41–50 of 170 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The tech companies would not exist for very long without those oil companies.
The oil does not go into gadgets. All the oil goes into your car, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPS1y81b1Bw
2. Transportation is critical to you receiving the gadget that you hold in your hand.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The tech companies would not exist for very long without those oil companies.
The oil does not go into gadgets. All the oil goes into your car, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPS1y81b1Bw
It goes into manufacturing. It goes into farming, fertilizers are often oil based. It goes into the chemical industry. It also goes into generating power for electricity. How do you think the gadgets manufactured in China gets to the US? On ships powered by oil. When you fly on a plane, what do you think powers those engines?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The tech companies would not exist for very long without those oil companies.
The oil does not go into gadgets. All the oil goes into your car, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPS1y81b1Bw
I know it sounds a little ridiculous, but I think Google still has a long way to grow. I can easily see them as the first trillion dollar company and well beyond that. I think they understand the process of re-inventing themselves better than any other tech company. They acquire a lot of companies, some of which continue to grow and change the very nature of Google itself (example Android). They also understand Black…
Agree the sky is the limit for Google's future but there's always some risk that FB or Baidu or someone could come in and take 80% of Google's users. Aso by any reasonable measure Apple's market cap should be well over a trillion. Take away their $165 billion cash pile from their $465 billion market cap, give them 0% growth and you're left with the idea that Wall St's expects Apple to be turning out the lights in 4 o…
I have to say I don't understand companies that have very little in the way of tangible assets being valued higher than companies that have mounds of tangible assets. For instance, Exxon-Mobil has $347 billion in tangible assets while most of Google's value comes from its brain trust and the vision of its leadership. The same could be said of Apple though they do have $40 billion in cash. In other words, if both comp…
Exxon: Assets: $350bn Liabilities: $75bn
Apple: Assets: $225bn Liabilities: $53bn
Google: Assets: $110bn Liabilities: $15bn
If you're trying to value a stock on fundamentals alone, you should take these tangible assets (as you call them), back them out of the market cap. Then look at what kind of P/E multiple you're getting. And compare that to other companies in the industry.
The big difference here is in growth rates. Google is priced for growth. And certainly you can imagine Google growing much faster over the next decade than Exxon.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The tech companies would not exist for very long without those oil companies.
The oil does not go into gadgets. All the oil goes into your car, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPS1y81b1Bw
Also, when you refine oil, not everything that comes out is gasoline. Those byproducts are a major component of consumer electronics (plastics). The entirety of a barrel of oil most certainly does not wind up in a car.
XOM ('12) GOOG ('13)
Revenue $453 B/a $60 B/a
Profit $45 B/a $13 B/a
Market cap $393 B $394 B
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExxonMobil
(101 for anyone who doesn't know this: revenue is how much you sell, profit is what's left over for shareholders, market cap is how much shareholders think that profit stream is worth).
Relevant: check out wikipedia's rankings of company size:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_companies_by_r... (and the see also)
is it still a good idea to buy google stock?
To answer your general question: http://arachnoid.com/equities_myths But specifically, by the time a company is widely regarded as successful, noteworthy, at the top of its game, the train has left the station. By contrast, Warren Buffett would invest in a "company" consisting of a couple of guys in a garage with a vision for the future.
I think you meant would NOT invest in that scenario. Warren invests in
- companies with strong reoccurring revenues
- strong moats around them to protect them from competitors
- companies that are the number one or two in their chosen fields
two guys in a garage with a vision of the future is sadly missing all of these things. That's a very unlikely scenario for Warren Buffet to invest in.