Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Marketwatch)   Following a 7 for 1 split, Apple's first affordable product is its stock   (marketwatch.com ) divider line
    More: Spiffy  
•       •       •

2447 clicks; posted to Business » on 08 Jun 2014 at 11:58 AM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



64 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2014-06-08 11:31:56 AM  
I don't see what gas Apple has left in its tank. Tablet sales are down 10% from last year. Everyone who wanted one - has one.  Smart watches are a stupid idea, as is Google Glass.  The market for doo-dads is saturated.  Welcome to being Microsoft, and welcome to how well their $120/share stock has done since its last split. If I owned any Apple stock, I would dump it all now.
 
2014-06-08 11:35:25 AM  

syrynxx: If I owned any Apple stock, I would dump it all now.


My theory is this...

With the new price it's going to go to $250 or $50 in 12 months. I have a strong feeling it's going to shoot higher based not on fundamentals but simply on price.

I could be wrong, I usually am on stocks.

If it gets back into favor with institutional money, then it's going up fast.
 
2014-06-08 12:08:17 PM  

syrynxx: I don't see what gas Apple has left in its tank. Tablet sales are down 10% from last year. Everyone who wanted one - has one.  Smart watches are a stupid idea, as is Google Glass.  The market for doo-dads is saturated.  Welcome to being Microsoft, and welcome to how well their $120/share stock has done since its last split. If I owned any Apple stock, I would dump it all now.


They could expand international sales. Don't know how that's going for Apple specifically, but there's growth potential there, even if they can't come up with the next big thing.
 
2014-06-08 12:13:34 PM  

syrynxx: Tablet sales are down 10% from last year


And sales of phones and traditional computers were up.  As well as digital sales.  Tablets will recover (whether it be Android or iOS based)

syrynxx: Everyone who wanted one - has one.


Not even remotely true

syrynxx: Smart watches are a stupid idea, as is Google Glass.


We don't know that.  The difference between Google and Apple is that Apple releases a product when they feel its finished.  Google just throws shiat at a wall and see what sticks.  Apple also knows what it is - a hardware company.  Google is an advertising company trying to be something else.  Its why I've refused to buy its stock.

syrynxx: The market for doo-dads is saturated.


What the hell is a 'doo-dad'?  And if history is any guide - someone will always come up with something that people will want to buy.

syrynxx: Welcome to being Microsoft


Google is following the Microsoft model.  Live off your cash cow while delivering nothing new that makes any money for the company.  Apple follows the Apple model - create great hardware and ship it.  Big difference.

/I am somewhat optimistic that the new CEO of Microsoft will get that company out of its rut
 
2014-06-08 12:15:19 PM  
I've been waiting for a split to happen for a while now. But I never thought it would end up a 7 for 1. This makes my portfolio very happy.

The only thing that would be more awesome is if Google said to Apple 'Anything you can do, I can do better'...
 
2014-06-08 12:24:54 PM  
Funny, subby -- in 15 years I've managed to "afford" an iMac, an iPod, a Power Mac, an iMac, an iBook, a MacBook Pro, as well as four iPads and five iPhones for various family members. Too bad about your job asking people "want fries with that?"
 
2014-06-08 12:29:17 PM  
I woke up rich this morning, the stock split and my account still showed the pre-split price but the post split share quantity.

/CSB
 
2014-06-08 01:10:34 PM  

RoyFokker'sGhost: I've been waiting for a split to happen for a while now. But I never thought it would end up a 7 for 1. This makes my portfolio very happy.

The only thing that would be more awesome is if Google said to Apple 'Anything you can do, I can do better'...


Is there any evidence that stocks appreciate more quickly after a split?
 
2014-06-08 01:10:52 PM  

Arkanaut: syrynxx: I don't see what gas Apple has left in its tank. Tablet sales are down 10% from last year. Everyone who wanted one - has one.  Smart watches are a stupid idea, as is Google Glass.  The market for doo-dads is saturated.  Welcome to being Microsoft, and welcome to how well their $120/share stock has done since its last split. If I owned any Apple stock, I would dump it all now.

