The Apple Core

Jason D. O'Grady & David Morgenstern

AAPL tops $300: Still waiting on Michael Dell’s apology

By | October 17, 2010, 8:30pm PDT

Summary: The clashing values of quality vs. commodity, and hardware innovation vs. supply chain innovation can be seen in the historic feud of Apple and Dell. This past week, when Apple stock closed at $314, it’s hard to remember the days when the “common wisdom” of the technology market was that Apple was toast, that anyone buying a Macintosh was crazy, and the best case for the company was to close up shop and send everyone home.

The clashing values of quality vs. commodity, and hardware innovation vs. supply chain innovation can be seen in the historic feud of Apple and Dell. This past week, when Apple stock closed at $314, it’s hard to remember the days  when the “common wisdom” of the technology market was that Apple was toast, that anyone buying a Macintosh was crazy, and the best case for the company was to close up shop and send everyone home.

In Oct. 1997, Apple stock stood around $17 a share and Dell at $33. At the ITxpo, Gartner Group’s long-running IT analyst conference, many technology CEOs spoke to the enterprise crowd, including Michael Dell. The question of the moment appears to have been Apple and Steve Jobs, who earlier that year had returned to Apple’s board and taken over in the summer as interim CEO.

Michael Dell, among others, was asked about what he would do if he were CEO of Apple:

“What would I do? I’d shut it down and give the money back to the shareholders.”

So, for the computer industry, especially in enterprise computing, Apple was a big joke. The company and its user base just didn’t get it.

Dell’s success was all about getting new models on the market quickly, keeping inventory low, avoiding the distribution costs of the channel through direct sales, and giving users what they wanted with build-to-order production.

Apple sold systems that ran counter to the increasingly commodity Wintel concept. Just as now, Macs came with a proprietary OS but worse to the rest of the industry, the Mac used a unique RISC processor (unique being another word for “expensive”). But like the rest of tech companies in the channel, Apple was susceptible to demand cycles, and problems with forecasting (so that there was an oversupply of the dog units in the channel and an under-supply of the popular models).

However, over the succeeding years, Apple (and everyone else) picked up on parts of the direct sales and build-to-demand model. At the same time, Cupertino focused on technology innovation in its OS transition, cutting-edge industrial design and materials, the use of Intel processors, increased support for standards, and increased quality controls.

Behind the scenes, Dell kept driving down cost in its boxes, much like Wal-mart Stores does in the consumer retail market. Each of its suppliers was expected to reduce costs on a regular basis, or some other contractor would be found to meet the lower price.

I remember attending a storage conference around 2002 (the exact year escapes me), where several hard disk vendors pleaded with their competitors to hold the line against such practices by Dell. Their concern was that quality would be impossible to maintain under such great pressure and such thin margins.

Check out: Dell and the Wish for Apple’s Cool

And so it happened. From riding high in 1997, Dell tanked over the next decade. Its quality declined and its systems had nothing to distinguish the so-called “Dell Experience” other than failure. In 2006, Dell executives admitted that its support program sucked and that its products stank.

“We know we’ve not done this perfectly in the past,” then CEO Kevin Rollins said at a press event in New York, referring to service and support. “The Dell experience is the number-one priority of the company. It is where we are going to invest this year and for the long term to provide the best customer experience, bar none.”

Dell this month settled a lawsuit that it knowingly shipped millions of faulty computers and then concealed those problems from its customers. The primary cause of the problems were cheap capacitors. Or should we say, overly cheap capacitors.

Michael Dell and the company this month finally settled with the SEC on charges the company had taken hidden payments from Intel to not use AMD chips and used fraudulent accounting practices to meet analysts’ targets.

In 2006, Apple market cap passed Dell’s. In 2008, Apple cap was 4x Dell’s.

At the end of the day this past Friday, Apple’s market cap topped $287 billion. The same day, Dell’s market cap stood at $28B. Apple’s market cap is now more than 10 times that of Dell.

