Google Again Surpasses Apple as Most Valuable Company in the World

[Blaze4G]

As for cars... I don't agree. I think we're heading into a new world of automobiles in the next 10 years. Software is going to play a significant roll in the new vehicles and Apple is one of the best at software. Way better than GM, Ford, Mercedes, BMW... any of the traditional auto makers. So, it's possible a new generation of auto makers like Tesla will take a leadership position in 10 years. This wave is just starting and Apple, Google, and others have a shot to be in the mix.

BTW... I think Apple's growth will come from the eco-system. If Apple can perfect the eco system between your smart phone, home, TV, computer, health, and cars, then they may have a huge advantage in extending their profits.

I see Apple car being a big fail. Why? Where are they going to sell the cars? At Apple stores? They would need dealerships across the country. By time Apple gets a footing in the auto arena (if they ever do) other major automakers will have caught up and passed them. I see Google partnering with other automakers vs building their own. While Apple is trying to do everything themselves. I think consumers would prefer to buy a Toyota + Google partnered car vs an Apple car. I see Tesla being bought out soon or atleast one of the major automakers buying a large stake in it.
[doublepost=1463467671][/doublepost]

It's always big news when Google surpasses Apple in market cap. Last time it lasted a day. This time it lasted 3 trading days, of course that is not news. Now Warren Buffet has decided to make a billion dollar investment in Apple maybe some others will see the value side of owning Apple at a 10 P/E ratio. Buffet buys stocks for the long term, and I wouldn't be against him being right on Apple when we look down the road 3-5 years.

first of all, Buffet firm 1 Billion investment was over a month ago when the stock was $109. I am sure they are second guessing their decision now. Second, Buffet does not like investing in Technology firms and rarely do. I think he has personally done it once with IBM and been losing on that. More likely this investment came from the 2 guys he has put in place to take over his firm. So you're not betting against him, you're betting against the two guys who suppose to be taking over.

 

[moxin]

NFC payments, large screen smartphones, 2k resolution, virtual reality with smartphones, fast wireless charging, USB quick charging, notification pulldown, multitasking, I can go on. I'm not saying Android invented all these features, but no other smartphone company has implemented them yet

exactly and these are all available on mid-ranged android phones ($200 - $400 price range)

 

[admob71]

Ahm Apple phones are definitely luxury items. Unless you're trying to say it is absolutely necessary to have an iPhone or else you won't be able to survive.

Something can costs 10s of pounds a month on contract luxury? Give over, I suppose you think ugg boots and burberry baseball caps are luxury as well.

Would you say an s7 edge that costs exactly the same is a luxury items? . I'm guessing not, why is that..

 

[Blaze4G]

Something can costs 10s of pounds a month on contract luxury? Give over, I suppose you think ugg boots and burberry baseball caps are luxury as well.

Would you say an s7 edge that costs exactly the same is a luxury items? . I'm guessing not, why is that..

It does not cost 10 pounds in total though. What the hell? Of course the s7 is a luxury item. A smartphone is a luxury item.
So you are telling me if you don't have a smartphone you will suddenly die?

 

[admob71]

It does not cost 10 pounds in total though. What the hell? Of course the s7 is a luxury item. A smartphone is a luxury item.
So you are telling me if you don't have a smartphone you will suddenly die?

Are a pair of socks a luxury item? A luxury item is something like a supercar, so things that costs a massive ammount more than the normal. You need to reassess what you consider luxury.. what is this dieing business all about. Jeez...

Apart from food , water and basic housing and clothes, do you consider everything else luxury?

 

[Blaze4G]

Are a pair of socks a luxury item? A luxury item is something like a supercar, so things that costs a massive ammount more than the normal. You need to reassess what you consider luxury.. what is this dieing business all about. Jeez...

Apart from food , water and basic housing and clothes, do you consider everything else luxury?

Okay maybe I went too far with luxury item however
Think of it like this. A corolla cost 20k. A corvette cost 100k. So 5 times the amount of the corolla. By your thought process the corvette is a luxury item right?

Okay so now a moto G cost 150 and an iPhone cost 650. So the iPhone is 4.3 times more than the moto G. Then the iPhone is a luxury item right? Since it cost "a massive amount more than normal".

