Seeking Alpha

User 4542301

User 4542301
Send Message
View User 4542301's Comments BY TICKER:

  • Apple: Capitalizing Vs. Expensing R&D [View article]
    Yes the tax treatment is very different, but then tax basis accounting is rejected by the accounting community as an acceptable method for measuring economic performance, for very good reasons. IRS regs, IMO, is a hodge podge of rules developed by congress for bringing in revenue to the federal government. It ain't reliable for measuring economic performance of a company, IMO.

    A good example is the 179 deduction or investment tax credit. You can write off the cost of an asset in the first year. It violates matching revenues with the expenses that generated them.

    Also, some costs (forget what they are) are not deductible at all under tax accounting.
    Nov 16, 2014. 11:26 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple: Capitalizing Vs. Expensing R&D [View article]
    The author states:

    "R&D is a cost that should be classified as a capital expenditure. "

    I don't agree where the R & D produces no commercial success, which appears to be the case, usually, over 50% of the time. Expense as incurred. Otherwise you maybe materially distorting earnings.

    You have something to stand on (credibility) if the R & D results in a product, process, or asset which is commercially successful, but otherwise the costs are simply "expenses" of the period incurred, nothing else. I don't agree with painting with a broad brush and capitalizing all R & D. That is nonsense to me.

    "Capital expenses are expenses that are expected to generate benefits over multiple periods"

    Yes, generate "benefits". R & D which does not result in producing a commercial product, product or asset which generates revenues does not generate "benefits". There are no future cash flows from such costs, i.e. no benefits.
    Nov 16, 2014. 10:13 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple: Capitalizing Vs. Expensing R&D [View article]
    dabard said:

    "Expensing R and D costs is the conservative way of accounting for cash flows within a company. There are "valuation" reasons for capitalizing such expenses"

    See my post above, generally capitalizing R&D is not an option.
    Nov 16, 2014. 10:00 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple: Capitalizing Vs. Expensing R&D [View article]
    wayneamorris said:

    "The author is just pointing out Apple is using a conservative accounting approach as many companies capitalize R&D."

    GAAP requires expensing of R&D, except for some cases with computer software. Read the standard.

    Paragraph 12 states:

    "12. All research and development costs encompassed by this Statement shall be charged to expense when incurred."

    So, I'd be interested to know what companies capitalize R&D and if that R&D falls under SFAS 2 guidance.
    Nov 16, 2014. 09:54 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple: Capitalizing Vs. Expensing R&D [View article]
    I'd suggest reading the accounting standard. I don't agree with the author. At the time the standard was written in 1974, here is what they said in the standard:

    "39. There is normally a high degree of uncertainty about the future benefits of individual research and development projects, although the element of uncertainty may diminish as a project progresses. Estimates of the rate of success of research and development projects vary markedly—depending in part on how narrowly one defines a "project" and how one defines "success"—but all such estimates indicate a high failure rate. For example, one study of a number of industries found that an average of less than 2 percent of new product ideas and less than 15 percent of product development projects were commercially successful."

    Capitalizing all R&D, assuming over 50% of such expenditures do not result in commercial success, probably distorts earnings worse than expensing all of it.

    FASB and GAAP aren't perfect, but they do seek the feedback of businesses on an annual basis. If things had changed sufficiently, I would think they would revisit the subject. The standard is below for those who care to research it.
    Nov 15, 2014. 06:56 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple Is Living On Borrowed Time [View article]
    Just a couple of comments. Apple's history has been nothing short of amazing.

    I will never own a Windows 8 device. I hate Windows 8. I will never own a Goggle computing device, laptop or tablet because Google harvests all the information fed into them for their own proprietary purposes. That info is mine, not theirs, and I won't surrender it to them.
    Dec 23, 2013. 06:04 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple's Growth Story Is Over [View article]
    I'm not talking about an individual stock. I made that clear from my first post. I look for as "certain" of things as I can. Higher interest rates is one of them. If you want to place a personal bet that rates aren't going back up at some point, I'll gladly take you on in that bet.

    You have what works for you, I have learned over 30 years some things that work for me. Apple has always been too expensive for me to even think about, Google also. I look for things that appear as close a sure bet as it can be. The crash of 2008, 2009 was one of them. Higher interest rates from here is another.

    Sorry for the losses. We all learn from our mistakes. I took a good hit in BPT before bailing. Have made it all back in 6 months, on paper anyway. I think I'll recover my paper losses in TBT. Good luck.
    Mar 7, 2013. 04:46 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple's Growth Story Is Over [View article]
    Thanks for the advice. In regards to Apple, I don't know what it will do, though I like the company.

    I consider myself inexperienced at investing. But, when the market plummets several thousand points as it did in 2008, 2009, I'm not concerned about buying in at the bottom. Just that I get in after most of the blood has been shed. If I make a mistake, I can average down by buying more as it continues to drop. But, I believed that at some point it would turn around and it did, thankfully. If I had listened to the analysts, I wouldn't have bought anything at that point. Shorting is not something I have done to date.

    " Looking at the chart, you'd have made money following the market and shorting the market all the way into March of 2009. Then going long when the market started to recover. "

    This seems riskier to me than what I did. "When" does the market actually begin to recover? This seems like trying to time the market to a degree.

    There are a few times, throughout the history of the market, when it's fairly certain what's going to happen. Nov' 2008 was one of those moments for me. Assuming the entire economy didn't collapse, I would make money by investing at that point and buying more if the market continued its down trend. Eventually, it would turn around.