So much for the Dell business model and so much for the 1997 strategic advice from Michael Dell. Certainly, he hasn’t taken his own advice for his company. Perhaps that’s because he has the example of Apple and Steve Jobs to advise him, even when he is looking in the rear-view mirror.

Here’s a prediction: More Apple products will be sold in the enterprise in 2010 than have ever been sold before. And 2010 will mark a new age for Apple in business computing and as a platform in the enterprise.

Note that at the same 1997 ITxpo conference, Scott McNealy, then chairman, president and CEO of Sun Microsystems, was asked why Sun might want to buy Apple (a rumor that surfaced several times in the 1990s).

“They’re got a great building we’d love to have. It’s right across the street from JavaSoft.”

Oops, Sun doesn’t even exist any more.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

David Morgenstern has covered the Mac market and other technology segments for 20 years.

Disclosure

David Morgenstern

Freelance journalist/blogger David Morgenstern has nothing to disclose.

Biography

David Morgenstern

David Morgenstern has covered the Mac market and other technology segments for 20 years. In the recent past, he founded Ziff-Davis' Storage Supersite, served as news editor for Ziff Davis Internet and held several executive editorial positions at eWEEK. In the 1990s, David was editor of Ziff Davis' award-winning MacWEEK news publication as well as its successor title, eMediaWEEKly, which focused on multiplatform professional content creation. His byline can be found online and in print publications including CreativePro.com, Peachpit Press' Mac Bible and Popular Photography.

61
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: AAPL tops $300: Still waiting on Michael Dell's apology
liezelee1109 14th Oct
Whether you are using your Dell product for fun or business at home, Dell can help you fix it. Find answers online, download. Dr. Jerry M. Foster
0 Votes
+ -
Hindsight is always 20/20...
olePigeon 17th Oct 2010
Hindsight is always 20/20. Apple had a significant cash reserve, but a lot of people were still uncertain of their future. If everyone was as confident now of Apple's future as they were then, we'd be millionaires.
@olePigeon
Also I agree with your statement and would add foresight in NOT 20/20 for most and I think Steve Jobs has foresight.

Pagan jim
0 Votes
+ -
Jobs' foresight was in understanding
frgough 19th Oct 2010
that when your product goes commodity, you have to differentiate on style.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: AAPL tops $300: Still waiting on Michael Dell's apology
jack of daniels Updated - 17th Oct 2010
@olePigeon Your statement, "Hindsight is always 20/20" is not the issue here. The larger issue to all out there is not to make crass judgments. Michael Dell should have never made a statement like that. Situations change and because Dell's statement is a blatant nail in the coffin attitude he was way off the mark. There was no counterbalance when the weight shifted against his statement. The counterbalance is an escape hatch to wiggle out of a situation just in case your stance is wrong
@olePigeon

There were many of us that saw their recovery back then, when Jobs came back, with the aggressive moves he were making. Streamlining their then messy product lines, killing failing products, partnering with MS. Read the book "iCon"
0 Votes
+ -
what a ridiculously simplistic article
RonanSail 18th Oct 2010
you could probably find two competitors in any industry you choose were one had done better than the other over the last few years. So what?

I really don't understand what you are trying to tell us other than apple have done well, which we already know.
But, Apple stuck to its knitting, and did some great designs, entered new markets, and blew everybody else away, passing HP, IBM, Microsoft, Dell, well, just about everybody, in market value.
0 Votes
+ -
confident of Apple's future, he pretty much sold most of his stock years ago as he thought it wouldn't get much past where it was at the time.

So even Steve Jobs was uncertain of the future of Apple.

