It is entirely possible that Jobs' combat precepts are for a past war. It is entirely possible that Jobs would not have evolved to meet the challenges of an evolving marketplace because he was so confident that his past strategies were the key to future challenges.
Tim Cook, thus far, has failed on many counts, including taking decisive stands in a changing landscape and adopting very defensive positions, which I define to include the dividend and buyback program.
Your response is fairly simplistic, as the issue of offshore earnings is quite complex and does recognize that there are some credible tax enforcing jurisdictions, just as there are some that are less so.
Given the degree of discussion that this issue has created over the years, certainly not just related to Apple, I guess that lots of time and effort would have been saved if only someone asked "really?"
Regardless, offshored income that is repatriated to the United States is credited for taxes paid to the foreign soil jurisdiction. There is no issue of double taxation. The US tax code requires that corporate taxes be paid upon foreign earnings once they are no longer held overseas.
Apple has punted. They felt an immediate need to do something as the shareholder noose was tightening. Instead of playing these games, let them take the lead in lobbying for a meaningful change in the tax code that would allow companies to repatriate cash in return for investing for the future in the United STates.
Acting in a socially and morally responsible fashion is everyone's responsibility, whether there are specific laws or not.
Perhaps the Supreme Court will someday rule that corporations have super-egos and then we could reasonably expect that they would be guided by the very same principles that guide humans
Right, none were broken. I believe I mentioned that to be the case. However, as a nation, most were in agreement, with regard to the various tax loopholes used by the most wealthy, that despite their being within the law, they were not within the spirit of the law.
Yet, believe it or not, legal doesn't mean morally or ethically correct, just as "not guilty" doesn't mean "innocent."
James Altucher: Why The Stock Market Is A Sucker's Game Right Now (And What Stocks I Own) [View article]
Thanks, my mentor once called me "slippery and manipulative" which I suppose is a positive thing when going through dental school, although his praise did fall short of the beatification I was seeking.
If only there was a way I could put those skills to use that didn't involve faxing you unsolicited stock offerings and then writing articles about them
On the other hand those that buy the option contracts you are selling may be otherwise. They are either someone who is fairly greedy or speculative, looking to leverage their funds for a quick fix or some professional looking to protect his underlying investment.
Since the professional often has disdain for the retail investor, I don't feel too badly when their options expire worthless. As for the greedy ones....
My Mad Method: Year-End Results 2012 [View article]
Having written a number of articles on Apple, also going back to mid-2012, that were decidedly negative, I know the feeling attached to be the target of lots of derisive and emotional rants.
It's one thing to disagree, but there are certainly ways to do so that aren't very disagreeable. Compared to the Apple folk, your comments are really tame, but compared to the tone in this thread, they aren't and carry a strong air of condescension. While it may actually be appropriate to gloat about the poor run Apple has had and remind your detractors that their emotion got the better of their rational side, there's really no instigatory animus from this article, nor in the thread, other than your own.
My Mad Method: Year-End Results 2012 [View article]
I was very fortunate in Q4, beating the S&P by 8.5%, as it lost 1.3%
Was I enlightened? No, just fortunate enough to keep applying my "ideology" despite the fact that in Q1 I trailed the S&P 500 by 6.6%. Perhaps I was enlightened then to understand that it would be wholly short-sighted to abandon a sound approach on the basis of a datum point
You neither validate nor invalidate a strategy by a single snippet of data. If anything, you evolve and gather more data to better apply the strategy in the future. Every strategy has an Achilles heel. The issue is all predicated on probabilities of various outcomes. If you believe in 100 year flood predictions you will likely rebuild your home after a black swan of a flood. If you're tentative about those guidelines you may look to move elsewhere. The tables, though, are more likely to be right when it comes to forward looking ability.
Very few people, including the very high profile (who do have the time to go into specifics) have above average performance year in and out. That doesn't mean that they abandon what got them to the dance. It is the ultimate in hubris to believe that the same person who applied a losing strategy (or sold a losing stock) would now be so smart as to suddenly exchange either for a new winning strategy (or stock).
Increase The Surface Area Of Your Portfolio And Profit [View article]
I didn't think we disagreed on anything. I just made a New Year's Resolution to be increasingly obtuse. When you referenced Epicurus I wondered why your name wasn't Post-Modernist
I've owned FCX nine seperate times since May 2012, but am still holding that $40 lot that couldn't be discounted by selling for a tax loss. In the meantime, why let opportunity go to waste if you can make money with lower priced shares and their option premiums?
My position in INTC is troublesome, since Erick Jackson of Ironbridge Capital, quoted me in an article he did for Forbes Magazine as having picked Intel as my top short for 2012.
I changed my mind a little after mid-year and was totally wrong with my thesis and timing.
I don't recall that suggestion being made. In fact, re-read my comment. I questioned whether the proposal to increase tax rates on the top 2% would make a dent in the budget gap.
The original comment was specifically about taxation and not about the expense side of the equation. Other than ideologues, most people believe that the equation has at least two factors; revenues and expenses.
The problem is when people believe that the problem can be summed up and closed with a single factor and then punctuating their opinion with "period," inferring that there are no other factors. You alone have summed up the problem as such.
That the government overspends or doesn't always have accountability in its spending should clearly be part of the equation, but it is not the topic of every discussion.
Jokes come on different planes. The most direct get you to laugh immediately, as there's very little thought process involved. Mother-in-law and fart jokes may be in that category.
