Yo Yore wrote:
Never mind rumors. The fact is that you're an idiot.
You apparently are misinformed as to the definition of the word fact.
This is not surprising.
Yo Yore wrote:
Never mind rumors. The fact is that you're an idiot.
You apparently are misinformed as to the definition of the word fact.
This is not surprising.
agip wrote:
er...the market falling 79 bps is not news
.
It should be. It would take nearly a year to earn that under any CD.
Of course most people would see no value in a CD. Funny how that changes when the "No Bad Days" belief system takes an "About Face."
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Jutty wrote:The author admits that revenue growth since 2011 is outpacing inflation, so what's the problem?
No, wrong interpretation, reread.
Igy
I didn't interpret anything. I asked a question. And my name is not 'reread'.
Sure you did that is why you need to reread.
agip wrote:
er...the market falling 79 bps is not news
+1
Oh no, UA and UPS miss Bigly!
ðŸ’
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Sure you did that is why you need to reread.
No, I didn't make any interpretation. You can deny all you want, but that doesn't change facts.
Also, I did reread it and nothing has changed. Can you answer the question, or are you still in denial?
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Oh no, UA and UPS miss Bigly!
Oh, he's getting excited!!
Keeping his fingers crossed that the doom and gloom senerio predicted many years ago will finally come true.
Jutty,
Quote that you misinterpreted:
"Revenues without the oil bust companies are up 13% since 2011. That’s an average annual growth rate of 2.5%, barely above the rate of inflation!"
You inferred that was true for the DOW, wrong, only true without the Exxon and Chevron.
So you are the wrong poster and in denial.
To the basement Junior without dinner or TV privileges.
Igy
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Jutty,
Quote that you misinterpreted:
"Revenues without the oil bust companies are up 13% since 2011. That’s an average annual growth rate of 2.5%, barely above the rate of inflation!"
You inferred that was true for the DOW, wrong, only true without the Exxon and Chevron.
So you are the wrong poster and in denial.
To the basement Junior without dinner or TV privileges.
Igy
You are trying to put words into my mouth. I never said it was true for the Dow. Anyone who read the article knew what I was talking about.
It was you who misinterpreted what was written.
Sure.
Glad I didn't buy yet. I knew it had to show some sustained period above 20k.
Maserati wrote:
Glad I didn't buy yet. I knew it had to show some sustained period above 20k.
Good Move! But I wouldn't wait too long. It's going to bust loose here, and never look back for a good while.
Apple Earnings
Q4 2015
Net Income $18.361 Billion
Share Count 5.594127 Billion
EPS $3.28
Q4 2016
Net Income $17.891 Billion
Share Count 5.327995 Billion
EPS $3.36
Without buyback of 266.132 million shares the EPS would have been $3.20 or a miss. The earnings spin and "growth" reality are two very different stories.
Igy
Careful wrote:
Maserati wrote:Glad I didn't buy yet. I knew it had to show some sustained period above 20k.
Good Move! But I wouldn't wait too long. It's going to bust loose here, and never look back for a good while.
Funny. But why do you feel a "bust loose" and not a "bust down"?
Igy
Apple Math:
Q4 2015
Net Income $18.361 Billion
Share Count 5.594127 Billion
EPS $3.28
Math: 18.361 / 5.594127 = $3.28
Q4 2016
Net Income $17.891 Billion
Share Count 5.327995 Billion
EPS $3.36
Math: 17.891 / 5.327995 = $3.36
Without buyback of 266.132 million shares the EPS would have been $3.20 or a miss.
Math: 17.891 / 5.594127 = $3.20
ðŸ’
