Slashdot Mirror
America's Five Biggest Tech Stocks Lost $97 Billion Friday (yahoo.com)
An anonymous reader quotes CNBC:
The so-called "big five" -- Apple , Alphabet Class A shares, Microsoft , Facebook and Amazon -- lost more than $97.5 billion in market value between the close on Thursday and the close on Friday, according to FactSet, dragging the Nasdaq to its worst week of the year. Shares of Apple fell nearly 4 percent on Friday, while the other four companies fell more than 3 percent. For most of the day, only 3 stocks in the S&P 500 tech sector were in the green: IBM , Teradata and Western Union . Apple, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, and Alphabet all traded more than 2 times their 30-day average volume... "They're just plain overbought," said David Bahnsen founder, managing director and chief investment officer of The Bahnsen Group, a private wealth management firm. "They are extremely stretched from a valuation standpoint."
CNN notes the drop occurred "after a Goldman Sachs analyst questioned this year's run-up in the industry's five biggest names." They also added that "The top five techs today account for 13% of the market value weighting in the S&P 500, even though they are only 1% of the companies in the index."
CNN notes the drop occurred "after a Goldman Sachs analyst questioned this year's run-up in the industry's five biggest names." They also added that "The top five techs today account for 13% of the market value weighting in the S&P 500, even though they are only 1% of the companies in the index."
It is all Obama's fault obviously.
All you have to do is look at the P/E ratios of the S&P500 to see that current stock valuations aren't based on fundamentals. If/when rationality returns to the market, it'll be a bloodbath.
Facebook Amazon Netflix Google
After some shuffling around and a name change, now FAAAM
Don't worry, they went up so much lately, a little pullback and profit-taking was bound to happen. Nothing goes up forever.
This is really just the fallout from the devastating news on Friday that Microsoft is closing up shop on Docs.com. It's madness, sheer madness I say! ;)
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
It's all funny money anyway. Just know when to cash out.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Go look at these stocks two year history. This drop means nothing.
Why do people own stocks? There are three primary reasons:
1. Control.
The mindset that prevails now among tech companies, and especially those founded by Silicon Valley types, is that investors are a necessary evil to be controlled. So they issue special shares to themselves to ensure that no matter how many shares somebody else owns, they still have control. It's a giant middle finger to the average investor whom the Silicon Valley types have zero respect for. Why would you want to invest in a company that doesn't care about you or your capital? It's like paying for the privilege of being abused. So in the case of these tech companies control is essentially impossible which eliminates this reason to own the stock.
2. Dividends.
Another reason to own a stock is to have a claim to a share of the profits that are distributed periodically to the owners. Some tech companies pay a dividend and some don't but even those that do offer a relatively miserly amount compared to their profits and market valuation. A look at tech company balance sheets reveals huge war chests full of cash or equivalent short term liquid investments. Doesn't this money belong to the shareholders? Why do the tech companies need such large hordes of cash in what is essentially a low capital equipment expense business? Again, this signals a lack of respect for the shareholders.
3. Capital Appreciation.
The final reason to own a stock is to have a stake in a growing business that will, by virtue of the business becoming larger and more profitable, grow in value over time. However, in the case of these tech companies, the lack of control makes any liquidation event, even in the distant future, a theoretical impossibility during the lifetime of the founder and probably for some time afterward too since tech billionaires like to put their shares into charitable trusts for long term social engineering projects. These trusts will probably continue to monopolize these assets for decades after the passing of the founders. Where is the capital appreciation if nobody can ever get control and liquidate the stakes?
Given all of these factors, how is tech an attractive investment? It looks more like a vehicle for speculation to me, at least for the average investor.
Does that mean someone could "find" it? Can someone tell me where to start looking?
Lots of other tech stocks also got hit after big runups this year. Unless there's a war, it should just be a pause though.
We have low unemployment and rising wages. Cloud computing is still ramping up. Semiconductor companies can look forward to VR and AR, autonomous driving, 5G, AI, industrial automation, defense projects, video gaming, and IoT for above-GDP growth opportunities over the next 2-5 years and beyond. Network buildouts in the US for 5G, in China for better connectivity outside major cities, and eventually in India will be the future story for communication equipment makers.
Things are still running along nicely, but even the strongest runners need to take a rest sometimes.
During the 2008 crash this happened nearly every day, for months. Most all these stocks are down from all time highs. It means nothing.
All the money seems to be going to Cryptocurrencies at the moment. The rise of Ethereum is insane.
Maybe find a data analyst that wasn't trying to crash the stocks.
Revenue % seems to be in line with a out 14% of the total S&P500 for these 5 companies...
Bubbles don't have much in terms of substance.
Just look at Bitcoin.
Mod^ Insightful.
Have they tried the back of the couch?
Or if the weather was different they might have worn a different coat.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
They did fall because their numbers were hyperinflated.
By example, their giant numbers were ficticious from the air without passing to the cashes (for paying lesser taxes).
It explains that their titanic numbers will be sunk.
Silicon Valley learned from older companies what happens when you let shareholders run the show entirely. Corporate Raiders, leveraged buyouts, asset stripping, golden parachutes (used to counter raiders, now abused by management).
Shareholder driven mean short term only, long term profitability be dammed.
Now, has tech taken it too far in the other direction? Probably. As for the warchests, no, those do NOT exclusively belong to shareholders. Shareholders are only one of many stakeholders in a company, along with management, employees, and customers. Investor money is a necessary but NOT sufficient ingredient for a company. If shareholders direct the company in a way that you lose all the productive employees, thereby killing the company, what was the point?
