Apple : first greatest biggest etc.

Wednesday, 28 January, Year 7 d.Tr. | Author: Mircea Popescu

The pressi is full of "Apple Just Had The Most Profitable Quarter Of Any Company Ever", because it posted something like 16 bn dollars for Q1. There are a coupla observations I wish to make on this score :

I. Apple is keeping up with inflation. At market cap of 700bn that means the Q1 USD inflation was something like 2.28%, which seems a little low but who am I to argueii. What this means is that.. well... every single other US company you may be holding stock in underperformed. Apple didn't make anyone any money : everyone else lost the owners some money. Some, like Chevron, managed to lose quite a lot, others, like Walmart, lost merely a bunch. All in all, each and every one of the ~2bn worth of Dow Jones or the ~8 trillion worth of NASDAQ lost you money. Not that much, a few cents to the dollar, but still - if you're in the business of investing this simply won't do.

Yes, yes, I know, inflation is difficult to grasp intuitively, your hundred dollar bill is just as good as it was before and all that jazz. At some point you will have to decide whether you wish to interact with reality or your own personal fictitious world, and should you decide for the latter note that there's absolutely no need to go to all these lengths with stock exchanges and stuff like that. Just write something down on a piece of paper and think really hard about that, it'll be just as good.

II. The USG spent about 1 trillion to do that. Yes, that's right, it spends grossly 4 trillion per year to make things like Apple possible. Things like Apple ? What's that mean, what other things ? Well... basically... Apple. A few tiny similar items, but by and large, the bubble pretty much converged, which is what bubbles doiii. Seems a pretty atrocious efficiency, spend 1 trn to get 0.016 trn, but then again in terms of government policy it definitely isn't the worst, nor are there many better examples of judicious use of public funds. Certainly not recently.

Ever heard that quip about how "it's easy to have positive results in an economic sector, all you have to do is wreck the larger economy" ? Well... it's your country, after all. Not in the sense that you built it, of course, as you didn't, nor in the sense that you could build another just like it if you felt so inclined, as you can't. But nevertheless, have fun, the world doesn't particularly mind. Or care.

III. No, you still can't buy Russia. Sorry about that.

Anyway, I'm looking to short AAPL, provided that a) the deal is fully Bitcoin based and b) you won't either expect me to pay any sort of "tax" to the USG, or pretend like you're paying for me as part of the deal. Ideally I'd prefer a traditional short mildly leveraged over any sort of option. Thanks!

———
  1. Not even the trade press, of any particular trade. Just, generally, anything and everything. The atmosphere is generally reminiscent of the All-Union Victory of Socialism of the 70s, but I won't bore you with that. []
  2. If you prefer the book metric, on a book value of 111.39 that means more like 14.54% for Q1, or 72% annualized, which is probably a little high, especially if you consider Apple is leveraged about 5:1. For which reason a 2.9ish% figure is probably more accurate - and roughly what US Q1 inflation actually was.

    Yes, yes, I know : derps like that Souflakis videogame character (the Greek "Minister of Finance" NPC) think they can " distinguish deflation from prices reductions due to increasing returns and falling average costs of production. Etc. etc." Good for them, some people can distinguish good phases of the moon from bad, and good days to plant crops or initiate travel from bad. You'd think their time is soundly gone by a few centuries, but I guess Greece sticks to tradition. []

  3. For very good reasons, bubbles behave in finance exactly like bubbles in a liquid : they join together until the largest possible one is formed which then pops.

    Bubbles are, in fact, attempts at monetization of a good without monetary value, and in this sense an unsupported political ploy. Which is why the inflating as well as the bursting of bubbles are political activities, and why the "victims" of the failed attempt to take over political power go begging to political power to resolve their "problems" (and why the wisest course is that taken by the Dutch authorities post tulip-crisis : STFU ; ESAD). []

Category: Actiuni si Optiuni
Comments feed : RSS 2.0. Leave your own comment below, or send a trackback.

14 Responses

  1. [...] to be all in Chinese hands, it'll make great dinner conversation. Could he sell "his" kids for all of Russia ? [↩]To quote the very author, why would anyone want to be involved with a loser like that ? [...]

  2. [...] into these ill baked schemes) and ample stockpiles of "UGC"-flavoured chumpatronium. It becomes "worth" billions in the same delusional dollars Yahoo was worth billions before ; except with a lot more [...]

  3. [...] pocket to another imaginary pocket. You think Apple is an actual thing, actually valuable, that could totally buy Russia, right ? You actually believe Warren Buffett couldn't find anyone with short positions on his Berkshire [...]

  4. [...] I actually had a linkedin account. Fortunately, I do not, but who's going to be impeded by reality! Linkedin could buy Saudi Unicornia! Return-path: <appear_service@bakerbotts.com> Envelope-to: *** Delivery-date: Thu, 02 Jan 2014 [...]

  5. [...] just the same, a fly and an ox pull just as strong on a plow that's not being currently pulled, Apple could buy Russia, provided it doesn't actually have to. Then and only then, for as long as it [...]

  6. [...] fantasy league sports with other people's athletes, imagining "what could be" if it were. Yet it isn't. [↩]On which topic, see also. [↩]Perhaps the first documented instance of me doing the [...]

  7. [...] an exercise, compare and contrast this nonsense with "Apple could buy Russia", a bit of equally nonsensical nonsense that the same sort of nitwits hold. They're contradictory, [...]

  8. [...] real bovine, the bovine-emulated-on-humans does not usefully graze) and then you get to say that "Apple could have bought Russia if only that Putin hadn't influenced TMSR". You realise this is where we're headed, do you ? [...]

  9. [...] "Google is a company, which has a product, and revenue, and consequently is worth money". You know, like Apple, and like other [...]

  10. [...] fiat parasites on Bitcoin into some sort of relevancy, for the exact same reasons you can't parlay "companies" that outsource their economic activity abroad into economic agents. [↩]This measure does not in any way change my rights in the work [...]

  11. [...] school but to meta-engineering meta-school said, and so they must be believed, that Apple is "the most valuable thing in the world". What'd it take for you to agree ? No, "it actually being that" is not among the multiple choices [...]

  12. [...] become filthy rich by doing each other's laundry while serving each other cupcakes." [↩]Apple could buy Russia by selling all its very valuable "intellectual property". Because totally, someone's going to trade [...]

  13. [...] into these ill baked schemes) and ample stockpiles of "UGC"-flavoured chumpatronium. It becomes "worth" billions in the same delusional dollars in which Yahoo was worth billions before ; except with a [...]

  14. [...] regulation beigeii, with the regulation repeating-note background muzak, relentlessly pushing the "Apple has a future" angle for no comprehensible reasoniii and so forth. I won't bore you, but for general practice [...]

Add your cents! »
    If this is your first comment, it will wait to be approved. This usually takes a few hours. Subsequent comments are not delayed.