But don't forget, he doesn't have any competition when it comes to Mac sales, unlike the others you mentioned above, as they are competing with each other, so it's a much harder area to make money in, much, much more competative.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: AAPL tops $300: Still waiting on Michael Dell's apology
The Danger is Microsoft 18th Oct 2010
@John Zern - Can you list your source for SJ selling most of his stock years ago? Inquiring minds want to know if you know what your write of or are just full of c.r.a.p.
0 Votes
+ -
Apple sells Personal Computers and competes with Dell
James Quinn Updated - 18th Oct 2010
@John Zerny
HP, and the list goes on and on and on. Apple sells Laptops and competes with those I listed above and others like Toshiba and Sony. Apple sells smartphones and competes with like everyone including Dell Apple sells tablets and competes once again with Dell and HP and others Apple sells MP3 players and competes with MS, Sony and others as well.

Sure Steve Jobs has sold stock over the years heck he's had plenty to sell and has for a number of years been paid in stock options. Not sure why this seems odd or faithless to you but I don't see an issue with it.

Pagan jim
0 Votes
+ -
RE: AAPL tops $300: Still waiting on Michael Dell's apology
The Danger is Microsoft Updated - 19th Oct 2010
@John Zern - A stock sale from 13+ years ago (equaling 10% of what he now owns) and a completely unrelated stock options transaction only prove that you are wrong. SJ did NOT sell MOST of his stock....not by any stretch of an Apple haters imagination. Sorry. You lose here.

BTW: The stock he received back in '97 was compensation for the Next purchase, so he should have sold it to get his money from Next. Everything else after is just gravy. Smart move on his part.
0 Votes
+ -
Wake Up
His_Shadow 18th Oct 2010
@RonanSail What you will not find is a company considered to be on it's last legs not just surviving, but thriving and eventually burying the competition. You won't find the Steve Jobs story repeated anywhere either. We have witnessed history in the making. Don't miss the significance because of your petulant dislike for Apple.
0 Votes
+ -
Rebalancing
johnfenjackson@... Updated - 18th Oct 2010
While one might be smug in hindsight about Apple's success compared to DELL's relative failure ... I think it would be more balanced to lament the dilatory nature of all participants. Agreed though, that Apple appear to be the only ones offering any innovation whatsoever.

And of course, in typical biased fashion, you forgot to mention that Jobs was investigated for securities fraud, didn't realise he was dying (despite having booked in for a rush transplant) and sees no problem with the latest iPhone antenna design. Remind you of any other companies beginning with D?
[No need to apologise for your forgetfullness wink ]
finances and disclosing his health situation. He was commenting on how Jobs ran the company. Yes, Jobs used poor judgement that got him into trouble, though, I think our health is our own business, even if it can affect stock prices.
0 Votes
+ -
Nice Herring
His_Shadow 18th Oct 2010
@johnfenjackson@... How did it come to be red? The article was of a singular focus. Jobs could have been convicted and fined and even gone to jail and that would be entirely irrelevant to the point of the story. Dell's race to the bottom got exactly the results expected. Apple's focus on quality and user experience got them the success they richly deserve.
@johnfenjackson@... speaking of antenna design I have a three year old Samsung flip phone with a stuck on label on the back bottom that states "Phone reception will be compromised if held over this area." I don't think the antenna design of the iP4 is capable of rewriting the laws of physics. Deal with it. It was a tempest in a teapot.
When the moonies and other cults died off in the 70s, no one would have believed that in the future technology cults would replace them.

Jobs has a messiah complex, but what is a surprise is that there are so many sheep willing to disengage brain at every publicity release from AAPL.

The tech from Apple has some nice touches, but I personally like my 3 year old Dell laptop running Ubuntu.
It is reliable, and I don't have to be following fads every quarter based on AAPL press releases.

Apple has single handedly created an electronics waste pile in every country by fostering this 'one year then dispose' culture around all it's products.

Dell, whilst not perfect, sells reasonable quality commodity hardware that does a job. Now that it has the Dell Streak slate, and is doing rather well with it's range of nettops, I think Dell is an okay investment today.

