- 8,332
- 216
Ducktales.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Originally Posted by HankMoody
Ducktales.
*Gucci voice* well damn! *Gucci voice*Originally Posted by tmay407
Assuming you even got in right as it started trading at $35 and got out at the perfect time as the stock reached its high of $35.99, you would have had to invest a little over $7000 to make $200. Knowing how unlikely it is for someone to do that (not to mention the stock price surely didn't move from $35 to $35.99 in 30 minutes), it's much more likely you would have had to invest closer to $28000 or more to make just $200 in a 30 minute period (generously assuming a $0.25 increase in price).
I would like to know what "slave +%$ job" you work if making just $200 on what would have most likely had to be a $28000+ investment is "easy money." (Keep in mind that's a rate of return of less than one percent.) Sign me up for that job.
tl;dr:
Originally Posted by HankMoody
Ducktales.
Originally Posted by tmay407
Assuming you even got in right as it started trading at $35 and got out at the perfect time as the stock reached its high of $35.99, you would have had to invest a little over $7000 to make $200. Knowing how unlikely it is for someone to do that (not to mention the stock price surely didn't move from $35 to $35.99 in 30 minutes), it's much more likely you would have had to invest closer to $28000 or more to make just $200 in a 30 minute period (generously assuming a $0.25 increase in price).
I would like to know what "slave +%$ job" you work if making just $200 on what would have most likely had to be a $28000+ investment is "easy money." (Keep in mind that's a rate of return of less than one percent.) Sign me up for that job.
tl;dr:
Originally Posted by HankMoody
Ducktales.
Wow dude you fail so hard, have you heard of marginOriginally Posted by tmay407
Assuming you even got in right as it started trading at $35 and got out at the perfect time as the stock reached its high of $35.99, you would have had to invest a little over $7000 to make $200. Knowing how unlikely it is for someone to do that (not to mention the stock price surely didn't move from $35 to $35.99 in 30 minutes), it's much more likely you would have had to invest closer to $28000 or more to make just $200 in a 30 minute period (generously assuming a $0.25 increase in price).
I would like to know what "slave +%$ job" you work if making just $200 on what would have most likely had to be a $28000+ investment is "easy money." (Keep in mind that's a rate of return of less than one percent.) Sign me up for that job.
tl;dr:
Originally Posted by HankMoody
Ducktales.
11/18/2010 | GM | BOUGHT 400 SHARES OF GM AT $35.0099 |
11/18/2010 | GM | SOLD 400 SHARES OF GM AT $35.62 |
Originally Posted by oO Master Chief Oo
Wow dude you fail so hard, have you heard of marginOriginally Posted by tmay407
Assuming you even got in right as it started trading at $35 and got out at the perfect time as the stock reached its high of $35.99, you would have had to invest a little over $7000 to make $200. Knowing how unlikely it is for someone to do that (not to mention the stock price surely didn't move from $35 to $35.99 in 30 minutes), it's much more likely you would have had to invest closer to $28000 or more to make just $200 in a 30 minute period (generously assuming a $0.25 increase in price).
I would like to know what "slave +%$ job" you work if making just $200 on what would have most likely had to be a $28000+ investment is "easy money." (Keep in mind that's a rate of return of less than one percent.) Sign me up for that job.
tl;dr:
Originally Posted by HankMoody
Ducktales.
11/18/2010 GM BOUGHT 400 SHARES OF GM AT $35.0099
11/18/2010 GM SOLD 400 SHARES OF GM AT $35.62
Trust me just because you have no money to trade that doesn't mean nobody else has money
Well then on that, I congratulate you.
yet android controls da lion's share of da smartphone market....Originally Posted by proper english
Originally Posted by sillyputty
Originally Posted by Cant Break The Unbreakable
Being first is so overrated now. In a lot of cases who does it best > first. Or who has more resources or user base > first
I had to quote this... This is the argument I make with people saying apple steals from android.
well said.
Originally Posted by ninjahood
yet android controls da lion's share of da smartphone market....Originally Posted by proper english
Originally Posted by sillyputty
I had to quote this... This is the argument I make with people saying apple steals from android.
well said.
Design philosophy isn’t a very easy thing. Most people seem to be of the opinion that pure features are ‘function’. I disagree — accessible features are actual features, all others are only used by people who really need to use them because otherwise they won’t be bothered to learn them. This is why for many people Macs and iOS devices are actually more feature rich than ‘open platforms’ like Windows, Linux or Android where you can ‘customise’ the OS on a more direct level: They get easy access to features and are not afraid of ‘messing up their system’ (this is true for iOS especially).
I was not implying that Apple is making the big money ‘with’ software, but because of it. The hardware is actually more concerned with getting out of your way. As Dieter Rams said in his brilliant interview for ‘Objectified’: Good design is as little design as possible. This is how Apple operates — their hardware tries to get out of your way, so does their operating system, what you’re left with is using your computer the way it’s supposed to be used: as a tool to accomplish what you need to do, or want to do.
Many people claim that they’re not interested in looks, only in performance — I can’t say I believe it, but I respect it. What I think is the main thing to consider with Apple’s products and prices is that they have managed to get back to the simplest form of capitalism: They ask for as much money as their customers are willing to pay for their products. People who think Apple users are stupid or ‘brainwashed’ just don’t want to believe that the user experience justifies the investment for them. For many people I know, including myself, it does.
