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 Soars Past $1,000 Pre-Split Price as Bulls Think 'Golden Opportunity' to Buy Remains
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
What! It just infuriates them more that so many sheep don't see the truth they make up.well this should appease the haters. Apple is still alive and doing well
It might be possible if they continue to accumulate cash. As it stands, they have around $240 billion in cash and cashish investments. That's a pretty big slice of the overall market cap.
Smells like you don't know what you are talking about.
Apple's market caps is $756 billion. Now make us all laugh and come up with an explanation how "pump and dump" would work on a company of that size. If you know what "pump and dump" actually means.
There's been plenty of market for Samsung, Apple and the others for years now. Apple has only 12% of the worldwide smartphone market but Apple gobbles up 91% of the profits.
That's the nice thing about a free market economy, you've got lots of choices. If Apple no longer fits for you, its time to move on. The fact remains that at this particular point in time, the Apple label has never been more profitable so they must be doing something right as a diversified company!
I invested in APPL in the 1990s and my shares are up by more than 2,000% before taxes since purchase. Apple pays me about $5,000 in dividends each year so I can afford to remain loyal and wait for new computer products.
Ahhh yes ... the snarky troll arrives to reveal its ugly head. Unfortunately, that thing you're smelling is your own ignorance with an unhealthy dose of arrogance.
This happens to Apple's stock every time a new device class and/or new iPhone is rumored to be launched.
The Market gets the media to publish outlandish news stories to get people to buy the stock. Thus, driving stock prices higher than the previous quarters. But only after they've published stories saying Apple is in trouble and the prices have decreased to a point where the savvy Market players have bought the stock at a lower price. Hence, it's the price spread that matters and not the market capitalization.
Hence, it's obvious you don't know what "pump and dump" actually means. Here's a short description for further study. I suggest you take a break from trolling and learn something: http://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/05/061205.asp
Actually APPL stock has had a long, slow, fairly steady climb for about five years now. I'm an Apple investor so I've tracked the stock on a daily basis for many years.
Just Google "Apple five year chart" and you'll see nothing that resembles a "pump and dump" pattern. The entire stock market has been in a bull market for eight years, the third longest run in history and APPL's growth patterns are consistent with the market as a whole.
"The Bull Market Just Turned Eight; Apple has surged more than 1,080 percent"
http://www.valuewalk.com/2017/03/bull-market-just-turned-eight-apple-surged-1080-percent/
The numbers speak for themselves. But perhaps there's been eight years of pumping and we're still waiting for the dumping.
Well, logically the better the company is doing financially the more they can rest on their laurels. When it was "innovate or be bankrupt", what a time that was for products. Humans individually are the same way. Ingenuity, critical thinking, and courage (real courage - not Apple BS
) will increase when personal safety is in jeopardy.
The new MacBook Pro absolutely slays and most 2016 MBP owners can't be happier with it. That's because they actually bought it and loved it, rather than looked at the paper specs and scoffed.
Don't believe the negativity here; the MacWhiners are the exception to the rule. Just reading this website, you'd think that everybody hates the 2016, but that couldn't be further from the truth.
I suppose that's your anecdotal analysis. However, after seeing and tyring out the 2016 MBP, I rushed to the Apple refurb store to buy the highest-spec last generation MBP I could get. Now I enjoy proper ports, including HDMI and an SD card slot, a better keyboard, magsafe, and better battery life. I don't know what I'll buy when I need to upgrade, but I doubt Apple will have anything for me. Of course, whatever they have will be incredibly thin and magical, it just won't be useful.
What it really come down to is, "everything I can't be bothered to understand must be a conspiracy."
Apple Computer, Inc. stock split several times before the initial IPO. Early investors and some employees got stock or stock option shares before some (or all in the case of Markkula) of those pre-IPO splits.
The 56:1 only represents those splits after the IPO.
[doublepost=1490850192][/doublepost]
Underpowered? The original PowerBook was price at over $2,200 and came with a 16 MHz 68000 CPU, 2 MB of RAM, and no disk drive. Over 1000X less powerful than your "underpowered" MBA. According to Wikipedia, Apple sold $1B in PowerBooks that first year.
As was previously discussed. Very few investors have access to pre-IPO shares, so 56:1 represents what 99.99% percent of investors can have experienced as AAPL splits. I wonder how many pre-IPO Apple investors are still alive?
Yes, underpowered. You may not understand "underpowered" was in reference to other laptops available at that time in 2008 when the MBA was introduced. And not in reference to the first PowerBook which was introduced 17 years earlier. That would make little sense.
Last edited:
People have been pointing to supposed "iPhone killers" for a decade and their cries of Apple being doomed have turned out to be wrong each and every time.
I stand by my earlier statements. The iPhone faces more competition from earlier versions of the iPhone compared to any other competing smartphone out there.
Doesn't Occam's razor suggest that Apple is earning so much money precisely because they are releasing great products which people want to buy?
So you're shorting, then?
[doublepost=1490874605][/doublepost]
The number of zeros on the other side of the decimal point is staggering...
As I suggested, Mr. Markkula was the first major investor in Apple Computer, Inc. That's why I referred to his purchase of shares, that's the earliest share value comparison that can be made for Apple. That's the first transaction on which we can base a market valuation for the company. It was very early days and things were moving fast for Apple, but that transaction represented Mr. Markkula agreeing to pay $91,000 for one-third ownership of Apple Computer, Inc.
Mr. Jobs and Mr. Wozniak had previously paid a small amount (and gave other consideration) for shares in Apple. But I'm not counting them as investors.
Mr. Markkula's share purchase represented the first (real) round of equity fundraising by Apple. As I indicated, it was done at 35 cents a share. A couple of months later Apple did another round of equity fundraising, selling 172,500 shares for $3 a share. So Mr. Markkula's investment was - after a couple of months - already being valued at about 9 times what he had paid for it.
You have a very short memory as the market has pumped and dumped Apple stock several times of the years.
[doublepost=1490884112][/doublepost]
Apple stock is not risk free for people buying in now. You bought in when the price was very low so you can't lose, but for those buying now any downward move in the stock price would easily outweigh the quarterly dividend payments.
Apple are basically a one product company now. If one day the iPhone stops selling so well, Apple has nothing else capable of making up the numbers. Also, if Trump follows through on his promise to slap import duties it could hit iPhone sales.
I found this article on Apple stockholders at the time of the IPO:
https://www.quora.com/How-much-equi...O-Did-he-really-have-double-the-equity-of-Woz
Of some interest, the single individual largest stockholder was Steve Jobs. Markkula was second and Wozniak was third. But the largest block by far was "all officers and directors."
"Apple are DOOMED! DOOMED I tell you"
[doublepost=1490891019][/doublepost]
I see a logical flaw inherent in the widespread attribution of the label "sheep" to Apple fans: do the folk attributing this label entirely miss that, by also following the crowd and bandying about this attribution of "sheep", they are, in fact, themselves "sheep" by having nothing more original or sensible to say about Apple fans, and just following the pattern of every OTHER person deriding Apple fans for their passion?
Irony 101.
[doublepost=1490891019][/doublepost]
I see a logical flaw inherent in the widespread attribution of the label "sheep" to Apple fans: do the folk attributing this label entirely miss that, by also following the crowd and bandying about this attribution of "sheep", they are, in fact, themselves "sheep" by having nothing more original or sensible to say about Apple fans, and just following the pattern of every OTHER person deriding Apple fans for their passion?
Irony 101.