x PhoneArena is looking for new authors! To view all available positions, click here.
  • Options
    Close




Cook's perfectly timed stock buyback raises Apple's valuation and rids it of a pest

0. phoneArena 19 Feb 2014, 02:33 posted on

Late last month, Apple reported that it sold 51 million iPhones in its previous quarter. While that certainly sounds like like a successful period, Wall Street's pencil pushers were looking for Apple to sell 55 million units in the period, leaving it 4 million phones short. Wall Street responded the way it always does when disappointed...

This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here

posted on 19 Feb 2014, 02:47 3

1. _Bone_ (Posts: 2106; Member since: 29 Oct 2012)


Happened last year too, Samsung did it as well when it's stock dropped. More stock = more control, which is important in a changing environment.

posted on 19 Feb 2014, 03:23 2

2. a_merryman (Posts: 637; Member since: 14 Dec 2011)


Agreed, it is much better for the company if they want to focus on long term growth to own more of their own stock than to allow people like Icahn to get it so they can use it to pressure the company to make stupid decisions for short terms gains as they (Icahn and his like) pick apart anything useful about the company. TheVerge had a great article on Icahn and his strategies not too long ago.

posted on 19 Feb 2014, 04:08 4

3. androiphone20 (Posts: 1399; Member since: 10 Jul 2013)


You had to see the comment section when Apple's shares took a dive, people spoke as if hell had frozen and yet it was but an opportunity to turn things around

posted on 19 Feb 2014, 06:47 2

9. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5586; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)


I wonder if you aren't conflating under-whelming sales results and Tim's obligations to maximize shareholder value? Tim has resources (balance sheet cash account) that are available for strategic use. When AAPL's price dips, it is a potential opportunity, and Tim took full advantage. That doesn't excuse the fact that the analyst community was under-whelmed at Apple's sales.

Apple needs to step up its game in the iToy business. Competition has dramatically improved from what it was 2+ years ago. Apple needs to do more than release a C version of the iPhone.

posted on 19 Feb 2014, 12:10 1

22. MySchizoBuddy (Posts: 49; Member since: 23 Aug 2011)


so if the analyst community decides Apple should sell 1 billion iphones and Apple can't them. It's all Apple's fault. How dare they not sell the amount we said they should sell. Android fanboys go nuts over Apple.

posted on 19 Feb 2014, 15:42

26. Chaseism (Posts: 55; Member since: 08 May 2013)


But I think that's the frustrating thing. The iPhone still sells incredibly well. Better than most smartphones out there. You're right, there is more competition so expecting ridiculously high sales is unrealistic, even if the iPhone is amazing. It's a lot like the music industry...you can't expect artists to go quadruple platinum anymore. Hell, even awesome commercial artists struggle to hit Platinum status nowadays because there isn't this funnel of music. People can discover new artists through more outlets than the radio or Mtv. Smartphones are the same way.

posted on 19 Feb 2014, 05:05

4. jacko1977 (Posts: 388; Member since: 11 Feb 2012)


Apple reported that it shipped not sold 51 million iPhones in its previous quarter

posted on 19 Feb 2014, 05:45 3

5. Napalm_3nema (Posts: 844; Member since: 14 Jun 2013)


Apple reported it sold, not shipped, 51 million iPhones:

http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2014/01/27Apple-Reports-First-Quarter-Results.html

posted on 19 Feb 2014, 08:44 2

13. PAPINYC (Posts: 2231; Member since: 30 Jul 2011)


Whether it claimed to have sold or claimed to have shipped 51 iMillion units, more than likely it wasn't the absolute iTruth since Apple lies about everything.

posted on 19 Feb 2014, 12:12 1

23. MySchizoBuddy (Posts: 49; Member since: 23 Aug 2011)


No. public companies lying about money means the execs go to jail. plain and simple.

Apple has always posted sold figures and never shipped figures.

posted on 19 Feb 2014, 05:48 2

6. tedkord (Posts: 4467; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)


Wait. Apple doesn't make money on the shares it buys back. They retire them.

posted on 19 Feb 2014, 06:00

8. Finalflash (Posts: 1550; Member since: 23 Jul 2013)


Yea I don't think Alan seems to understand that the company can't hold stock in itself. They didn't make any money on the trade but instead cemented the stock against any other big drops.

posted on 19 Feb 2014, 06:54 2

11. ardent1 (Posts: 1991; Member since: 16 Apr 2011)


FinalFlash: you say some of the dumbest things on PA.

US companies that are publicly traded do repurchase its stock on the open market. Sometimes, they acquire the shares in a private transaction.

What makes you think companies can't hold stock in itself? What part of "treasury stock" don't you understand?

posted on 19 Feb 2014, 06:50 1

10. ardent1 (Posts: 1991; Member since: 16 Apr 2011)


Dude, learn accounting. When a public company repurchase its stock, under US Gaap, it is considered treasury stock.

Second, those treasury stock will help the Company when it issues stock grants, options, etc.

posted on 19 Feb 2014, 23:02

27. roscuthiii (Posts: 1785; Member since: 18 Jul 2010)


Technically, it's only treasury shares if the company doesn't retire them. Once they're cancelled, they're null & void.
Apple has only retired around 9% of the total $42B worth of shares bought back though, so the vast majority of the stock bought back will be available for reissue.

Something to keep in mind is that treasury shares, while they very well indeed have the potential to be pretty beneficial (mostly to long term shareholders), are also not without their limitations and a few drawbacks.

http://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/05/retiredstock.asp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treasury_stock

posted on 19 Feb 2014, 05:54 3

7. samirsshah (Posts: 61; Member since: 10 Mar 2011)


10/10 to Tim Cook.

posted on 19 Feb 2014, 07:10 2

12. pongkie (Posts: 496; Member since: 20 Aug 2011)


ha! loved that pest part

posted on 19 Feb 2014, 09:13 1

16. troutsy (Posts: 248; Member since: 17 Feb 2012)


Wasn't Icahn's strategy to force Apple to take out low interest loans to buy back and retire company stock?

I think this article cuts out a bit of the truth in order to glorify Cook's actions.

posted on 19 Feb 2014, 09:30

18. DnB925Art (Posts: 157; Member since: 23 May 2013)


Cook used cash they already had to buy back the stock, iCahn suggested taking out loans at lower interest rates to buy back the stock.

posted on 19 Feb 2014, 09:33 2

19. PBXtech (Posts: 969; Member since: 21 Oct 2013)


On the good side, anything that gets rid of Icahn is a positive. On the bad side, they spent $42 billion for it to only go up around $42 dollars a share.

And where are all those analysts who predicted AAPL would be at $1000 a share? I even read one prediction that said $1300. Analysts should be paid by the correctness of their predictions.

posted on 19 Feb 2014, 10:44 2

21. Caralho (Posts: 119; Member since: 18 Jun 2012)


You reminded me of stock guru Jim Kramer, who yelled for everybody to buy Bearn Stearns(which thousands of people did), just as the company imploded.
To this day, he is ridiculed for it. I too read those $1300 price target predictions for Apple, and laughed out loud. So much for analysts...

posted on 19 Feb 2014, 12:14

24. MySchizoBuddy (Posts: 49; Member since: 23 Aug 2011)


Sorry like droid_x_doug said it is Apple's fault it's stock isn't 1000 or 1300 like the analyst predicted. Once the Holy analyst predict something The humble companies should make it happen else face the wraith.

* Some comments have been hidden, because they don't meet the discussions rules.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories