AAPL hits 700 in aftermarket trading


Recommended Posts

Following today's news that the iPhone 5 has set a record with over two million pre-orders during the first 24 hours of availability last Friday, Apple's stock price is rising once more. Apple's share price broke through the $700 mark for the first time today in after-hours trading, continuing the company's meteoric rise as the most valuable publicly traded company in the world.

The stock price has been on a tear -- albeit with a bit of a lull in the middle of the year -- since Apple reported blowout earnings for the first fiscal quarter of 2012, rising more than $270/share, or over 65%, in nine months.

aapl700stock.png

At the end of February, Apple broke through the important psychological barrier of $500 billion in market capitalization, then through $600 billion in April. Apple is now worth more than $650 billion, which is $225 billion -- or approximately one Google -- more than second-place ExxonMobil.

http://www.macrumors.com/2012/09/17/apples-stock-price-breaks-through-700-sets-new-all-time-records-for-price-and-market-cap/

Their stock is as hyped as their products.. it's a bubble that's going to burst so loud and it will have severe economic consequences.. and all because of the investors and those who are making quite a bit of money now want to make even more so they are propping up Apple's stock value.

Nobody cares about these numbers anymore really.. to most objective people (even investors) this is insanity. A company that has 80% of their revenue on 2 products is valued more than other companies with diversified revenues.

Completely disconnected.

It's gonna be one helluva fall when they tank...

it's a bubble that's going to burst so loud and it will have severe economic consequences..

Do you two dolts know the God damned definition of a bubble? A bubble means there is nothing there. The internet was a bubble. Stocks are a bubble. Mortgages are a bubble. Apple is not a bubble. Apple actually manufactures things. It is 100% tangible. Just like Germany and China who are doing well right now despite most of the world economy being bad, because they manufacture things. Just like the USA was booming in the 50s, because it manufactured things. Apple can't "burst." You can't burst a solid.

You can't burst a solid.

You can't burst a solid? What solid? Apple is coasting on 2 products only.. those 2 products get in trouble and their stock bursts. That's why they are suing everyone and trying to prevent competition.. because that's all they really have. That's why it's an overvalued stock and bubble.

They have been artificially bubbled up to the point of insanity so those investors in Apple can make more and more money. It has zero connectivity to any economic sense. They are basically basing the stock on Apple's brand recognition.. that's about it. This is how other bubbles (housing market and other ones were artificially inflated) and then when they burst those who bought in late got screwed.

Same exact thing with Apple.

But don't listen to me.. listen to some of the biggest investors:

apple-guide1.png

http://www.forbes.co...le-is-a-bubble/

It?s also worth thinking of the fragility of our financial markets generally. The federal government currently borrows ten-year money at 1.42 percent. Our government debt is rapidly approaching the levels last seen at the end of World War II. We have no plan for regaining control over the budget. The Fed has exhausted every tool of monetary policy and has, indeed, risked creating a huge inflationary problem down the road.

The truth is that 1.42 percent is an insanely low yield for a borrower in the shape that the government is in today. Sooner or later, the government bond market will correct (it would do so much faster if the Fed stood back) and there will be an inevitable rebound on to equities.

So much for the general argument. The specifics on Apple are no more cheering. Analysts expected third quarter revenues to come in at $37 billion; they came in at $35 billion. The miss on earnings was even worse: analysts had penciled in $10.36 a share, and the outcome was more than a dollar per share worse than that at $9.32.

Sales of iPods fell. Sales of Macs were flat. Sales of iPhones were up on the year, but sharply down on the prior quarter. Sales of tablets were excellent, but the competitive background is changing fast. The new iPhone is great, but it?s not a game-changer the way the first one was. It?s kind of like the Rocky films. Rocky 15 just won?t lift the heart the way the very first one did.

Now at this point, I should probably reiterate what I said at the start. I love this company?s products. I think the company that Jobs built is the most impressive American company to have emerged since the days of Ford and General Electric. But those judgments are different from judgments about valuation. The results just announced are not the results of a gravity-defying company, but of one governed by the same laws of competition that everyone else faces too.

