Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Hedge Funder Lee Cooperman Takes 'Modest Position' in Apple, Drives Stock Price Over $500

Stock Manipulation? No, if you are on the right side of the trade. Yes, if you are on the wrong side or have missed the boat :p

Do not play the game if you do not like it or play it and stick with some Warren Buffett type strategy if you are not able to handle the market volatility or so called manipulation!

Carl Icahn " Some people get rich studying artificial intelligence. Me, I make money studying natural stupidity."
 
keysofanxiety said:
Stuff like this just goes to show how easily (well, easy if you've got billions of dollars to spend) the stock market can be manipulated.

Apple stock ≠ Apple's performance.
Click to expand...

As I said in the other recent topic here:

"Stock price and market manipulation at it's finest?"

And I think spending this much in one company and bragging about it is fishy. As most smart people would have a diversified share portfolio to spread the risk. Either they are trying to manipulate the market or they have insider information.
 
I'm glad to see it on the way up. It should be more. Apple has weathered a hard year of many competitors and even with equipment that can be seen as "behind the times" they continued to do well.... much better than most companies on the planet. I think the last year was really more based on fear than reality. With new products coming on all fronts, it should be a very different 2014.
 
It's the opposite of this that did blackberry in.

The media mauled them and took confidence out of the company.

It wasn't all about their product line.
 
the8thark said:
As I said in the other recent topic here:

"Stock price and market manipulation at it's finest?"
Click to expand...

Yes, and it's just as bad of a comment now as it was there.

And I think spending this much in one company and bragging about it is fishy. As most smart people would have a diversified share portfolio to spread the risk. Either they are trying to manipulate the market or they have insider information.
Click to expand...

It was legally required for Cooperman to disclose this in a 13F filing. He was then asked about it and answered.

keysofanxiety said:
Yeah, I suppose it's market manipulation at its finest; borderline illegal at its most extreme, perhaps. It's crazy thinking about how the stock market works.
Click to expand...

You don't know how it works, which is why you think this is borderline illegal or some massive manipulation.
 
IJ Reilly said:
Speaking of uninformed claptrap.

On any given day at any given moment, the markets are not necessarily behaving rationally. But in the final analysis, the markets are all about earnings, and the growth thereof. So no, stock price is not "unrelated" to performance, it is very closely related. Apple posted three consecutive quarters of declining earnings and (lo and behold!) the stock price when down. What a conspiracy. Now optimism is building that Apple's earnings will begin to grow again, and oddly enough, the stock price is going up again. Double that conspiracy, because it can't be anything else.
Click to expand...

The stock market has become less of performance and more of speculation. These guys just made a bet that Apple would out perform as always and that earnings will be high.

Regardless, the decision was based on a future prediction rather than what is actually going on right now.

This is why the general populous is now paying high prices of gas. Due to the oil futures speculations. The more you speculate, the less reality you have.
 
Badandy said:
You don't know how it works, which is why you think this is borderline illegal or some massive manipulation.
Click to expand...

I'll be honest mate, I just made that comment so I could correct the8thark's grammar. I was hoping that by using 'it's' and 'its' in as much as I could in that comment would hopefully correct him in future, without me actually making a grammatical correction.

(I'm not even joking. Reading 'it's' when it should be 'its' makes me want to drop-kick a baby)

I kinda wish I now said something a little less … controversial. ;)
 
Well, we just observed the herd effective of the stock market. If someone with a name recognition takes a lead in one direction, the herd will follow. This time it just happened to be up.
 
jav6454 said:
The stock market has become less of performance and more of speculation. These guys just made a bet that Apple would out perform as always and that earnings will be high.

Regardless, the decision was based on a future prediction rather than what is actually going on right now.

This is why the general populous is now paying high prices of gas. Due to the oil futures speculations. The more you speculate, the less reality you have.
Click to expand...

It's because future cash flows make up a much larger piece of a company's valuation than near-term cash flows. Look at a DCF and calculate what percentage of a company's value is tied up in its terminal value rather than the cash flows even five years out.
 
FrizzleFryBen said:
I agree with nearly all you say...short of the "uninformed claptrap", sounds all old timey. And I assume you are twirling your moustache while saying so.

I believe the gent was speaking directly to your point about markets not necessarily behaving rationally in the short term. From my perspective, it seems that's what most of your so called "uninformed claptrap(s)" are getting at.
Click to expand...

I could also have called it horse hockey or canal water, but that would have been too ancient, even for an old-timer like me. No mustache, except for my icahn.

From reading comments in these threads the general drift is always that the stock markets are all a con. Just look at the number of posts saying almost exactly that, and how much they are endorsed. Granted us little fish are along for the ride, but the thinking that the markets are about nothing but manipulation is wrong-headed, and kind of sad. I don't know how someone gets to the point where they can retire in some sort of comfort when they don't have clue one about investing. Probably this is why so few people do get there.
 
gnasher729 said:
The company has been performing well all the time, and is still massively undervalued.
Click to expand...

Says who? There is no such thing as undervalued or overvalued. The stock is only worth what someone else is willing to pay for it. It's simple supply and demand. This has more to do with good old fashioned greed and stock manipulation than anything else. Personally I hope they get burned the greedy fat basterds. They're just parasites. They have no interest in Apple.

As for Icahn. He buys a load of shares then expects Apple to waste a shed load of money in another stock buy back just so the greedy toe rag can make even more money. What a cheek.

Some days I really miss Steve and this is one of those days. He would have told Icahn to shove it up his ass.
 
jav6454 said:
The stock market has become less of performance and more of speculation. These guys just made a bet that Apple would out perform as always and that earnings will be high.

Regardless, the decision was based on a future prediction rather than what is actually going on right now.

