….ringrazio il mio amico Francesco Maggioni per il gentile contributo….
che ti permetterà di CONTESTUALIZZARE la fase attuale con quella del 2000 e capire l’assurdità delle quotazioni di alcuni titoli oggi
QUI UN ESTRATTO CHE TI PERMETTERA’ DI CHIEDERTI “MA COSA CAVOLO STAVO PENSANDO?”
My friend Eric recently shared an iconic quote from the dotcom mania that is especially relevant to the equity market today. Scott McNeely was the CEO of Sun Microsystems, one of the darlings of that bubble. At its peak his stock hit valuation of ten-times revenues. A couple of years afterward he had this to say about that time (via Bloomberg):
At 10 times revenues, to give you a 10-year payback, I have to pay you 100% of revenues for 10 straight years in dividends. That
assumes I can get that by my shareholders. That assumes I have zero cost of goods sold, which is very hard for a computer company. That assumes zero expenses, which is really hard with 39,000 employees. That assumes I pay no taxes, which is very hard. And that assumes you pay no taxes on your dividends, which is kind of illegal. And that assumes with zero R&D for the next 10 years, I can maintain the current revenue run rate. Now, having done that, would any of you like to buy my stock at $64? Do you realize how ridiculous those basic assumptions are? You don’t need any transparency. You don’t need any footnotes. What were you thinking?
Below is a chart of Sun Micro from 1996 to 2006. It started around $5 ran up to that $64 Scott mentions and then fell right back to $5. And you would think this might serve as a cautionary tale for investors today.
#AMZN #GOOG #MSFT #INTC
Value today: $2096b
Value 1y ago: $1592b
**Increase in value: $504b
Increase in earnings: $2.2b**
Considerando solo questi aumenti, chi compra oggi queste azioni sta pagando 250 volte i maggiori profitti (P/E)
Quando questi investitori rientreranno del loro investimento?
A questi livelli parliamo appunto di centinaia di anni, assumendo che i profitti per questo periodo rimangano almeno uguali a oggi.
Al confronto Apple assomiglia piu a Ford come valutazione (ed è quindi in linea teorica,solo x questo esempio, da preferire).