The moonies 'ran their time' and Android is likely to shove all but the messianic followers of AAPL, into the real world, where a balance between cost and function, wins out over shiny products that are overpriced.
0 Votes
+ -
bs
banned from zdnet 18th Oct 2010
@gary2010
apple products have the longest live circles of the industry and are the ones that are best recyclable with the least use of toxic materials. after their first use by the buyer, most of them will be sold or handed down to friends/relatives. unlike your cheap plastic, toxic piece of sh**.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: AAPL tops $300: Still waiting on Michael Dell's apology
The Danger is Microsoft 18th Oct 2010
@banned from zdnet - You are correct and gary2010 is way off base. Typical Linux/Windows user that hates Apple. Anyone wanting to see the details of the Green Apple can visit
http://www.apple.com/hotnews/agreenerapple/
0 Votes
+ -
@banned from zdnet: apple products have the longest live circles of the industry...

Another often said but never supported assertion about Apple.
@ye
they still work. I have a PowerBook 145 and it still boots only thing wrong with it is it's battery is dead. At my employer there are still a hundred original G4 Towers pumping out production work on Quark 4.1 and running OS9.

Pagan jim
@James Quinn: I know of individuals who still have Lisa's and Mac 128K

I'm sure if anyone cared they could find examples of the earliest PCs around too.

I have a PowerBook 145 and it still boots only thing wrong with it is it's battery is dead. At my employer there are still a hundred original G4 Towers pumping out production work on Quark 4.1 and running OS9.

And I can find just as many examples of same vintage PCs still working. The question is: Why use one? Seriously? A new PC can be had for dirt cheap. People are disposing of fully functioning PCs of the vintage you mentioned merely because you can get something faster for no or low cost. It makes no sense to keep using something of that vintage when much faster is available free or low cost.
0 Votes
+ -
Well as for the G4's
James Quinn 18th Oct 2010
@ye
My company services news papers and a lot of them still use OS9 and Quark 4.1. News papers have had a terrible time of it of late even before the recession and now it's worse still for them so upgrading is not on their agenda nor do I see it as happening anytime soon.

As for going PC well for them there is the software costs and Quark is very expensive on the PC or Mac.

Pagan jim
@James Quinn: My company services news papers and a lot of them still use OS9 and Quark 4.1. News papers have had a terrible time of it of late even before the recession and now it's worse still for them so upgrading is not on their agenda nor do I see it as happening anytime soon.

Understood. But how does this prove Macs last longer than PCs of that era?

As for going PC well for them there is the software costs and Quark is very expensive on the PC or Mac.

I was not suggesting they move to PC's. If what they have is working for them then they should continue using them. Though when the time comes they should consider moving to a PC because you can save a lot of money by doing so (depending on needs).
0 Votes
+ -
Oh please...
vikingnyc@... Updated - 18th Oct 2010
More yammering from the Cult of Linux with it's 0.9% share. And if Android isn't careful, they will go the way of Dell with it's cheap commoditization, and as many different "builds" as Bayer has pills. While it's nice to have choice in the market, too many choices, as the history of this industry has shown us over and over again, leads only to consumer confusion and frustration. I don't think that's going to be a threat to iPhone any time soon.
0 Votes
+ -
Please Stop
His_Shadow 18th Oct 2010
@gary2010 This idiotic refrain that some over simplified version of the history of the computer industry will repeat itself and Apple will fall to commodity junk is tiresome. It's also pure bvllsh!t, evidenced by the painfully obvious fact that Apple rose to prominence in the last 10 years in the face of industry forces aligned against it. Now, suddenly, using the secret weapons of commoditisation and cheap knock-off imitation that Apple already handily defused, these industries caught with pants down are going to challenge the resurgent Apple, when they couldnt kill the bloated, stagnant Apple?

Just stop it already.
0 Votes
+ -
What are you talking about!?!
James Quinn 18th Oct 2010
@gary2010
Over the years I've seen Macintosh computer run for years on end. My employer still has over a hundred G4 Towers doing Quark 4 and OS9 production work.

