You're certainly not alone in that feeling, but I'm not sure I agree. Even at 700, the fundamentals were not high: PEG was well below 1.0. PE of about 16+, (in comparison, GOOG PE is 50% higher than Apple was at 700).
I think the high share price contributes to the perception of being overpriced. If Apple had done a stock split and was selling at 70 at the peak, I wonder if as many people would have thought the stock was overpriced.
Ive been hearing about dividends for some time now. Has anybody actually received any?
I Haven't.
Ive been hearing about dividends for some time now. Has anybody actually received any?
I Haven't.
As long as Apple believes that its stock is undervalued at current prices, Buffett argues that if the company can "buy dollar bills for 80 cents, it's a very good thing to do."
They should buy back a bunch of stock but do so through Braeburn capital and its offshore holding companies so it is invisible in the shares outstanding figure.
Apple stocks were ridiculously overpriced previously.
Not really, it was just ridiculously overvalued recently.
It was overvalued at $700
P/E is still very low, even for a non-growth company.
Apple was never valued at a growth company.
.....
My initial attraction to AAPL was that it was a growth stock trading at a blue-chip valuation.
Oh please. Even at $700, it was priced (P/E-wise) more like a non-growth company. It was hardly priced like a high-flying company. You wanna see overvalued? Check AMZN.
low P/E doesn't mean it's cheap
.......
Just look at Apple's market cap growth and you'll see it's been considered a growth stock.
You're right, low P/E doesn't necessarily make a stock cheap.
Yet you admit Apple is a growth stock. A growth stock with a low P/E typically means it's cheap (particularly with Apple's cash horde).
Low P/E stock are typically non-growth or low-growth stocks.
you're wrong again. P/E has nothing to do with value.
P/E is basically a sentiment indicator.
Apple has been at a reasonable P/E because growth has always been realized each year.
Negative.
I have. The last dividend was paid on February 14: $2.65 for every share of AAPL stock you owned on February 7.
Before that they paid the same dividend on 11/15/2012 and 08/16/2012.
Apple investment funds buying back shares lowers the float, albiet not in the official figures. It would also make a ready market for block sales, thus putting a floor on the stock price. Thanks for asking.I'm curious how this benefits the individual investor? Can you enlighten me? (No sarcasm - I really am curious.)
The stockholder of record usually has their stock held within a brokerage account. In those cases, 95% of stock, Apple transfers funds to those brokers and they credit your account. It all happens seamlessly. You have the money in your account that day. If you hold your stock as a physical certificate I think they physically mail you a check, not sure.How do they pay them?
Of course it does. Price to Earnings is a valuation measurement.
You have this backwards, the stockholders own the company, so it isn't what the stockholders do for the company it is what the company should do for the stockholders. Which is namely distribute cash or grow in value.
Yes stockholders only give money to the company at the initial issuance. For a company like apple it has little need to issue new stock. So the stock price really doesn't matter too much to the company. However, and this is big for tech companies, many employees are paid in stock. So when stock price drops all of management and many many of the employees are seeing a real hit to their wealth. So they might care. That can be bad for moral. And it can even destroy a tech company if the employees believe the stock can't recover and they decide they have to go somewhere else to get paid stock options in a hit company.
But the employees are long time holders. So they should not freak out like folks on this board. At least we hope they aren't distracted by this nonsense.
Thank you for the education. I often forget company stock is also issued to employees as part of compensation/reward.
I made a post well before AAPL hit 700 saying it would hit 445 and possibly 420. Both came to pass and both were based on purely technical trading. Gaps as a primary factor.
Look up my posts on it.
BTW another technical measure says it will go above 700 by the same margin as the ultimate bottom. Let's say the ultimate bottom is 420 and the top was 705. The difference is added to the top to give you 990. It might take 6-12 months to get there. You have dips in most stocks in May-June and August-September. You can trade on that. Even if you only do 4-5 trades a year, using options on the downside and stocks on margin on the upside. Keep a 5% trailing stop to be safe. Send me 10% of your net gains.
Rocketman
Here's an exercise: Think for a few moments about what a price to earnings ratio tells you...
The ratio of market price to earnings is not a meaningful relationship, because one does not directly affect the other. Does it tell you about the value of the underlying business? No, price is not an accurate reflection of the underlying value of a business.
. . . .
Important to always remember Buffett's distinction between price and value: "Price is what you pay. Value is what you get."
You may say that, but you are wrong. It is trend lines and Fininacci. Look them up. Then try it once. Options only cost $100 and up.It really is a kind of crazy thing to suggest that reading the chart is all you need to do to predict the future. Apple's stock is up today. But it has nothing to do with the chart.
You may say that, but you are wrong. It is trend lines and Fininacci. Look them up. Then try it once. Options only cost $100 and up.
How quickly do you expect Ive to deliver the next new iOS after Forstall was demoted and shuttered? How quickly do you expect 10.9? Can we give the company time to develop the products, so that they bring it to us right, as opposed to feeding the media nattering negativity machine?
You're right, low P/E doesn't necessarily make a stock cheap.
Yet you admit Apple is a growth stock. A growth stock with a low P/E typically means it's cheap (particularly with Apple's cash horde).
Low P/E stock are typically non-growth or low-growth stocks.