They could expand international sales. Don't know how that's going for Apple specifically, but there's growth potential there, even if they can't come up with the next big thing.


1. There are a lot of countries where they have little to no presence. That will change. The people crowing about the Mac having a 7% share worldwide conveniently ignore that it's 12-15% in the U.S. and U.K. And higher than that among people under 30.

2. They were behind in China. They only got a deal with China's biggest cell service provider last year. That's a company with 800 million subscribers. Just a five per cent share of those customers would be 40 million phones. By comparison, Apple sold 150 million phones worldwide in 2013.

3. Unlike Microsoft, they have new (or updated) products coming out several times a year. Microsoft stays the same. Aside from the X-Box and the Surface, what new products has Microsoft come out with in the last 20 years?
 
2014-06-08 01:15:19 PM  

syrynxx: ...  Smart watches are a stupid idea, as is Google Glass....


That is why Apple has not come out with a "smart watch."  It's stupid, so they don't pursue it.
 
2014-06-08 01:30:20 PM  

bingethinker: Aside from the X-Box and the Surface, what new products has Microsoft come out with in the last 20 years?


Arbitrary timeframe in pathetic talking point is arbitrary.  If you bring it down to 10 years, which is still a long time in the tech world, what major products have Apple come out with other than iPhone and iPad?  Plus with MS you should count their enterprise cloud services.

All that matters is profits, which is why Apple stock should be good for at least a few more years.  I'd rather buy stock behind the iPhone 10S if it's still raking it in than some newfangled crap that sounds fresh but hasn't made a profit.
 
2014-06-08 02:31:55 PM  

Yankees Team Gynecologist: bingethinker: Aside from the X-Box and the Surface, what new products has Microsoft come out with in the last 20 years?

Arbitrary timeframe in pathetic talking point is arbitrary.  If you bring it down to 10 years, which is still a long time in the tech world, what major products have Apple come out with other than iPhone and iPad?  Plus with MS you should count their enterprise cloud services.

All that matters is profits, which is why Apple stock should be good for at least a few more years.  I'd rather buy stock behind the iPhone 10S if it's still raking it in than some newfangled crap that sounds fresh but hasn't made a profit.


All timeframes are arbitrary. Funny how they matter for one company but not the other. Other companies can push out minor upgrades of previous products, but Apple MUST come out with some earth-shaking new thing every couple of years or they're DOOMED!

I'm with you on the profits. People crow about the iPhone having only 20% of the market, but they have more than half of the profits. Samsung has the rest. Everyone else is losing money.
 
2014-06-08 02:40:39 PM  

Speaker2Animals: Funny, subby -- in 15 years I've managed to "afford" an iMac, an iPod, a Power Mac, an iMac, an iBook, a MacBook Pro, as well as four iPads and five iPhones for various family members. Too bad about your job asking people "want fries with that?"


You said iMac twice.
 
2014-06-08 02:44:39 PM  
Apple should be more concerned from Amazon than Google. The OS people have their own and they're probably not going anywhere; Apple has that group locked in and monetized.

Amazon is building a farking war machine for cloud storage, media streaming, and business integration services. My personal theory is Amazon is trying to do what Microsoft did in the 1980s/1990s: Get so big and so powerful that the government steps in and locks you into a position with heavy regulation.
 
2014-06-08 03:12:43 PM  

bingethinker: All timeframes are arbitrary. Funny how they matter for one company but not the other. Other companies can push out minor upgrades of previous products, but Apple MUST come out with some earth-shaking new thing every couple of years or they're DOOMED!


That's because Apple and its fans have characterized the company that way.  You can't use it selectively.  The brand would be very different if it became known for breadth and steady profits (like an oil company) instead of style and cutting-edge innovation, even if the economics were still sound.
 
2014-06-08 03:57:05 PM  

Staffist: Speaker2Animals: Funny, subby -- in 15 years I've managed to "afford" an iMac, an iPod, a Power Mac, an iMac, an iBook, a MacBook Pro, as well as four iPads and five iPhones for various family members. Too bad about your job asking people "want fries with that?"

