What they said there was: "Damn, he's right, we are making so much damn money we don't know what to do with it. We were confused by the rumors of our impending doom."
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Issues Statement About Returning Cash to Shareholders
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
What they said there was: "Damn, he's right, we are making so much damn money we don't know what to do with it. We were confused by the rumors of our impending doom."
So what exactly does "ownership" mean to you, as it apparently doesn't mean "owning" anything?
No, when you buy a share of stock you are buying a portion of the right to the assets, which includes cash.
The stock is very much priced to include the amount of cash in hand.
Right now the $468 per share price can be split between $145 for the right to the cash on hand, and $323 for the right to future earnings.
Giant waste of cash
The day after they distribute the cash, people forget about it and Apple has less cash. Nobody wins.
Just buy Sharp instead.
The day after they distribute the cash, people forget about it and Apple has less cash. Nobody wins.
Just buy Sharp instead.
Yes, but what is it to me as a holder of regular stock? Its hard to see the benefit in preferred stock with 1 billion regular stock on the market and Apple that doesn't need the extra cash.
A stock split 10:1 and joining the Dow Jones index would help the stock a lot more, now it seems that the stock is settling on a price based on the dividend at 2,5 %. Its almost as if Apple want's to keep the stock price low.
So, Einhorn is basically suggesting that Apple give him $32 million (based on the number of shares and his $32 per share estimate). Apple has a ton of cash. Giving it all to people like Einhorn to either pocket or cover the loses for his poor management ( 
) of his funds doesn't seem like it's in Apple's best interest. Then again, what do I know (don't answer that )?
) of his funds doesn't seem like it's in Apple's best interest. Then again, what do I know (don't answer that )?Stock split or joining the DJIA would do absolutely NOTHING when it relates to the stock price.
You simply can't compare this to anything else on the street. No one has ever run a balance sheet like Apple.
They should just continue to buy back stock. The low stock price can only enhance that. As much as I love the public nature of companies that are, well, publicly traded on the open market, it would probably help Apple to go private. This isn't something that happens overnight with a company this large, but spending 25-40 billion a year on stock buy backs will only increase stock value overall, and eventually help them become private. Private companies have a lot more leeway in how they run their businesses. Also we all know how much Apple wants to be "secretive", going private will help that cause.
"Bain Apple"? You mean take a struggling company and help turn it around? That certainly doesn't apply here.
Basically preferred shares get paid first at a specified dividend, before other shares, but they can't vote.
So for example you may see AAPL A shares, and AAPL B shares, with Apple maybe pays $10/share dividend and trades at $450. Apple B shares is 'guaranteed' to pay say $20/share and trades at a different price.
The result is A shares have volatile growth, and usually lower dividend; and B shares have set dividend and stable stock price.
Institutional investors, such as pensions (and people that want stable income) often like preferred because it adds a base, predictable ROI, and provides them with some potential growth.
Some people want the volatility because they want to cash in on the growth aspect of the company (non-preferred are better suited for this).
> what is it bad?
Because it 'guarantee' to the preferred shareholders is at cost of non-preferred shareholders and even at the cost of future opportunities. So if Apple, one day has flat earnings (for whatever reason) and needs money - they must still honor the preferred shares even if it means cancelling or altering strategic plans.
What Einhorn suggests makes sense, because he and others probably believes that Apple can sustain a consistent higher return, without need to borrow, for the long term. But more importantly his proposal is to vote against the blocking of preferred shares... he wants all options opened and considered (ie, don't rule it out)
On the otherhand, it could just be a ploy to get short term gains (because Einhorn has been incredibly successful by hedging).
.
Last edited:
I thought a huge problem with paying dividends is due to the fact that a substantial portion of Apple's cash profits is held overseas and Apple has not been able to repatriate the funds back to the U.S. without substantial tax consequences.
So, while Apple may be sitting on a pile of cash, they really can't pay a majority of it to shareholders in dividends unless they are willing to take a huge corporate tax hit on the cash first.
So, while Apple may be sitting on a pile of cash, they really can't pay a majority of it to shareholders in dividends unless they are willing to take a huge corporate tax hit on the cash first.
Too bad Apple got so defensive after SJ's passing. If he were still alive, his standard answer to Einhorn and his vulture clan would be: ******* OFF.
But now that spineless Cook has decided to issue dividends even though Apple is and has always been a growth stock, the toothpaste is out of the tube and won't come back.
Alas, a terrible decision that sets terrible precedents.
But now that spineless Cook has decided to issue dividends even though Apple is and has always been a growth stock, the toothpaste is out of the tube and won't come back.
Alas, a terrible decision that sets terrible precedents.
*that they just let sit in the bank
There were 17 companies last year alone that had more $$$ coming in
What makes you think Apple is in any way influenced by the share price? It doesn't actually matter one bit except to people buying shares.
THIS is why a company shouldn't want to be in the public stock market.
If Apple doesn't get better at controlling the idiots, it will eventually be their undoing.
If Apple doesn't get better at controlling the idiots, it will eventually be their undoing.
Looks like I bought at the right time. Dividends?
----------
It would be foolish to buy stock in a company that just released a tablet with a 30GB OS and a horrible battery life.
----------
It would be foolish to buy stock in a company that just released a tablet with a 30GB OS and a horrible battery life.
How? Do you suggest they go to the R&D store and say, "I'd like to order $20 billion in research please."
Assuming an engineer or software developer costs about $250,000 in salary and $250,000 in yearly supplies, office space, equipment (pretty large assumption) that would require hiring 40,000 new R&D folks. Setting aside Apple's retail stores, that would more than double the current number of Apple employees. Where would you find all these engineers and software developers.