Pagan jim
0 Votes
+ -
I'm still running 2 Dell 1500SC's
John Zern 18th Oct 2010
James Quinn. Die hard work horses. You're saying they should have died by now?

We still have about 6 Optiplex G100's, and about 30 g60's from around 2002.

(Please don't mention to the computers they should be history, I don't want to upset them.)
0 Votes
+ -
@John Zern
that his assumption that Apple is creating piles of computers being thrown into the dumb year after year cause of people upgrading each and every year was absurd. It has little to do with the PC if anything.

I would also point out to the same fellow the very good resale value of the Macintosh makes simply throwing them out INSANE.

Pagan jim
@gary2010 : Until Apple starts selling gadgets that come with a replacable batteries, I'm not touch them. A friend of mine hasn't tossed his 3 dead iPods and soon 2 dead iPhones in the trash. All dead batteries that can't [officially] be replaced. Really surprised environmentalists don't go after them.

Jobs is excellent in marketing but is lousy to be around.

In this day and age where the economy sucks, still surprised how people buy an iPad at $600 when you can get a netbook at half the price with more everyday features [aside from the status symbol and fanbois/fangurls syndrome].
@Gis Bun

I'm sure there are many people who would have taken those 'tossed' iPods and iPhones.

The batteries can, of course, be replaced, and your friend is a fool for not bothering to check on that.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: AAPL tops $300: Still waiting on Michael Dell's apology
The Danger is Microsoft 19th Oct 2010
@Gis Bun - silly man, take it or ship it to Apple and get a new battery. Just because YOU can't replace it doesn't mean it CAN'T be replaced. Guess you just want to waste your investment....go for it just don't beotch to us about it...!
0 Votes
+ -
And you've been smoking what?
godsfault Updated - 18th Oct 2010
From @gary2010 "Apple has single handedly created an electronics waste pile in every country by fostering this 'one year then dispose' culture around all it's products."

I suggest you read your opinion, above, again. Sure you want to stick to it? If so, I sure wish I could make a bet with you.

I know many Apple products users. The real reason we buy new products even though our old ones are working fine is that we want new and improved stuff. It's like getting a new car even though the old one is perfectly serviceable.

And Apple makes us want the new stuff because of captivating design and feature changes.

Really, this is business 101. You shouldn't let your bias against Apple make you appear so naive and wrong headed.
0 Votes
+ -
michael, ...
banned from zdnet 18th Oct 2010
... always remember, kharma is a bit**!
Anyone with half a brain back in the 90s knew that the computer industry as a whole (largely thanks to Dell's influence) was headed towards a meltdown. Dell sparked off a spiral of cost slashing in the industry forcing companies to cut as many costs as possible to keep the prices of PCs down and competitive with Dell. Everything suffered because of it. PCs in the 90s were cheap and crappy. They were just pumping the things out as quickly as possible.

Then Apple showed up and everyone started to realize taht yes it is possible to build a good product and make a profit at the same time.

This Wal-Martification of industry is a huge problem. Its not just unique to Tech but its more noticeable there.
0 Votes
+ -
Wal-Martification my a@#$
wackoae Updated - 18th Oct 2010
@dfl274 You can buy decent product at low price @ Wal-Mart, something you can't do at Dell even when you pay a premium.

Dell is just junk with a label. When a server has a cheap plastic cover connecting the CPU to a back case fan instead of a real CPU fan ......
0 Votes
+ -
Apple also wasn't competing with
John Zern 18th Oct 2010
other vendors selling Apple computers, as Dell was with PCs. Apple could keep the marginns up a bit as where else where you going to buy a Mac? But with PC's dell had to come up against already entrenched companies like IBM, HP, Compaq.