 

[admob71]

Okay maybe I went too far with luxury item however
Think of it like this. A corolla cost 20k. A corvette cost 100k. So 5 times the amount of the corolla. By your thought process the corvette is a luxury item right?

Okay so now a moto G cost 150 and an iPhone cost 650. So the iPhone is 4.3 times more than the moto G. Then the iPhone is a luxury item right? Since it cost "a massive amount more than normal".

Erm 80k more is luxury, a few hundred pounds isnt. Anything that the average man in the street can buy I. E a 100 million iphones ain't luxury pal. It's the ratio of cost to earnings. All working folk can afford a smartphone, 0.1% of folk if that can afford a Ferrari. They are luxury, a iPhone isn't. Sadly in the UK a smashed screen 4s is the mobile phone choice of the chav. They seem to think it gives them some weird sort of prestige, when in reality it's 20 quids worth of broken tech.

 

[I7guy]

I see Apple car being a big fail. Why? Where are they going to sell the cars? At Apple stores? They would need dealerships across the country. By time Apple gets a footing in the auto arena (if they ever do) other major automakers will have caught up and passed them. I see Google partnering with other automakers vs building their own. While Apple is trying to do everything themselves. I think consumers would prefer to buy a Toyota + Google partnered car vs an Apple car. I see Tesla being bought out soon or atleast one of the major automakers buying a large stake in it.
[doublepost=1463467671][/doublepost]
first of all, Buffet firm 1 Billion investment was over a month ago when the stock was $109. I am sure they are second guessing their decision now. Second, Buffet does not like investing in Technology firms and rarely do. I think he has personally done it once with IBM and been losing on that. More likely this investment came from the 2 guys he has put in place to take over his firm. So you're not betting against him, you're betting against the two guys who suppose to be taking over.

So the most savvy investor in the world didn't see the writing on the wall and is now second guessing their decision? Alrighty then.

 

[Blaze4G]

So the most savvy investor in the world didn't see the writing on the wall and is now second guessing their decision? Alrighty then.

Did you not read? Buffet might not have been the one that made the investment or had any knowledge before hand.

If it was in fact buffet, if he was so savvy why not wait a month for the stock to drop $19 more? The investment from 1 month ago has now cost the company over 180 million. I would love to see you lose 180 million in a month and see if you shrug that off as nothing.

Nobody is perfect. But apparently you believe buffet and Apple is.
[doublepost=1463508732][/doublepost]

Erm 80k more is luxury, a few hundred pounds isnt. Anything that the average man in the street can buy I. E a 100 million iphones ain't luxury pal. It's the ratio of cost to earnings. All working folk can afford a smartphone, 0.1% of folk if that can afford a Ferrari. They are luxury, a iPhone isn't. Sadly in the UK a smashed screen 4s is the mobile phone choice of the chav. They seem to think it gives them some weird sort of prestige, when in reality it's 20 quids worth of broken tech.

So the definition for luxury keeps changing? I thought it was something that cost more than normal. Or something that is one of the most expensive in that industry. So if people start buying 1,000 dollar watches, its not luxury because the average man in the street can buy it right?
A $1000 shoes is not luxury because the average man can buy it right?

 

[I7guy]

Did you not read? Buffet might not have been the one that made the investment or had any knowledge before hand.

If it was in fact buffet, if he was so savvy why not wait a month for the stock to drop $19 more? The investment from 1 month ago has now cost the company over 180 million. I would love to see you lose 180 million in a month and see if you shrug that off as nothing.

Nobody is perfect. But apparently you believe buffet and Apple is.
[doublepost=1463508732][/doublepost]
So the definition for luxury keeps changing? I thought it was something that cost more than normal. Or something that is one of the most expensive in that industry. So if people start buying 1,000 dollar watches, its not luxury because the average man in the street can buy it right?
A $1000 shoes is not luxury because the average man can buy it right?

Well considering Berkshire Hathaway is worth 210k a share I would say his credentials win over your opinion; regardless of whether a junior purchased the shares or not. When your in the game for 210k a share expect huge swings in your valuation. I would love to see you have the guts to buy the same number of shares BH did.

