I'm still kicking myself for not buying stock when it was less than $200 ...![]()
Aren't we all!
I'm still kicking myself for not buying stock when it was less than $200 ...![]()
I bought at 85 a few years ago. Of course, I sold 2 years ago. Made a nice little prophet, but could have been so much more.
The logic behind short term stock market is so subjective and unpredictable than I don't waste my time with it. But in the long term, it seems to work.Oh ok, no worries!
I do wonder how much further it can rise at this point
Depends on what you mean by wealthy. Luck has produced a few millionaires. But look at the list of the world's wealthiest ... Among billionaires there isn't a single one of them who arrived there, and, most importantly, STAYED there, on luck.
And that's why I'm not buying now ... and if I could figure out where it is going next, I would make a lot more money than I do now.![]()
It's as I told a close friend yesterday, buying AAPL is not an investment strategy. There are two important words there: "investment" and "strategy".
Investment requires active research, and making decisions not based on speculative plays but a sound analysis of the value of the asset being acquired. Hearing about a company as ubiquitous as Apple and then jumping on board on the assumption that it'll keep going up (remember the housing market?) is not investing.
If all of Apple's enterprise were struck by a meteor tomorrow and wiped off the face of the planet, would the average Apple speculator be well insulated from that catastrophe in the rest of their portfolio. Would their "sit and presume infinite growth" tack work with the broader market?
If the answer to questions like these is "no" then whatever else you want to call it, it's not investing, and it's not a strategy.
Spend less time beating yourself up for "shoulda, woulda, coulda" on a company that could have just as easily gone the other way... and start beefing up your knowledge of investing, and insulate yourself against potential catastrophic loss. THAT, and not consistent huge wins, is what will growth your wealth tremendously in the long term.
Chasing unsustainable returns is a sure fire way to expose your principal to risk of loss... and that kind of loss compounds over time. I don't miss the AAPL boat because I have much more stable long term investments that are actually providing pretty stellar returns, very close to Apple's.... but without the volatility of the umpteen zillion speculators who are all sitting and hoping with their eyes closed and ears shut.
I'm not saying that Apple will do terribly, but Apple's book value is well below 600 dollars per share. So the difference is owing entirely to speculation on where they will go in the future. That works perfectly as long as Apple keeps producing double digit growth infinitely... but its the "infinitely" part that is a statistical impossibility. Growth rates have to shrink at that scale because a) Apple is gaining share of wallet much faster than the number of wallets or size of wallets is increasing, and b) Apple has to produce exponentially more marginal revenue each quarter just to maintain the same growth rate mathematically.
And then there's the Steve factor... any time a business's image and success are so inextricably tied to an iconic figure you cannot top that. No one will ever take the reins of Apple with a greater vested interest than Steve had. No visionary of Steve's caliber will prefer to work for Apple over starting his own company.
A shrewd investor is like a good hockey player... skate to where the puck is going next, not to where it is now.
It's as I told a close friend yesterday, buying AAPL is not an investment strategy. There are two important words there: "investment" and "strategy".
Investment requires active research, and making decisions not based on speculative plays but a sound analysis of the value of the asset being acquired. Hearing about a company as ubiquitous as Apple and then jumping on board on the assumption that it'll keep going up (remember the housing market?) is not investing.
If all of Apple's enterprise were struck by a meteor tomorrow and wiped off the face of the planet, would the average Apple speculator be well insulated from that catastrophe in the rest of their portfolio. Would their "sit and presume infinite growth" tack work with the broader market?
If the answer to questions like these is "no" then whatever else you want to call it, it's not investing, and it's not a strategy.
Spend less time beating yourself up for "shoulda, woulda, coulda" on a company that could have just as easily gone the other way... and start beefing up your knowledge of investing, and insulate yourself against potential catastrophic loss. THAT, and not consistent huge wins, is what will growth your wealth tremendously in the long term.
Chasing unsustainable returns is a sure fire way to expose your principal to risk of loss... and that kind of loss compounds over time. I don't miss the AAPL boat because I have much more stable long term investments that are actually providing pretty stellar returns, very close to Apple's.... but without the volatility of the umpteen zillion speculators who are all sitting and hoping with their eyes closed and ears shut.
I'm not saying that Apple will do terribly, but Apple's book value is well below 600 dollars per share. So the difference is owing entirely to speculation on where they will go in the future. That works perfectly as long as Apple keeps producing double digit growth infinitely... but its the "infinitely" part that is a statistical impossibility. Growth rates have to shrink at that scale because a) Apple is gaining share of wallet much faster than the number of wallets or size of wallets is increasing, and b) Apple has to produce exponentially more marginal revenue each quarter just to maintain the same growth rate mathematically.
And then there's the Steve factor... any time a business's image and success are so inextricably tied to an iconic figure you cannot top that. No one will ever take the reins of Apple with a greater vested interest than Steve had. No visionary of Steve's caliber will prefer to work for Apple over starting his own company.
A shrewd investor is like a good hockey player... skate to where the puck is going next, not to where it is now.
What goes up must come down.
Anyone got a time machine? Would love to go back a few years...
I can only imagine what all the apple emo haters are going to be doing tomorrow. I swear some of my friends almost pop when Apple proves themselves the best certain times. I am surprised a couple of them have not knifed me yet just for owning a mac.
if anyone wants to buy in... just wait for it to drop a bunch, then buy. if it drops more, don't be pissed, just buy more![]()
No but it's still a fact... sorry to burst your bubble nothing lasts forever. It may go up for the next 100 years, but it will go down sometime. I suppose after the sun explodes apple stock will keep going up, right?
Have you ever heard of Mark Cuban? Do you know how he made all his money?
I think Apple's a fine company and there are a lot worse stocks out there to buy, but you have to wonder if it's becoming a self contained bubble.
You pick up any financial magazine or newspaper or read an article online and everyone is recommending Apple and saying it's going to $1,000 and will be the first trillion dollar company. One thing I've noticed with the stock market is that (usually) when everyone agrees on something, it doesn't happen.
Just ask yourself how different Apple is today than last month? Is it really worth $100 more a share than it was at the beginning of February? How much has the business changed? We all knew the iPhone was going well. We all knew the iPad was getting updated.
Or since January? Is Apple 50% better today than it was in January? Because the stock's jumped from $400 to $600 since then. Is it justified?
Again, I'm not saying Apple's not going to succeed. I'm just saying I wouldn't feel very comfortable buying at this level.
Have you ever heard of Mark Cuban? Do you know how he made all his money?
I'm still kicking myself for not buying stock when it was less than $200 ...![]()
If only I had invested in Apple back in the 80's.