Recommended Posts

Apple is currently worth something like zillion dollars (read: $656 billion) and it has no signs of slowing down. The question , when are they going to reach the unreachable summit? When is Apple going to break the trillion dollar ceiling?

According to Bilton, analysts and investors think a reasonable assumption given the current trends is that Apple will crack the $1 trillion plateau on April 9, 2015, at around 11 a.m., which seems strangely specific all things considered. But, Bilton warns, there are other analysts (read: more fun analysts) who think Apple could do it within the year. Yep, they think Apple could do it by August 16, 2013. No specific time was given.

Having Apple skyrocket up the stock market charts with a bullet to the tune of another $350 billion is unlikely. ?It?s hard to imagine Apple growing any faster," said Michael E. Driscoll, chief executive a big data and predictive analytics company, who thinks the 2015 guesstimate is right.

more

That's what happens when an American company employees people working in slave-like conditions in China to make their products rather than giving the jobs to people in their home country. By simply reducing their profit margin slightly they could still offer the same products at the same price and provide the US economy with much needed jobs, while improving brand image. Instead the slave factories they employ have to put up anti-suicide nets at all their facilities to prevent their workers from literally jumping to their deaths, while riots break out due to the oppressive treatment of "employees". Globalisation has allowed businesses to avoid all the legal safeguards required in their native country by exporting jobs to countries which race-to-the-bottom to provide the worst working conditions and lowest pay. No company needs a trillion dollars in the bank and in fact it gives them far too much influence.

Infinite growth with limited resources and a limited population is unsustainable. The economic model employed by most countries and businesses is completely unsustainable and creates a huge amount of suffering as economies boom and bust.

I wonder if these "analyst" are taking in to account that Samsung is suing them over LTE patents and there is a good chance Sammy could win? A ban on the new iPhone or a huge payment for licensing could change some things. Seems that they just want it to keep growing like a few years ago they said it was a group of traders trying to push oil over $100 a barrel just because they could.

Worth on paper is just that.. worth on paper.. if their iphone dries out and people don't want it anymore and they lose their brand hype which is already happening btw.. that 600+ billion is going to quickly become near nothing. It's all smoke and mirrors.

  • Like 2

The are worth so much now in cash..not just stocks right? I mean they have CASH in the vault. Even if the stock drops to nothing..they have BILLIONS in the bank for reserves unlike other companies.

Here's some insight. Their operating costs (meaning just costs to run the business) are near $15 billion a year (this does not include items such as mortgage payments and capital expenditures and other stuff). This means that in about 5 years if they get into doo doo, that cash is gonna melt away. I'm not going into the fact that investors will want that money. They can't hoard cash forever. This is why many investors and people who actually know this stuff much better than anyone on this forum have concerns that if Apple doesn't introduce something as huge as iPhone or iPod, all that value goes away fairly quickly.

Will Apple go bankrupt.. no.. that's highly unlikely even if nobody buys an iPhone or iPad again, but we are talking about market value here. It's very clear that "value" Apple holds is heavily inflated and mostly brand related.

  • Like 2

That's what happens when an American company employees people working in slave-like conditions in China to make their products rather than giving the jobs to people in their home country. By simply reducing their profit margin slightly they could still offer the same products at the same price and provide the US economy with much needed jobs, while improving brand image. Instead the slave factories they employ have to put up anti-suicide nets at all their facilities to prevent their workers from literally jumping to their deaths, while riots break out due to the oppressive treatment of "employees". Globalisation has allowed businesses to avoid all the legal safeguards required in their native country by exporting jobs to countries which race-to-the-bottom to provide the worst working conditions and lowest pay. No company needs a trillion dollars in the bank and in fact it gives them far too much influence.

Infinite growth with limited resources and a limited population is unsustainable. The economic model employed by most countries and businesses is completely unsustainable and creates a huge amount of suffering as economies boom and bust.