The mistake they (BH) obviously made is not look at macrumors' "Apple is doomed" threads, which has multiplied like rabbits.

 

[Blaze4G]

Well considering Berkshire Hathaway is worth 210k a share I would say his credentials win over your opinion; regardless of whether a junior purchased the shares or not. When your in the game for 210k a share expect huge swings in your valuation. I would love to see you have the guts to buy the same number of shares BH did.

The mistake they (BH) obviously made is not look at macrumors' "Apple is doomed" threads, which has multiplied like rabbits.

Lol typical i7guy with the excuses. So what logical reason is there for buying Apple shares at $109 a month ago vs waiting until a few days ago to get it at $90?

Now as usual you're not going to answer the question or try and divert.

Fact of the matter is they would have MUCH preferred to buy it at $90 vs $109. They perhaps anticpate it to go up in the distant future. Does not change the fact that they would have preferred to have bought in at $90. So if they got their first prediction wrong of $109 being the best value to buy in for Apple. Why can't they be wrong that the forecast they made for Apple is also incorrect.

As stated before, the only tech company buffet bought into was IBM. He lost BIG TIME. So he is not perfect. He also advice's to be wary of tech companies and does not like investing in them. But continue to make excuses, because Apple is perfect.

P.S. not because someone is an expert in something mean they can't make mistakes or learn something from a noob.

 

[I7guy]

Lol typical i7guy with the excuses. So what logical reason is there for buying Apple shares at $109 a month ago vs waiting until a few days ago to get it at $90?

Now as usual you're not going to answer the question or try and divert.

Fact of the matter is they would have MUCH preferred to buy it at $90 vs $109. They perhaps anticpate it to go up in the distant future. Does not change the fact that they would have preferred to have bought in at $90. So if they got their first prediction wrong of $109 being the best value to buy in for Apple. Why can't they be wrong that the forecast they made for Apple is also incorrect.

As stated before, the only tech company buffet bought into was IBM. He lost BIG TIME. So he is not perfect. He also advice's to be wary of tech companies and does not like investing in them. But continue to make excuses, because Apple is perfect.

P.S. not because someone is an expert in something mean they can't make mistakes or learn something from a noob.

All speculation. Of course since you dont know the facts of the hey they bought at the time they bought you filled in your own version with a dash of hyperbole. (I.e. Incompetence and hol units) Sure people make mistakes, but I don't see anyone asking for your(or mine) investing advice on macrumors. But I do see people following Buffet.

But continue to fill in the blanks with your own version of the facts; quite entertaining.

 

[admob71]

Did you not read? Buffet might not have been the one that made the investment or had any knowledge before hand.

If it was in fact buffet, if he was so savvy why not wait a month for the stock to drop $19 more? The investment from 1 month ago has now cost the company over 180 million. I would love to see you lose 180 million in a month and see if you shrug that off as nothing.

Nobody is perfect. But apparently you believe buffet and Apple is.
[doublepost=1463508732][/doublepost]
So the definition for luxury keeps changing? I thought it was something that cost more than normal. Or something that is one of the most expensive in that industry. So if people start buying 1,000 dollar watches, its not luxury because the average man in the street can buy it right?
A $1000 shoes is not luxury because the average man can buy it right?

The average man in the street is not buying a 1000 dollar watch, hence they really are a luxury item. I'd wager that 200 bucks is the average price of a watch across the country. Try again, but maybe a tad harder. Or maybe just accept you made some foolish comments and move on..

 

[Blaze4G]

The average man in the street is not buying a 1000 dollar watch, hence they really are a luxury item. I'd wager that 200 bucks is the average price of a watch across the country. Try again, but maybe a tad harder. Or maybe just accept you made some foolish comments and move on..

LOL. So a luxury item by your ever changing definition, the latest one being if the average man can buy it then it is not a luxury item. The average man can buy a 1000 watch just like how he can buy a 1000 iPhone 6s+. But now your definition for luxury item changes ones more. You and your foolish definitions for luxury items. What are we on now the 4th definition by you? Keep backtracking when you realize you're contradicting yourself.