    I bought into TBT when I "thought" things had turned around. I'm down about 40% at present, but believe in the long term that will turn into a profit as well. I should buy more as at this point. Rising interest rates looks like a sure thing to me. The question is when.
    Mar 7, 2013. 02:18 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple's Growth Story Is Over [View article]
    Mar 7, 2013. 12:52 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple Is Still Cool [View article]
    The Mac and fat Mac were very, very cool, far ahead if its time. It was amazing all that you could do with one. The music you could play and create on it was far ahead of its time also.

    Jobs was a genius. The Mac, the IMac, the Ipod, Ipad, Iphone. Then there was Pixar. Yes, Apple is cool, very cool, and Jobs' footprint continues with both companies. It's an American success story that needs to be told to the generations to come, a Disney "when you wish upon a star" fantasy come true.
    Mar 5, 2013. 11:10 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple Is Still Cool [View article]
    Yep, Apple is cool. I'm just not sure what its future is now that Jobs is gone. Long live Apple.
    Mar 5, 2013. 04:46 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple Does Not Have $137 Billion In Cash [View article]
    "Short-Term Marketable Securities
    Essentially, these are investment tools that allow for a higher rate of return than a savings account and have a 3 to 5 year maturity horizon."

    This is not accurate. Short-Term Marketable Securities are included on the Apple 10-K, you provided a link to, under "Current Assets". By definition, Current Assets are "cash and other assets a company expects to convert to cash, sell, or consume either in one year or in the operating cycle, whichever is longer." (Chapter 5, "Balance Sheet and Statement of Cash Flows", INTERMEDIATE ACCOUNTING, 13th Edition, 2010, Kieso, Weygandt, Warfield.)

    So, generally, no investment having a maturity less than 3 months or beyond a year would be included under this classification. A 3 to 5 year maturity would be classified as a Long-Term Investment, provided the company does not intend to convert that security to cash in the next 12 months.

    "Long-Term Marketable Securities
    The time horizon on these instruments is 5 to 10 years, at least."

    This is also not accurate. Long-Term for balance sheet classification is defined as longer than one year or one operating cycle. The time horizon can be 366 days or longer, not 5 to 10.

    "Do not take at face value with what is said in the mainstream media."

    Unfortunately, the same applies to your own article. The classification of the $137 billion as "cash" is inaccurate, I agree. But getting your definitions of current and long-term assets right would have given you a lot more credibility.

    In the end, there are the SEC reports which spells out everything. Someone relying on just analyst statements shouldn't be investing on an individual stock in the first place. Been there, done that and got burned.
    Mar 5, 2013. 01:35 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple's Growth Story Is Over [View article]
    "Always trade with the market. The market is never wrong."

    Apple aside, this is herd mentality. If I had taken this advice, I would not have kept buying into the market in Nov. 2008, when everyone was bailing out, and I would not have kept buying as the market kept plummeting, eventually reaching 6500. I was following Buffett's lead in believing that the time to buy is when everyone is shouting "the sky is falling run for your lives!". When there is fear and panic in the streets is when you should be thinking about taking advantage of dirt cheap stock prices in what you believe will be good investments in the long term.

    I traded against the market and I made a great return on my investment. So, I don't follow your logic to always trade with the market. The market is definitely not always right.
    Mar 4, 2013. 03:54 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple's Growth Story Is Over [View article]
    Wrong about you not having a job, but right about the rest. You over exaggerate in your writing, i.e. referring to ME, as if similar problems don't exist today, when they do, and saying you can send your 15 year old on a 2 month course to do this, i.e. fix driver/software issues, and install servers at a business location. II don't believe a business is going to hire the 15 year old to be their source to go to with their computer/software issues. What you are trying to say is that these tasks don't require that much education to perform. In reality, the exaggeration and other remarks are simply intended to belittle.

    It was you who implied the claim that such problems don't occur in Win 7/8 when, in fact, very little has has changed when it comes to having software issues with Windows. There are still driver issues and other issues causing software hangups and BSOD. But, according to your own words, Apple doesn't have this problem.

    While there may be applications whose preferred operating system is Windows, I would wager that the reason is not due to superior hardware or software but due to a half century of IBM having mainframes in such industries (when Apple didn't exist) and developing compatible computers (the IBM pc) to work with those mainframes. So, I consider that part of your argument moot.

    I worked with IBM pcs when it had a C:\ prompt when you booted it up and you had to get the syntax correct to load programs and carry out MS-Dos commands. The Mac was a lot easier to work with. So, don't try to sell me that MS Hardware/software is superior. Clearly it never has been. Your supposed "Superior Intelligence" doesn't impress me one iota.
    Jan 29, 2013. 09:33 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple's Growth Story Is Over [View article]
    You were making the case that the current releases of Windows no longer had problems:

    "Please honestly tell me you had all those problems on Windows 7 or 8 (even XP after service pack 3).

    Stop comparing Windows of 12 years ago with Windows of Today."

    As you, yourself, have pointed out: "There are bound to be issues with some devices here and there and keep in mind that device manufacturers themselves are always releasing updated drivers that are more recent than the one they shipped to Microsoft which is what is baked into the os."

    EXACTLY. Nothing has changed. There are still blue screens of death with the current releases of Windows, NOT ME. That was my point.

    Also: "Apple seemingly does not have this problem "

    Thank you for making my case for me. :)

    As for an IT laughing at me, I am the consumer who uses the damn product. You are the one who fixes the problems. That PROVES my point: you need IT on call to fix Windows problems in a business, or you are in deep do-do. IF WINDOWS 7/8 WERE LARGELY ERROR FREE, NO BLUE SCREENS OF DEATH OR ANY SERIOUS ISSUES, YOU WOULD BE OUT OF A JOB. :)
    Jan 28, 2013. 11:20 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
More on AAPL by User 4542301