Can't argue with a bit of that. What is very sad is that all U.S. tech firms seems to employ the same strategy and that may shoot them in the foot one day. It makes very little sense to actively shift jobs away from the very consumers that are supposed to buy these dandy toys. One would think people employed in the tech industry would have some foresight, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

Can't argue with a bit of that. What is very sad is that all U.S. tech firms seems to employ the same strategy and that may shoot them in the foot one day. It makes very little sense to actively shift jobs away from the very consumers that are supposed to buy these dandy toys. One would think people employed in the tech industry would have some foresight, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

It costs too much in the states. If you had a business and your competitor had cheaper labor for the same product line you would have to do the same. Made in the USA does not bring in enough consumers to justify it.

It costs too much in the states. If you had a business and your competitor had cheaper labor for the same product line you would have to do the same. Made in the USA does not bring in enough consumers to justify it.

Does it cost too much? Could Apple (or anyone else) get by with a 100 percent profit margin rather than 300 percent? One should think so. I'd wager the decision to build overseas has less to do with competitive pricing than it does with increasing profit margins as much as possible. That will come back to haunt us in the longterm.

Here's some Apple USA Jobs...

http://www.engadget....al-photographs/

How many of Apple's retail brick and mortar stores are in the US?

How many data centers and planed data centers?

True, many jobs overseas but a few here as well and more coming.

Apple may not grow faster, but the idiocracy of fanboys does...

This!

When you are quite literally a cult, it isn't hard to suck your members dry of every dime they have.

Worth on paper is just that.. worth on paper.. if their iphone dries out and people don't want it anymore and they lose their brand hype which is already happening btw.. that 600+ billion is going to quickly become near nothing. It's all smoke and mirrors.

So true!! It just makes me wonder though at what point will people realize there are better alternatives out there to the iPhone?

The are worth so much now in cash..not just stocks right? I mean they have CASH in the vault. Even if the stock drops to nothing..they have BILLIONS in the bank for reserves unlike other companies.

Nokia was in the same position yet now their stock is rated "Junk" by credit ratings agencies and their cash reserves are fast disappearing; if it can't make a dramatic turnaround then it will either become insolvent or be bought up by a competitor.

Just take a look at Apple products: the iPod has already peaked and become irrelevant; iMac sales have never been great; the iPad will be facing very heavy competition; and the iPhone is starting to receive a lot of negative press and fast heading the way of the iPod. Without innovative new products that can be successfully marketed Apple doesn't have any future worth. That said, such a scenario seems unlikely at this point.

Apple should buy Facebook stock. :shifty:

I think Apple should buy Nintendo.

I think they should also Start their OWN Wireless Communication Service Company or buy up one like AT&T

I think they should also buy up Yahoo! to provide their own search engine and start with some base resources.

Think of the possibilities..

Nokia was in the same position yet now their stock is rated "Junk" by credit ratings agencies and their cash reserves are fast disappearing; if it can't make a dramatic turnaround then it will either become insolvent or be bought up by a competitor.

Just take a look at Apple products: the iPod has already peaked and become irrelevant; iMac sales have never been great; the iPad will be facing very heavy competition; and the iPhone is starting to receive a lot of negative press and fast heading the way of the iPod. Without innovative new products that can be successfully marketed Apple doesn't have any future worth. That said, such a scenario seems unlikely at this point.

Nokia at its hey day was 40$ a share. Not same as Apple at $684 today. Also I can fine no mention of Nokia having a 100billion in CASH. I know they had 62$ billion invested at one time off of there 40$ a share networth but not CASH reserve. So this is much different. Yes I believe Apple is on the downfall too but it will be a slow and steady ride and not lead to bankruptcy like Nokia.

