Apple becomes most valuable firm of all time

[The Dread Pirate]

Just because your specific set of uses and values isn't congruous with the product it doesn't make the product itself bad.

TBH It's all down to personal preference(and in my opinion I can find somthing cheaper and more suited to my needs ergo it's an overpriced and pointless product) but what really gets to me is the mindset of not going and buying <insert tech item here> on merit but because it's apple and I need it if I want to look cool. It's become a fasion brand more than anything else these days.

 

[OhEsEcks]

It's become a fasion brand more than anything else these days.

And the penultimate question is.... so?

 

[Glaucus]

TBH It's all down to personal preference(and in my opinion I can find somthing cheaper and more suited to my needs ergo it's an overpriced and pointless product) but what really gets to me is the mindset of not going and buying <insert tech item here> on merit but because it's apple and I need it if I want to look cool. It's become a fasion brand more than anything else these days.

Ad yet currently, no other device does what I want. Ergo I buy apple on functionality.
Apple haters seem to think everyone who buys apple are a sheep.
How many android threads do you see ruined by apple fans? And how many in the reverse. Says a lot about certain android fans having an irrational hatred of apple.

As for others saying you get stuck in the ecosystem. What exactly do you think you get when you are on android or windows. You equally get stuck. It's not like your android or windows apps are transferable.

 

[Pudney]

They haven't traditionally given back to investors, so investors shouldn't expect it, it's wasted money and they did give a dividend this year, anyway.

As for assets, they do buy them. Again it's pointless spending money for the sake of it. They are hardly saving money at the detriment of the business. It's just they can aford to spend what they need to and still have money left over. Not like, they aren't building a new multi million dollar headquarter is it.

Actually it's not about "spending money for the sake of it". It's the efficient use of shareholder's money.

I'm not suggseting they shouldn't keep reserves behind, this is very sensible, but the fact is it's detrimental to go to either extreme. Spend all your money and your at risk of cahsflow issues, don't spend your money and your not managing your resources well and your shareholders are worse off because their shares could have been worth more. Either way it's a bad thing but for different reasons.

 

[Glaucus]

Actually it's not about "spending money for the sake of it". It's the efficient use of shareholder's money.

I'm not suggseting they shouldn't keep reserves behind, this is very sensible, but the fact is it's detrimental to go to either extreme. Spend all your money and your at risk of cahsflow issues, don't spend your money and your not managing your resources well and your shareholders are worse off because their shares could have been worth more. Either way it's a bad thing but for different reasons.

They aren't going to the extreme. Going to the extreme to save money, would mean they aren't buying assets or spending money else where. They are doing both.
You seem to thinka as they have lots of money they aren't buying assets. They clearly are. So again it's pointless spending money for the sake of it. They've also given out a dividend and it's not the shareholders money. It's the companies money, which shareholders have a say in, via their voting powers.

 

[ntg]

They aren't going to the extreme. Going to the extreme to save money, would mean they aren't buying assets or spending money else where. They are doing both.
You seem to thinka as they have lots of money they aren't buying assets. They clearly are. So again it's pointless spending money for the sake of it. They've also given out a dividend and it's not the shareholders money. It's the companies money, which shareholders have a say in, via their voting powers.

Let's clarify some things.

They have $110bn in cash. That is a lot of cash to keep in reserve. Their working capital is much-much less than that. Therefore they do not need to keep as much in reserve. This is undisputable despite how people may "feel".

Whatever assets they are buying, the capital they are spending is nowhere near to justify such as cash reserve and most likely can be funded by cash flow anyway. Again, another reason why they don't need to keep the money in the books.

Finally, it is the shareholders money, it's not the 'company's' money. Where did you get that concept? The shareholders own 100% of the company and therefore own all of its assets and liabilities, including the cash. It's theirs. Companies need to keep some liquid assets, typically cash, for working capital and some money (or raise debt) for capital expenses. Anything else should either be invested, or if there is no good investment to be made then returned to the shareholders to whom they belong (either via dividend or share repurchase).

 

[Basher]

You forgot:

*Insert typical OcUK love Apple remark here*

Which balances out the typical debate we get here........

