Apple Trades at $200 for the First Time

On Wednesday, shares of Apple Incorporated peaked at the $200 mark for the first time ever; they now stand at $198.95. Apple shares have traded between $76.77 and $199.33 in the past year, rising steadily since January. During this time, Apple released the iPhone, refreshed its line of iPods, upgraded its notebook computer offerings and launched Leopard. Essentially, the company has been gaining momentum progressively throughout 2007 with no apparent signs of slowing down. They say what goes up must come down, but the recent trend from Apple seems to be ignoring this rule. Whether you buy the company's products or not, you have to admit Apple has been doing very well. What do you think 2008 will bring for the growing company?

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Appeals court hands Google patent case setback

Next Story

WTO Awards Caribbean Country Right to Ignore US Copyright

40 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

What do you think 2008 will bring for the growing company?

Failure?

EDIT: Just a guess, calm down. I ignored all the facts and just threw this up there.

shakey said,
their market skyrocketing due to its momentum, or its overcharging of products......

Like I said Apple products are expensive, however, they are not THAT expensive. Apple products come at highest quality level, so if you get a dell laptop or anything else and customize them to their highest quality, then they will match the Apple price.

So stop bringing up the "overcharging" debate just to get some attention. Hardware and Software compatibility and new innovative products come with a little higher price.

-Eagle101

Eagle101 said,

Like I said Apple products are expensive, however, they are not THAT expensive. Apple products come at highest quality level, so if you get a dell laptop or anything else and customize them to their highest quality, then they will match the Apple price.

So stop bringing up the "overcharging" debate just to get some attention. Hardware and Software compatibility and new innovative products come with a little higher price.

-Eagle101

We all know Apple overcharges. They make 100% profit for each product sold. The reason though is not the high quality. Its the fact that they sell fashion, not technology.

Harbinger said,

We all know Apple overcharges. They make 100% profit for each product sold. The reason though is not the high quality. Its the fact that they sell fashion, not technology.

Easy to use, effective, well-designed UIs and well-designed products are always fashionable. Getting your work done faster, with less effort, and with less of a learning curve is also fashionable.

And if Apple doesn't sell quality then the rest of the industry sells absolute garbage. And it does. Which is why people like me are *willing to pay more* for (if it suits you) the Best of the Worst.

LTD said,

Easy to use, effective, well-designed UIs and well-designed products are always fashionable. Getting your work done faster, with less effort, and with less of a learning curve is also fashionable.

And if Apple doesn't sell quality then the rest of the industry sells absolute garbage. And it does. Which is why people like me are *willing to pay more* for (if it suits you) the Best of the Worst.

Since you're so mad about quality I'll give you an example

iPod nano 3g. Going from 2g to 3g Apple improved build quality, battery, screen, UI. What they didn't improve ? SOUND QUALITY, it's still bad compared to similarly-priced competition. Yeah, because obviously the majority buys an iPod to watch videos and not to listen to music...

Guys, the article was not about who is worth more in the stock market, but how Apple's stock market is skyrocketing due to its momentum that it keeps having almost every year. I agree with the article because Apple has been working hard at coming with good and innovative products. Apple does NOT make the best products in the world, and of course Apple products are expensive, but Apple has been gaining momentum because its always innovating new products (ipods, imac, iphone, and future multi touch products).

Even if we dislike Apple, we should give them respect for their hard work and the innovation they are bringing which are forcing other companies to work harder to make better quality products.

-Eagle101

Apple EPS : 3.93 (from 198.5) 2%
Microsoft EPS :1.52 (from 36.61) %4.15
Google EPS :12.78 (from 710.84) %1.8

So.. If you put 100 dollars (each) on Apple, Microsoft and Google, then you will earn (yearly):

Apple :2 dollars.
Microsoft :4.15 dollars.
Google :1.8 Dollars.

Out of speculative business (where they can go down in just a few hours), the best deal is to invest in Microsoft over Apple and Google together. Or you could say, Microsoft earn more money that apple and google.

Magallanes said,
Apple EPS : 3.93 (from 198.5) 2%
Microsoft EPS :1.52 (from 36.61) %4.15
Google EPS :12.78 (from 710.84) %1.8

So.. If you put 100 dollars (each) on Apple, Microsoft and Google, then you will earn (yearly):

Apple :2 dollars.
Microsoft :4.15 dollars.
Google :1.8 Dollars.

