Agreed except about the acquisition. Large acquisitions are always a problem because of the culture clash.
What really bothers me in this discussion as well as many others are the writers who moan about the lack of innovation at Apple and the coming demise of Apple due to the death of its visionary founder, Steve Jobs.
Most of these critics do not understand the nature of innovation. It starts with a vision which is followed by a lot of hard work and an extraordinary amount of quality control and product testing. Undisputably, Jobs was an extraordinary visionary. More importantly, he built a team of scientists and engineers that could bring his ideas to fruition. As far as I know, that team still exists and even as I write is trying to make sure that the next product lives up to the standard that Jobs established.
What armchair critics and financial analysts, who have never put in one days of work on a real product (and no, financial engineering does not count),do not understand that sometime it takes time to do things right. Compared to historic pace of innovations, Apple's lull from October 2012 to (maybe) September 2013 is miniscule at best.
There is 1 operational issue with the falling stock price. AAPL's talented engineers receive a portion of their compensation through incentive stock options (ISO). A falling stock price means that that incentive is lost. Also lost is the golden handcuff aspect of ISO's.
If even a portion of its talent pool is enticed away to the competition, AAPL's loss is almost immeasurable.
This is why management will do well to watch its stock price.
Further Signs Of Demand Weakness Now Hit The iPad Mini [View article]
I would think that both VZ and T and others have "most favored nation clause" in their agreements. Aapl would not offer any additional discounts to WMT because it would mean that they would have to provide matching discounts to those other reatilers. And depending on the agreement, might even have to discount retroactively.
One advantage of a 10 for 1 split is that it would promote AAPL into the Dow 30 and therefore a large number of ETF's and Mutual Funds. And it would stay in those funds forever. Just that would lower volatility.
Yes! and the best way to attract people to your bar is to have a line outside it on Friday night. (Even if you could accomodate all the people in line inside)
Well, I found the answer by just watching the weeklies.
The dividend has no impact on the strike price of either weekly or regular options. I believe this is true for regular dividends.
I recall that a few years ago, when MSFT declared a special dividend ($3.00 ??), it did change the strike price of not only MSFT options but also of QQQ and maybe other ETF's that had a significant holding of MSFT.
Does the payment of the dividend affect the strike price of options outstanding? I am particularly curious about the options expiring on the next day, August 10.
I agree. AAPL is an extraordinarily well managed company with many long and short term opportunities to grow revenues and profits.
The real question is if all that growth and prosperity will result in a higher price. One explanation for the post earning swoon in AAPL pricing is that there may not be enough appetite or capacity within the institutional community for its shares. In other words, institutions may be limited by its high price and share in their portrfolios from owning any more shares.
I am unable to find any other reason why AAPL commands lower P/E ratio than EBAY, QCOM, NVIDIA ORCL, CTXS to name just a few.
Why The Risk Reward Favors Buying Apple Now [View article]
I agree with the analysis and with the general statement that Apple despite its high price and recent runup from $360.00 is cheap. However I suspect that there may be a technical factor that is holding AAPL back.
Is it true that most large institutions are prohibited from allowing any one individual security from exceeding a predetermined % of the portfolio? If this is the case and there are many such institutions, then is it likely that these institutions are forced to sell AAPL as the stock continues to rise or at a minimum, precluded from buying it? Wouldn't this be a drag on the stock price and would this phenomenon explain why AAPL continues to be cheap despite its stellar performance?
Apple Still A Buy Regardless Of Steve Jobs' Departure [View article]
Nice article but...Hurd did a good job at HP?? Yes he did a good job of plundering HP's future. Notice that there were no/few innovation in the PC arena. Hurd gave Wall Street the numbers it wanted by cutting back on R & D and the future of the company. Meanwhile Apple continued to innovate and invest in its future and in development. It is now Leo Apotheker's burden to pay the piper for Hurd's doing. I do not have any opinion on Leo's success or failure as he has not been in the job long enough.
Normally, B.I. G. provides some useful insights. But analysis pertaining to odd and even years? Or 50% of Decembers having a price increase? This is getting beyond reading tea leaves.
Apple: Innovative Future Products Following Detroit's Lead? [View article]
Clearly, I was wrong.
Can AAPL make the product sexy enough that it would catch fire? AAPL has done that with Sony's walkmaster and Hitachi's tablets. Time will tell.
Also, I would accept with a very large grain of salt, the author's claim that he has privy to insider technical information.
Apple's Magic Is Broken [View article]
What really bothers me in this discussion as well as many others are the writers who moan about the lack of innovation at Apple and the coming demise of Apple due to the death of its visionary founder, Steve Jobs.
Most of these critics do not understand the nature of innovation. It starts with a vision which is followed by a lot of hard work and an extraordinary amount of quality control and product testing. Undisputably, Jobs was an extraordinary visionary. More importantly, he built a team of scientists and engineers that could bring his ideas to fruition. As far as I know, that team still exists and even as I write is trying to make sure that the next product lives up to the standard that Jobs established.
What armchair critics and financial analysts, who have never put in one days of work on a real product (and no, financial engineering does not count),do not understand that sometime it takes time to do things right. Compared to historic pace of innovations, Apple's lull from October 2012 to (maybe) September 2013 is miniscule at best.
Should Apple Repurchase Shares? [View article]
If even a portion of its talent pool is enticed away to the competition, AAPL's loss is almost immeasurable.
This is why management will do well to watch its stock price.
Further Signs Of Demand Weakness Now Hit The iPad Mini [View article]
In my opinion, WMT eats those discounts.
Apple's Board Is All Grown Up [View article]
Other than that, split is only a cosmetic change.
Apple iPhone 5 Production Cut: Signaling A New Product Release? [View article]
Apple Is A Buy Before Earnings [View article]
Apple Dividend, Last Call [View article]
The dividend has no impact on the strike price of either weekly or regular options. I believe this is true for regular dividends.
I recall that a few years ago, when MSFT declared a special dividend ($3.00 ??), it did change the strike price of not only MSFT options but also of QQQ and maybe other ETF's that had a significant holding of MSFT.
Is this the Black Scholes formula?
Apple Dividend, Last Call [View article]
Apple's Run Isn't Over Yet: Part I [View article]
The real question is if all that growth and prosperity will result in a higher price. One explanation for the post earning swoon in AAPL pricing is that there may not be enough appetite or capacity within the institutional community for its shares. In other words, institutions may be limited by its high price and share in their portrfolios from owning any more shares.
I am unable to find any other reason why AAPL commands lower P/E ratio than EBAY, QCOM, NVIDIA ORCL, CTXS to name just a few.
Why The Risk Reward Favors Buying Apple Now [View article]
Is it true that most large institutions are prohibited from allowing any one individual security from exceeding a predetermined % of the portfolio? If this is the case and there are many such institutions, then is it likely that these institutions are forced to sell AAPL as the stock continues to rise or at a minimum, precluded from buying it? Wouldn't this be a drag on the stock price and would this phenomenon explain why AAPL continues to be cheap despite its stellar performance?
Would appreciate any input on this aspect.
Why You Should Avoid Apple [View article]
I wish SA had a higher standard for publication. Articles like this only lowers its readership.
Apple Still A Buy Regardless Of Steve Jobs' Departure [View article]
$321: Apple's Maginot Line [View article]
Maybe this is a sign of market top?