People haven?t got bored of smart phones or of anything else that Apple makes. But sometimes, as an investor, you have to stand back and ask, really? And the question here is really twofold. One, can Apple?s top line growth continue when its markets are becoming relentlessly competitive? Two, can Apple?s near 40 percent operating margin persist when every big electronics and Internet company on the planet is out to steal the firm?s lunch?

http://planetponzi.c...n-the-apple-inc

Do you two dolts know the God damned definition of a bubble? A bubble means there is nothing there. The internet was a bubble. Stocks are a bubble. Mortgages are a bubble. Apple is not a bubble. Apple actually manufactures things. It is 100% tangible.

Whilst you're happy calling people dolts, your explanation makes absolutely no sense - you do not seem to understand what a stock market bubble is. Stock market bubbles have nothing to do with manufacturing, a bubble means that stock is priced above its real-world value. By this definition, it's valid to claim that Apple stock is bubbling.

Nobody cares about these numbers anymore really.. to most objective people (even investors) this is insanity. A company that has 80% of their revenue on 2 products is valued more than other companies with diversified revenues.

That's like saying Ford makes all it's money on 1 product (cars).

That's like saying Ford makes all it's money on 1 product (cars).

LOL not really.. Ford makes DOZENS of different things. Trucks, commercial trucks, different car models etc etc..

It would be the same if Ford made only Mustang and F150 and nothing else and that consisted of 80% of their revenue and they were coasting on brand recognition alone.

But that's not really the case. They are very well diversified.

Hell, even the luxury brands don't sell only 2 car models. Lamborghini, Porsche, Mercedes, Audi all have tons of different models and "form factors" for their vehicles with different specs and basically completely different models.

What's even more ridiculous is that Apple doesn't even have it's own manufacturing unlike Ford and everyone else. They outsource everything. They are basically Dell. So when you put those things in the equation, it makes it even more ridiculous.

It puts thing very much in perspective.. Apple, the most "valuable" company in the world, got that value on 2 products alone they don't even manufacture. No reasonable and logical investor would call them anything else but a bubble. Which they absolutely are.

Hell, even the luxury brands don't sell only 2 car models. Lamborghini, Porsche, Mercedes, Audi all have tons of different models and "form factors" for their vehicles.

iPod, iPad (2, maybe 3 soon), iPhone, Mac Mini, Macbook (Air, Pro, and Retina), iMac, Mac Pro, Apple TV, Airport Express/Extreme...

And that's only the hardware side. They are the largest vertically integrated tech company on the planet, at the moment. iTunes / App Store -> iOS -> iPod/Pad, OSX -> PC.

There's also the small fact that they sell a ton of computers to college students. If you asked me what their future earning potential is, I'd say it's absolutely gigantic.

The bubble would have burst in this economy long ago. Apple's cruising on 2 things, solid performance, and quite ironically, hype. One's driving the other (not saying which one), and seeing their sales figures of their iPhone 5 launch I'm confident they're not going to tank any time soon.

iPod, iPad (2, maybe 3 soon), iPhone, Mac Mini, Macbook (Air, Pro, and Retina), iMac, Mac Pro, Apple TV, Airport Express/Extreme...

And that's only the hardware side. They are the largest vertically integrated tech company on the planet, at the moment. iTunes / App Store -> iOS -> iPod/Pad, OSX -> PC.

There's also the small fact that they sell a ton of computers to college students. If you asked me what their future earning potential is, I'd say it's absolutely gigantic.

It doesn't matter.. 80% of their revenue and value comes from 2 products..iPhone and iPad. This is what their current value is "based on". Without it, they wouldn't be worth squat.

Well, its pretty amazing where they have come over the last couple of years. Everybody knows them and the two main products they sell. They've done a pretty amazing job. I wouldn't be surprised to see their stock hit 900 dollars before it crashes back to a reasonable amount.

I remember wanting an Apple computer before the iphone was released - now I'll steer well clear. A company with that much money equals a lot of power... too much... I don't like.