You said iMac twice.


I've had two of them.
 
2014-06-08 04:23:13 PM  

Yankees Team Gynecologist: bingethinker: All timeframes are arbitrary. Funny how they matter for one company but not the other. Other companies can push out minor upgrades of previous products, but Apple MUST come out with some earth-shaking new thing every couple of years or they're DOOMED!

That's because Apple and its fans Internet trolls and paid anti-Apple shills have characterized the company that way.  You can't use it selectively.  The brand would be very different if it became known for breadth and steady profits (like an oil company) instead of style and cutting-edge innovation, even if the economics were still sound.


FTFY. We're constantly hearing how Apple claims to have "invented" this or that, but it's always a straw man thrown out by people like you, or certain journalists that Samsung has in their pocket.
 
2014-06-08 04:29:53 PM  

Brontes: I woke up rich this morning, the stock split and my account still showed the pre-split price but the post split share quantity.


Me too! Think if we sell during the first millisecond of trading we can keep it?
 
2014-06-08 04:54:33 PM  
Lieutenant Dan got me invested in some kind of fruit company. So then I got a call from him, saying we don't have to worry about money no more. And I said, that's good! One less thing.
 
2014-06-08 04:57:27 PM  

gingerjet: We don't know that. The difference between Google and Apple is that Apple releases a product when they feel its finished. Google just throws shiat at a wall and see what sticks. Apple also knows what it is - a hardware company. Google is an advertising company trying to be something else. Its why I've refused to buy its stock.


Google hasn't made a smartwatch and glass is still in beta so I don't get your comment.

SirHolo: syrynxx: ...  Smart watches are a stupid idea, as is Google Glass....

That is why Apple has not come out with a "smart watch."  It's stupid, so they don't pursue it.


Wrong. Its coming out soon.
 
2014-06-08 05:26:10 PM  

bingethinker: FTFY. We're constantly hearing how Apple claims to have "invented" this or that, but it's always a straw man thrown out by people like you, or certain journalists that Samsung has in their pocket.


Really? You want to distance yourself from the claim that Apple is more innovative, forward-thinking, and cutting-edge than the competition?
 
2014-06-08 06:08:16 PM  

bingethinker: 3. Unlike Microsoft, they have new (or updated) products coming out several times a year. Microsoft stays the same. Aside from the X-Box and the Surface, what new products has Microsoft come out with in the last 20 years?

One huge thing that Microsoft has done, is that it embraced "cloud" computing with Azure. While it isn't a household name, it undoubtedly runs something in your life. Strong rumors have it that the Apple iCloud runs on Azure services/framework. Plus they have a ton of enterprise software that most people don't realize is there, and is raking in the cash.

Interestingly in 2010, Microsoft could be broken down to 8-separate businesses that had a revenue over a billion dollars. In 2013, they doubled that, up to 16-separate billion-dollar businesses.

-Windows (which also, up until now, included Surface, which contributed $853 million to the total in fiscal 2013)
-Windows Server
-Windows Azure
-Office (client)
-Xbox
-SQL Server
-System Center (client and server both, so includes Windows Intune)
-SharePoint
-Visual Studio
-Dynamics (CRM and ERP)
-Online Advertising (search and display both)
-Office 365
-Client-access license (CAL) suites (formerly known as desktop access)
-Enterprise Services (including consulting)
-Enterprise communication business (Exchange plus Lync)

Things like SQL Server don't get the Gizmodo headlines, but it pulls in way more money than a "hobby" like Apple TV. I wouldn't be surprised if the Surface group rises to be another billion dollar business for them in 2014.
 
2014-06-08 06:21:19 PM  

RoyFokker'sGhost: I've been waiting for a split to happen for a while now. But I never thought it would end up a 7 for 1. This makes my portfolio very happy.

The only thing that would be more awesome is if Google said to Apple 'Anything you can do, I can do better'...


how does it make your portfolio very happy? Other than the possibility that the DJIA will add Apple and thus certain index funds will have to buy in, this will not significantly affect your portfolio long term.

