Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Briefly Becomes World's First $3 Trillion Company

mi7chy said:
On a side note, high valuation is reward for overpricing consumer products. Good for investors but don't understand why some consumers are smug about it since they're overpaying for low bang for the buck products.
Click to expand...

There is a term for it, that’s going to annoy the ones who fall in that category and happen upon reading it.
 
macintoshmac said:
All this is great for the company and stockholders. But users ? Not as much at all.
Click to expand...
For the users that want what Apple’s selling? It’s good in that the company is and will be around to continue making products they like and continuing to offer the warranty protection and services they want to pay for. When you consider how many companies evaporate each year it’s not a bad deal.

For those that don’t want what Apple’s selling, it’s of no consequence. For those that REALLY REALLY just want to see Apple fail because they expected them to fail spectacularly after…
a. They stopped making AirPort base stations, or
b. They stopped supporting systems with 32-bit processors, OR
c. They released FCPX when everyone KNOWS FCP7 was and is better in every way
etc.

It’s not great. In fact it’s bad.
 
macintoshmac said:
All this is great for the company and stockholders. But users ? Not as much at all.
Click to expand...
It does not matter to the users.

Except that all this success provides Apple the money and resources to develop hardware and software.

And except that only very few companies, such as Microsoft or Google, will be able to compete with Apple in any field.
 
mi7chy said:
Mass selling would bring the share price and valuation down.

On a side note, high valuation is reward for overpricing consumer products. Good for investors but don't understand why some consumers are smug about it since they're overpaying for low bang for the buck products.
Click to expand...

There’s a saying about someone who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.
 
Analog Kid said:
I think you don't understand capitalism or socialism. Neither affect an individual's ability to innovate using their own limited resources, they govern the flow of resources through a society.

Capitalism directs societies resources toward endeavors that the society indicates a preference for through their individual allocation of scarce resources. Socialism directs societies resources toward endeavors identified by a few powerful decision makers.

Purity is the death of either system, and there are a lot of markets where capitalism leads to worse outcomes generally because consumers in those markets lack complete information or generational thinking, but consumer electronics is a ideal market to be driven by consumer choice and thus a capitalistic approach subject to government management of negative externalities.

In short, capitalism ensures that if Apple continues creating products people value at a cost sufficiently below that value, society will direct additional resources in their direction allowing them to further innovate and provide future products. Socialism would mean that Apple's market position would be protected by the government, making it more difficult for shifts in consumer sentiment to restrict the operations of the company, or they would face a government sanctioned alternative that isn't subject to consumer approval and would deny society the benefits of the Apple development and business models.
Click to expand...
Read some Marx
 
mi7chy said:
Mass selling would bring the share price and valuation down.

On a side note, high valuation is reward for overpricing consumer products. Good for investors but don't understand why some consumers are smug about it since they're overpaying for low bang for the buck products.
Click to expand...
There is mass selling every day. On January 3rd, 104 million shares were sold and the price and valuation went up. On January 4th, fewer than 90 million shares were sold and the price went down. Why? Because every seller has a buyer. For every person who sold a share on January 3 thinking it wasn't worth $182 to them, someone else thought it would be worth more than $182 to them and bought it. Everybody else thinks what they have is worth more than they could sell it for.

The closing price is literally what the last person selling on any given day and the last person buying thought was a good deal.


You also don't understand how profits are generated. Overpriced products, by definition, are not as profitable. They are overpriced-- fewer people buy them. Likewise, underpriced products aren't as profitable-- people would be willing to pay more. The most profitable products are priced optimally for their value to the consumer.
 
Last edited:
Profits are a capitalist tool used to suppress us all and anyone who supports profits is cringe
 
George Dawes said:
Steve was brilliant at one thing for certain- choosing the right people for the right job

with Tim he hit a home run for the ages , say what you like about mr cook but he’s a VERY safe pair of hands
Click to expand...

fwiw , Cook is just walking the path that Steve Jobs pointed him towards. Have they chosen Federghi or Schiller I would image the result would be more or less the same. Even M1 goes back to Jobs days when they bought a CPU company to make iphone chips. It could have been a long term plan for Apple all this time.

I would like to give credit to Tim Cook that he at least did not ruin Apple and held it in safe hands because there are other CEOs that will drive you down like Enron's , Blockbuster, or Yahoo.
 
I7guy said:
I’m pretty sure “apple is doomed” meme and it’s variants refers to financial ruin.
Click to expand...

am not sure what others mean, maybe they thought that sales will drop or some users will go away but I do not think any one seriously thought Apple will end up like Atari, Commodore, or Yahoo.
 
Analog Kid said:
Everybody else thinks what they have is worth more than they could sell it for.
Click to expand...

this should be taught in elementary school.

as for the optimal price, how can you figure out what is the optimal price? Personally, If someone told me to start a business back in the 70s selling a cup of coffee for $5 I would say he needs to go to the mental asylum but Starbucks worked.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Analog Kid
MacBH928 said:
this should be taught in elementary school.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I find it frightening how many people go through life without understanding how the systems that govern our society actually work…
MacBH928 said:
as for the optimal price, how can you figure out what is the optimal price? Personally, If someone told me to start a business back in the 70s selling a cup of coffee for $5 I would say he needs to go to the mental asylum but Starbucks worked.
Click to expand...
That’s the trick, isn’t it? I’d think the first step is to understand that there is an optimal price and get past the “they’re successful because they overprice their products” and “marketshare is everything” mindsets.
 
"Go woke go broke" I tweet furiously at a company worth 3 trillion dollars, tears rolling down my eyes while I secretly wish Jordan Peterson would be my daddy.
 
MacRumors said:
"Hitting $3 trillion is another historical moment for Apple as the company continues to prove the doubters wrong with the renaissance of growth story playing out in Cupertino," said analyst Dan Ives of Wedbush, which has a $200 price target for AAPL.
Click to expand...
A week later and the stock has dropped about $10/share, closing at $172.40 after bottoming out at $168.18
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back