Online Stock Trading

As can often be the case in the Blogosphere, bloggers meet other bloggers. Weeks ago, I met the College Analysts because I stepped forward to investigate the possibility of some traffic exchange. After learning that any exchange would be rather inequitable (I would receive far more attention than I could possibly give), we both agreed to box up the prospect for potential future use. We even suggested, should either one of us write something provocative, opening up that box and perhaps sparring a bit. Nothing draws crowds like good sport. In the meantime, I subscribed to their feed and have kept up reading their material, always watchful for something I couldn’t possibly agree with.

So what’s the problem?

The problem is, they don’t do anything wrong. In fact, far from it. It turns out that they’re some of the sharpest “kids” I’ve met (I say “kids” tongue in cheek—we’re likely rather close in age). Truly some talented, quick witted, crystal sharp thinking going on over there. And this is a compliment coming from a guy who runs a blog crammed deep into the recesses of deep thinking of all things.

Again, So what’s the problem?

So the problem is, that while in the course of doing well what they do so well, they managed to stir up a hornet’s nest. They picked on Apple. Wall Street’s momentary darling. But, they didn’t really pick on Apple so much as they analyzed it in a way that no one really liked. Everyone seems to have a vested interest in everyone else’s vested interest; i.e., everyone who’s rooting for Apple doesn’t want there to be a single damned dissenter. The College Analysts valued the stock somewhere (it doesn’t even matter where) below where all those vested interests wanted them to. They would rather have had them value it somewhere between $800 and $1000 I suppose, which is where they hope to have it go.

Rarely do I get to see so often, stacked up like the dead, so many angry comments from my favorite people like Anonymous, and oh yeah, Anonymous, ridiculing what I thought was a brilliant post. Talk about nit picking. Some of these nameless but obviously angry faces go so far as to mire themselves knee deep in personal attacks. Read this: Nothing gives away someone whose wrong more quickly than that.

After reading these now dozens of angry comments, I realized that I could either join that ugly fray over there or, with far greater reach and room over here, defend those embattled, though quite correct authors, under siege as they are, over here.

All we have to do is ask one question.

Who doesn’t own Apple? Warren Buffett for one. At least not that I am currently aware of (I think we all know that he doesn’t detail many of his purchases until he absolutely has to) and if he ever was in the market for Apple stock you can bet like hell he isn’t right now.

Regardless of whether or not some infinite scrutiny over this earnings projection or that one is absolutely correct (which is ultimately irrelevant because the ones they used are close as hell), we can be certain of one thing: for all the companies that once looked and smelled just like Apple does today (Microsoft, Google, etc), i.e., those that simply exploded, there have been many, many more that simply turned to dust. Dust.

So the College Analysts, by valuing Apple less than Apple-rooters wanted them to, actually pointed this little inconvenient fact out. What’s even worse (or funnier if you’re me), is that if you include any variation of expected return (or value) that incorporates this inconvenient fact in it, the un-popularly low value they provided looks to be many degrees too high even while it’s low.

In the end, I’m rather glad they have the capacity to inconvenience as they do. After all, someone has to have a clear head about these things. Meanwhile, I’ve got some knuckles to go tape. I’ve got allies to go box for.