// if I converted your dollar bill into ten dimes would you be richer? Because that's all a stock split is.
 
2014-06-08 06:44:27 PM  

Moopy Mac: RoyFokker'sGhost: I've been waiting for a split to happen for a while now. But I never thought it would end up a 7 for 1. This makes my portfolio very happy.

The only thing that would be more awesome is if Google said to Apple 'Anything you can do, I can do better'...

Is there any evidence that stocks appreciate more quickly after a split?


Quickness of re-appreciation doesn't matter much to me, only that they will return to the pre - split value in time. That's why it's called long term investing.
 
2014-06-08 06:46:24 PM  

dukeblue219: RoyFokker'sGhost: I've been waiting for a split to happen for a while now. But I never thought it would end up a 7 for 1. This makes my portfolio very happy.

The only thing that would be more awesome is if Google said to Apple 'Anything you can do, I can do better'...

how does it make your portfolio very happy? Other than the possibility that the DJIA will add Apple and thus certain index funds will have to buy in, this will not significantly affect your portfolio long term.

// if I converted your dollar bill into ten dimes would you be richer? Because that's all a stock split is.


Except that over time, each of those dimes turns into a dollar bill and has a greater chance of doing so than the dollar bill becoming a tenner on its own.
 
2014-06-08 07:31:32 PM  

RoyFokker'sGhost: dukeblue219: 
// if I converted your dollar bill into ten dimes would you be richer? Because that's all a stock split is.

Except that over time, each of those dimes turns into a dollar bill and has a greater chance of doing so than the dollar bill becoming a tenner on its own.


There's no logical reason for that to be true. It's a fallacy to assume a $1 stock will increase in price faster than a $7 stock just because it's cheaper. It's not "easier" to go from $1 to $2 than $7 to $14. It's all percentages that matter.

The stock is fundamentally priced based on expected future earnings of the company, and those aren't going to grow any faster just because there are 7 times as many shares available at 1/7th the price. Yes of course there is volatility and plenty of other factors technical and psychological which affect the price but over time the price will generally track investors assumptions about the company's profitability.  Nothing about the company changed with the split so there is no logical reason to pay more for a certain percentage of those earnings tomorrow than last week.
 
2014-06-08 07:37:17 PM  

SirHolo: syrynxx: ...  Smart watches are a stupid idea, as is Google Glass....

That is why Apple has not come out with a "smart watch."  It's stupid, so they don't pursue it.


But if they do, a certain person in this and every Apple thread will be telling you how Apple's latest invention is the best thing since sliced bread, and will insult you for thinking otherwise.
 
2014-06-08 07:46:18 PM  

dukeblue219: RoyFokker'sGhost: dukeblue219: 
// if I converted your dollar bill into ten dimes would you be richer? Because that's all a stock split is.

Except that over time, each of those dimes turns into a dollar bill and has a greater chance of doing so than the dollar bill becoming a tenner on its own.

There's no logical reason for that to be true. It's a fallacy to assume a $1 stock will increase in price faster than a $7 stock just because it's cheaper. It's not "easier" to go from $1 to $2 than $7 to $14. It's all percentages that matter.

The stock is fundamentally priced based on expected future earnings of the company, and those aren't going to grow any faster just because there are 7 times as many shares available at 1/7th the price. Yes of course there is volatility and plenty of other factors technical and psychological which affect the price but over time the price will generally track investors assumptions about the company's profitability.  Nothing about the company changed with the split so there is no logical reason to pay more for a certain percentage of those earnings tomorrow than last week.


This. 401k managers and other massive fund managers don't give a shiat if they're buying 1 share at $1000 or 10 shares at $100, they look at the potential for company growth, P/E ratios, dividend rates, volatility, risk factors in the company market and so on.

The only people this would affect are retail investors who are either not very good at math or were planning on buying a single apple stock at a time; people who make up an insignificant part of the pool of stockholders.
 
