Re:Apple surpasses Saudi Aramco to become the most valuable ...
by perl4ever on Friday July 31, 2020 @09:06PM
(#24016309)
Well, they lost like $800 million in 1996, which is why the market value was low, but look at the preceding years. Going back to 1992, revenue was $7-11B and they had $1-1.5B in cash and short term investments.[1] So $1.7B was not that much different, and asserting they acquired the culture in '97 is plainly wrong. Having a lot of cash was a consistent theme.
[1]See "Item 6. Selected Financial Data"
Re:Apple surpasses Saudi Aramco to become the most valuable ...
by JumpCrisscross on Saturday August 01, 2020 @03:20PM
(#24023140)
> Going back to 1992, revenue was $7-11B and they had $1-1.5B in cash and short term investments
...which is closer to the 1996 ratio of cash to revenue than today’s.
This is a sign of distress. The equity markets were attributing minimal value to the non-cash parts of the business.
In 1996, Apple had about one fifth of its net turnover in cash. Today, it’s close to four fifths. Operating-to-operating metrics are a better indicator of management’s preferences than operations-to-markets.