Apple loses $26 Billion after shares fall 4.2% due to recent events.

[MrSuperb]

Oh...and Apple aren't even close to being the largest company in the world.

What have they put in your brain?

 

 

In terms of market cap they were/are for a long time.

[Nineshadow]

In terms of market cap they were/are for a long time.

Are?

 

They were.

 

Anyway...Samsung is like 200 billion ahead of them.

[mr moose]

nope ... assets are

 

 

 

The market cap of AAPL is more than twice as high as it total assets.

no, assets are capital a company can borrow against, or sell in a pinch, shares are cash invested into a company in return for some of the profits (part ownership), ergo when someone buys shares they are providing the company with a financial resource.  

[Builder]

Apple is the most valuable, not the largest.  A company's size is normally measured by its revenue.

Entirely correct. My mistake. I will correct the post.

 

Investors went into a frenzy.   There has been no real dump as the prices has only edged down slowly. 

Apple stock has been a prime target for manipulation for awhile now. 

 

Sometimes I feel sad for people like you...the blackhole just keeps growin' and grown' Not even sure what this means. Elaborate?

 

Yeah...features in iOS.Most features being already present in Android. Examples?

 

"deep inside chips like 64-bit".Apple didn't invent the first 64 bit chip for phones!Jeez.ARM V8 was released way back in 2011. That's an architecture specification, not a processor. A7 remains the only 64-bit ARM chip in common circulation. That will change when the Snapdragon 810 is released. And how does a feature already present in a current generation phone make you want to buy the next one? Because they've shown they know how to design processors. And what the hell does 64-bit have to do with "great features"? It's a fantastic example of innovative engineering. It barely helps at all!I mean...we don't get more than 4GB-s of RAM for phones,and I can't say that there's a major difference over 32bit.Sure,it's always better,at least for the future.But is buying just for 64-bit worth it,when there are no apparent benefits?Nah. Again, I recommend you read up on the benefits of 64-bit architectures, because they span much farther than memory address space. I can't list them all here, so I think that demonstrates my point.

 

Oh...and Apple aren't even close to being the largest company in the world. They're incredibly close. They leapfrog with Google all the time.

What have they put in your brain?

You feeling OK buddy? I'm feeling fine. You're the one who has shown, repeatedly now, that you have no fucking clue about half of the subjects you weigh in on. I suggest you change that before quoting me again.

[MrSuperb]

no, assets are capital a company can borrow against, or sell in a pinch, shares are cash invested into a company in return for some of the profits (part ownership), ergo when someone buys shares they are providing the company with a financial resource.  

 

yes, during an IPO or when the company issues new shares ... when I sell you my Apple share for 100$ or 10$ on the stock exchange Apple sees shit

[MrSuperb]

Are?

 

They were.

 

Anyway...Samsung is like 200 billion ahead of them.

 

In your dreams maybe.

 

Samsung Electronics

Market Cap $150.52B

 

Apple

Market Cap $592.44B

 

 

edit:

Exxon is at 422.67B, so yes Apple still is the leader in terms of market cap.

[Nineshadow]

In your dreams maybe.

 

Samsung Electronics

Market Cap $150.52B

 

Apple

Market Cap $592.44B

 

 

edit:

Exxon is at 422.67B, so yes Apple still is the leader in terms of market cap.

Samsung revenue : $327 bil

Apple revenue : $170 bil

[MrSuperb]

Samsung revenue : $327 bil

Apple revenue : $170 bil

 

according to forbes:

Samsung: $208.9 B

Apple: $173.8 B    -17%

 

Profit:

Samsung: $27.24 B

Apple: $37 B    +36%

[zacRupnow]

This can easily be fixed with the new iPhone and hopefully the iWatch, but Apple need to step up their game and release some must have tech in order to keep their edge

 

Time will tell

iWatch = iPod Nano 6th

[mr moose]

yes, during an IPO or when the company issues new shares ... when I sell you my Apple share for 100$ or 10$ on the stock exchange Apple sees shit

that's true, But that's only when you're selling your shares to someone else.  The money that originally bought those shares went into apples coffers,  The lower the value of the shares the more shares they need to sell to maintain the same investment.  As you may know what determines a companies value is market cap, not individual share price, so i unless they split shares and offer more shares, the company value decreases making them less appealing to long term investment which reduces their resource pool. 

