AAPL

[Valuethinker]

If one if of a mind to pick individual stocks, my advice is to use the Boredom Screen. Companies that people react to with disdain or better yet, indifference, have the best chance of being undervalued.

keep an eye on Japan. If they are serious about printing money, and they do it, then the lightbulb goes on in the world, that actually there is a cure. The best solution to a debt-deflation spiral is monetary recklessness. If they can prove that thesis then the door falls open.

And that could put value through the roof, because value stocks (should be, not sure empirically) are relatively more inflation sensitive.

[Taylor Larimore]

What are folks thoughts on AAPL getting back to 700? and for that matter, 1000?

With index funds, it is not necessary to waste time thinking or worrying about it.

Best wishes.
Taylor

[Tim_in_GA]

What are folks thoughts on AAPL getting back to 700? and for that matter, 1000?

With index funds, it is not necessary to waste time thinking or worrying about it.

Best wishes.
Taylor

I think about it a little since AAPL is the largest holding of an index fund which makes up a large part of my portfolio. But I don't dwell on it too much.

[Grt2bOutdoors]

Last night, AAPL closed at $464 in after-hours trading. Look for it to get hit today. Reversion to the mean.

[Bustoff]

I can't help but wonder, what do the AAPL buyers think they know that the AAPL sellers do not ?

[Grt2bOutdoors]

I can't help but wonder, what do the AAPL buyers think they know that the AAPL sellers do not ?

There is a floor of $40 billion in cash on the balance sheet. The only problem is much like a free spending person - always taking out one soon comes to the bottom of the pot.

[Sheepdog]

Breaking News : What to do with Apple now
http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/breakout ... 39295.html

(Glad I don't invest in hot stocks anymore.)

[airahcaz]

Spanked. 700 in a year?

[TomatoTomahto]

Excuse me, could you perhaps help me out? I was looking for the Bogleheads forum, and instead found something very different. It's not all that entertaining or informative; maybe we should invite Jim Cramer.

[stratton]

A little AAPL collateral damage.

viewtopic.php?f=10&t=109689&newpost=1594585

Paul

[bawr]

I can't help but wonder, what do the AAPL buyers think they know that the AAPL sellers do not ?

There is a floor of $40 billion in cash on the balance sheet. The only problem is much like a free spending person - always taking out one soon comes to the bottom of the pot.

Cash and other investments are actually $137 billion, or approximately $145 per share. These holdings make Apple's Braeburn Capital subsidiary one of the largest money managers in the world.

[marc515]

Excuse me, could you perhaps help me out? I was looking for the Bogleheads forum, and instead found something very different. It's not all that entertaining or informative; maybe we should invite Jim Cramer.

I find threads like this very informative. While "Bogleheads" might mean "index" investing, threads on individual stocks do provide some investing insight into the markets. Index investing may be passive in nature, but I do enjoy learning about stocks that make up the indexes.

Cramer may be a little over the top.

[YDNAL]

We'll all know Jan 23rd right?

I don't get it..... why Jan 23rd? *

You started this thread Dec 18th and in a little less than 1 month you clearly see what UNdiversified risk is all about. Are you still interested in the question you posted in the OP?

If not to post this, please delete, or let me know and I will delete.

What are folks thoughts on AAPL getting back to 700? and for that matter, 1000?

* Rhetorical question, no need to answer since I know that Apple plans to conduct a conference call to discuss financial results of its first fiscal quarter on Wednesday, January 23, 2013 at 2:00 p.m. PT / 5:00 p.m. ET.

Well?......

Apple Inc.
NASDAQ: AAPL - Jan 25 4:00pm ET
439.88 -10.62‎ (-2.36%‎)

[TomatoTomahto]

Excuse me, could you perhaps help me out? I was looking for the Bogleheads forum, and instead found something very different. It's not all that entertaining or informative; maybe we should invite Jim Cramer.

I find threads like this very informative. While "Bogleheads" might mean "index" investing, threads on individual stocks do provide some investing insight into the markets. Index investing may be passive in nature, but I do enjoy learning about stocks that make up the indexes.

Cramer may be a little over the top.

As an analogy: I love ice hockey and dislike baseball. As the saying goes, that's what makes horse races (I though I would mix up 3 sports in one analogy). My discussing hockey on a baseball forum might provide some insight to the forum readers (i.e., there are common elements to both sports), but I don't think that I should and I wouldn't be surprised if forum members suggested that I go to a hockey forum with my insights on the NJ Devils' power play. Options on AAPL are possibly a wonderful thing, but I think it's fair to say that they aren't what I come to bogleheads.org to read. That's all I was saying.

[marc515]

Excuse me, could you perhaps help me out? I was looking for the Bogleheads forum, and instead found something very different. It's not all that entertaining or informative; maybe we should invite Jim Cramer.

I find threads like this very informative. While "Bogleheads" might mean "index" investing, threads on individual stocks do provide some investing insight into the markets. Index investing may be passive in nature, but I do enjoy learning about stocks that make up the indexes.

Cramer may be a little over the top.

As an analogy: I love ice hockey and dislike baseball. As the saying goes, that's what makes horse races (I though I would mix up 3 sports in one analogy). My discussing hockey on a baseball forum might provide some insight to the forum readers (i.e., there are common elements to both sports), but I don't think that I should and I wouldn't be surprised if forum members suggested that I go to a hockey forum with my insights on the NJ Devils' power play. Options on AAPL are possibly a wonderful thing, but I think it's fair to say that they aren't what I come to bogleheads.org to read. That's all I was saying.