This is why the general populous is now paying high prices of gas. Due to the oil futures speculations. The more you speculate, the less reality you have.
Click to expand...

The markets are always about betting on future performance, and never about right now. This is nothing new. A lot of things have changed about the markets, but not that. I hope this doesn't come as too much of a shock or surprise.

----------
Shaun said:
Says who? There is no such thing as undervalued or overvalued. The stock is only worth what someone else is willing to pay for it. It's simple supply and demand. This has more to do with good old fashioned greed and stock manipulation than anything else. Personally I hope they get burned the greedy fat basterds. They're just parasites. They have no interest in Apple.

As for Icahn. He buys a load of shares then expects Apple to waste a shed load of money in another stock buy back just so the greedy toe rag can make even more money. What a cheek.

Some days I really miss Steve and this is one of those days. He would have told Icahn to shove it up his ass.
Click to expand...

Your first statement is absolutely true. Too bad you followed it with a rant that is absolutely false.
 
jav6454 said:
This is why, ladies and gentlemen, the stock market is a craphole and unrelated marker of performance for anything.
Click to expand...

I recall an episode of Sliders in which Our Heroes visited a parallel universe where the stock exchange had been replaced by a huge casino in which privileged traders played high-stakes games of roulette and poker.

(This was years before the term 'casino banking' entered the language - so not such an obvious gag as it would be today)

I find that it helps to think of it that way.
 
Tankmaze said:
funny how big investors and the sentiment of "undervalue" can make the stock price up. not how the company is performing, how many billion dollars made, etc. stock market is still a mystery to me.
Click to expand...

Yup, and it pisses me off. These investors shouldn't have any influence on the price of the stock, but they do, unfortunately.
 
Badandy said:
It's because future cash flows make up a much larger piece of a company's valuation than near-term cash flows. Look at a DCF and calculate what percentage of a company's value is tied up in its terminal value rather than the cash flows even five years out.
Click to expand...

I have always known that trying to predict the future is a hit-n-miss. It's like trying to guess what number you'll get when you roll two six-sided dice. In other words, trying to predict a cash flow for 5 years in advanced is idiocy at best (even if you have a nice historic background on which to base it on).

I'm an electrical engineer, and my thought pattern has always been to go with what you know happens when you change T(f) and with what comes out. There is no such thing as a positive Poles (if there were, you'd have a system that predicts the future) in a system's Transfer Function [which is elemental in all electrical systems].

This is why engineering works so well. Because no one tries to play God with the future as the stock market does.
 
IJ Reilly said:
Actually, it is kind of depressing. People having no clue about investing is why so many end up at retirement age without enough resources to get by.
Click to expand...

That is depressing. But one can invest properly and still be disgusted by the likes of what hedge fund managers and mercenary billionaires like Icahn get away with. Legal yes (usually). Ethical? Not so sure.
 
Trying to correct all the misconceptions about the market in this thread would take too long. I'd strongly suggest some kind of primer (reading a couple finance textbooks) for everyone who has a strong opinion on this piece of "news".

Just like I don't pop in and make ignorant statements on photography forums (because I recognize I know nothing about photograph), it would be nice if others would do the same when they're discussing finance.
 
iLilana said:
how is this not stock manipulation?
Click to expand...

He didn't make this comment and then dump the stock.

Telling folks what you own is not manipulation. In fact in many situations you are required to publically disclose your position. Certainly he has to tell his investors what he has invested in. Obviously he only does an investment because he thinks the company he is investing in is undervalued. He wouldn't buy a company that he thinks is overvalued. And he certainly isn't going to invest his client's money in companies that he thinks are perfectly valued and therefore unlikely to see growth. So these statements are neither manipulation or in fact avoidable. Just saying "I own Apple stock" implies the statement "I believe Apple is undervalued."

Short term manipulation is only useful if you are doing short term trades. This guy is buying and holding. At least for a few months. He doesn't benefit from day to day manipulation.
 
IJ Reilly said:
It's always manipulation when you don't know what you are talking about. Conspiracy theories are emotionally satisfying, and don't need to be supported by any facts, knowledge, or evidence.
Click to expand...

I'd amend your statements ever so slightly. What some are calling "manipulation" is short-term perturbations in pricing. If an entity is confident in the existence of those perturbations and their directionality—or, even better, their ability to generate them—then that does open the door for gains. (It's basically informational arbitrage.)

However, in the long-run, such shocks or perturbations should not persist (which basically serves a corollary to the weak form of the Efficient Market Hypothesis, while still being agnostic on the issue of the ability to predict returns).
 
ValSalva said:
That is depressing. But one can invest properly and still be disgusted by the likes of what hedge fund managers and mercenary billionaires like Icahn get away with. Legal yes (usually). Ethical? Not so sure.
Click to expand...

I really don't see the ethical qualm.

He bought shares. He bought a lot of them. He announced that he bought shares.

Also, stop criticizing "hedge fund managers." Your statement makes the group out to be quasi-criminals. Other than more extensive use of leverage and shorting and different reporting and investor criteria, they're not altogether different from mutual fund managers (especially so given the rise of 120/20 mutuals).

----------
jav6454 said:
I have always known that trying to predict the future is a hit-n-miss. It's like trying to guess what number you'll get when you roll two six-sided dice. In other words, trying to predict a cash flow for 5 years in advanced is idiocy at best (even if you have a nice historic background on which to base it on).
Click to expand...

Actually, it's not. In the aggregate, good stock pickers can consistently generate alpha (i.e., make money). Just because many others struggle to beat a benchmark does not mean that it's impossible, nor does it mean that those who are successful are universally just "lucky".

Predicting price movements doesn't require perfect prediction of cash flows at some future date. There are a lot of factors at play.

Look up IR=IC*sqrt(BR). A good picker certainly doesn't have to be right every time to make a whole lot of money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back