[patrickjp93]

how to you come to that number?

 

 

and you know how the market price is determined ?!

amortized mean of share prices when large amounts were changing hands and then multiplying that by shares per transaction by the transaction count. It's a rough approximation.

 

Market price is determined by the NASDAQ/NYSE book keeping and a bit of speculation based on sales moment to moment. I'm not even totally sure what the total method is because a lot of it is proprietary algorithms running on the market analysis computers.

[patrickjp93]

that's true, But that's only when you're selling your shares to someone else.  The money that originally bought those shares went into apples coffers,  The lower the value of the shares the more shares they need to sell to maintain the same investment.  As you may know what determines a companies value is market cap, not individual share price, so i unless they split shares and offer more shares, the company value decreases making them less appealing to long term investment which reduces their resource pool. 

Stock market investment: the only legal ponzi scheme in the world.

[MrSuperb]

that's true, But that's only when you're selling your shares to someone else.  The money that originally bought those shares went into apples coffers,  The lower the value of the shares the more shares they need to sell to maintain the same investment. 

 

If Apple sells shares for $1000, those $1000 go to apples cash accounts. If now the original investor a day later thinks that his share in Apple will drop to $500 in a year and therefore sells it share for $600, Apple still has $1000 in its cash Account.

 

 

As you may know what determines a companies value is market cap, not individual share price, so i unless they split shares and offer more shares, the company value decreases making them less appealing to long term investment which reduces their resource pool. 

The market cap only tells us how much a stock is worth to investors. Only if an investor would sell his shares back to the company itself it would  decrease the available ressources in a company.

[MoonSpot]

yeah but wasn't apples market cap was around 1 trillion a year or 2 ago.  They're falling quite fast, must be looking to give blackberry stockholders some company.

[MrSuperb]

yeah but wasn't apples market cap was around 1 trillion a year or 2 ago.  They're falling quite fast, must be looking to give blackberry stockholders some company.

no, it never was and no, it doesn't.

 

[Hebdomad]

If I was a gambling man, I would be so buying up Apple shares right now... It would all be riding on the next iPhone being awesome though... O_o

[MoonSpot]

no, it never was and no, it doesn't.

 

-snip-

 

I stand corrected.  after digging a bit I found fist fulls of articles from 2012 speculating.

However, their stock is trading A LOT less volume then before(with the exception of the last 2 days where everyone is jumping ship), which may be echoing peoples excitement for apple.

http://charting.nasdaq.com/ext/charts.dll?2-1-14-0-0-536-03NA000000AAPL-&SF:1|39|38|5-BG=FFFFFF-BT=0-WD=530-HT=395--XTBL-

[MrSuperb]

amortized mean of share prices when large amounts were changing hands and then multiplying that by shares per transaction by the transaction count. It's a rough approximation.

 

so basically just a random number?

Again we are talking about what Apple lost and not some investors.

 

 

Market price is determined by the NASDAQ/NYSE book keeping and a bit of speculation based on sales moment to moment. I'm not even totally sure what the total method is because a lot of it is proprietary algorithms running on the market analysis computers.

 

I am confused now. are we talking about the value of a share (i.e. the market cap) which is determined by supply & demand and no speculation on the stock exchange side. Or are we talking  about the price where a transaction happens, which is determined by the automated matching of sell & buy offers.

 

your original statement was "Wrong. If you sell a share at less than market price the company pays you the difference. Short-selling a company can run it dry, which is another reason the big 2007 crash was so catastrophic."

