Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Nope, I'm talking about the people who bought a house with ARMs, IOs, or negam loans where the only way the math would work is if the house value continued to increase so they could later sell or refi. If you were in the housing industry and didn't see the end coming, then I don't know what else to say. 20% or more/year is not something that's ever sustainable, and if you think it is I have a tulip bulb to sell you!

QFT
 
APPLE is doing well when you look around you.

And 9 out of the 10 chickens havent even come home to roost....yet

We still await:
The coming PRIME crisis-thought to be 2-3 times worse than the sub-prime.
The ARM se-sets this spring-think SPRING UPWARD, fall back by the thousands....
The tip of the iceberg in terms of fraudulent financial schemes and instruments coming to light-
GIANT banks and companies that dont have or are not worth a cent

The Fed rate cut was going to come after a meeting on Tuesday, but the attendees and Mr Berhenke panicked and let it loose Monday
You might say they pulled the dynamite stick from the dam just in time, when the fuse was down to one half inch left
 
Apple stated a while ago they are taking Google route and won't be splitting anytime soon. Why would you want a split anyways? If you have 3000 bucks, it doesn't matter if you buy 3000 shares at 1 buck each or 30 shares at 100 each, its all the same amount of money. If it were to split, there would be more shares outstanding and it would move less.

Splitting encourages dabblers. For large-block investors (eg, your retirement funds), it doesn't matter. But, for the guy with $100 extra this month who thinks, wouldn't it be cool to own a piece of Apple? He's locked out.
 
Stock split is a terrible idea. That just adds more shares to the float. If you look at the stocks like Microsoft, Intel, Oracle, eBay, Yahoo, Dell, etc that split and split, now they can't get out of their way. Apple has about 875 million shares outstanding. All those others have billions...that is why the stock doesn't move anymore. Hard to move it with so many shares outstanding. Google has moved nicely also because it doesn't believe in splitting shares, along with great earnings growth.

If a person can't understand that $1,000 invested is $1,000 invested no matter if the stock is $130 or $50, then I hope they don't invest in Apple.


Question: Why, then, is it "harder" for large investors (whose movements make the stock price move) to buy/sell $100k worth of $50 stock than $100k worth of $130 stock?

My understanding is that they only direct affect of a split is how easily a "casual" investor can get into the game. Secondary effects are up for grabs (ie, is that a good thing, or a bad thing, for stock volatility?). But that's the only primary effect.

More "float" is completely offset by the price-per-share. The important thing with "float" isn't the number of shares, but the dollar amount. A split doesn't change that one whit.

Of course, I'm open to being convinced otherwise.
 
My understanding is that they only direct affect of a split is how easily a "casual" investor can get into the game.

If you define a "casual investor" as someone who can only afford to buy one share, maybe.

Splitting shares used to be meaningful in the days when trading "odd lot" shares cost more in brokerage fees -- odd lots being defined as anything less than 100 shares. Now it really doesn't matter whether you trade ten shares at 100 or 100 shares at ten, the brokerage fees are the same.
 
Let's see how long Steve will keep yakking before Apple starts delivering. Where is the mid-market tower that so many of us want?

If Apple wanted to send their stock back to $200 all they would have to do would be to open up their OS to the full market.
 
Let's see how long Steve will keep yakking before Apple starts delivering. Where is the mid-market tower that so many of us want?

If Apple wanted to send their stock back to $200 all they would have to do would be to open up their OS to the full market.

Oh please not this again... Seriously.

How is licensing OSX going to send the stock to $200?
 
No it's not! I invest in Apple to do what Apple does (design and sell electronic devices), not manage my finances. I think we can all agree that Apple needs to be spending that money on R&D, engineers, etc... A company like Apple sitting on a lot cash scares me. Does it mean they are out of ideas to spend it on? The latest MWSF sorta confirms they are...

QFT. You could create a pretty nice (non-integrated monitor) mid range system for a fraction of that cash and fill in the hole in the product line. One that could vie for a serious chunk of market share. Or... you could create something really amazing. The "next" thing so to speak.

Them sitting on that much cash is actually a bad thing from an investor and Apple product enthusiast point of view.
 
Let's see how long Steve will keep yakking before Apple starts delivering. Where is the mid-market tower that so many of us want?

If Apple wanted to send their stock back to $200 all they would have to do would be to open up their OS to the full market.

This would send their stock POURING down. No one in Apple wants to compete directly against Windows. Especially since Dell, HP, Sony aren't exactly "partners" with Apple. In fact, Apple competes directly with them. Why would they want to license Mac OS X? To make Apple more money? That's why Microsoft isn't in one bit interested in computer hardware because it would put them in direct competition with the companies that make them the multi-billion dollar company that they are.

Opening their OS, no matter how well it "just works" is suicide.
 
This would send their stock POURING down. No one in Apple wants to compete directly against Windows. Especially since Dell, HP, Sony aren't exactly "partners" with Apple. In fact, Apple competes directly with them. Why would they want to license Mac OS X? To make Apple more money?

Back of the envelope calculations indicate that Apple would have to increase their sales by an order of magnitude (well, five to ten times) to equal their absolute revenue.

Yeah. Like that's about to happen in a year or two.
 
Steve, im gonna give you some advice; sack Ive and make him work at Sony because since his change in design ideas, thats where he belongs and hire Lovegrove and pay him whatever he asks.

P.S say hi to Woz for me and tell him to return my seg cap.:apple:
 
AAPL closed today at $130.01. Exactly six months ago, 25 July 2007, it closed at $137.26, and 12 months ago, 25 Jan 2007, it was $86.25.

Thank you for putting it into perspective. It has been a crazy 6 months.

Two things need to happen. 1. The chatter about recession disappears. 2. Apple has rumored or releases a new or vastly improved mass-masket (not boutique) device.

Then I say sell at $300 :D
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.