Slashdot Mirror


Wall Street: Software More Valuable Than Oil

CWmike writes "The tech industry's answer to this week's stock market roller coaster was delivered on Tuesday by the mighty Apple Inc. Apple saw its stock price rise enough — gaining more than 5% — to briefly surpass Exxon Mobil as the most valuable company in the U.S., according to an AP analysis of its market cap. (Exxon Mobile wound up the day slightly ahead of Apple.) Most of the other major tech companies — including Intel, IBM, Dell, Microsoft and Hewlett-Packard — all finished in positive territory yesterday, as markets made up ground lost in the big sell-off on Monday that also hit oil prices and other commodities.Tuesday's rally may be all that's needed to shake away, at least temporarily, some of the economic concerns the IT industry still faces. By closing in on Exxon, Apple effectively affirmed that there are few limits to tech growth. CW blogger Jonny Evans posits that ideas are why Apple beats Exxon on market cap, noting, 'While Exxon drills, hammers and crushes its way to find its billions, Apple's mind-miners explore myriad complexities to develop and understand new technologies.'"

28 of 223 comments (clear)

  1. Yeah, Right by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 2

    Look, Apple closed above Exxon today but that doesn't make software worth more than oil. Oil is a finite resource and has price fluctuations like many other commodities. There is an endless supply of coders to spew out software.

    Now, good software may be worth more than oil, but I don't think there's enough of it around to really turn it into a commodity.

    1. Re:Yeah, Right by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      There is. It's use in aerospace and space travel. Ya know, the kind of places where a bluescreen or a burping driver can not only really ruin your day, but the day of many people at once.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:Yeah, Right by sjames · · Score: 2

      I'll admit that depending on what he had for lunch, a burping driver can be quite unpleasant, but you shouldn't let it ruin your whole day.

  2. Umm... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Informative

    Bizarre coinages aside, Wall Street wasn't making a comparative pronouncement on the value of software and oil(pro-tip: without oil, the market for shiny consumer goods would skew heavily toward the 'canned' variety...); but on the relative value of a company with substantial ability to pull margins that its peers cannot, vs. a company with a smaller ability to do that.

    Now, carry on. It's the "information age" or somesuch...

    1. Re:Umm... by sabt-pestnu · · Score: 2

      While I see your humor, I have to argue that your point (and, to be honest, the point you were replying to) is a victim of mistaking (or improperly generalize) Nth generation tools as 1st generation tools.

      Computer control of equipment is done because computers are available. Use of petroleum products in computers is done because petroleum is available. Substitutes in each case exist, but result in lower efficiency and/or greater costs. Much greater costs, much lower efficiency in many cases.

      But you'll recall that the first oil was gained by sicking shovels into the ground, or by dipping buckets in pitch springs. And the first things we'd recognize as computers were analog/mechanical devices. ... unless you count abacuses, of course.

  3. ridiculous by JonySuede · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is ridiculous !

    Without oil we have no modern civilization. Even if you could somehow replace all the energy produce from oil, you will still need it for: pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, plastics and others various organics chemicals. The modern world depends on oil even more than it dose on software.

    --
    Jehovah be praised, Oracle was not selected
    1. Re:ridiculous by cfalcon · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Actually, if you could replace all the energy you get from oil, you could use that energy to make the items you list out of simpler substances- no one has any problem combining ingredients to create oil and gas, the issue is that it's never efficient to do so compared to getting it out of the ground. But if we were given a magical device with 100x the energy of all our current sources, we could just afford to fabricate oil and whatever the end products are from veggies and such.

    2. Re:ridiculous by mcgrew · · Score: 2

      True but requires a magical device....

      To someone from 1911 an iPod would be magical. To someone from 1811 an airplane would be magical. Have you kids no imagination? I'm 59, I live in a science fiction world. Self-opening doors, communicators, flat screen computers, PADDs, almost everything from the original Star Trek of my youth is commonplace today. Hell, stuff today is past what sci-fi writers envisioned when I was young. See this journal.

      Hell, in Star Trek II McCoy gave Kirk a pair of reading glasses, I have an implant that lets me focus at any distance after wearing thick glasses all my life. I'm a fucking cyborg!!! No way would I have believed at age 25 that I'd not need glasses at age 59.