Originally Posted by oO Master Chief Oo
^^^^^ wow, the hate is strong with you
Originally Posted by oO Master Chief Oo
why do u guys assume i made a killing or something i only made like 200 dollars the point was that relative to my slave %$% job it took no effort, i learned about it that day and it was only like 20 min worth of work
2 points.Originally Posted by sillyputty
Originally Posted by ninjahood
yet android controls da lion's share of da smartphone market....Originally Posted by proper english
well said.
Before this turns into a smartphone battle...I dont care about what your argument states...because it doesn't matter.
I saw this quote about Apple and it basically expresses how I feel about comparisons to Android.
Its like saying a Nissan is better than a BMW. Its just not true. But obviously there are more Nissans on the market.
Design philosophy isn’t a very easy thing. Most people seem to be of the opinion that pure features are ‘function’. I disagree — accessible features are actual features, all others are only used by people who really need to use them because otherwise they won’t be bothered to learn them. This is why for many people Macs and iOS devices are actually more feature rich than ‘open platforms’ like Windows, Linux or Android where you can ‘customise’ the OS on a more direct level: They get easy access to features and are not afraid of ‘messing up their system’ (this is true for iOS especially).
I was not implying that Apple is making the big money ‘with’ software, but because of it. The hardware is actually more concerned with getting out of your way. As Dieter Rams said in his brilliant interview for ‘Objectified’: Good design is as little design as possible. This is how Apple operates — their hardware tries to get out of your way, so does their operating system, what you’re left with is using your computer the way it’s supposed to be used: as a tool to accomplish what you need to do, or want to do.
Many people claim that they’re not interested in looks, only in performance — I can’t say I believe it, but I respect it. What I think is the main thing to consider with Apple’s products and prices is that they have managed to get back to the simplest form of capitalism: They ask for as much money as their customers are willing to pay for their products. People who think Apple users are stupid or ‘brainwashed’ just don’t want to believe that the user experience justifies the investment for them. For many people I know, including myself, it does.
I don't wanna turn this into a Apple vs Google thread but Ima just say thisOriginally Posted by ninjahood
yet android controls da lion's share of da smartphone market....Originally Posted by proper english
Originally Posted by sillyputty
I had to quote this... This is the argument I make with people saying apple steals from android.
well said.
2 points.Originally Posted by ninjahood
Originally Posted by sillyputty
Originally Posted by ninjahood
yet android controls da lion's share of da smartphone market....
Before this turns into a smartphone battle...I dont care about what your argument states...because it doesn't matter.
I saw this quote about Apple and it basically expresses how I feel about comparisons to Android.
Its like saying a Nissan is better than a BMW. Its just not true. But obviously there are more Nissans on the market.
Design philosophy isn’t a very easy thing. Most people seem to be of the opinion that pure features are ‘function’. I disagree — accessible features are actual features, all others are only used by people who really need to use them because otherwise they won’t be bothered to learn them. This is why for many people Macs and iOS devices are actually more feature rich than ‘open platforms’ like Windows, Linux or Android where you can ‘customise’ the OS on a more direct level: They get easy access to features and are not afraid of ‘messing up their system’ (this is true for iOS especially).
I was not implying that Apple is making the big money ‘with’ software, but because of it. The hardware is actually more concerned with getting out of your way. As Dieter Rams said in his brilliant interview for ‘Objectified’: Good design is as little design as possible. This is how Apple operates — their hardware tries to get out of your way, so does their operating system, what you’re left with is using your computer the way it’s supposed to be used: as a tool to accomplish what you need to do, or want to do.
Many people claim that they’re not interested in looks, only in performance — I can’t say I believe it, but I respect it. What I think is the main thing to consider with Apple’s products and prices is that they have managed to get back to the simplest form of capitalism: They ask for as much money as their customers are willing to pay for their products. People who think Apple users are stupid or ‘brainwashed’ just don’t want to believe that the user experience justifies the investment for them. For many people I know, including myself, it does.
[h1]Apple, With 4 Percent of Handset Market, Captures 52 Percent of Profits[/h1] ARTICLE DATE : November 5, 2011 By Damon Poeter Apple may have lost its crown as the top shipper of smartphones this past quarter, but the iPhone maker hauled in more than half of the mobile industry's operating profits during that period, according to a new research note from Canaccord Genuity analyst T. Michael Walkley. That despite having just 4.2 percent of the global handset market. "With Nokia in the midst of a challenging smartphone strategy transition and our checks indicating RIM and Motorola Mobility continue to struggle in North America given the increasingly competitive Android smartphone market, we believe Apple will gain further value share in the December quarter and could capture over 60 percent of industry profits," Walkley wrote in his note,according to All Things D. Samsung shipped the most smartphones in the third quarter, according to separate reports from IDC and Strategy Analytics last week. But Samsung's margins of 17 percent on its handsets were dwarfed by Apple's 35 percent margins for the quarter. So while Samsung did capture a healthy 29 percent of operating profits in the third quarter, Apple was king with 52 percent of the profits available to handset makers from July to September (full chart below). Apple only makes high-margin smartphones, so while it did own about a 15 percent percent share of that market in the third quarter, according to industry research, its share of the overall handset market came in at below 5 percent. Samsung accounted for nearly 24 percent of smartphone shipments in the quarter and had about 22 percent of the overall mobile phone market in the three-month period. While Samsung was overshadowed by Apple in terms of operating profit in the quarter, other handset makers were absolutely obliterated. Nokia shipped far and away the most units in the third quarter.6 million, according to IDC—but captured just 4 percent of the operating profits during the period. HTC and Research in Motion each had less than 10 percent of the profits reported by handset makers for the quarter, while Sony Ericsson struggled to scratch out 1 percent. LG Electronics and Motorola Mobility reported losses in the third quarter. |