wobatus

Apple Overvalued? Here's What Else You Can Get for the Price

The only above post that makes a cogent point is the one about cash flow. I bought some Apple at around $7 or so in 1999 or so. It was trading near cash levels.

I don't know that it is an awful investment here. It is a great company. The author doesn't gainsay that. I think it could double in 3-5 years or so, maybe, if it continues this growth rate somewhat and premium valuation, or the standard 8-9 years for a solid equity. It will eventually run into a wall, law of large numbers, and a lot of its success has to do with a hip cachet that is hard to maintain. When everyone has an iphone, how hip can it be?

When Will Nokia Wake Up?

Indeed. I think NOK is content with being the top handset maker in the world and staying that way with reams of cash flow. Not everyone can be the Apple. NOK isn't going away.


On Oct 20 06:28 AM Yagottabe Kidding wrote:

> Perhaps Nokia has decided the "smartphone segment" isn't much of
> a segment relative to their other segments so are participating strictly
> because they have a need for a presence.
>
> When featurephones have all the capability that smartphones have
> with, literally, some minor details excluded (in fact, pundits are
> going through excruciating convolutions to define "featurephone"
> and "smartphone" now so they don't totally overlap), why produce
> a smartphone?

Buying Apple Today: Like Buying Microsoft in 1998?

He is using microsoft's split adjusted price, which price also adjusts for the dividends (although at that it wasn't $24 split adjusted on 9/11/1998 per yahoo).

At $24 MSFT was priced at 48 x cash flow in 1998. Apple is at 15 to 20x, and you are not deducting the cash on the balance sheet to arrive at an enterprise value, not capex to get free cash flow.

But if msft has maintained value (and we are going from a peak to almost trough market period you are viewing), if apple has the same performance, at the current price it is a decent bet to triple over the next 10 years.

A double every 9 years is the standard S&P 500 historical return, not counting inflation effects.

Sounds like Apple might not be a bad bet, IF it can maitain a dominant position as msft has. Other investors here can address that better than I can.

You are mistaking the ability to double or triple in a year that a small cap may have with long term wealth appreciation. Warren Buffett certainly shows you can make decent returns buying larger cap companies, even as he made huge money early on with smaller caps.

I have no current position in Apple.

Microsoft vs. Apple: Monopolist vs. Innovator

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Wow. A cellphone. Innovative.

Why I'm Selling Apple and Google Today - and Holding Amazon

This whole post just seems idiotic, like he trades on a whim.

How Apple Stock Should Be Valued: P/FCF

Are those 2009 and 2010 call options in the money? LOL. You'd better hope Apple isn't at $150 next year.

How to Get Apple to $200

Ultimately doing a dcf is worthwhile, not to give a precise value, but to give an idea of a range of values, which is what this guy did here. You can argue all you want that circumstances change, or all that matters is supply and demand for shares, but ultimately the real value outs over time (again, circumstances change, so 'real" value may be quite different ultimately than the model).

So, despite fact shares of enron, MBIA, etc all traded very high at one time, they fell hard...and although aapl was valued single didgits after 200 crash, it is now worthw ay more. To say that a discounted cash flow analysis is worthless for a company like apple or any company is just foolish.

Cell-Tower Fatalities: 3G iPhones at Any Price?

Wow, touchy apple holders. I own shares but still found this sobering. Some of the longs here come off like flippant jackasses. I don't think this is apple's fault, but I wouldn't shoot the messenger for bringing this up.

WSJ Report: What Apple Will Be Creating in 5 Years

Rd4sndk, you are correct. Look at Trader Mark's blog. "Fund My Mutual Fund." He wants folks to pony up $7 million to him. Ha. With his snarky "lemmings" comments and falling for the Forrester bait. Hilarious.

WSJ Report: What Apple Will Be Creating in 5 Years

True dat, Newton Rules. I have to go hit the i-snooze on my i-clock radio.

WSJ Report: What Apple Will Be Creating in 5 Years

Trader Mark, you come off like a smug jerk. So, when you sell because it is a little overvalued after a long run, it is being shrewd, because lemmings might dump, but someone else who sells to book profits after a nice run is a...lemming. And if someone buys back when it gets cheaper again, just like you will, they are lemmings too.

Intel, Google, Apple: Valuation Anomalies To Consider

If GOOG traded at $100 it would have a forward p/e of 5. If apple was $7.50 it would have trailing p/e below 2. Just interpreting at will here.

The suggestion seems to be if you are a very fast grower, buying at the p/e trough is a good idea (although intc only doubling in 12 years isn't so great, but we are talking trough to trough and Herb points out it has stopped growing). Question is where that trough will be.

Not sure this is all that relevant other than to point out p/e ratios are fairly low, probably because people don't expect growth to be as good, or, perish the thought, income may shrink. All the PEG obsessive crowd will be so confused if companies have any p/e if growth goes negative.