Even companies like NEC, Sony, ect already had a better foothold in the industry. The fact that Dell grew to the size they currently are with all that competition is impressive, given a lot of other companies starting up at the same time have long since disapeared since then.
0 Votes
+ -
I say the same thing about Apple....
James Quinn 18th Oct 2010
@John Zern
There have been a ton of name brand computers that have come and gone in Apple's time, and you are wrong Apple has been competing with everyone of them todays survivors and everyone else who has had their day in the sun and failed.

Pagan jim
0 Votes
+ -
@John Zern

It was much easier for a DELL to sell cheap commodity PCs to consumers than it was for Apple to sell quality/premium Macs through the years. Enterprises bought these cheap DELL machines in bulk, easy sell. Consumers who wanted to join in on the computer revolution at its height but did not want to invest much bought cheap DELLs and HPs and Gateways and Compaq's (remember them?). Half these guys are either gone now or struggling but not Apple. The fact that little Apple (little then) were able to hold it's own against an onslaught of PC competitors for all these years is just incredible. Not only hardware competitors but software as well in Windows OS.
0 Votes
+ -
No, Jim, I'm not wrong
John Zern 18th Oct 2010
Apple competes with other computer makers, but only up to a point. If you had a Mac before, or where running Mac only software, (publishing, printing, ect) you had Apple to choose from.

If you had Windows software you were running you had HP, Dell, Compaq, NEC, ect. The competition was more fierce in teh PC field as many comapnies made and sold PC's , only 1 comapny was legaly allowed to build and sell Macs.
0 Votes
+ -
Which is why, dave95
John Zern 18th Oct 2010
Apple lets other people make and sel Mac clones?

See, there's the flaws in your argument. One is that Apple is not where it is today because of computers, its where it's at today because of cell phones and MP3 players. If they didn't get into that, you're saying they would be as large as they are on sales of Macs alone?

What would happen if Psystar and others where allowed to sell OS X, or Mac clones? Would Apple still be where they are today, or would they lose sales to Mac competitors?

The others are strugling because their is competition in the PC market (as Applers like to point out that Macs, are alone as they aren't PC's) so they can set the price that bests suits them as, for someone wanting a Mac, you got nowhere else to go but Apple, so Apple sets it more then the market.

For PC makers, if you want Windows on a PC, you have competition between Dell, HP, Levono, Acer, and even Tiger Direct for PC or home built, so pricing is controlled more by the market then the manufacturer.

There are also other factors, mainly that all of Apple's manufacturing and assembly is done overseas in China, while a good portion of Dell's was done here in the US up untill last year. (I believe the servers are still built in Austin, TX).
I'm sure had Dell moved all manufacturing overseas years ago, back in 2000, I think they'd be in much better shape, as that would have been a large cost savings over the last 10 years.

So please, don't think it's because Apple's so much better or smarter, its really beacause we're comparing Apples and Oranges.
0 Votes
+ -
@John Zern
does Apple stand alone? Well that is not much considering how low Apple's past market share was and even today in the US it's what 10% and world wide less than that. Also while you are correct to a degree I would point out that there is NOTHING stopping people from choosing to go to the PC and selling their Mac's. The resale value of Mac's is still to this day stronger than the PC and yes they'd likely have to start over with software costs but at least they know what they won't be purchasing this time around which is a benefit as well. In the end I don't think it's that big a deal and I give Apple props for finding a niche that everyone and their mother for decades now has claimed was going to be a certain failure for Apple and when it turns out it is not they and only then do they start whining about it:P

Pagan jim
How many AAPL stock splits have there been since the $17/share price and the $315/share price (today)?

I know of a 4 for 1 split and I believe there was another 2 for 1 split which would mean 100 shares of AAPL in 1997 would have cost $1,700.

Today it would be 800 shares at $315 = $252,000.

Should have bought stock rather than that Lombard PowerBook I guess!
0 Votes
+ -
Apple and the Myth of Market Cap
adornoe@... Updated - 18th Oct 2010
While Apple might be raking in lots of profits lately, it might benefit a lot of people to become familiar with what market cap means in relation to a company's real value.