2014-06-08 08:01:19 PM  
Splits happen. As do short term spikes and valleys. But there's only one thing that drives long term rises in stock price (relative to the total market - who gives a shiat if a stock was up 30 percent in a year when the whole market was up the same?) And that's profit GROWTH. Profits are great. Certainly better than the alternative. But we should not forget that msft was extremely profitable for a decade while the stick price was moribund. Profits are assumed, and at their size the profits will be huge. But either their profit per share will go up substantially or it won't.
 
2014-06-08 09:03:55 PM  

dukeblue219: RoyFokker'sGhost: dukeblue219:
// if I converted your dollar bill into ten dimes would you be richer? Because that's all a stock split is.

Except that over time, each of those dimes turns into a dollar bill and has a greater chance of doing so than the dollar bill becoming a tenner on its own.

There's no logical reason for that to be true. It's a fallacy to assume a $1 stock will increase in price faster than a $7 stock just because it's cheaper. It's not "easier" to go from $1 to $2 than $7 to $14. It's all percentages that matter.

The stock is fundamentally priced based on expected future earnings of the company, and those aren't going to grow any faster just because there are 7 times as many shares available at 1/7th the price. Yes of course there is volatility and plenty of other factors technical and psychological which affect the price but over time the price will generally track investors assumptions about the company's profitability.  Nothing about the company changed with the split so there is no logical reason to pay more for a certain percentage of those earnings tomorrow than last week.


Don't waste your breath. Apple users can't figure out how to configure simple devices without having it done for them, so there is no reason to believe that they will have the brainpower to understand simple math like a stock split. You might as well be giving this lesson to your dog.
 
2014-06-08 09:16:43 PM  

gingerjet: syrynxx: Tablet sales are down 10% from last year

And sales of phones and traditional computers were up.  As well as digital sales.  Tablets will recover (whether it be Android or iOS based)

syrynxx: Everyone who wanted one - has one.

Not even remotely true

syrynxx: Smart watches are a stupid idea, as is Google Glass.

We don't know that.  The difference between Google and Apple is that Apple releases a product when they feel its finished.  Google just throws shiat at a wall and see what sticks.  Apple also knows what it is - a hardware company.  Google is an advertising company trying to be something else.  Its why I've refused to buy its stock.

syrynxx: The market for doo-dads is saturated.

What the hell is a 'doo-dad'?  And if history is any guide - someone will always come up with something that people will want to buy.

syrynxx: Welcome to being Microsoft

Google is following the Microsoft model.  Live off your cash cow while delivering nothing new that makes any money for the company.  Apple follows the Apple model - create great hardware and ship it.  Big difference.

/I am somewhat optimistic that the new CEO of Microsoft will get that company out of its rut


Lol Apple is a hardware company? How is that given they have zero fabrication or even assembly facilities?

Apple pays someone to assemble components made by other companies. Marketing is all they do.
 
2014-06-08 09:20:58 PM  

dukeblue219: RoyFokker'sGhost: dukeblue219: 
// if I converted your dollar bill into ten dimes would you be richer? Because that's all a stock split is.

Except that over time, each of those dimes turns into a dollar bill and has a greater chance of doing so than the dollar bill becoming a tenner on its own.

There's no logical reason for that to be true. It's a fallacy to assume a $1 stock will increase in price faster than a $7 stock just because it's cheaper. It's not "easier" to go from $1 to $2 than $7 to $14. It's all percentages that matter.

The stock is fundamentally priced based on expected future earnings of the company, and those aren't going to grow any faster just because there are 7 times as many shares available at 1/7th the price. Yes of course there is volatility and plenty of other factors technical and psychological which affect the price but over time the price will generally track investors assumptions about the company's profitability.  Nothing about the company changed with the split so there is no logical reason to pay more for a certain percentage of those earnings tomorrow than last week.


No, the stock is priced based on a combination of demand and the perception of the future earnings of the company.

Reality has no influence in the matter.

Demand for Apple stock will be much higher at the lower price point. Barristas can't afford $500 investments but can toss $50 on.
 