It doesn't matter.. 80% of their revenue and value comes from 2 products..iPhone and iPad. This is what their current value is "based on". Without it, they wouldn't be worth squat.

yeah, in early 2000's it was the ipod, they knew it and they knew it wouldn't last so they segwayed to iphone and ipads, while simultaneously increasing mac and itunes hardware sale *and* cracking the PC deathgrip in enterprises. leave aside the fact that because the hardware is so expensive and continues to outsell cheaper PC alternatives, the company makes *more* money PER PRODUCT compared to all alternatives that are sold. and most of all, they had over $100 billion sitting in cash to do whatever they want with it.

you do realize this isn't like an investment portfolio where you want to have diverse products simply to mitigate your risks?

most businesses have their flagship product aside from whatever else they sell, many only have 1~3 products to offer. the idea is to do few things really well as opposed to a mediocre job at a ton of things.

It doesn't matter.. 80% of their revenue and value comes from 2 products..iPhone and iPad. This is what their current value is "based on". Without it, they wouldn't be worth squat.

It's closer to 70%, but whatever. It used to be they made money off of iPods and Macs. In about five years, they completely changed their market to iPads and iPhones. And they can do this because, again, they control their entire product line. If the market shifts elsewhere (TVs?), Apple has the content providers, the software, the distribution channels, the cloud storage, and the hardware all lined up for it.

Everyone else in the industry is jealous of this. Microsoft wants to manufacture the surface so they can compete. Google would love to build phones in house. I think Apple's stock will level off when other tech companies catch up, but any "crash" would have major ramifications in the entire industry.

They will most likely do a Stock Split so new investors can invest more money.

I doubt it, they want to be like BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY.. make it look extreamly valuable in numbers... can't have a $24 apple stock, that just looks bad! *cough* MSFT after all their splits *cough*

but any "crash" would have major ramifications in the entire industry.

Well absolutely. But again it would be greed and over the top hype based on unrealistic values that got the industry in that position.. aka Wall Street.

It wouldn't mean squat for competition and innovation. it would have financial consequences for the stock market. This is why the legal system is desperately defending Apple as well and are heavily biased in their favor, whether they are wrong or right about something.

They pumped them up, and now it's the same thing we had with financial institutions and the collapse. It's very similar scenario and the same tactic. Milk it, hype it, bubble it up so they can make billions until it crashes.

It seems nothing changed.. they have done this with every industry and now it's tech industry again.

Well absolutely. But again it would be greed and over the top hype based on unrealistic values that got the industry in that position.. aka Wall Street.

It wouldn't mean squat for competition and innovation. it would have financial consequences for the stock market. This is why the legal system is desperately defending Apple as well and are heavily biased in their favor, whether they are wrong or right about something.

They pumped them up, and now it's the same thing we had with financial institutions and the collapse. It's very similar scenario and the same tactic. Milk it, hype it, bubble it up so they can make billions until it crashes.

It seems nothing changed.. they have done this with every industry and now it's tech industry again.

So Apple is too big to fail, time for Gov Intervention!

They pumped them up, and now it's the same thing we had with financial institutions and the collapse. It's very similar scenario and the same tactic. Milk it, hype it, bubble it up so they can make billions until it crashes.

It seems nothing changed.. they have done this with every industry and now it's tech industry again.

No, this is completely wrong. The original tech bubble was built on things like Pets.com, which was losing tons of money from they day they opened their doors. They had no business model, but they had tons of investors, because they all thought there was gold in them there internets.

The housing bubble happened because the markets were trading slices of mortgages on the unrealistic expectation (among other things), that housing prices would continue to increase at insane rates for ever. There was, like the original tech bubble, no real money in the market. Banks would give loans to people with practically nothing down, investors would split up those loans and repackage them to sell again, houses kept selling so people though there must be gold in them there houses.

Apple? Makes money hand over foot on everything it sells, is sitting on a pile of cash, and will, for the foreseeable future, continue to do so. That's not a bubble. They might be overvalued, but again, a crash on that would be something like us not wanting entertainment any more. I don't think that's going to happen.

