So GOOG had good earnings, Apple had good earnings...hey the analysts got it wrong *again. * those guys and girls! Always too pessimistic.
So GOOG had good earnings, Apple had good earnings...hey the analysts got it wrong *again. * those guys and girls! Always too pessimistic.
Yes, really wrong.....
https://www.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/ex%208%20comp.jpg?itok=1Mhb8_JV
Bears bad, Bulls good.....
https://www.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/disconnected%20SPX.jpg?itok=gP-Rd2T6
“Apple also announced that it had repurchased a whopping $17BN in stock in the quarter, and spent $3.6BN on dividends. After the buybacks, AAPL's diluted shares declined by 1 million, from 4.7BN in Q2 to 4.6BN in Q3.
While Apple beating on earnings was great news (and the extravagant buyback certainly did not hurt), less impressive was Apple's iPhone revenue, which came in at $25.986BN, below the $26.45BN expected, and well below the $29.5 billion from a year ago, as well as the slight miss in services revenue which came in at $11.46BN, below the $11.88BN consensus.
Another disappointing data point: China revenue came in at $9.16BN, down 4.1% Y/Y; China was one of the two geographic regions that posted a Y/Y revenue decline in the quarter (Europe was the other).”
You keep missing the point.
No, you see companies direct analyst just low enough that the company clears the EPS hurdle. Surprise! Wall Street and companies are complicit in the non-GAAP EPS and stock buy back game. Insiders sell their stock that is compensation, but that stock based compensation is not counted as an expense. This juices non-GAAP EPS and investors believe it is a zero sum game. That is why your investors will be very disappointed in how this game ends. You should know this, but you are inexperienced. That is the point.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
No, you see companies direct analyst just low enough that the company clears the EPS hurdle. Surprise! Wall Street and companies are complicit in the non-GAAP EPS and stock buy back game. Insiders sell their stock that is compensation, but that stock based compensation is not counted as an expense. This juices non-GAAP EPS and investors believe it is a zero sum game. That is why your investors will be very disappointed in how this game ends. You should know this, but you are inexperienced. That is the point.
Stop pretending that have any idea what I, or anyone else, “sees”. You are clueless.
Why should I assume otherwise?
Financial Advisor wrote:
You are clueless.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Why should I assume otherwise?
^SCIIG
I’m actually kind of proud of that one, though you really gift wrapped it for me.
agip wrote:
So GOOG had good earnings, Apple had good earnings...hey the analysts got it wrong *again. * those guys and girls! Always too pessimistic.
I don’t know why people give the analysts so much credence. They’re basically just guessing.
SCIIG wrote:
I’m actually kind of proud of that one, though you really gift wrapped it for me.
Sure, kind of figured that is your life's goal.
Punter wrote:
agip wrote:
So GOOG had good earnings, Apple had good earnings...hey the analysts got it wrong *again. * those guys and girls! Always too pessimistic.
I don’t know why people give the analysts so much credence. They’re basically just guessing.
they are taking what the company says and trying to apply a BS filter to it, by looking at industry stats. macro factors, comparable company results, etc.
It's not exactly guessing - it's mostly another channel for companies to talk to the world.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Bears bad, Bulls good.....
https://www.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/disconnected%20SPX.jpg?itok=gP-Rd2T6
Nice chart for promoting your - Stock purchases since 2011 will not fare well-scenario.
Just keep pointing out the obvious, that you are too dense to understand my statement.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Just keep pointing out the obvious, that you are too dense to understand my statement.
Oh, the irony!
“Instead of investing in new property, plant, equipment, innovation, and employee training for the long-term benefit of their shareholders, employees, and the communities in which they operate, companies instead are taking advantage of ultra-low funding costs to buy back expensive stock. In a desire to prop up stock prices to enhance their compensation and satisfy short term investors, corporate executives have and continue to make poor capital allocation choices.
If the goal was to increase shareholder value via a temporarily higher share price, then corporations succeeded, albeit temporarily. The goal always should be to increase long-term shareholder value via stronger growth; a goal corporations have largely ignored. After ten years of poor decision making, many companies are left with inflated stock prices but dim prospects for future growth to fund their obese debt structures.”
—Michael Lebowitz via RealInvestmentAdvice.com. 7/31/2019
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Why should I assume otherwise?
You shouldn’t assume anything about someone that you don’t know.
seattle prattle wrote:
Racket wrote:
Just so you know, AMD is an overpriced penny stock. Look at the volume it trades at each day. It's insane given their market cap and various institutions have taken them for a ride in both directions over the past several years. It honors nothing even remotely close to fundamentals or technicals.
Thx. Comparing the trading volume to the market cap yes, it is being really actively traded. Checked it against the ratios of some other companies, and it is highly skewed. Will think that one through over the weekend....
Told ya