2014-06-08 09:38:40 PM  

Bullseyed: dukeblue219: RoyFokker'sGhost: dukeblue219: 
// if I converted your dollar bill into ten dimes would you be richer? Because that's all a stock split is.

Except that over time, each of those dimes turns into a dollar bill and has a greater chance of doing so than the dollar bill becoming a tenner on its own.

There's no logical reason for that to be true. It's a fallacy to assume a $1 stock will increase in price faster than a $7 stock just because it's cheaper. It's not "easier" to go from $1 to $2 than $7 to $14. It's all percentages that matter.

The stock is fundamentally priced based on expected future earnings of the company, and those aren't going to grow any faster just because there are 7 times as many shares available at 1/7th the price. Yes of course there is volatility and plenty of other factors technical and psychological which affect the price but over time the price will generally track investors assumptions about the company's profitability.  Nothing about the company changed with the split so there is no logical reason to pay more for a certain percentage of those earnings tomorrow than last week.

No, the stock is priced based on a combination of demand and the perception of the future earnings of the company.

Reality has no influence in the matter.

Demand for Apple stock will be much higher at the lower price point. Barristas can't afford $500 investments but can toss $50 on.


Ok, I'll give you that. This allows someone who wouldn't buy a $500 share to get in on the game. However, a) those type of investors are in the noise margin and completely irrelevant to the overall market, and b) someone with $50 to invest should not even contemplate individual stocks because the trading fees will eat them alive.
 
2014-06-08 10:06:36 PM  

SirHolo: syrynxx: ...  Smart watches are a stupid idea, as is Google Glass....

That is why Apple has not come out with a "smart watch."  It's stupid, so they don't pursue it.




Yeah, that's the argument Apple fanboys use when they admit they won't look at any other products other an Apple.

"Why would I want a smaller iPad, the iPad is the perfect size...OH wait IPAD MINI, that's the perfect size for reading!"

"Why would I want as larger phone. IPhone is the perfect size..OH wait, Apple is coming out with a larger phone this fall..It'll be awesome! Now I can finally read my emails on my phone."

"Those Nest things are pretty interesting...did you know that they were created by ex-Apple people I'm kind of interested in...OH wait, Google just bought them out...yeah smart house dohickeys are pretty stupid..OH wait, Apple just announced a SmartHome initiative, that'll be cool when it comes out later this year..."

***These are the conversation I have with people at work. And so goes, the days of our lives. One of my bosses has pretty much stated that he doesn't even know what an Apple smartwatch will do, but he will be a day one purchaser of it.
 
2014-06-08 10:29:20 PM  

Bullseyed: dukeblue219: RoyFokker'sGhost: dukeblue219: 
// if I converted your dollar bill into ten dimes would you be richer? Because that's all a stock split is.

Except that over time, each of those dimes turns into a dollar bill and has a greater chance of doing so than the dollar bill becoming a tenner on its own.

There's no logical reason for that to be true. It's a fallacy to assume a $1 stock will increase in price faster than a $7 stock just because it's cheaper. It's not "easier" to go from $1 to $2 than $7 to $14. It's all percentages that matter.

The stock is fundamentally priced based on expected future earnings of the company, and those aren't going to grow any faster just because there are 7 times as many shares available at 1/7th the price. Yes of course there is volatility and plenty of other factors technical and psychological which affect the price but over time the price will generally track investors assumptions about the company's profitability.  Nothing about the company changed with the split so there is no logical reason to pay more for a certain percentage of those earnings tomorrow than last week.

No, the stock is priced based on a combination of demand and the perception of the future earnings of the company.

Reality has no influence in the matter.

Demand for Apple stock will be much higher at the lower price point. Barristas can't afford $500 investments but can toss $50 on.


The other guy was correct. Stock buyers who won't a stock at $500 that they will buy at $50 simply don't move the market in any perceivable way. Institutional buyers that do move the needle don't give two shiats whether the price is $200 or $2000. Batista stock buying is absolutely invisible for as much as they move the stock price.
 