Well, I guess the analogy applies somewhat; but hockey is not in baseball, whereas AAPL is in the various indexes. However, since AAPL is one of the most widely held stocks, and is in the major indexes, it plays an important role in Boglehead portfolios. It's amazing how its weighting can affect the indexes, and other funds with heavy AAPL holdings. Still say threads such as these are good every now and then.

[airahcaz]

How about we turn the conversation to expertise that bogleheads know.

What would it take to make Aapl return to a growth stock versus becoming a value stock that gets stuck at the same price, yet pays out dividends?

[marc515]

As an Apple products user, I'm not sure Apple can return to a major growth stock. At one time Apple products were the leading edge, now it appears players like Samsung are major contenders, and are capturing more and more market share. IOS is standard across the line, simple to use, and prone to less problems . I also think the iPhone is still the best made phone out there, but I don't think it really has any features over the Samsung Galaxy III. The iPads share the same qualities as the iPhone, and what keeps Apple customers coming back is the Apple ecosystem. Android is catching up, and if they could ever standardize android, it would eat more market share away from Apple. Oh, Apple has the best customer service I've ever received.

However, all that said, Apple has finally realized it's not the only dog in the field, and has to play catch up somewhat. In giving up market share, Apple will have to make due with lower margins.

So, while Apple products still have the edge, others are on their tail.

[YDNAL]

How about we turn the conversation to expertise that bogleheads know.

What would it take to make Aapl return to a growth stock versus becoming a value stock that gets stuck at the same price, yet pays out dividends?

I don't know what Bogleheads know, but my response earlier in this thread, and response now, is that AAPL is one company and one company comes with UNdiversified risk. After nearly 2 pages of posts, the noise drowned the issue with your original post... I guess the original question is no longer important.

If not to post this, please delete, or let me know and I will delete.

What are folks thoughts on AAPL getting back to 700? and for that matter, 1000?

When we invest in diversified Index funds we don't care if AAPL is just another CSCO (cap today $112.3B). In 2000, CSCO was believed by several nuts to be headed to $1 trillion in market capitalization. BTW, Jeremy Siegel believed otherwise if it matters.
http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/stor ... l?page=all

It's not different this time.

[linberl]

I worked for Apple and left with a ton of stock. Sold all of it over 2011/2012. Made a lovely profit. Why did I sell? Everyone I know at the retail/corporate level was telling me things were changing, and not for the better. I've been a retail manager my whole life, and worked for enough companies to get a good feel for shifts in management and policy which indicate a downward trend. I love my Apple products and still think highly of the company but (1) it's too volatile for a retired person to own, and (2) once people think the magic is gone, it's gone. Maybe Apple will recover in the long run (it'll have to get back over $650 for me to feel I lost anything) but I sleep a lot better now following the Bogle path. If I was going to consider buying Apple again, I'd probably do it within a tech fund to spread some of the risk. YMMV.

[airahcaz]

Bottomed or dead cat bounce?

[zaboomafoozarg]

Bottomed or dead cat bounce?

I was unaware that dead cats could bounce.

[baw703916]

The term "dead cat bounce" is derived from the idea that "even a dead cat will bounce if it falls from a great height."[2] The phrase has been used on Wall Street for many years. The earliest use of the phrase dates from 1985 when the Singaporean and Malaysian stock markets bounced back after a hard fall during the recession of that year. Journalists Horace Brag and Wong Sulong of the Financial Times were reported as saying the market rise was a "dead cat bounce".[3] A similar expression in Cantonese has an older history and this may be the origin of the term.

[airahcaz]

What does this cash announcement mean, recovery?

[blumby]

AAPL is one reason why I'm now a Boglehead. In college I received about $8k that I decided to use to first get into the market. In my clueless mind, I thought I should buy a stock with it (yes, just A stock). I had heard about the iPhone and thought it was revolutionary, so I bought $8k of AAPL. It did do well for me, but was so volatile and I spent most free time researching and following all things Apple. Eventually I sold it all, started reading about investing and found the Boglehead way.

One of the things I did with the money after I sold it was buy another type of "investment" - an engagement ring

[BrandonBogle]

I have shares of AAPL bought back in the day at about $85. Sold enough at $500 to pay myself back a couple years later and now enjoying the dividends regardless of the taxes on it. I know I could sell and put that money elsewhere, but I enjoy the 12% dividends too much. If it gets to the point they kill off dividends down the road and the stock tanks to $0, I still come out ahead and thus, I have zero plans to touch those holdings.


That said, the dividends are going to a Three Fund + REIT portfolio.

[dbr]

but I enjoy the 12% dividends too much.

Are you making a fundamental mental accounting mistake of rating the dividends on your purchase price rather than on the value of the stock today? The source of this error is thinking of volatile investments in ownership as if they were a fixed investment in debt, ie confusing the basic difference between stocks and bonds. The yield on AAPL is currently 2.3%, which may or may not be worth the risk you are taking to hold the stock. Nearly the same payout can be had in the much less volatile total stock market. You are engaging in the psychological error of ignoring present risk because the investment has been successful relative to your purchase price. Why on earth would you accept the possible loss of that asset because you "will have come out ahead"? If you think your risk evaluation suggests that it is time to take less risk, it might be a good idea to sell the holding and place the money in fixed income or in whatever your asset allocation suggests.

[airahcaz]

Down to 385 and now on a tear back up from there, on the debt issuance and rich guy pouring $100M into AAPL...