or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Business, Careers & Education › Talking stocks, trading, and investing in general
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Talking stocks, trading, and investing in general - Page 209

post #3121 of 5131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cantabrigian View Post

My point was that a split would likely increase retail participation. Those are the guys who plow in and run for the exits. And sometimes they don't have a choice if they're heavily levered.

The easiler you make it for those guys to participate, the more volatile it will be.

Part of the problem is that it is such a large chunk of THE index that people index to. So it's almost like indexers are short gamma - they have to buy when it rises and sell when it falls.

I hear you, and tend to agree. I want that participation. The stock price is too low and it would trade at a better level if it split 5 or 10 to 1. If it split down to $50 I think it would easily level out at 70 and then fuck it, at that level let it swing 10 bucks either way. I'm up 200% anyway. The problem is at 500 people do this eek.gif and its price stays artificially depressed.
post #3122 of 5131
Im sitting around trying to break my Apple model with all kinds of overly conservative assumptions... cannot get to a share price under $500.

Am I supposed to believe their operating margin is going to drop by half over the next 5 years?
post #3123 of 5131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pennglock View Post

Im sitting around trying to break my Apple model with all kinds of overly conservative assumptions... cannot get to a share price under $500.

Am I supposed to believe their operating margin is going to drop by half over the next 5 years?

numbers don't tell the whole story.
post #3124 of 5131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pennglock View Post

Im sitting around trying to break my Apple model with all kinds of overly conservative assumptions... cannot get to a share price under $500.

Am I supposed to believe their operating margin is going to drop by half over the next 5 years?

Ya, its fucking nuts. Even if they flat like for a few quarters they have 137 B in CASH.


Quote:
Originally Posted by imolazhp_ci View Post

numbers don't tell the whole story.


So, what are numbers hiding?
post #3125 of 5131

Sorry to hijack the Apple discussion but I wanted to bring up a company that I don't think has ever been discussed on here - Novo Nordisk. They basically own the international diabetes market (especially China) and with the world getting fatter and more prone to contracting the disease, they are a great growth story. The stock trades at a bit of a high multiple (25x) but has had excellent historical performance.

 

As it comes to AAPL, I think that their success is dependent on the other players more than themselves barring a brand new product (i.e. something as revolutionary as the iPad) being released. Pair trades may make the bank here.

post #3126 of 5131
Quote:
Originally Posted by thezolt View Post

Sorry to hijack the Apple discussion but I wanted to bring up a company that I don't think has ever been discussed on here - Novo Nordisk. They basically own the international diabetes market (especially China) and with the world getting fatter and more prone to contracting the disease, they are a great growth story. The stock trades at a bit of a high multiple (25x) but has had excellent historical performance.

As it comes to AAPL, I think that their success is dependent on the other players more than themselves barring a brand new product (i.e. something as revolutionary as the iPad) being released. Pair trades may make the bank here.

Was a big fan a few months ago, still a solid stock imo
post #3127 of 5131
Spent some time pondering about the implications of Apple without Jobs, and I'm actually less fervent now on the belief that Apple may be screwed without him in terms of product innovation. He was wrong about smartphone screen sizes. He was wrong about the iPad mini, saying that small tablets wouldn't be popular -- it's Apple's most popular iPad.

Where he was excellent and better than Tim Cook in every which way were his charisma and ability to CUT FUCKING DEALS with other companies and executives. He just had that oomph that made him a persuasive motherfucker and got shit done. An Apple TV is definitely in the works. Let's face it. It is. What they're stalling at, though, is making deals with media companies for content. Jobs was able to make iTunes the most successful online music store because he was also able to convince media labels and artists to sell their shit on the platform on a massive fucking scale. I truly believe he would have been able to make much, much more progress with TV network executives than Cook or whichever executive that is currently the negotiator for Apple.

You guys have seen the Apple key notes, right? Tim Cook fucking sucks in terms of charm or personality. No one loves him.

