Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Apple Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Phillip C. Lee who wrote (13286)	5/10/1998 1:58:00 PM
From: Alomex	Respond to of 213182

I derive $69 based on the stock price climbing ratio of the first 4+ months of '98, the actual number should be: X/30.4375 = 30.4375/13, which yields x = 71.26. In other words, you are extrapolating from previous data. Be very careful, e.g. Johnny grew from 3ft tall when he was 10 years old to 6ft tall when he was 20 years old. Therefore, according to your logic, it is highly likely that by the time Johnny is 30 he'll be 12ft tall given the current rate of growth. When comparing to Dell's 67+ PE and Gateway's 73+, Compaq's expected 50+ PE, Apple's 35 PE is feasible under the current condition of gradual revenue/net improvements. Yup, and when you compare me to Carl Lewis, Flo-Jo or Donnovan Bailey, me running 100 meters in under 11 seconds is feasible. But why compare Apple against the best PC companies, considering that Apple has proven not to belong there? I'd say the cool headed assumption here would be to compare them with a middle of the road PC company. Say, with Micron Electronics which has a current P/E of 22.4. Hence, whether or not $69 is too high will totally depend on Q3 and Q4's revenues/nets as well as overall tech stocks trend in the next six months. At last, the light of reason. This statement I agree with.

To: Phillip C. Lee who wrote (13286)	5/10/1998 4:37:00 PM
From: HerbVic	Respond to of 213182

Gee Phil. I thought I understood this PE thing. Now I'm all confused. ---- With 2 months earnings you said the calculation is: 30.4375/2x(0.71) = 21.434 provided that we have similar Q3 and Q4 to Q1 and Q2. ---- If I may, that's: Stock Price / 2 x (1/2 annualized earnings) ---- But with 4 quarters reporting: Stock Price / (annualized earnings) = PE (?) ---- So: 30.4375 / (0.71 x 2) = 21.434 PE I know it comes out the same, but for clarity be kind to us math dummies. ---- I still don't get the climbing ratio. You stated: > I derive $69 based on the stock price climbing ratio of the first 4+ > months of '98, the actual number should be: X/30.4375 = 30.4375/13, > which yields x = 71.26. ---- Stated verbally where CSP is Current Stock Price and PSP is previous stock price: Climbing Ratio / CSP = CSP / PSP Climbing Ratio / CSP = 2.341 Climbing Ratio = 2.341 x CSP Climbing Ratio = 71.264 Where do you derive $69 from 71.26? Just ballpark conservative inching? And, is that number just a guestimate for mid September? For those who might want a quick review before tomorrow's festivities: Date Price Volumeÿÿÿÿ May 8, 1998 30ÿ7/16 2,418.0ÿÿÿÿ May 7, 1998 30ÿ3/16 4,936.6ÿÿÿÿ May 6, 1998 30ÿ5/16 8,005.3ÿÿÿÿ May 5, 1998 29ÿ11/16 3,743.6ÿÿÿÿ May 4, 1998 29ÿ1/16 5,099.5ÿÿÿÿ May 1, 1998 28 1,643.5ÿÿÿÿ Apr 30, 1998 27ÿ3/8 1,606.6ÿÿÿÿ Apr 29, 1998 27 1,692.3ÿÿÿÿ Apr 28, 1998 26ÿ15/16 2,117.6ÿÿÿÿ Apr 27, 1998 27ÿ3/4 3,658.9ÿ Good luck all, HerbVic