While Apple's market cap is way higher than Dell's, if a downturn were to occur, and if the whole economy takes another huge dive, Dell might just turn out to be the winner after all. With Apple stocks selling at around 30 times earnings, it may be way overpriced, while Dell may represent good value for potential investors.

When all is said and done, and when the price/earnings ratios are examined, Apple is seen as a huge technology bubble which may explode at any time.

Anyhow, go read further about the myth (the article may be a few months old, and the price/earnings ratio will be worse now):

Apple and the Myth of Market Cap

http://www.ctoedge.com/content/apple-and-myth-market-cap

Here's an excerpt:

But you have to ask yourself if Apple is really worth more than Microsoft or any of a number of other companies in the top-10 range in market capitalization. Apple is selling at something like 26 times earnings (actually, closer to 30 now), which is pretty expensive. Will it stay there, or is this an example of that irrational exuberance we heard about when the tech bubble burst? After all, Apple is nothing if not good at self promotion, and a lot of people, especially smaller investors, can buy into that without looking at the economics behind the stock value.
0 Votes
+ -
I concur... Apple stock may be overvalued
Roque Mocan 18th Oct 2010
@adornoe@... Apple is - in market value - just second to Exxon. Does Apple make a life changing product, that nobody can replicate and live without?
0 Votes
+ -
Life changing product?
adornoe@... 18th Oct 2010
Does Apple make a life changing product, that nobody can replicate and live without?

The Apple fanatics will say "Yes, absolutely! Life would not be worth living without Apple. Besides, who would we worship to?"
0 Votes
+ -
RE: AAPL tops $300: Still waiting on Michael Dell's apology
The Danger is Microsoft 19th Oct 2010
@adornoe@...

"Yes, absolutely! Life would not be worth living without Apple. Besides, who would we worship to?"
@adornoe@...
but what really interests me is Apple's massive reserves. Say the economy does take another dip sure investors "MIGHT" dump Apple and choose Dell or they might get out of the stock market all together and go for Gold for all I know but the thing that will save Apple is it's reserves. I've got a rock solid good feeling about Apple's future and one big part of that is all that money Apple can turn to in the face of disaster.

Pagan jim
0 Votes
+ -
eh... did you notice we just went through a recession?
Davewrite Updated - 19th Oct 2010
@adornoe@...

you say "While Apple's market cap is way higher than Dell's, if a downturn were to occur, and if the whole economy takes another huge dive, Dell might just turn out to be the winner"

we just went through a downturn, some say the worst since the great depression and guess what .. the gap between Apple making more money and growing bigger than Dell has widened tremendously during the last three years.

The marketcap article you linked to is one of the dumbest articles on business i have ever read and the guy obviously has no investment skills whatsoever.

Apple stock has gone up so high because it's profits are growing so quickly. For example Apple has a brand new product the iPad which in a few months is already outselling it's Macs, 91% growth in iPhones, etc. The article laughably suggests instead that Apple's growth is due to 'self promotion' while i suppose Msft lacks this 'self promotion'. Dudes the reason Msft is stagnant is NOT lack of promotion but because of the simple fact it doesn't have brand new revenue streams like iPhone or iPad that makes as much or more money than it's old ones (like the Mac), Windows 7 only REPLACES Vista, WP7 only replaces Win Mo. Msft does NOT have a new product as big as Windows. If it did and made a new product as big as Windows every few years like Apple did with iPod, iPhone, iPad (as big as Mac) then maybe Msft stock will soar too. Msft stock didn't tank due to lack of 'promotion' but lack of products!

Apple's forward PE ratio is only around 17 (it'll be lower with the new results) and minus it's 50 billion in cash it'll be lower still. Amazon's forward PE is 46, Msft is 9.85, goog is 21.9.

I don't think Apple is overpriced at all.
Whether you are using your Dell product for fun or business at home, Dell can help you fix it. Find answers online, download. Dr. Jerry M. Foster

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix
ie8 fix