Thank god Jony Ive is still at Apple.
post #3128 of 5131
Quote:
Originally Posted by thezolt View Post

Sorry to hijack the Apple discussion but I wanted to bring up a company that I don't think has ever been discussed on here - Novo Nordisk. They basically own the international diabetes market (especially China) and with the world getting fatter and more prone to contracting the disease, they are a great growth story. The stock trades at a bit of a high multiple (25x) but has had excellent historical performance.

As it comes to AAPL, I think that their success is dependent on the other players more than themselves barring a brand new product (i.e. something as revolutionary as the iPad) being released. Pair trades may make the bank here.

I own some big Pharma, but at todays prices I'm not sure I'm a buyer for additional shares of any of the Pharma stocks I own. The dividend for Novo nordisk is pretty small by comparison to the industry, and it's trading at 27x earnings....little pricey IMO.

GreenFrog,

Anyone who took the job was doomed to live in a shadow.
post #3129 of 5131
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkinnyGoomba View Post


I own some big Pharma, but at todays prices I'm not sure I'm a buyer for additional shares of any of the Pharma stocks I own. The dividend for Novo nordisk is pretty small by comparison to the industry, and it's trading at 27x earnings....little pricey IMO.

GreenFrog,

Anyone who took the job was doomed to live in a shadow.

 

Yeah 1% dividend and at all time highs, are a bit risky for for me 

post #3130 of 5131
BAC seems to be pricing in alot of potential for a raise in the dividend. I'm curious to see if that gets approved considering their litigation risk.
post #3131 of 5131

The company still owns the international portion of a huge growth story (NVO). I've put a stop loss on in any case but I like the free money (up like 2% per day....)

post #3132 of 5131
I don't think it's a bad company, just on the pricey side for my interest.
post #3133 of 5131
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkinnyGoomba View Post

BAC seems to be pricing in alot of potential for a raise in the dividend. I'm curious to see if that gets approved considering their litigation risk.

I dumped my shares at $10.45. Sold off a bit too early but I booked a nice 55% gain on last year's taxes. I think we will see a bit of a pull back in financials over the next month or so.

 

A few points on the Apple front:

 

A major chunk of that cash is held overseas, so to pay it out to shareholders they would have to repatriate it. If you are in the stock for the long-term, better to wait and hope for a repatriation holiday while they continue to pay out domestic cash.

 

On fundamentals, Apple certainly is cheap. The question is how far the momentum will carry it down before value investors can't resist it anymore.

post #3134 of 5131
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedLeg View Post

I dumped my shares at $10.45. Sold off a bit too early but I booked a nice 55% gain on last year's taxes. I think we will see a bit of a pull back in financials over the next month or so.

 

A few points on the Apple front:

 

A major chunk of that cash is held overseas, so to pay it out to shareholders they would have to repatriate it. If you are in the stock for the long-term, better to wait and hope for a repatriation holiday while they continue to pay out domestic cash.

 

On fundamentals, Apple certainly is cheap. The question is how far the momentum will carry it down before value investors can't resist it anymore.

 

haha me too, sold at 10:40 =\ missed the run up to 12

post #3135 of 5131
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkinnyGoomba View Post

BAC seems to be pricing in alot of potential for a raise in the dividend. I'm curious to see if that gets approved considering their litigation risk.

Wow, did you see the PBS Frontline show 'The Untouchables' about Wall St executives and banks? Its fraud and whistle blowers around every corner all setting up civil suits. Countrwide had finger prints everywhere.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RedLeg View Post

On fundamentals, Apple certainly is cheap. The question is how far the momentum will carry it down before value investors can't resist it anymore.

I cant see it much lower than 440 at a bottom.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TiberiasUSA View Post

haha me too, sold at 10:40 =\ missed the run up to 12

I bought at 5, I'm going to let it roll for a while. Litigation is a risk, but $5 is a pretty safe floor.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Business, Careers & Education
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Business, Careers & Education › Talking stocks, trading, and investing in general