$9.10 in 2011, 52% looks good on the day chart, not so good over 5 years...
AMD stock up 52%
21–30 of 98 posts
Re: AMD stock up 52%
#22Why? Is anyone else surprised that up 50% is $4?
Why do you think the price per share is relevant?
Because while logically the price is irrelevant, in practice is isn't. Prices below $5 often indicate that a company is in trouble.
Which I think is what the unfairly downvoted comment above was referring to.
Re: AMD stock up 52%
#23Reminds me that Zen is coming in a few months too. bandwidth rumors: http://techfrag.com/2016/04/02/first-amd-zen-benchmarks-leak... CERN rumors: http://seekingalpha.com/article/3961536-amd-zens-release-wil...
Your first link is about april fools joke.
http://www.bitsandchips.it/component/content/article/52-engl...
Re: AMD stock up 52%
#24Reminds me that Zen is coming in a few months too. bandwidth rumors: http://techfrag.com/2016/04/02/first-amd-zen-benchmarks-leak... CERN rumors: http://seekingalpha.com/article/3961536-amd-zens-release-wil...
Your first link is about april fools joke. http://www.bitsandchips.it/component/content/article/52-engl...
`facepalm`
Hard to check a posteriori indirect articles from around 1st of april. Good catch.
Re: AMD stock up 52%
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
A $4 share price is comparable to other company share prices relative to market capitalisation. eg. Alphabet at 950B ~ $720 per share. Perhaps the surprising thing is the $4.7B market cap on AMD?
Price per share is irrelevant. Going from 2 to $4 is that same 50 to 100. Typically however, companies like to keep their stock price higher as it seems more attractive and a low share price seems less valuable than I.e. $100/share. Market cap is completely separate, all depending on number of outstanding shares.
There are more important practical reasons for slightly higher share prices than appearances. A lot of major brokers (eg Fidelity, Scottrade, TradeKing, TD Ameritrade) won't allow any margin on stock prices below $2 or $3, and often brokers adjust the margin requirements based on price brackets (eg $5 to $3, X% capital requirement; sub $3, no margin allowed). That can cause a margin crunch on investors if the stock falls below $3.
Re: AMD stock up 52%
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do you think the price per share is relevant?
Because while logically the price is irrelevant, in practice is isn't. Prices below $5 often indicate that a company is in trouble. Which I think is what the unfairly downvoted comment above was referring to.
> Prices below $5 often indicate that a company is in trouble.
Really? What are you basing that on?
Re: AMD stock up 52%
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because while logically the price is irrelevant, in practice is isn't. Prices below $5 often indicate that a company is in trouble. Which I think is what the unfairly downvoted comment above was referring to.
> Prices below $5 often indicate that a company is in trouble. Really? What are you basing that on?
Just read the comments below before posting again.
Re: AMD stock up 52%
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
Price per share is irrelevant. Going from 2 to $4 is that same 50 to 100. Typically however, companies like to keep their stock price higher as it seems more attractive and a low share price seems less valuable than I.e. $100/share. Market cap is completely separate, all depending on number of outstanding shares.
There are more important practical reasons for slightly higher share prices than appearances. A lot of major brokers (eg Fidelity, Scottrade, TradeKing, TD Ameritrade) won't allow any margin on stock prices below $2 or $3, and often brokers adjust the margin requirements based on price brackets (eg $5 to $3, X% capital requirement; sub $3, no margin allowed). That can cause a margin crunch on investors if the stock f…
There are also important practical reasons for low share prices - there are high fees and commissions for trading shares in lots smaller than 100.
This makes stocks at low prices attractive for small investors, unlike the Berkshire of old with a price of 100k...
Re: AMD stock up 52%
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do you think the price per share is relevant?
Because while logically the price is irrelevant, in practice is isn't. Prices below $5 often indicate that a company is in trouble. Which I think is what the unfairly downvoted comment above was referring to.
A stock is just an arbitrary fraction of the capital stock, therefore the price in absolute value of a single stock is completely irrelevant. Suppose a company has a market value of $1,000. The company can divide its stock into 1,000 one-dollar shares, or into 500 two-dollar shares. Either way in makes no difference as far as the total worth of the company goes.
Re: AMD stock up 52%
#30So AMD bought ATI for 5.4B only a year later wrote down 2.65B of it, valuing ATI at 2.75B in 2007. Currently AMD is worth 3B, valuing the AMD part of the company roughly zero provided ATI had at least 1% growth in each of the past nine years. Licensing out what a bit ago would've been the crown jewels for $.3B makes a lot of sense in these circumstances.