Out of speculative business (where they can go down in just a few hours), the best deal is to invest in Microsoft over Apple and Google together. Or you could say, Microsoft earn more money that apple and google.

Hmm...you people are good & great at investment research...i never had that much of knowledge in analyzing..better i need to try something like you guys! ...good going..

So.. If you put 100 dollars (each) on Apple, Microsoft and Google, then you will earn (yearly):

Um, no. Just simply: NO.

That vid's rubbish, I wish people would stop linking to it. We all know you hate apple, but you know, a lot of the stuff you use is thanks to their work.

whistlerxp said,
That vid's rubbish, I wish people would stop linking to it. We all know you hate apple, but you know, a lot of the stuff you use is thanks to their work.

I'm sick of that video link too, but what exactly did they do that I should be thankful for? I don't use QuickTime, iPods, iPhones, Macs, or anything else that they produce. And don't say they invented the GUI, because Apple and Microsoft stole that from Xerox PARC's Star...

GreyWolfSC said,

I'm sick of that video link too, but what exactly did they do that I should be thankful for? I don't use QuickTime, iPods, iPhones, Macs, or anything else that they produce. And don't say they invented the GUI, because Apple and Microsoft stole that from Xerox PARC's Star...

But thats where you are wrong, and its not nice to continue to write untruths. Apple gave millions in shares to Parc for a tour of the facilities, many of the members of the Parc team went and worked for Apple on the Mac.

Why not try and read up on it all.

evo_spook said,

But thats where you are wrong, and its not nice to continue to write untruths. Apple gave millions in shares to Parc for a tour of the facilities, many of the members of the Parc team went and worked for Apple on the Mac.

Why not try and read up on it all.

I don't need to read up on it... I remember when it happened just fine. And I stand by my "untruths" even though that's a crappy, double-speak non-term.

whistlerxp said,
That vid's rubbish, I wish people would stop linking to it. We all know you hate apple, but you know, a lot of the stuff you use is thanks to their work.

I think is a better example of Macidiots - yes, I'm a Mac user, but my stock churns everytime I see these drones; they're worse than Microsoft drones - and thats not saying much for the Microsoft drones.

kaiwai said,

I think is a better example of Macidiots - yes, I'm a Mac user, but my stock churns everytime I see these drones; they're worse than Microsoft drones - and thats not saying much for the Microsoft drones.

I'd rather not see it again and again and again though.

Also yes, as the guy said, although I don't want to dig up old dirt too much, Apple did pay for a look at PARC's work and made significant changes, which ended up in the Lisa/Mac systems and which were cloned by Microsoft.

PARC stuff looks very different to Macs and PCs. However Macs and PCs look almost identical.

GreyWolfSC said,

I'm sick of that video link too, but what exactly did they do that I should be thankful for? I don't use QuickTime, iPods, iPhones, Macs, or anything else that they produce. And don't say they invented the GUI, because Apple and Microsoft stole that from Xerox PARC's Star...

Also, Apple brought out what is commonly termed the first PC, the Apple II. Long before the Mac, which started the entire game and inspired the IBM PC.

evo_spook said,
Maybe you should read up on it again as your memory seems a bit faulty.

My memory is just fine, thanks. I even remember telling you that I recalled the events accurately in the previous comment I made. Apparently your memory is at fault since you forgot that I said I didn't need to read up on it because I was around when it happened.

whistlerxp: The Apple II was not the first PC, I built computers before it was a twinkle in the Steves' eyes. I skipped the Apple II for the same reasons I am skipping the Mac: overpriced, too proprietary, too much "Apple knows what's good for you so just pay us and shut up."

Sill not worth as much as MSFT...

MSFT - Shares 9.36 Billion at $36.61 = $342,669,600,000
AAPL - Shares 875.54 Million at $198.95 = $174,188,683,000
GOOG - Shares 312.84 Million at $710.84 = $222,379,185,600

wake me when Apple and Google split the stocks and stop trying to create a false sense of worth...

exactly, even though microsoft is worth $36 per share while apple's is worth close to $200, people often over look the amount of shares each company has.

Apple's stock did split a year or so ago. But you're right, I think it has to split six more time to roughly equal the number of Microsoft stocks.

Last time it split when it breached 100 per share, this time they let it go beyond that, it might split again soon but who knows.