2014-06-08 11:12:18 PM  

Yankees Team Gynecologist: Arbitrary timeframe in pathetic talking point is arbitrary.  If you bring it down to 10 years, which is still a long time in the tech world, what major products have Apple come out with other than iPhone and iPad?  Plus with MS you should count their enterprise cloud services.


Saying "other than the iPhone or iPad" with regards to apple is like saying "Aside from Windows and Office, what else does Microsoft have?" A, it's stupid because you're ignoring giant pillars, and B, you're still wrong because both companies have huge other portfolios of products, many of which make a whole lot of money.
 
2014-06-08 11:17:28 PM  

saintstryfe: Yankees Team Gynecologist: Arbitrary timeframe in pathetic talking point is arbitrary.  If you bring it down to 10 years, which is still a long time in the tech world, what major products have Apple come out with other than iPhone and iPad?  Plus with MS you should count their enterprise cloud services.

Saying "other than the iPhone or iPad" with regards to apple is like saying "Aside from Windows and Office, what else does Microsoft have?" A, it's stupid because you're ignoring giant pillars, and B, you're still wrong because both companies have huge other portfolios of products, many of which make a whole lot of money.


Your ignorance is showing. I think Windows actually trails enterprise server software for the first time. But most of the profit still comes from office. They may need to be apprehensive about that.
 
2014-06-08 11:30:19 PM  

saintstryfe: Saying "other than the iPhone or iPad" with regards to apple is like saying "Aside from Windows and Office, what else does Microsoft have?"


Look at what I was replying to.
 
2014-06-09 12:31:57 AM  

Speaker2Animals: Funny, subby -- in 15 years I've managed to "afford" an iMac, an iPod, a Power Mac, an iMac, an iBook, a MacBook Pro, as well as four iPads and five iPhones for various family members. Too bad about your job asking people "want fries with that?"


We all get what we deserve in a meritocracy, right?

Douche.

/doesn't have that job, still douchey.
 
2014-06-09 12:33:32 AM  
Darn, forgot to put it in the Boobies but:

Douchey.

/as apple fanboys tend to be.
/super sloppy zing.
 
2014-06-09 06:10:13 AM  
TFA doesn't say how Apple is planning to adjust the dividend but unless they do it exactly to match the current yield this is probably a good thing for shareholders on record.
 
2014-06-09 08:15:30 AM  

bingethinker: Aside from the X-Box and the Surface, what new products has Microsoft come out with in the last 20 years?


Off the top of my head? Within your meaningless timeframe and completely ignoring existing product lines that underwent radical transformation over that period?

Azure, .NET, Bing, Sharepoint, Windows Mobile.

Hell, even Hotmail is less than 20 years old.

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. The fact that a key piece of your argument is that Microsoft has been successful over that 20 years by focusing on and improving existing popular productivity and entertainment products really solidifies that fact.
 
2014-06-09 08:49:53 AM  

skozlaw: The fact that a key piece of your argument is that Microsoft has been successful over that 20 years by focusing on and improving existing popular productivity and entertainment products really solidifies that fact.


If by "focusing on and improving existing popular productivity and entertainment products," you mean "trying to get countless bugs out of crappy, bloated software within 5 versions", then yes, they're SUPER successful.
 
2014-06-09 09:08:15 AM  

LeoffDaGrate: If by "focusing on and improving existing popular productivity and entertainment products," you mean "trying to get countless bugs out of crappy, bloated software within 5 versions", then yes, they're SUPER successful.


And, yet, there those biatches are, eating revenue expectations like they own the place...

We get it. You don't really know anything about them or why they continue to be attractive to investors, you just know you're too cool to like Micro$oft.
 
2014-06-09 09:31:30 AM  
In some, possibly better, alternate timeline, I spent the $3K I was saving for a new mac in 2002 on Apple stock instead when it was $7/share.
 
2014-06-09 09:45:45 AM  

Bullseyed: dukeblue219: RoyFokker'sGhost: dukeblue219: 
// if I converted your dollar bill into ten dimes would you be richer? Because that's all a stock split is.

Except that over time, each of those dimes turns into a dollar bill and has a greater chance of doing so than the dollar bill becoming a tenner on its own.

