<You've got it wrong, mate.>

Actually, with the exception of the beginning part, where my meaning may have been misconstrued, you are AGREEING with my conclusion, namely, that AAPL will EVENTUALLY get to 1.5 Trillion market cap, but it won't be as soon as the others in this thread are suggesting. (See my original post, it clearly says that.)

<Stocks don't go up simply because people want to dump them at higher prices. Stocks go up for many reasons, but in much regard to their future cash flows, regardless of dividends. Even if you buy a high dividend stock, don't you buy it based on its ability to *keep* delivering, and hopefully increasing that dividend? It's about future cash flow. >

I didn't say that "stocks go up simply because people want to dump them at higher prices." That is a misinterpretation of what I did say, although I confess that I said it poorly.

My point is simply this: you don't make money in a stock until you sell it. Often, people use that fact to try to convince you that you should sell soon, or whatever. I am not doing that. Don't read too much into what I am saying. It is a simple fact: you won't get a single dollar from your AAPL stock until you sell it. For my part, I don't intend on selling for a long, long, time, because I think the growth potential is enormous. In the meantime, the methods that are used to set valuation (e.g. PE of 20 for a tech stock that is not growing, or higher for one that has growth expectations, such as Apple) are not derivable from anything that is fundamental. They are based entirely on observed data and have become expected guidelines. They evolved in a quite arbitrary manner. Owning stock (that pays no dividends) is not like owning a product with its own intrinsic value. The value of a stock like AAPL is entirely contained in the answer to the question "what could I get for my shares if I were to sell them at some point in the future?". Of course the answer to that question is dependent on a host of fundamental and psychological factors, and I am suggesting that the "market cap" is one of them, and its effect becomes larger as your company gets further and further ahead of the "pack".


<It probably won't be Aapl that does it first. Probably one of the big oil co's would be my guess, but it doesn't matter. There were times when there wasn't a 100 billion company, 10 billion, 1 billion, as you go back in time. Can you imagine the gasps when KO or GE was the first to be a 1 billion dollar company? We'll have the same thing with 1 trillion. Then a 2nd company will cross the mark, and a third, and so on, and so on, until it's no longer big news.>

Look at where I said that any one company can't get too out of balance with the rest of the world. I am saying that you can't expect AAPL to shoot to 1.5 T market cap in the next few years while eveything else is still down here in the .5 T range. I said let the market grow and the economic landscape change over time. I agree that AAPL won't be first to pass the 1 T barrier.

<Will Apple cross the trillion market cap barrier? Yes, I think it will. It may be 7-10 years away, but eventually, you betcha. >

Go back and read my post again. I said that AAPL will eventually get there, but not as soon as these others are saying. So you are agreeing with me.

So now you should be saying "you got it right, mate".
Thompson