Well absolutely. But again it would be greed and over the top hype based on unrealistic values that got the industry in that position.. aka Wall Street.

It wouldn't mean squat for competition and innovation. it would have financial consequences for the stock market. This is why the legal system is desperately defending Apple as well and are heavily biased in their favor, whether they are wrong or right about something.

They pumped them up, and now it's the same thing we had with financial institutions and the collapse. It's very similar scenario and the same tactic. Milk it, hype it, bubble it up so they can make billions until it crashes.

It seems nothing changed.. they have done this with every industry and now it's tech industry again.

you seem to hate apple for other reasons than your opinion on its stock price. maybe because how it's controlling, how it litigates or maybe even because they have lied/stretched the truth in their marketing and profited from it, i can understand that but if you think apple is overhyped/bubble then you're wrong. you have been for past several years (consistently), and you will be at least in the near future. the stock isn't "artificially" propped up by wall street analysts. at its current price it's not exactly viable either (you can't make that much money without a huge risk of losses).

i can argue the company's viability based on stock valuation, business analysis (company's operations efficiency, product cycles, product lifelines), consumer analysis, you name it.

this doesn't mean if there's an economic collapse and the world falls apart that apple won't suffer either (it did back in 2008 as well), but it will be far, far more resilient to it.

as they currently stand, if they made 0 sales for the next 3~4 years, they can still continue to run their operations from their cash alone without needing to sell any other assets.

its going to be a laughing fest when windows 8 is released,and people realize they don't need to buy an ipad to complement their pc anymore when they can get one product,and it has all the apps,and still acts like a computer.

what will happen to AAPL then?

and all these analysts have been propping this stock up and intentionally putting out bad news about other competitors. its a ****in scam. once they inflate the stock to its limit, they get their money out,and let all the other suckers eat the loss.

ive been investing for a long time,and ive seen this happen all the time. its going to happen.

its going to be a laughing fest when windows 8 is released,and people realize they don't need to buy an ipad to complement their pc anymore when they can get one product,and it has all the apps,and still acts like a computer.

what will happen to AAPL then?

and all these analysts have been propping this stock up and intentionally putting out bad news about other competitors. its a ****in scam. once they get they inflate the stock so its limit, they get their money out,and let all the other suckers eat the loss.

yeah i wish you were right but nothing like that is going to happen.

Bubble!?!?

I wish i had stocks of this Bubble you so call. Apple controls hardware and software, and both are top notch. And the bashing still makes them stronger like i usually say they began to rise when they began to itch.

Im glad there is Apple, if my tech world was still depending on windows PC?s i would be a ver sad person behind a desk lol