I would say that Apple is going to keep the momentum for at least another year. Their newer patents and job positions suggest more product lines and the touch thing is just leaving the ground. Leopard sold more copies per capita than Vista did during their respective launches and downright outsold XP and Vista in Japan, this should frighten Microsoft and people who have invested money in that company.

I don't hate on either side, I have my reasons for using what I use and I use both PCs and Macs in daily routine. But I tend to smile when Apple has its victories because they do a lot to earn them.

AeronPrometheus said,
Apple's stock did split a year or so ago. But you're right, I think it has to split six more time to roughly equal the number of Microsoft stocks.

Last time it split when it breached 100 per share, this time they let it go beyond that, it might split again soon but who knows.

I would say that Apple is going to keep the momentum for at least another year. Their newer patents and job positions suggest more product lines and the touch thing is just leaving the ground. Leopard sold more copies per capita than Vista did during their respective launches and downright outsold XP and Vista in Japan, this should frighten Microsoft and people who have invested money in that company.

I don't hate on either side, I have my reasons for using what I use and I use both PCs and Macs in daily routine. But I tend to smile when Apple has its victories because they do a lot to earn them.

"per capita" means per head. Are you saying that more copies of Leopard were sold per person than Vista and XP? Because I have 0 copies of Leopard and 1 each of XP and Vista...

The market capitalization is not affected by a stock split. If the stock is split 2:1, then all current shareholders get twice as many shares as they used to have.

Galley said,
The market capitalization is not affected by a stock split. If the stock is split 2:1, then all current shareholders get twice as many shares as they used to have.

yes, but to the average person how doesn't understand stocks and the market... high price usually means to them worth more... MS has had so many splits on their stock... Apple has had no where near as many and/or shares issued

Companies that don't split their stocks when they hit a high price aren't necessarily trying to create a higher looking value but sometimes they do it to make sure only people interested in actually investing in a company buy their stock.

Pretty much they keep their stock value very high so that day traders and the likes aren't the people buying their stock, but instead people who are actually interested in the company itself and desire to invest in it for that reason buy stock. It's not very common but happens once in a while.

I'm not saying that's why Apple and Google aren't splitting their stock but just pointing out that creating an appearance of higher value isn't the only reason to let your stock prices soar.

MegaManXcalibur said,
Companies that don't split their stocks when they hit a high price aren't necessarily trying to create a higher looking value but sometimes they do it to make sure only people interested in actually investing in a company buy their stock.

Pretty much they keep their stock value very high so that day traders and the likes aren't the people buying their stock, but instead people who are actually interested in the company itself and desire to invest in it for that reason buy stock. It's not very common but happens once in a while.

I'm not saying that's why Apple and Google aren't splitting their stock but just pointing out that creating an appearance of higher value isn't the only reason to let your stock prices soar.

That gave a good laugh. Why would Apple care who is investing? Does it make a difference if person A or person B bought the stock? Absolutely not.

GreyWolfSC said,
"per capita" means per head. Are you saying that more copies of Leopard were sold per person than Vista and XP? Because I have 0 copies of Leopard and 1 each of XP and Vista...

Per machine. As in a higher percentage of Leopard have been sold against the total number of Macs than copies of Vista against the total number of PCs.

AeronPrometheus said,
Per machine. As in a higher percentage of Leopard have been sold against the total number of Macs than copies of Vista against the total number of PCs.

oh FFS...Leopard is a POINT release to an existing OS. Vista is an entirely new OS upgrade. If you want to play the e-penis game, XP SP2 has a higher per capita distribution among XP users than Leopard does among OS X users. :cheeky:

mrp04 said,
That gave a good laugh. Why would Apple care who is investing? Does it make a difference if person A or person B bought the stock? Absolutely not.

You'll notice the last line in my post... I wasn't saying that's why they weren't splitting the stock. I was just saying that is why SOME companies don't split their stocks. And yes some companies (very few) actually care if they have investors interested in the company's future or just some random day traders trying to make a buck.

neufuse said,
Sill not worth as much as MSFT...

MSFT - Shares 9.36 Billion at $36.61 = $342,669,600,000
AAPL - Shares 875.54 Million at $198.95 = $174,188,683,000
GOOG - Shares 312.84 Million at $710.84 = $222,379,185,600

wake me when Apple and Google split the stocks and stop trying to create a false sense of worth...


Everything is a competition, huh? ;)

Why can't we just take this as good news for Apple?