141–150 of 445 posts
According to Google Finance, it appears that Alphabet has a market capitalization of $517B, which is far different than the $558B quoted in the article. This does not appear to be a temporary fluctuation. https://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ%3AGOOGL Am I missing something? Based on the current market cap numbers on Google Finance, Apple is still higher than Alphabet.
According to Google Finance, it appears that Alphabet has a market capitalization of $517B, which is far different than the $558B quoted in the article. This does not appear to be a temporary fluctuation. https://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ%3AGOOGL Am I missing something? Based on the current market cap numbers on Google Finance, Apple is still higher than Alphabet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which pretty much shows that the market value of a company is not based on what they sell today, but on the expectation of what they will sell tomorrow. Does Apple do research in biotech (Alphabet's Calico)? Are they developing drones delivering wireless internet to the world (Google's Skybender)? Do they have an investment arm (Google Ventures)? Did they start an ISP (Google Fiber)? People see Alphabet's increasing…
It's interesting that the market is valuing Apple's ability to innovate in the absence of Steve Jobs at ~zero. Apple trades like a value stock right now; Wall Street assumes that they're a cash cow that is just going to be milked, and unlikely to have any future major hits. If you (correctly) disagree with this assessment, there may be money to be made here. If you agree with it, well, I understand why Apple wouldn't…
According to Google Finance, it appears that Alphabet has a market capitalization of $517B, which is far different than the $558B quoted in the article. This does not appear to be a temporary fluctuation. https://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ%3AGOOGL Am I missing something? Based on the current market cap numbers on Google Finance, Apple is still higher than Alphabet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They are getting better, every single year, over more than a decade, in a way that click growth outpaces traffic growth. That they're getting better at it is why click growth outpaces traffic growth. If they stayed the same at it then click growth would equal traffic growth. > It seems unlikely it's just targeting, without spilling over into something that's bad for consumers. It could be one or the other or both.…
>> Care to present any evidence They certainly do things today that they did not do 5 years ago. Like specific query results where everything above the fold on desktop is an ad. I personally do not think that's good for consumers. I suspect, though, that you disagree. On your other point, they are getting better every year as measured by a YoY comparison...not just plain growth. Double-digit percentage YoY improvemen…
Do you have an non-anecdotal evidence to present? A few advertisement laden queries and a "funny feeling" is rarely a sound investment strategy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's interesting that the market is valuing Apple's ability to innovate in the absence of Steve Jobs at ~zero. Apple trades like a value stock right now; Wall Street assumes that they're a cash cow that is just going to be milked, and unlikely to have any future major hits. If you (correctly) disagree with this assessment, there may be money to be made here. If you agree with it, well, I understand why Apple wouldn't…
I agree with you, but I think it's a bit bold to call "correct" or "incorrect" about future events.
People were losing their minds over the fact that iPhone shipments slightly declined. If you look at the year over year growth (excluding the massive bump for iPhone 6), it would show that AAPL is still ahead of the growth curve. See https://imgur.com/vO0kPEy * Apple's quarterly revenue: $75.9bil * Apple's quarterly profit: $18.4bil * Google's quarterly revenue: $21.3bil * Google's quarterly profit: $6.8bil In sheer…