Live data from Hacker News

Apple becomes the first $1T company

washingtonpost.com

231–240 of 352 posts

Re: Apple becomes the first $1T company

#231
Just to give some context, the first publicly traded company to hit $1T USD market cap was Petrol China, but that was only in HK, in mainland china, its stock were never valued more than $500B. And it has only 5% of stock in HK open market.

Compare to AAPL today.

Apple still has a ridiculously low P/E of ~17. Which is how everyone values a hardware company. And has stayed within this P/E range since the death of Steve Jobs. Apple hasn't been selling more iPhone than the last super cycle aka iPhone 6, which is when the plus version was first introduced. But Apple's iPhone ASP has been up $100+, and Apple has been buying back LOTS of share, which is one of the main reason pushing its stock price upwards.

A lot of analyst likes to focus on the flat unit sales, and the higher ASP. In reality it is the user base growth that is much more important. Tim Cook mentioned a double digit percentage growth in iPhone. That puts Apple with close to 800M active iPhone users. Roughly 70M+ of iPhone users coming are either new to smartphone or switching from Android. So while Apple's iPhone sales has been flat for a few years, its iPhone user base has matched from 600M to 800M. Given the moat, or the stickiness of Apple ecosystem, users are likely going to buy another iPhone, staying within the ecosystem than going to Android.

The Mac are also adding lots of new users, 60% of Mac buyer are new to Apple. This continuous trend means Apple is adding 10M new Mac users YoY. The last reported figure there were roughly 150M active Mac users. If we look at the sales figures and Active Mac users over time, it is clear the average Mac lifecycle is now on 4 - 5 years before upgrade.

The iPad has roughly 300M, may be now closer to 400M iPad users. Again while the sales hasn't grown, its user base is growing.

Both Horace Dediu and Benedict Evans are expecting 1.5 billion Active devices by either late 2018 or mid 2019. As impossible it may seems, Apple is STILL growing its user base.

And there are few more things to fuel future growth. The rumoured of slightly cheaper iPhone and Mac. We should have a sub $700 6.1" LCD iPhone coming this September. Along with a better sub $1000 entry level MacBook. And I believe the best iPad has yet to come, still with lots of potentials.

Yes, I hate the TouchBar, Yes I absolutely hate the new bloody keyboard they put on MacBook. And I don't like FaceID much, still prefer under screen finger print. But all these aside, Apple is still doing extremely well, and its bigger picture is good with no immediate risk at its current valuation. Cant say the same for Microsoft, Google, or Amazon. And they have just finish moving into its new Spaceship. There are lots of mental preparation and inefficiency involved when moving to a whole campus. I hope they are now settle and up their productivity.

To sum it up, with a P/E less then 20, and the most Net Cash ( ~$130B ) any company has in the world, they are truly worth their $1T Market Cap.

Congrats AAPL.

P.S - Steve probably would have sent another note to all employees about Dell. :P

Re: Apple becomes the first $1T company

#232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We can still complain about their walled-garden approach to software distribution, particularly the extortionist 30% fee and handicapping of non-native apps. Or their kowtowing to the Chinese censors.

Their walled garden approach is looking smarter and smarter with every EU fine that gets thrown at Google. As an aside: As an engineer, I dislike their walled garden approach; but I love their approach as a consumer. To be frank, most companies have bad taste and poor UX design. Apple doesn't knock it out the park all the time, but their products are consistently good and their design guidelines for iOS apps enforce…

> but I love their approach as a consumer.

Quite often anti-competitive actions are beneficial to customers at the expense of other companies.

Re: Apple becomes the first $1T company

#233
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

doesn't mean he held them though

This is what I tell everyone when they kick themselves for not buying BTC when it was $0.25. You would have sold them the second they hit $1.00. The only people I know who got rich off BTC are those who found an old wallet on an old drive in their garage.

I have a friend who bought low and didn't think about selling until he had about $300,000 worth. Except he stored them on MtGox and they were gone.

Re: Apple becomes the first $1T company

#234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is incredibly true, a huge lesson from the iPhone is that consumers can not tell you what they cannot imagine. Creating entirely new markets takes vision.

They should have learned that lesson from the iPod - “No wireless, less space than a Nomad, Lame”

I guess the conclusion might be: Unimaginative people are bad at predicting the future.

Re: Apple becomes the first $1T company

#235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

DuckDuckGo looking nicer every day.

DDG is essentially just a reskin of Bing.

DDG claims to have multiple searches, like local or specialized search engines, but if Bing shuts down they would probably be in trouble.

That said it’s irrelevant. Microsoft is happy to keep the competition alive for Google and I bet they are winning some revenue from their DDG deal, so it’s a win win.

And if DDG gets big enough, and it probably is already, they can develop their own web crawler - because in case you don’t know, it’s the crawling part that’s really expensive.

Re: Apple becomes the first $1T company

#236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple was the first to lead with this egregious fee Before that carriers had much higher fees when you sold J2ME apps on feature phones through thier store.

What type of customers or market sectors bought those apps?