You cannot talk of future products. No one can who knew the ipad, iphone would be popular. Most experts were saying who cares its a fad, blah blah. They still are selling this year, next year too.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • AnyDesk 9.7.7 by Razvan Serea AnyDesk is a fast remote desktop system and enables users to access their data, images, videos and applications from anywhere and at any time, and also to share it with others. AnyDesk is the first remote desktop software that doesn't require you to think about what you can do. CAD, video editing or simply working comfortably with an office suite for hours are just a few examples. AnyDesk is designed for modern multi-core CPUs. Most of AnyDesk's image processing is done con­currently. This way, AnyDesk can utilize up to 90% of modern CPUs. AnyDesk works across multiple platforms and operating systems: Windows, Linux, Free BSD, Mac OS, iOS and Android. Just 7 megabytes - downloaded in a glimpse, sent via email, or fired up from your USB drive, AnyDesk will turn any desktop into your desktop in se­conds. No administrative privileges or installation needed. AnyDesk 9.7.7 fixes: Fixed an issue that prevented users from creating meetings without an active license Download: AnyDesk 9.7.7 | 8.0 MB (Free for private use, paid upgrade available) Links: AnyDesk Home Page | Other platforms | Release History | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • I used a Pixel 10 Pro XL when it first came out for about 8 months. When I first got it, it was using Google assistant and that was fast, when asking it to call somone etc. Then it automatically switched with some update to Gemini. Doing even the simplist of things like asking it to call someone in my contacts was soooooo slow compared to Google assistant. I guess it had to go out to the cloud to do that? Back on iPhone and while Siri is dumb right now, it does do those simple things, like call someone, set a timer, star the stop watch etc, really fast. That an while I like Google Material Design 3 over iOS 26, they Pixel 10 Pro XL was so slow in comparison to the iPhone 17 Pro I am using.
    • I use Gemini in my rotation of AI clients...that work pays for. It is good at most things, better than copilot for imgage searching and making images, worse at writing vs Claude and way worse at hadling technical issues when it comes to Azure stuff. I also use YT premium and maps. Anything else Google is a pass for me. I have now seen multiple people locked out of their Google accounts for reasons that are just very vauge.
    • Microsoft is building an AI datacenter that "uses less water than a fast food restaurant" by Ivan Jenic Image: Microsoft Microsoft has announced plans to build a new datacenter campus in Pecos, Texas, as the company continues to invest billions in AI infrastructure. The new facility, called project Kilby, will reportedly have a capacity of 2 gigawatts and will be one of the largest single capacity additions in the company’s history. To power the campus, Microsoft signed a 20-year deal with Chevron to supply natural gas from the Permian Basin, America's largest oil field. This deal is set to become the largest collaboration to date between a U.S. oil and gas giant and Big Tech. It’s no secret that Big Tech has often been criticized for exploiting natural resources for its AI developments. Microsoft is trying to mitigate some of that negative consensus by promising to build its own power supply for the new datacenter, independent of the public grid. The Pecos datacenter will be powered by a power plant hub, built by Chevron, with up to 2.5 gigawatts of gas-fired capacity, with potential to scale to up to 5 gigawatts. The facility will include at least seven GE Vernova turbines, with first power potentially coming online as early as late 2027 or early 2028. The power plant hub is part of an approximately $7 billion investment by Chevron, making it one of the largest dedicated energy projects tied to a single datacenter campus in the U.S. Microsoft hasn’t publicly disclosed the amount it’s investing in the new datacenter. Microsoft has also committed to implementing a closed-loop cooling system that will only require an initial water charge to operate. The company said that “the total lifecycle water use of this datacenter is only a fraction of that consumed annually by a typical fast-food restaurant.” What the press release doesn’t mention, however, is how much water the natural gas plant itself will consume, or how a 20-year fossil fuel commitment squares with the company's pledge to be carbon negative by 2030. The construction of the new datacenter should provide over 6,000 construction jobs at peak build-out, and create hundreds of operational job roles once the facility is built. Via: Reuters
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      tuben earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      mnsgroup earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Conversation Starter
      sumytbe earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Year In
      B4dM1k3 earned a badge
      One Year In
    • One Year In
      DarkWun earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      524
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      94
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      82
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      67
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!