 

Short-selling has nothing to do with "sell a share at less than market price"

________

 

Let's say an imaginary market value of $100 is determined, because there is an sell offer of $110 and a buy offer of $90.

If someone (out of his mind) now would add an sell offer of $80, the transaction would be made at $80. You want to tell me now, that Apple has to pay $20 ?

[mr moose]

If Apple sells shares for $1000, those $1000 go to apples cash accounts. If now the original investor a day later thinks that his share in Apple will drop to $500 in a year and therefore sells it share for $600, Apple still has $1000 in its cash Account.

 

 

The market cap only tells us how much a stock is worth to investors. Only if an investor would sell his shares back to the company itself it would  decrease the available ressources in a company.

Maybe this will help explain what I am saying:

 

http://www.investopedia.com/articles/basics/03/020703.asp

[MrSuperb]

Maybe this will help explain what I am saying:

 

http://www.investopedia.com/articles/basics/03/020703.asp

 

nope, doesn't explain at all what you are saying ... "The lower the value of the shares the more shares they need to sell to maintain the same investment."

 

 

_______

 

 

"The original company that issues the stock does not participate in any profits or losses resulting from these transactions, because this company has no vested monetary interest."

[mr moose]

nope, doesn't explain at all what you are saying ... "The lower the value of the shares the more shares they need to sell to maintain the same investment."

 

 

_______

 

 

"The original company that issues the stock does not participate in any profits or losses resulting from these transactions, because this company has no vested monetary interest."

 

We've already covered that.

Investment may not be the best word.

 

If apple wanted to (I couldn't think of a good reason why) they could  maintain their company value by selling more shares, but they would be selling them at the lower price and thus not netting the same cash influx.

 

As I said earlier, the total value of share price loss would be $26B, but that is not a loss per se to apple, it would be more accurate to describe it as a financial resource it no longer has access to. 

[MrSuperb]

If apple wanted to (I couldn't think of a good reason why) they could  maintain their company value by selling more shares, but they would be selling them at the lower price and thus not netting the same cash influx.

 This would lead to stock dilution and most probably a lower stock price, which won't male investors happy.

Apple did the contrary last year (?) and bought back shares.

 

 

As I said earlier, the total value of share price loss would be $26B, but that is not a loss per se to apple, it would be more accurate to describe it as a financial resource it no longer has access to. 

 

Let's just say the market cap dropped by $26B.

 

How is it a finacial resource no longer available to Apple? Apple doesn't have access to its market cap. Apples book value didn't (or at least not drastically) change because of that drop in the stock market.

[mr moose]

Let's just say the market cap dropped by $26B.

 

How is it a finacial resource no longer available to Apple? Apple doesn't have access to its market cap. Apples book value didn't (or at least not drastically) change because of that drop in the stock market.

Apples value would have dropped But I didn't check how much by, and even so $26B is nothing when you have a value of $500B, It's not like they are in danger of being taken over.

 

 This would lead to stock dilution and most probably a lower stock price, which won't male investors happy.

Apple did the contrary last year (?) and bought back shares.

 

It would have the same effect as stock splitting (which they did heavily in April). However it would directly inject more cash into the company because instead of dropping the individual share price but the split ratio  they would be selling  X number of stocks at the current price to the market. Ergo more cash to them, more stock on the market and maintaining company value.  Consequences of that are shaky investor confidence and possibility of individual share price dropping further still from the sudden influx of more shares.  But as I said, I can't think of a good reason why they would do that.

 

EDIT: you know what, I have never been good at explaining financials, if the above doesn't make sense I'll just post links to relevant articles.

[Tech_Dreamer]

Meanwhile Tissue's  stocks have sky rocketed.... :mellow:

[MrSuperb]

Apples value would have dropped But I didn't check how much by, and even so $26B is nothing when you have a value of $500B, It's not like they are in danger of being taken over.

 

I wonder how you want to check that if Apple only publishes financial statements quarterly ...