The same types of customers. For instance, back in the day around 2003-2006 Sprint sold J2ME games and apps that once you purchased them, you could redownload them on new phones.

Re: Apple becomes the first $1T company

#237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GDP is more like a country's Turnover than Net Profit

That’s debatable. There are a number of ways to calculate GDP. One is the sum of value added, as in the value of the end product minus the value of input. Another is the total sum of income from labor and assets. Since it includes time spent it is not really net profit but it’s not turnover either. It’s some hybrid but, I would say it is closer to net profit.

Quite a funny hybrid indeed: if I pay you to take my money, and you pay me to take your money, somehow GDP would have increased.

It's a measure of economic activity (of which our little give-and-take game would be an example) and it is meaningful under the assumption that all that activity happens for more rational reasons than just trolling economists. Note that our little give-and-take game would be a very expensive example of such trolling, if somehow the tax-man got involved.

Re: Apple becomes the first $1T company

#238
post #171

Is Samsung Electronics ridiculously undervalued or what? It generates more profit than Apple https://wccftech.com/samsung-posted-higher-profit-than-apple... yet is valued at only $290 billion instead of $1000 billion. What the heck.

I think there's three big reasons. Reason #1: Apple has 243.7B in cash right now. That'll already push them to nearly Samsung's valuation. Reason #2: Samsung's business is more vulnerable. Most of their profits came from the chips division: https://money.cnn.com/2017/07/27/technology/samsung-profit-a... Samsung sells components to many companies, including Apple. In fact, Samsung makes more money from iPhone than the…

#1, so you agree that it is undervalued?

#2, Samsung's business is diversified, not vulnerable. During the DRAM glut years ago, the mobile division's higher profit helped cushion their chip division's lower profit. Now, it's the other way around. Also, unlike Apple's reliance on a single product line, their mobile sales come from many different models, greater than the sales of Apple's in aggregate, but, as individual models, lower than that of Apple iPhone. CNN's comparison likewise is nonsensical.

Apple accounts for about ~3 or 4% of Samsung's overall sales last I checked. Apple has significantly cut their reliance on Samsung, especially after the legal battle started in early 2012's, and stopped using Samsung's parts before -- for instance, the earlier iPhone Ax chips were designed and manufactured by Samsung in Texas, USA, but now Apple designs them in-house (after PA-semi and Intrinsity acquisition in 2008 and 2010) and outsources manufacturing to Taiwan/China. That was about 6 years ago and Samsung is still laughing their way to the bank with about $50B in profit last year.

#3, I've too noticed that a lot of Apple fanbois are out of touch with the reality at times (is that what you call reality distortion field?). Congrat Apple for achieving such huge milestone and I love my MBP which is 6 years old and still going strong, but surely, no sane mind would believe that Samsung would be out of business (or vulnerable) without Apple.

Re: Apple becomes the first $1T company

#239
post #171

Is Samsung Electronics ridiculously undervalued or what? It generates more profit than Apple https://wccftech.com/samsung-posted-higher-profit-than-apple... yet is valued at only $290 billion instead of $1000 billion. What the heck.

I think there's three big reasons. Reason #1: Apple has 243.7B in cash right now. That'll already push them to nearly Samsung's valuation. Reason #2: Samsung's business is more vulnerable. Most of their profits came from the chips division: https://money.cnn.com/2017/07/27/technology/samsung-profit-a... Samsung sells components to many companies, including Apple. In fact, Samsung makes more money from iPhone than the…

#1 is a good point. Samsung's cash pile is $40 billion, decent but quite a bit smaller. Apple should be worth more than Samsung, just the size of the difference seems a bit out of step.

About this moat. A fab is not exactly a shoe, it's not something that anyone can just do. The idea that Apple would make their own memory is out there. Apple still uses TSMC or Samsung to make their SoCs, and will have to keep paying those companies for that. Designing the chips is relatively low cost in comparison. Apple cannot easily just make their own. I mean this stuff is advanced technology, it's at least harder than switching from iPhone to Android. People talk a lot about the wall garden and how that prevents switching but this moat is theoretical, it's never been tested. Apple has been good about keeping pace or in front of the competition hardware wise. For a company making good products it deserves the profits, but if it falls behind I don't expect the "moat" to save it. Majority of apps people use are free and are cross-platform. There are only a handful of relevant apps like iMessage or Sketch that are truly apple exclusive. Mac sales have been declining recently and I personally use 5 platforms, linux, mac, windows, ios, android and have no major problems.

#3 :)

Re: Apple becomes the first $1T company

#240

Everyone talks about Apple as the best possible investment, but an investment in XEM or XRP (Nem or Ripple or Stellar Lumens) in early 2017 surpassed all of Apple in its 30 year history. My money is on Google, Facebook or Amazon eventually surpassing Apple though

Yeah, if you had just hit the jackpot on a $100 slot machine, you would get a way bigger ROI than investing $100 in APPL at any point in its history.

Of course, Gambling isn't "investing", and that's all cryptocurrencies are: Gambling assets.

Post reply on HN