There's no logical reason for that to be true. It's a fallacy to assume a $1 stock will increase in price faster than a $7 stock just because it's cheaper. It's not "easier" to go from $1 to $2 than $7 to $14. It's all percentages that matter.

The stock is fundamentally priced based on expected future earnings of the company, and those aren't going to grow any faster just because there are 7 times as many shares available at 1/7th the price. Yes of course there is volatility and plenty of other factors technical and psychological which affect the price but over time the price will generally track investors assumptions about the company's profitability.  Nothing about the company changed with the split so there is no logical reason to pay more for a certain percentage of those earnings tomorrow than last week.

No, the stock is priced based on a combination of demand and the perception of the future earnings of the company.

Reality has no influence in the matter.

Demand for Apple stock will be much higher at the lower price point. Barristas can't afford $500 investments but can toss $50 on.


Again, is there empirical evidence that company's values appreciate more quickly after a stock split?
 
2014-06-09 09:49:56 AM  

RoyFokker'sGhost: Moopy Mac: RoyFokker'sGhost: I've been waiting for a split to happen for a while now. But I never thought it would end up a 7 for 1. This makes my portfolio very happy.

The only thing that would be more awesome is if Google said to Apple 'Anything you can do, I can do better'...

Is there any evidence that stocks appreciate more quickly after a split?

Quickness of re-appreciation doesn't matter much to me, only that they will return to the pre - split value in time. That's why it's called long term investing.


This comment is not responsive to my question in the situation. How will a split Apple stock be more beneficial to your portfolio than if it had not split?

Are you saying that stocks that split perform better than those that did not?
 
2014-06-09 09:56:14 AM  

Moopy Mac: Bullseyed: dukeblue219: RoyFokker'sGhost: dukeblue219: 
// if I converted your dollar bill into ten dimes would you be richer? Because that's all a stock split is.

Except that over time, each of those dimes turns into a dollar bill and has a greater chance of doing so than the dollar bill becoming a tenner on its own.

There's no logical reason for that to be true. It's a fallacy to assume a $1 stock will increase in price faster than a $7 stock just because it's cheaper. It's not "easier" to go from $1 to $2 than $7 to $14. It's all percentages that matter.

The stock is fundamentally priced based on expected future earnings of the company, and those aren't going to grow any faster just because there are 7 times as many shares available at 1/7th the price. Yes of course there is volatility and plenty of other factors technical and psychological which affect the price but over time the price will generally track investors assumptions about the company's profitability.  Nothing about the company changed with the split so there is no logical reason to pay more for a certain percentage of those earnings tomorrow than last week.

No, the stock is priced based on a combination of demand and the perception of the future earnings of the company.

Reality has no influence in the matter.

Demand for Apple stock will be much higher at the lower price point. Barristas can't afford $500 investments but can toss $50 on.

Again, is there empirical evidence that company's values appreciate more quickly after a stock split?


I've only ever seen one study on the subject and it did not correct for the health of Z company (companies that split their shares tend to be able to do so because they, or at least their share price, are successful, not the other way around).

Is there any evidence that a stock split itself affects price performance (assumably from increased demand from retail buyets)?
 
2014-06-09 10:07:05 AM  

Moopy Mac: Are you saying that stocks that split perform better than those that did not?


I suspect that a split works in two ways:

1. There is demand pressure from people who want to buy stock, but could afford so few shares at the higher price that they don't bother.

2. There is a difference in the perceived cost of the stock vs the value of the company. This is totally a psychological issue, like pricing an item at $9.99 instead of $10. But, humans are illogical creatures.
 
2014-06-09 10:19:10 AM  

syrynxx: If I owned any Apple stock, I would dump it all now.


A major tech company with lots of room to grow internationally, boatloads of cash and a P/E of 15? I'm not a big fan of Apple products, but that stock is grossly undervalued.

gingerjet: Google is following the Microsoft model.


No. Just no.

Both are good long term stocks. Though I'd give the edge to Google in the long, long run. More innovative company.
 
Displayed 50 of 64 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report