that's not a new story. there are always corrections. that's why they're called corrections. How deep depends on how out of balance P/E ratios vs. growth prospects are.
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's Stock Price Reaches New All-Time High
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
People exercise idiotic agency all the time. Certainly no mutual exclusivity there at all. As someone who has been an apple/Mac user since 1991, there is absolutely no question that Apple's focus has shifted from Steve's passion to create the most innovative tech products on the market to Tim's strategy to 'Keep stock prices up at all costs'. Tim's 'one more thing' is putting 2TB of memory in a product and calling it innovation. This is all coattails. Without Steve's era of creative innovation, Tim's era of incremental propagation would never be possible. Though admittedly conjecture, IMO, Tim would not be a successful CEO with any other tech company. His history with and the recommendation by SJ is what has solely carried him.
Well, AMZN stock is up even though they’re suffering issues: https://health.aws.amazon.com/health/status
Politics and interest rates influence the stock more on average than the individual performance of a company. Of course unless something drastic happens to a company.
Politics and interest rates influence the stock more on average than the individual performance of a company. Of course unless something drastic happens to a company.
Apple is not unbeatable, if they didn’t give the customer more features in this iPhone 17 they would be in serious trouble. Their strategy of doing the bare minimum in terms of features and using the cash to buy back the stock would not have worked in this environment.
This assumption is based on the market being rational, that is not always the case. Thats how some stocks are still at an all time high while revenues are at an all time low. Some companies are becoming meme stocks at this point, case in point Tesla stock.
All you folks that liked on "A bubble that is going to blow up, nostock can replace the reality, just look the quality of 17 pros" should go ahead and short AAPL. Then tell us how that worked out for you in six months.
P.S. The 17 Pros are great quality, but that is IMO.
It isn't based on this assumption at all, and even it was, it would be irrelevant to the point. The point being, you as an individual cannot outguess the collective evaluations of millions of investors. Even the pros with all of their data can't do this consistently. It's a fool's errand to try.
We are seeing the phenomenon of meme stocks. These are small and fundamentally low-value companies that are traded thinly enough to be essentially pumped-and-dumped by manipulators who are not trading on the value of the businesses. Tesla, as one of the most valuable companies in the market, is not one of them.
Do not denigrate buybacks. The insinuation that buybacks are meant to move stock price is wrong-headed thinking. Buybacks are basically legal insider trading; Apple knowing that its future is good and stock undervalued, so it buys some back. Smart.
The reason the stock is at an all-time high is because of rumors that iPhone 17 sales are better than iPhone 16 sales were. Once again proving that Apple is the iPhone company and that’s all Wall Street really cares about.
That’s the thing: I haven’t used them in a few years, so I no longer have the hands-on experience that drove me to the Apple ecosystem and no updated knowledge about whether they’re now superior. I stay because the experience is good enough to keep me from considering switching back. I’m sure I’m not the only person like that.
Yes, Apple is behind in AI. And last time AAPL was this high it was coasting on Apple Intelligence hype.
As soon as that was exposed it plummeted.
At this point Apple's best hope is to be part of a smart glasses duopoly.
As soon as that was exposed it plummeted.
At this point Apple's best hope is to be part of a smart glasses duopoly.
Last edited:
Can you point to where Cook called adding 2TB in an Apple product "innovation?" Thanks.
"This is all coattails. Without Steve's era of creative innovation,..."
What innovation would that be? Are you referring to the Mac and its graphical user interface and being mouse driven? Well... credit for that goes to Xerox PARC (Palo Alto Research Center) and to Doug Englebart who invented the mouse at SRI (Stanford Research Institute). Fortunately for Apple, Jobs got a demo of PARC's invention in their lab which eventually lead to Apple developing the Mac.
Or maybe iPad? Nope... Grid developed the first tablet, which was followed by others, including HP, before Apple released iPad.
Or perhaps iPhone? Again no. Apple collaborated with Motorola wireless engineers (who wrote the book on cellular telephony, lead by Martin Cooper) helping Apple develop ROKR. After acquiring cellular telephony knowledge working with Motorola helped Apple develop iPhone.
He does get credit for Apple III, Apple Lisa, Newton, PowerMac G3 Cube, Apple iPod HiFi, Apple iPod Sox, Macintosh TV, Apple Powerbook 5300, 20th Aniversary Mac, Macintosh TV, Pippin, Performa 200, ROKR cell phone. All flops.
"Tim would not be a successful CEO with any other tech company. His history with and the recommendation by SJ is what has solely carried him."
Nope. Apple's 1+ Billion active and repeat customers, becoming one of the most successful consumer tech companies in the world, speaks volumes about Cooks leadership.
And, with that, the little twinge in the sides of those pining for products that Apple discontinued sticks just a bit sharper. “How can they continue to exist when they discontinued <product they liked>? Doesn’t everyone know that product was what made Apple what they are today and, without it, they should be fading into obscurity? Why won’t people let them fade into obscurity!?!?!”
Well the smartphone market is almost 20 years old and quite mature now … and Apple has been number one during all those years (i.e. is still unbeaten). What makes you think this will change any other way than a new type of device replacing the smart phone as the most important device?
But they did.
Not really. How many years have „experts“ on the internet claimed that the iPhone of whichever year they made the comment wasn’t innovative enough, and yet iPhones still sold like the always did. The ecosystem is just incredibly strong and sticky.
They just create different product tiers, like all good businesses do. If you want all the bells and whistles, get a Pro Max.
What has buying back stock to do with whether or not Apple is beatable in the smart phone market?