Maybe we should have a poll:

a) Love Apple
b) Hate Apple
c) Eat my pancake
d) To thick to take a balanced view
e) I love fanboys
​

Irony?

 

[Glaucus]

Let's clarify some things.

They have $110bn in cash. That is a lot of cash to keep in reserve. Their working capital is much-much less than that. Therefore they do not need to keep as much in reserve. This is undisputable despite how people may "feel".

Whatever assets they are buying, the capital they are spending is nowhere near to justify such as cash reserve and most likely can be funded by cash flow anyway. Again, another reason why they don't need to keep the money in the books.

Finally, it is the shareholders money, it's not the 'company's' money. Where did you get that concept? The shareholders own 100% of the company and therefore own all of its assets and liabilities, including the cash. It's theirs. Companies need to keep some liquid assets, typically cash, for working capital and some money (or raise debt) for capital expenses. Anything else should either be invested, or if there is no good investment to be made then returned to the shareholders to whom they belong (either via dividend or share repurchase).

The shareholders as a collective own it. They do not own it individually and as such int there money. If they wish they can sell there shares. It's a bit like a democracy. Owning a share entitles you to little, owning over 50% of shares entitles you to a lot. No where does it say it should be all given back to investors, where did you get that idea from? You won't find any big company doing that.

What don't you understand that they are spending money, if there's no need to buy anything why spend it for the sake of it. Spending money on assets increases your expenditure for as long as you hold it. They are buying and improving assets anyway. What they aren't doing is just buying a few billions worth of warehouses that aren't needed, just to spend money.

 

[StriderX]

Apple is the chic in computer devices as Aston Martin is to the car world.
(I suppose you could say Ferrari, but i think that would more likely analogise far more expensive and luxury computing items)

You probably don't need it necessarily, its mostly desire and ego masturbation.

Great, sorted that out, stop the silly nonsense.

 

[fieldy]

well I for one am glad - I've been using apple products for many years and find their them to be well designed and genuinely useful. It’s a massive achievement to become what they have especially since they were in a lot of trouble a while back

 

[Deep]

TBH It's all down to personal preference(and in my opinion I can find somthing cheaper and more suited to my needs ergo it's an overpriced and pointless product)

Well that's just stupid.
Just because it doesn't fit your specific needs doesn't make it pointless and overpriced.

That's just a ridiculous statement

 

[The Dread Pirate]

Ad yet currently, no other device does what I want. Ergo I buy apple on functionality.
Apple haters seem to think everyone who buys apple are a sheep.
How many android threads do you see ruined by apple fans? And how many in the reverse. Says a lot about certain android fans having an irrational hatred of apple.

No If you've got your reasons other than "It's cool" then fairplay to you so long as you have an actual reason for picking the product I'm not fussed(I still think you're wasting money but thats a personal view) it's those who buy these things they clearly don't need just because it's in that gets to me...

Also I'm not actually that big a fan of smart phones for the reason yes they may be able to do many thousands of useful, entertaining and frivolous things...
but they don't do them to the standard of an actual device that's made spcifically for each individual task what's the old saying "Jack of all trades master of none"

Finally the real thing that annoys me about all smart phones pointless app's you know the ones: Soundboards, annoy your friends today, instrument emulators etc... I mean why!

But the worst of all has to be the internet connections im sure I'm not the only one who's had this happen on multiple occasions... Good Night out having a laugh with the mates conversation is flowing as are the intoxicants suddenly you hear "Oh man I've seen this great video/found this interesting article/seen somthing awesomne on <insert site/app here>" at this point all conversation and other activity stops and everyones either crowded round the instigators phone staring at the most tiny images known to man or they're pulling out their own phones to one up said instigator with their pick of the site video etc...

I mean come on what happened to the social gathering and fun times or am I just backward and it's really more fun to sit there drooling at a tiny screen than get up off your **** and doing somthing/talking to someone...

Anyhoo rant over...

 

[Basher]

TBH It's all down to personal preference(and in my opinion I can find somthing cheaper and more suited to my needs ergo it's an overpriced and pointless product) but what really gets to me is the mindset of not going and buying <insert tech item here> on merit but because it's apple and I need it if I want to look cool. It's become a fasion brand more than anything else these days.