Yogi always had at least one plane extra that made you think about what he had said and then the little delay in the realization of just how funny, insightful and true the comments were.
Cranky, you and I on the other hand insist on having 5 to 6 intervening planes, so people just look at us and then warn their kids and other loved ones to cross to the other side of the street when in our sight.
This comment of yours was so important that you sent it twice? Eleven hours apart? Even my short term memory is better than that and certainly not bad for a "fuddy duddy," which incidentally is only a term that one would expect to hear from a "fuddy duddy."
Shame On You, Apple [View article]
It is entirely possible that Jobs' combat precepts are for a past war. It is entirely possible that Jobs would not have evolved to meet the challenges of an evolving marketplace because he was so confident that his past strategies were the key to future challenges.
Tim Cook, thus far, has failed on many counts, including taking decisive stands in a changing landscape and adopting very defensive positions, which I define to include the dividend and buyback program.
Shame On You, Apple [View article]
Given the degree of discussion that this issue has created over the years, certainly not just related to Apple, I guess that lots of time and effort would have been saved if only someone asked "really?"
Regardless, offshored income that is repatriated to the United States is credited for taxes paid to the foreign soil jurisdiction. There is no issue of double taxation. The US tax code requires that corporate taxes be paid upon foreign earnings once they are no longer held overseas.
Apple has punted. They felt an immediate need to do something as the shareholder noose was tightening. Instead of playing these games, let them take the lead in lobbying for a meaningful change in the tax code that would allow companies to repatriate cash in return for investing for the future in the United STates.
Shame On You, Apple [View article]
Acting in a socially and morally responsible fashion is everyone's responsibility, whether there are specific laws or not.
Perhaps the Supreme Court will someday rule that corporations have super-egos and then we could reasonably expect that they would be guided by the very same principles that guide humans
Shame On You, Apple [View article]
Yet, believe it or not, legal doesn't mean morally or ethically correct, just as "not guilty" doesn't mean "innocent."
James Altucher: Why The Stock Market Is A Sucker's Game Right Now (And What Stocks I Own) [View article]
If only there was a way I could put those skills to use that didn't involve faxing you unsolicited stock offerings and then writing articles about them
Schadenfreude Suits Me Just Fine [View article]
On the other hand those that buy the option contracts you are selling may be otherwise. They are either someone who is fairly greedy or speculative, looking to leverage their funds for a quick fix or some professional looking to protect his underlying investment.
Since the professional often has disdain for the retail investor, I don't feel too badly when their options expire worthless. As for the greedy ones....
Google Is Bargain Priced [View article]
My Mad Method: Year-End Results 2012 [View article]
It's one thing to disagree, but there are certainly ways to do so that aren't very disagreeable. Compared to the Apple folk, your comments are really tame, but compared to the tone in this thread, they aren't and carry a strong air of condescension. While it may actually be appropriate to gloat about the poor run Apple has had and remind your detractors that their emotion got the better of their rational side, there's really no instigatory animus from this article, nor in the thread, other than your own.
My Mad Method: Year-End Results 2012 [View article]
Was I enlightened? No, just fortunate enough to keep applying my "ideology" despite the fact that in Q1 I trailed the S&P 500 by 6.6%. Perhaps I was enlightened then to understand that it would be wholly short-sighted to abandon a sound approach on the basis of a datum point
You neither validate nor invalidate a strategy by a single snippet of data. If anything, you evolve and gather more data to better apply the strategy in the future. Every strategy has an Achilles heel. The issue is all predicated on probabilities of various outcomes. If you believe in 100 year flood predictions you will likely rebuild your home after a black swan of a flood. If you're tentative about those guidelines you may look to move elsewhere. The tables, though, are more likely to be right when it comes to forward looking ability.
Very few people, including the very high profile (who do have the time to go into specifics) have above average performance year in and out. That doesn't mean that they abandon what got them to the dance. It is the ultimate in hubris to believe that the same person who applied a losing strategy (or sold a losing stock) would now be so smart as to suddenly exchange either for a new winning strategy (or stock).
Increase The Surface Area Of Your Portfolio And Profit [View article]
I'm Not An Accountant, Either [View article]
My position in INTC is troublesome, since Erick Jackson of Ironbridge Capital, quoted me in an article he did for Forbes Magazine as having picked Intel as my top short for 2012.
I changed my mind a little after mid-year and was totally wrong with my thesis and timing.
We Have Met The Enemy [View article]
The original comment was specifically about taxation and not about the expense side of the equation. Other than ideologues, most people believe that the equation has at least two factors; revenues and expenses.
The problem is when people believe that the problem can be summed up and closed with a single factor and then punctuating their opinion with "period," inferring that there are no other factors. You alone have summed up the problem as such.
That the government overspends or doesn't always have accountability in its spending should clearly be part of the equation, but it is not the topic of every discussion.
We Have Met The Enemy [View article]
Yogi always had at least one plane extra that made you think about what he had said and then the little delay in the realization of just how funny, insightful and true the comments were.
Cranky, you and I on the other hand insist on having 5 to 6 intervening planes, so people just look at us and then warn their kids and other loved ones to cross to the other side of the street when in our sight.
Apple Shares Are A Screaming 'Bye' [View article]
Again, as I asked earlier, please define "old."
Apple Shares Are A Screaming 'Bye' [View article]