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • Stellarium 26.2 by Razvan Serea Stellarium is a free open source planetarium for your computer. It shows a realistic sky in 3D, just like what you see with the naked eye, binoculars or a telescope. It is being used in planetarium projectors. Just set your coordinates and go. Stellarium key features: Realistic simulation of the sky, sunrise and sunset Default catalogue of over 600,000 stars Downloadable additional catalogues for up to 210 million stars Catalog data for all New General Catalogue (NGC) objects Images of almost all Messier objects and the Milky Way Artistic illustrations for all 88 modern constellations More than a dozen different cultures with their constellations Solar and lunar eclipse simulation Photorealistic landscapes (more are available on the website) Scripting support with ECMAScript (a few demo scripts are included) Extendable with plug-ins: 8 plug-ins installed by default, including: artificial satellites plug-in (updated from an on-line TLE database) ocular simulation plug-in (shows how objects look like in a given ocular) Solar System editor plug-in (imports comet and asteroid data from the MPC) telescope control plug-in (Meade LX200 and Celestron NexStar compatible) The major changes of this version: Added new sky culture Added new plugin: Planes Many improvements in plugins Many improvements in Core and GUI Many updates in sky cultures. [full release notes] Download: Stellarium 26.2 (64-bit) | 456.0 MB (Open Source) View: Stellarium Home Page | Other Operating Systems | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • NASA: This asteroid may not kill us but it probably won't be far off either by Sayan Sen Image by Zelch Csaba via Pexels New observations by NASA's James Webb Space Telescope have eliminated the last remaining impact threat posed by asteroid 2024 YR4, ruling out the possibility that the near-Earth object could strike the Moon in December 2032. NASA said observations collected by Webb on February 18 and 26, 2026, enabled scientists to refine the asteroid's orbit enough to "rule out a chance of lunar impact on Dec. 22, 2032." Instead, asteroid 2024 YR4 is now expected to pass the Moon at a distance of about 13,200 miles (21,200 km). The agency stressed that the update "reflects improved precision in our understanding of where the asteroid is expected to be in 2032 rather than a shift in its orbital path." The announcement closes a remarkable chapter in planetary defence that began in late 2024, when the approximately 60-metre-wide asteroid briefly became the most closely watched near-Earth object in the world. Discovered on December 27, 2024, by the ATLAS telescope in Chile, 2024 YR4 initially appeared to have a small chance of colliding with Earth on December 22, 2032. As astronomers gathered more observations, the impact probability briefly climbed to around 3%—the highest ever recorded for an asteroid of its size—before steadily falling as its orbit became better understood. By early 2025, international observations had ruled out any significant risk to Earth. However, astronomers were left with another possibility: a roughly 4% chance that the asteroid could instead strike the Moon. "The probability that asteroid 2024 YR4 will strike the Moon on 22 December 2032 is now approximately 4%," the European Space Agency (ESA) had said last year, noting that "there is a 96% chance that the asteroid will not impact the Moon." ESA said such an impact, while unlikely, would have presented an extraordinary scientific opportunity. "It is a very rare event for an asteroid this large to impact the Moon – and it is rarer still that we know about it in advance. The impact would likely be visible from Earth, and so scientists will be very excited by the prospect of observing and analysing it," said Richard Moissl, Head of ESA's Planetary Defence Office. "It would certainly leave a new crater on the surface. However, we wouldn't be able to accurately predict in advance how much material would be thrown into space, or whether any would reach Earth," he added. The asteroid also exposed an important blind spot in planetary defence. Because 2024 YR4 approached Earth from the direction of the Sun, it remained hidden from ground-based telescopes until after its closest approach. "We looked into how Neomir would have performed in this situation, and the simulations surprised even us," Moissl said. "Neomir would have detected asteroid 2024 YR4 about a month earlier than ground-based telescopes did. This would have given astronomers more time to study the asteroid's trajectory and allowed them to much sooner rule out any chance of Earth impact in 2032." He added, "As an infrared telescope, like Webb, Neomir would have also immediately given us a much better estimate for the asteroid's size, which is very important for assessing the significance of the hazard." The latest NASA observations underscore the value of space-based infrared telescopes in tracking faint asteroids. According to NASA, Webb made "among the faintest ever observations of an asteroid," extending the object's observational record by nearly eight months at a time when it had become too faint for other telescopes. That additional data allowed scientists to eliminate the remaining uncertainty surrounding its 2032 flyby. Although asteroid 2024 YR4 is now confirmed to pose no threat to either Earth or the Moon, scientists say its discovery remains one of the most significant real-world tests of the international planetary defence system, demonstrating how continued observations can rapidly transform an object once considered hazardous into one whose future path is known with high confidence. Source: NASA, ESA This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • Yup. Google is just scraping the entire internet for their own ad profits without sharing revenue with the sources. It's obviously stealing, but since these sites depend upon Google's search scraps to survive... As for me, I just stopped using Google for anything except Reddit searches. If Reddit's own search wasn't complete crapola, I'd never use Google search again.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      Admir earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • First Post
      The_Focal_Point earned a badge
      First Post
    • Apprentice
      daryld went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Contributor
      Carltonbar went up a rank
      Contributor
    • One Month Later
      The_Focal_Point earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      418
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      170
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      130
    4. 4
      Xenon
      69
    5. 5
      neufuse
      69
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!