been an absolutely amazing investment for many of us over the years...it's done much better, for much longer, than most investments. But, is it the #1 investment over the last 20+ years? Heck no! And it's missed being #1 by a lot. Some time ago, I got tired of hearing how *fortunate* Apple investors were...that they just happened to pick a great stock...as if no other stocks would have given such great returns. So I searched and found a stock I'd never heard of previously...Monster Beverage Corporation (MNST). It's done *much* better than AAPL over the last 20 years and gained 132,275% since the first market day of 2001...while AAPL has gained a *relatively* puny 71,587%. Do I regret being invested in AAPL instead of MNST over the years? Not one bit. And I feel the same way about the possibility that Microsoft will soon "dethrone Apple as the most valuable S&P 500 company". In fact, the statements, "Microsoft's profit is seen rising more than 14% in the current fiscal year, topping the anemic 6.9% profit growth expected from Apple. Apple still has no AI strategy." sound like comments an AAPL Bear might make on Seeking Alpha...6.9% growth is *anemic* when compared to 14%? Less than half...sure...anemic?...I don't think so. In any case, check the table below to see the different results from investing $10,000 in each of four stocks 22 years ago. MNST is the winner by far...but I'm still very happy with what AAPL has done in the same time period. If I've made any serious math or entry mistakes in the table, please let me know and I'll fix them. BTW, I am *not* suggesting MNST has given the best return of any stock over the last 22 years...just much more than AAPL. View AttachmentI never bought Monster stock. And sure it is quite clear that it did VERY well over the years. BUT it is very important for an investor to know themselves, and I know that even if I had bought Monster stock, it would have been in much lower quantities than I ever bought Apple stock. So, in the end, regardless of overall returns across the decades, MNST would have had a much lower effect on my portfolio than AAPL did.
|
|