Everything that doesn't fit your needs is pointless?

 

[Pudney]

The shareholders as a collective own it. They do not own it individually and as such int there money. If they wish they can sell there shares. It's a bit like a democracy. Owning a share entitles you to little, owning over 50% of shares entitles you to a lot. No where does it say it should be all given back to investors, where did you get that idea from? You won't find any big company doing that.

The shareholders own it. Where does it go upon winding up?

What don't you understand that they are spending money, if there's no need to buy anything why spend it for the sake of it. Spending money on assets increases your expenditure for as long as you hold it. They are buying and improving assets anyway. What they aren't doing is just buying a few billions worth of warehouses that aren't needed, just to spend money.

What you don't understand is NOT investing money can give a poorer return than investing it. So whilst a cash balance may be nice, it's detrimental to shareholder wealth as it could have been used to generate more than if it is kept.

Ultiimately directors have a duty of care to shareholders, they are operating the company for the shareholders benefit not anybody elses. That's why they have to report to them. Directors should therefore strike a balance between returning money that isn't needed whislt retaining enough to grow the company.

I'm not actually saying that the directors don't have good reasons to keep that amount of cash, just that it does appear to be an unecessarily high level of reserves.

 

[Glaucus]

They "own" it. Doesnt mean they can dictate what the companies does with it, like you think.
Yes they could invest it, in multiple ways andd get better returns. But again this depens on their planss and predictions. Perhaps they can foresee a huge buyout of. Another moony, or they think they will need a huge cash reserve for x,y,z that isn't tied down and inaccessible for x-months.

Finally you agree, that there's good reasons and that it shouldn't have to be all paid out to investors.

 

[The Dread Pirate]

Well that's just stupid.
Just because it doesn't fit your specific needs doesn't make it pointless and overpriced.

That's just a ridiculous statement

Everything that doesn't fit your needs is pointless?

Personal preference and need are quite simple concepts not everything out there is useful to every individual on the planet you know yes to other people it maybe useful and have a point to myself it doesn't therefore I see it as pointless I'm entitled to my opinion just as you are yours hell I'm sure there's stuff out there you think is pointless doesn't make it true for everyone does it.

 

[Basher]

Personal preference and need are quite simple concepts not everything out there is useful to every individual on the planet you know yes to other people it maybe useful and have a point to myself it doesn't therefore I see it as pointless I'm entitled to my opinion just as you are yours hell I'm sure there's stuff out there you think is pointless doesn't make it true for everyone does it.

Yes, there's lots of things I don't need or want. That doesn't make them pointless though

 

[deuse]

Ad yet currently, no other device does what I want. Ergo I buy apple on functionality..

I thought you said in another thread that the company you work for(railways company) bought your ipad for you?

 

[Pudney]

They "own" it. Doesnt mean they can dictate what the companies does with it, like you think.
Yes they could invest it, in multiple ways andd get better returns. But again this depens on their planss and predictions. Perhaps they can foresee a huge buyout of. Another moony, or they think they will need a huge cash reserve for x,y,z that isn't tied down and inaccessible for x-months.

Finally you agree, that there's good reasons and that it shouldn't have to be all paid out to investors.

"Finally"? Seeing as I've already said it's sensible to keep a reserve it would appear I've already said holding money isn't necessarily a bad thing.

I'll reiterate though for you, holding money to an extreme isn't a good thing and Apple could probably be worth a lot more if it was actually being used properly. I'd suggest that the directors don't have some master plan consdiering they've been hoarding it for years as well unless their plan is to buyout America in 15 years time which seems a bit too long term for that type of corporate planning.

Edit: Oh hang on, are you an Apple fanatic who doesn't like negative things said about them?

 

[Glaucus]

They aren't withholding money to an extreme. Holding huge amounts of money does not mean they're holding on to it in the extreme. That would mean they are withholding money at the deter mental affect of the rest of the company. That is not happening. They are expanding, they are buying assets, they are spending loads of money. In no way are they holding into money to the deters mental affect of the company.

I thought you said in another thread that the company you work for(railways company) bought your ipad for you?

Nope