      You can't imagine the wonders you'll see in your life.

      You have no clue the sci-fi marvels that will be commonplace when you're my age (and I'm dead).

    3. Re:ridiculous by BitZtream · · Score: 3, Informative

      Exxon doesn't advance anything.

      Silly little man.

      Things like Autotune exist because of companies like Exxon. You have no fucking clue how much Exxon alone has advanced ground radar and sonography, the amount of science Exxon has contributed is rather impressive. Because of oil companies, we know far more about our own planet than you can possibly imagine. These guys make a living out of generating high resolution maps of what the crust of our planet above AND BELOW the surface of the ocean are made of its not even funny.

      They don't do it out of the goodness of their hearts, its about money, but they most certainly do advance science in numerous ways in order to further their own business, to find oil where they couldn't find it before, which directly benefits volcanologists and archeologists for instance. They've created technology that has allowed my county to turn away a potentially extremely profitable chemical processing plant ... because tech the another oil company developed let them see into the ground well enough to predict that any leakage would go directly into our water supply ... not just because of the whole NIMBY side, but because there was actual clear evidence that it would be a problem.

      Oil companies do a lot for you besides get you to where you want to go, don't be so ignorant about the world around you. I'm not telling you that you should love the oil companies because they are trying to save the world, thats simply not true. Saying they do nothing to advance anything however is 100% false in every way.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  4. Apple did end up on top today by bwintx · · Score: 2

    Market essentially washed away what it gained back yesterday, and Apple did end up on top today, FWIW.

    "Apple Overtakes Exxon to Become Most Valuable"

    --
    Discussion System prefs link: http://slashdot.org/users.pl?op=editcomm
  5. Re:Of course by peragrin · · Score: 2

    depending on job you can work from home without gas (yea for nuclear power),

    So yeah it is possible he can understand.

    me I am in sales, I can do about a 1/3 of my responsibilities with a laptop, net connection and cell phone.

    --
    i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
  6. The hyperbole is ridiculous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Apple's mind-miners explore myriad complexities to develop and understand new technologies."

    Apple isn't NASA in the 60's, it's a manufacturer of shiny gadgets. They don't even have a research division.

    Apple profits because people are vain, and are willing to accrue massive amounts of debt to buy pretty things.

  7. Re:Of course by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    me I am in sales

    *barf*

  8. It's just stock prices by nedlohs · · Score: 2

    These are the people who in days gone by would read tea leaves.

  9. Apple needs oil by istartedi · · Score: 2

    Without a high-energy society, there is no Apple. Without plastics, there are many missing parts. Without diesel powered container cargo vessels, you must make your products locally for much more money. Without energy intensive semiconductor fab, there is no product. Without electricity the product is not powered. Most importantly, without high-energy freeing up labor, nobody can afford your device. They would be too busy plowing fields with draft horses.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
  10. Re:Prepare for the price of gas to go up by Dunbal · · Score: 2

    Nah, gas goes up when demand goes up. As the market plunges, oil has actually declined because a US in a recession consumes less oil than a US with a strong, healthy economy. But oil doesn't need excuses - as China and the rest of the world continues to grow, so does non-US demand. And since the population of the US is actually rather small when compared to, say, China, the US economy will become less and less relevant to the price of oil.

    Of course in any slide there's always a bounce because those who are short need to take profits at one point or another. Right now we're at around $81/bbl and yesterday we were in the high 70's. So it's bouncing at the moment. I wouldn't expect $100+ oil in the near future though. Oil should decline too until the slack in demand is picked up by the rest of the world. Of course violence (especially in the middle east) could change that overnight.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  11. More important than oil by Dunbal · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Apple's mind-miners explore myriad complexities to develop and understand new technologies.

    "New" technologies? What exactly has Apple invented here, apart from an OS taken from unix, applications written at no cost to Apple because they were done by others, touch screen technology that's been around on PDA's for almost 15 years, etc. Yeah they put it into a good looking package and built a good brand and marketed the crap out of it, but there's nothing exactly "cutting edge" here except for maybe the gross violation of your rights when they make you sign exclusivity contracts with third party cell phone providers.