Just because the average man is not buying a 1000 dollar watch makes it a luxury item? Wow brilliant definition. But because the average man buys an iPhone it is not a luxury item. So if the average man is not buying the blackberry priv it is now a luxury item? Oh gosh you're quite funny.
[doublepost=1463520309][/doublepost]

All speculation. Of course since you dont know the facts of the hey they bought at the time they bought you filled in your own version with a dash of hyperbole. (I.e. Incompetence and hol units) Sure people make mistakes, but I don't see anyone asking for your(or mine) investing advice on macrumors. But I do see people following Buffet.

But continue to fill in the blanks with your own version of the facts; quite entertaining.

Own version? All what I stated are facts. They made the investments over a month ago at 109 per share. After 1 month it fell to $90. However you still fail to grasp that this was not a good thing in the investment world. It is not rocket science. I don't need to work on wall street to know that was not the best investment at the time. Common sense should tell you that.
Do some reading for yourself if you don't believe my figures. By the way the total investment of 1 billion bought a little bit over 9 million shares in Apple. I don't remember the exact figure. You can do your research for yourself since you think I am making up figures out of thin air.

 

[I7guy]

LOL. So a luxury item by your ever changing definition, the latest one being if the average man can buy it then it is not a luxury item. The average man can buy a 1000 watch just like how he can buy a 1000 iPhone 6s+. But now your definition for luxury item changes ones more. You and your foolish definitions for luxury items. What are we on now the 4th definition by you? Keep backtracking when you realize you're contradicting yourself.

Just because the average man is not buying a 1000 dollar watch makes it a luxury item? Wow brilliant definition. But because the average man buys an iPhone it is not a luxury item. So if the average man is not buying the blackberry priv it is now a luxury item? Oh gosh you're quite funny.
[doublepost=1463520309][/doublepost]
Own version? All what I stated are facts. They made the investments over a month ago at 109 per share. After 1 month it fell to $90. However you still fail to grasp that this was not a good thing in the investment world. It is not rocket science. I don't need to work on wall street to know that was not the best investment at the time. Common sense should tell you that.
Do some reading for yourself if you don't believe my figures. By the way the total investment of 1 billion bought a little bit over 9 million shares in Apple. I don't remember the exact figure. You can do your research for yourself since you think I am making up figures out of thin air.

Do some reading..the stock market has consistently gone up for the last sixty years. Profit takers shouldn't be in market where they can't weather a downturn. buffet isn't a buy today, sell tomorrow guy. The fact the market goes up and down is an uncomfortable truth only if you were planning on selling tomorrow do paper losses mean anything. If you are concerned about losing shareholder equity the stock market is not for you for at some point you will.

 

[Blaze4G]

Do some reading..the stock market has consistently gone up for the last sixty years. Profit takers shouldn't be in market where they can't weather a downturn. buffet isn't a buy today, sell tomorrow guy. The fact the market goes up and down is an uncomfortable truth only if you were planning on selling tomorrow do paper losses mean anything. If you are concerned about losing shareholder equity the stock market is not for you for at some point you will.

The stock market has gone up for the last 60 years? Why are you telling me that like that matters? Did every stock go up during those 60 years? No. So you stating that does not mean Apple will go up as well. You're here stating the obvious, thanks!

You still fail to grasp that they must have been upset to have not waited a month. You still can't give me a logical benefit why they would not have preferred to wait another month.

In your mind they must be elated to finally own apple stock no matter if it meant losing a 180 million in a month. You sir is a wise man.

 

[I7guy]

The stock market has gone up for the last 60 years? Why are you telling me that like that matters? Did every stock go up during those 60 years? No. So you stating that does not mean Apple will go up as well. You're here stating the obvious, thanks!

You still fail to grasp that they must have been upset to have not waited a month. You still can't give me a logical benefit why they would not have preferred to wait another month.

In your mind they must be elated to finally own apple stock no matter if it meant losing a 180 million in a month. You sir is a wise man.

Because you are not BH you can't grasp why some decisions are made. I dont have to justify their decision and Apple in general has gone up since it was founded. unless you're around market managers that manage billions and billions of dollars you don't understand and hence posts like this. There never is a perfect time giving the randomness of the market; ask warren why he did it.

