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.
Fortune Again Names Apple World's Most Admired Company
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Actually, if you are a public analyst and you can't reliably predict the future, your opinions will be summarily chucked into the circular file. One's track record becomes important when 72% of the outstanding shares are owned by mutual funds and institutional investors. That's why I specifically mentioned Marshall and Hargreaves; their track records are excellent.
When publicly trade companies don't match analyst expectations, the market usually reacts poorly. There is no logic for analysts to create unrealistic estimates. Despite your belief that analysts exist to manipulate the market, they can't manipulate SEC filings.
You have much to learn. You can start with spelling, followed the fundamentals of a free market economy. Your credibility is heavily damaged by your lack of mastery of either topic.
Good luck.
adobe is amazing. the end.
personally, i would fit in your heavily investigated "etc..."
if you're going to make a point about who and why people are disenchanted by Apple, you should at least try to not assume or be biased. come up from the dim light of your grandmother's basement and do some actual research.
really, *LTD*? a quick browse of all the threads you've started on this site begs to question who the real troll is.
I am going to be honest, I did not read the list because I am lazy, but I think the blurb mentioned Google being on that list.
I guess Google can be admired for some things, but in the next few years I think a very different view of Google will come to light.
Google does some things amazingly ineptly that the general public don't know about, and they continue to try and enter into businesses where this short-comings could be catastrophic.
So we shall see... I used to admire google, but do not any longer.
I guess Google can be admired for some things, but in the next few years I think a very different view of Google will come to light.
Google does some things amazingly ineptly that the general public don't know about, and they continue to try and enter into businesses where this short-comings could be catastrophic.
So we shall see... I used to admire google, but do not any longer.
Congratulation Apple
No doubt that Apple took the top spot. Steve Jobs and his team deserves it. Congratulation to each and even person who is involved in bringing Apple to this level. (from the line employees to developers to P. Manager to VP's to Chief officers..)
I am happy too - As I am a big fan of Apple
No doubt that Apple took the top spot. Steve Jobs and his team deserves it. Congratulation to each and even person who is involved in bringing Apple to this level. (from the line employees to developers to P. Manager to VP's to Chief officers..)I am happy too - As I am a big fan of Apple
I really wouldn't be surprised if it did that. It will be interesting to see the market impact that the iPad is going to make and its contribution to the bottom line over the next several quarters. The early demand stats look pretty good.
Give it a rest dude, seriously. What do you own, 1,000 shares? Woop-dee-doo.
This isn't a website about the stock market and not that many people here care about Apple's stock. I can assure you that no one here cares that you own any or what price you bought it at.
wal-mart and coco-cola are also in the top 10. there's nothing admiral about those companies except for their profits. it is fortune magazine, after all.
care to elaborate on your statement about google for us, the general public?
+1
If you are a public analyst and you can't reliably help create the future, your opinions will be summarily chucked into the circular file.
But they can manipulate investor behaviour, which in turn affects corporation behaviour, together affecting SEC filings.
I apologise if I have made a spelling error... could you please point it out for my benefit?
I am certain that one of the fundamentals of a free market economy is that marketing affects customer behaviour, and that includes the marketing of investments to current and potential investors. Public analysts may start off by making good guesses, but once they have a voice well heard -- as you have yourself admitted -- they help the fulfilment of their own prophecies, most easily through the publication of vague recommendations.
I'm sure you remember what happened to HP under chief clown Fiorina. On the one hand, we must admire Apple for observing the risk they took with Intel, and we can understand their wanting to invest in their own chip plants. But they remain in the same trap of relying on a few years of unparalleled technical success and accompanying investor support, and have begun to allow the tail to wag the dog. The iPad is revolutionary as an ink cartridge with strong DRM, and it fulfils a similar role.
Hear hear! The most repeated fallacy I have seen on Macrumors (and other Apple community sites) is the "ur jus jealous" argument. It might be interesting to try and understand why, as few other enthusiast communities fall into the same mistake of assuming that every visitor is going to have the same values/motivation/interests. Although I chuckle at the idea of going to a Linux community forum and seeing proud proclamations about investment performance in, say, Red Hat. OK, there was a bit of that a decade or so ago, but people grew out of it when they acknowledged once again that investors are a means to the end: technological advancement.Eso said:
Virtus? Blackstone? You mean the type of players who were responsible for the crash in the first place? Try again. We're still trying to pull out of the biggest market crash in 70 years. Few stocks have returned to near their pre-crash levels. Aapl not only sailed through the storm while analyst clowns like Abramsky were predicting shrinking demand/lower prices, but has gone on to all time highs. I've also been in aapl 5 years. The crash was no fun but aapl survived it far better than any others. And it's just the beginning. The mobile internet is just getting started and aapl is better positioned in the space than any other company. Selling aapl right now (trading at @ 13 times forward earnings ex cash) would be about as dumb as buying a Palm or NOK phone. If you think $275 in a year is mad, you'll love $375 in 2.
The mobile Internet was "just getting started" not after 1998, when I first recall sitting in a McDonald's in London with a Psion palmtop connected to a GSM cellphone.
Apple can't even begin to take pre-orders until March 12, so you are simply blowing smoke up people's arse.
The risk of staying with PowerPC architecture was greater than switching to Intel.
"investing in their own chip plants" - What do you mean by this? I do not see evidence of Apple building their own foundries or even taking a partial ownership stake in someone else's.
if you get music books and movies for free maybe it means you are stealing?
just wondering
Eidorian doesn't believe in paying for digital content, failing to understand that the reason people create digital content is to make money (ie a living) by doing so.
Fortunately there are those of us who do pay for content, enabling its creation and his opportunty to mooch it.
To be generous, I'll assume that you're not an American citizen -
your profile doesn't list your homeworld.
In the US, "property taxes" are taxes paid on "real property" - in
other words, land and buildings on the land. They are "real
estate" taxes, not taxes on personal property like Igadgets and
the like.
Renters don't own the real estate, so they do not directly pay
property taxes (although one can assume that the landlord has
factored the property taxes into the rent).
So, it's a big stretch to take "I don't pay property taxes" to
"you are just a dirty thief".
so you are saying instead of buying books music and movies is ok to get them illegally without paying?
you are out of your mind
i dont need to be usa citizen to understand such simple concept
Public libraries in the US loan books and DVDs without charge -
that's the basic purpose of a library. One of our local libraries
even loans ebooks.
Public libraries are paid for by taxes, so Eidorian is actually
paying for the content - just not at the point of consumption.
Assuming that Eidorian doesn't digitize the books or rip the DVDs
to his system, it's legally (and ethically) proper.
If I really want to buy a CD I can get them off of eBay for pennies and shipping. Failing that there's Amazon or DRM free iTunes.
Otherwise content for the sake of one time consumption is off of my ATSC DVR, Hulu, or borrowing materials from the library. I don't see a reason to buy content if I don't want to own it. Subscriptions tread a gray area for me but I haven't purchased any yet.
With all of the money I do save not paying for books, DVDs, and music (usually classical); I do buy plenty of games via Steam for my friends (4 person bulk discounts in addition to 50-75% off sales) and for the rest of my free time.
Yes, I am a renter.
Aiden do you have any idea how the licensing and viewer works for your library system's eBooks? We have downloadable audiobooks and certain materials visible via a web browser. It's still a leap to see the library fitting into as a eBook filling station for devices at this point. It still looks like vendors and service providers are fighting it out in hardware and software.