    Now, guess which company is more important. A company that obtains and produces a (relatively) cheap source of energy, or a company that produces a marginally different but very shiny communications/computing device?

    Apple is fantastically over-valued and overbought, as anyone holding $400 Apple stock will tell you. I can just imagine the pain of the people who have been stopped out. Well what did you expect when you were buying the stock? Largest market cap != biggest money maker. Amazing revenue growth rates have to make you wonder how sustainable they are over the medium and long term. The bigger they are, the harder they fall. Me, I will cover my shorts at $280 and re-assess.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  12. Re:Of course by toastar · · Score: 2

    um.... working from home is fine, but how do you expect to get food to the grocer?

  13. Re:Of course by BitZtream · · Score: 2

    Yea, and what about the other 2/3rds? You think you're boss is going to understand that part not getting done?

    You are CLEARLY in sales based on your statements. You think its perfectly acceptable to deliver a product that only does a 1/3rd what you claim it does.

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  14. This is bad news by makubesu · · Score: 5, Funny

    what countries are we going to invade for software now?

  15. Re:Bubble by Americano · · Score: 2

    This assumes it's an overinflated bubble now, and there are very few indications that it is. Given that it's P/E ratio isn't particularly out of line with other similar companies, there's not a lot to suggest that its value is heavily over-inflated at present - they make a metric shit-ton of money (and profit) on all those devices, and they've been selling more, and more, and more of them quarter over quarter and year over year.

    Now, Steve Jobs stepping down / dying would certainly be a psychological shock, but there's not a lot to indicate that the market would be fundamentally left adrift by that happening - they have a solid line of products, they no doubt have several years of future revisions mapped out, probably several product ideas in the pipeline, and strong leadership still - all fundamentally good things for a company. I expect the stock will take a hit when he does step down (or pass away), but I suspect that will be fundamentally a self-correcting jitter.

    You won't see the price truly take a lasting hit until one or more of the following becomes true:
    1) Apple's margins start getting eaten into by competing products; so far, doesn't look like that's happening - Macs still make good profits-per-unit, and all estimates of iPod, iPad and iPhone costs also suggest high margins;
    2) Apple's sales volume drops significantly, and for several quarters in a row; so far, doesn't look like that's happening, with quarterly increases and year-over-year increases for several years running now;
    3) Apple's products reach a saturation point ("everybody who wants an iPad, iPhone, iPod, or Mac has one"), and it becomes apparent that they have no additional product ideas - new lines, or new models of existing lines - in their pipeline; Too early to tell if that's the case, but I suspect they have a few more tricks up their corporate sleeve.

  16. Re:Of course by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

    An iPad will get you through times of no oil better than oil will get you through times of no iPad.

    Not if we're talking about baby oil.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  17. Re:Software? by Opportunist · · Score: 2

    Yeah, what this economy needs direly is another bubble.

    Could we, I dunno, ya know, build stuff, sell that and value companies based on what gets made and sold? I know, a completely outlandish concept, but I'm nuts enough that I really want to see this being tried.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  18. Apple also more valuable than air! by Geof · · Score: 2

    This also shows that Apple is more valuable than air. After all, air is free!

    Uh, yeah. The idea that price equals value is dangerous ideological mumbo-jumbo. Prices tell what something costs to buy. They do not indicate what it is worth to have. This is why political economists (particularly Marxist ones these days) distinguish between use value and exchange value.

    Examples of market prices failing to reflect use values are too numerous to count. Fancy clothes and cars vs basic food, for example, or the most valuable things in life - such as love, meaning in life, and human kindness - that are only available for free.

  19. Re:Does not surprise by LordKronos · · Score: 2, Informative

    And the funny thing is, if you DO find oil in your backyard, you'll find that most urban property owners don't actually have mineral rights to their property.

  20. Price per pound? By volume? by Alsee · · Score: 2

    By any unit of measure, even Windows 1.0 and Clippy are more valuable than gold.

    -

    --
    - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  21. and yet: by spiracle · · Score: 2

    Apple profit: $5.5 billion
    Exxon profit: $US5.5bn in the second quarter.

  22. Re:Of course by circletimessquare · · Score: 2

    hmmm...

    so you're saying get our petrochemical products by liquifying baby humans?

    worth a study

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it