 

[Blaze4G]

Because you are not BH you can't grasp why some decisions are made. I dont have to justify their decision and Apple in general has gone up since it was founded. unless you're around market managers that manage billions and billions of dollars you don't understand and hence posts like this. There never is a perfect time giving the randomness of the market; ask warren why he did it.

Oh so you're saying there may be a good reason why they invested at 109 per share be 90 per share a month after. Instead of seeing the obvious that it may have just been a bad time to invest. Okay sir you win. I can't debate with people who lack common logical reasoning.

 

[I7guy]

Oh so you're saying there may be a good reason why they invested at 109 per share be 90 per share a month after. Instead of seeing the obvious that it may have just been a bad time to invest. Okay sir you win. I can't debate with people who lack common logical reasoning.

You have to ask Warren Buffet why his firm bought at that time. All of MacRumors knew the stock was on the temporary down slide. How could the most astute investor in the world miss that? Answer, he didn't. So there must have been another reason the firm bought the stock that you sir, have no idea about and all that is happening is you are tilting at windmills.

 

[Blaze4G]

You have to ask Warren Buffet why his firm bought at that time. All of MacRumors knew the stock was on the temporary down slide. How could the most astute investor in the world miss that? Answer, he didn't. So there must have been another reason the firm bought the stock that you sir, have no idea about and all that is happening is you are tilting at windmills.

Again your post shows ignorance and lack of knowledge. Apple stock was on the upswing from February. It was down to 93 in February and rose to 110 in April. So no it was not on the downslide when buffet invested. So let's hear the next explanation / excuse you can come up with please.

IBM was in a similar position as Apple when Buffet bought in. After 5 years Buffet has made zero profit / gain from IBM. How could the most astute investor miss that? . You should probably stick to debating about why the iPhone is better than any android phones and leave investment debates for others.

 

[I7guy]

Again your post shows ignorance and lack of knowledge. Apple stock was on the upswing from February. It was down to 93 in February and rose to 110 in April. So no it was not on the downslide when buffet invested. So let's hear the next explanation / excuse you can come up with please.

IBM was in a similar position as Apple when Buffet bought in. After 5 years Buffet has made zero profit / gain from IBM. How could the most astute investor miss that? . You should probably stick to debating about why the iPhone is better than any android phones and leave investment debates for others.

So the man whose company stock is 210k per share doesn't know what he is doing? Citing one example years ago as evidence? Maybe im not the only one who should stick to phones and leave the investment debate to others. Eh?

 

[Blaze4G]

So the man whose company stock is 210k per share doesn't know what he is doing? Citing one example years ago as evidence? Maybe im not the only one who should stick to phones and leave the investment debate to others. Eh?

Your ignorance again gets the best of you. I am highlighting mistakes can be made, citing that one example as evidence. However you fail to grasp that as well as many things. It is laughable you sit their with a straight face thinking there must be a reason Buffet's firm invested in Apple at $109 instead of $90 a month after. Why can't this be another mistake?

 

[I7guy]

Your ignorance again gets the best of you. I am highlighting mistakes can be made, citing that one example as evidence. However you fail to grasp that as well as many things. It is laughable you sit their with a straight face thinking there must be a reason Buffet's firm invested in Apple at $109 instead of $90 a month after. Why can't this be another mistake?

Sorry pot kettle thing here. Your only speculating as you don't know as don't I. Sure I'll say a mistake could be made or alternatively it was deliberate based on factors no one knows. They might be gearing up for the long haul and this was the start of their plan.

 

[Blaze4G]

Sorry pot kettle thing here. Your only speculating as you don't know as don't I. Sure I'll say a mistake could be made or alternatively it was deliberate based on factors no one knows. They might be gearing up for the long haul and this was the start of their plan.

They could have geared up for the long haul at $90.

 

[I7guy]

They could have geared up for the long haul at $90.

But they didn't. They already purchased the stock. Big investors, don't "wait", because the price could have also increased in a month and it could have cost more. And if they have confidence in apple and believe there is room for growth, they will make their money back and then some.

BTW, if you do the math, based on a market cap of 347B, the money they lost(100M) amounts to .02%. Mere peanuts for a concern that size.