News at 11.
AAPL: 5% off split adjusted all-time high, set less than 1 month ago
AMZN: 3.8% off split adjusted all-time high, set less than a week ago
FB: 4% off split adjusted all-time high, set same day
GOOGL: 3.8% off split adjusted all-time high, set less than a week ago
MSFT: 3.5% off split adjusted all-time high, set less than a week ago
No drop more than 5% and four of five set new all-time highs this week. What part of this does not look like profit-taking?
"America's Five Biggest Tech Stocks Lost $97 Billion Friday"
Ha ha...err, I mean, "OMG, that's terrible!"
You mean Mark Zuckerberg is worth a billion less than he was yesterday? Can we take up a collection for the poor guy?
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
The drop in value of Apple's stock is obviously connected by the failure to refresh the Mac Mini, or meaningfully refreshing the Mac Book Air, and not ALREADY having a replacement for that stupid little goddamned fucking trashcan computer, instead preferring to make everyone wait until DECEMBER for an iMac that pretends to be a Mac Pro, while being in all probability NOT EXPANDABLE AT ALL.
They COULD, you know, just go back to the aluminum box chassis Mac Pro before the stupid ugly little piece of shit garbage can computer, with little to no redesign required, and just stick new, updated hardware inside. That would save them money having to figure out something that looks new and different.
And don't tell me that they can't because they don't want to admit the wastebasket form-factor was a stupid idea, or that each new generation of Mac Pro has to look unlike anything they've ever done because that's OBVIOUSLY bullshit, considering the upcoming "iMac Pro" looks almost EXACTLY like a FUCKING iMac!
That explains the loss in the value of their stock. Apple has spent much of the last year sitting on its fucking hands, probably on account of wasting oodles of OUR money on that stupid fucking SPACE SHIP bullshit, and self-driving cars... instead of focusing on things like making affordable, but TERRIFIC hardware and secure, robust software. They're FUCKING around instead of doing what they SHOULD be doing, and that's why Apple is sinking. Maybe they'll fire that... Tim Cook guy, and hire someone who has ... I dunno ... balls?
Apple under Jobs became the Apple we knew and ... well, anyway, that Apple.
Apple under Cook makes crap like super expensive "smart watches" that aren't worth a fuck, and super-expensive earphones. Fuck that shit.
Guess my next computer I'll have to build myself, and just put GNU/LINUX on it, because sure as FUCK I'm not plunking down good money after bad paying all those stupid, clueless fucks they have running that circus now.
OH, LOOKIE LOOKIE! The new iMac "Pro" will come in GREY! Wow, courageous AND original!
Fuck that and fuck them too.
Wait? What?
Google is down to levels not scene since May?!
--Q
Step 1: Short major tech stocks to the tune of billions with accounts obfuscated through a beach of shell companies.
Step 2: Your analyst "Has a press release noting that they are overvalued"
Step 3: Wipe with thousand dollar bills for the rest of your days.
Trump finally shook the false Russia crap, now he's going after H1B's.
All the big techies from Apple to Microsoft to Facebook to Twitter despite their holier than thou attitude, force H1B's to work as slaves. Furthermore, Apple employs lots of Chinese slaves building out their crap.
So now the Trump train is going to crack down, finally, and do the needful on H!B's.
Only thing to do is cut into the top CEO's insane salaries and stock options (Little Timmy Cook rakes in millions for doing nothing but bitch about how everyone should live except for him and his company).
So just because a billionaire isn't selling his shares in the company anytime soon, means I can't sell my shares after they have grown? That's the point of being in the public stock market, having the liquidity to easily get cash for your asset. You don't need the whole company sold to realize your gains.
Shareholders are only one of many stakeholders in a company, along with management, employees, and customers.
Irrelevant. Management and employees are paid according to contract for their services, they have no further claim on the assets of the corporation. The assets belong to the owners of the corporation, which in the case of a publicly traded corporation are the stockholders. The customers are free to buy the products or services of the corporation or not. Likewise, they have no legitimate claim on the assets of the corporation simply by virtue of their being customers.
If shareholders direct the company in a way that you lose all the productive employees, thereby killing the company, what was the point?
Which is why intelligent shareholders don't generally do that. However, it is their right to do so and sometimes the right move is to liquidate or sell the company. In such cases, without shareholders asserting their rights as owners, you'd get zombie companies full of bad debts and propped up by the governments. Indeed, this is exactly what happens in many countries and the whole society suffers for it, whether they own shares or not.
Do it! Do it! Do it!
Better by you, Better than me!
>Shareholders are only one of many stakeholders in a company
This is approaching equivocation. Maybe an employee wants a company to do well because it keeps them employed and they believe in the good work a company does, but it doesn't mean they own it. No part of the company "belongs" to them. Shareholders literally own part of the company whether it's private or publicly traded. Employees don't, and certainly customers don't, unless they own shares.
What you are describing is "ownership" in some holistic but not actual legal sense.
Just cause Hillary didn't win doesn't mean that Goldman Sachs is done screwing with the market. Those guy's are just going to have to cough up the cash to keep them happy. Or volatile stocks will stay volatile.
4. Gambling
People could give 2 fucks about the company, they trade em like baseball cards.
Just cause Hillary didn't win doesn't mean that Goldman Sachs is done screwing with the market. Those guy's are just going to have to cough up the cash to keep them happy. Or volatile stocks will stay volatile.
Well, considering they are running the Trump administration's financial branch, that's no surprise. Despite what Trump said about them during the campaign.
Of course news about a fake are Fake News.