I missed this article from last month:
Apple Stock Split: Analyzing the scope of yet another stock split of Apple’s Stocks in the recent future.
https://crowdwisdom.live/us-stocks/apple-stock-split/
Interesting collection of its history of splits as well…
Hard to imagine a ‘conservative’ port not having a portion invested in the Apple juggernaut.
I have definitely been late to the party, but better late than never. Even with my lateness, seeing a CAGR of over 40%.
In today’s scene of the street’s running red, this gem barely budged with -.91%.
Will likely be a life long holder of AAPL.
Still recovering from the 20/1 Google split. If that ever happened to Apple, would probably have a heart attack. 2024/5 next one and 4/1 would be very nice. But the way this market has behaved so far this year, who knows. However, quite happy where they stand at present. Some even now calling it a defensive stock!!!
Good news for me as well at least on Amzn and Bill today but FB stinks. Funny how it goes, as partly due to Apple’s privacy laws but mainly I think because Tik Tok and others eating it’s, FB’s(Meta)lunch and dinner.
For what purpose would Apple do this?
Well, i’m not concerned if AAPL splits, obviously it’s done it before and it has opened up shares to maybe a larger market, but no immediate gains anyway. I am more interested in other talk of raising dividends, but I see none of that. An inlaw asked me last evening what I knew about a split of AAPL, but I hadn’t seen it, went on the hunt… All guesswork, we seem to be just pacing the overall market for now, no plans to sell or trade…
The general purpose is to lower the costs for smaller investors, make it more palatable… No actual affect on value, but as the article shows, share price does seem to rise after a split, maybe because of ‘new’ money inflow…
wecoguy
The general purpose is to lower the costs for smaller investors, make it more palatable… No actual affect on value, but as the article shows, share price does seem to rise after a split, maybe because of ‘new’ money inflow…
Agreed on all points. The euphoria that surrounds a split simply nudges the resultant price, a split being an indicator of how well a company is doing. (Likely catches the attention of non-holders to take a look.)
Agreed on all points. The euphoria that surrounds a split simply nudges the resultant price, a split being an indicator of how well a company is doing. (Likely catches the attention of non-holders to take a look.)
Seems reasonable, but if so, why has Amazon not done a split? Its share price is over 15 times Apple’s, and it’s been over $1000 for several years.
7325:
Seems reasonable, but if so, why has Amazon not done a split?
Perfectly logical question, and one I’d like to see get resolved, too.
#1 answer: Bezos has rejected any idea about splitting. “I/we don’t need it”, or something along those lines.
I SUSPECT, it has something to do with the “cachet” of simply having a lofty price. And higher than Bren’s Google. Now that Google is going for 20:1? Might alter Bezos’ resistance(???)
Bezos turned over the CEO reins to AMZN’s AWS division boss several months ago. I predict:
After that, the crystal ball fogs up…
Holdings here are modest, but I will hold; they will continue to inch higher annually, and I will hold in anticipation of those outlandish ideas.
If I remember correctly, and that is a BIG IF, Apple’s 7:1 split in 2014 was to bring the share prices down so that it could become a DJIA stock. That happened about 9 months after the split. I think the 2020 4:1 split was to keep the share price in line with the price weighted DJIA. I am sure that someone will correct me if that’s wrong.
PucksFool
I think the 2020 4:1 split was to keep the share price in line with the price weighted DJIA. I am sure that someone will correct me if that’s wrong.
Don’t know the answer to the “keeping in line” thing, but it reminds me of a question I’ve asked for a long time now.
Why does the DJIA insist on hanging on to the stock price criteria???
AFAIK, all other indices, world wide, go by capitalization.
Back over 100 years ago, the share price basis HAD to be used. It was the only practical way they could maintain the task of calculating.
Now, with computers on every desk in every office in every nook and cranny, it makes no sense.
So, why doesn’t the DJIA migrate to capitalization based? Why? The current scheme skews results wildly. Many say it’s the least useful metric for judging the market. It holds its quote ship / readership / followership all due to its “First in the Field” status.
Good question.
Next question. 
Why does the DJIA insist on hanging on to the stock price criteria???
Probably because once a new formula is used, comparisons to the 136 years of history are even more meaningless than they already are. At least by staying the way they are they can pretend it isn’t absurd. Just as the idea of putting so much importance in just 30 companies is absurd.
Many say it’s the least useful metric for judging the market.
Many? I think it is a lot more than many, at least among people who actually understand anything about investing, and the markets. But then reporting changes in points instead of percentages means maybe 1/1000000 (I’m being generous) has any feel for what they hear reported everywhere constantly. For me it approaches being a useful contrarian indicator, as my high-growth portfolio generally performs the opposite of the DOW.
Why does the DJIA insist on hanging on to the stock price criteria???
Because it’s probably the most quoted stock index in the popular and business press, and you don’t mess around with such a popular product without some risk (1), (2), (3)
New Coke. Clearly a disaster, even though the “taste tests” indicated otherwise.
Schlitz Beer. Most people don’t know Schlitz was #1 in the 1960’s, but then a new CEO found a way to cut costs by using a different pasteurization process. It was just as effective at eliminating bacteria in the lab, but what they didn’t know is that beer went flatter sooner but not until it had left the factory. So bars and taverns began pushing other brands, and Schlitz never recovered.
Coke actually did change the formula. Originally it was made with all cane sugar. When sugar prices skyrocketed they changed to using sweetened corn syrup, but they made the change slowly. It was 90-10 for a couple months, then 80-20, all the way until it was 10-90 and eventually all corn syrup. (You can still get it made with cane sugar in the “Ethnic aisle” as they still make it for the Hispanic market.)
3a. But I don’t see a way for the DOW to “ease” into a change, so they stick with what has worked, wonky as it is.
3a. But I don’t see a way for the DOW to “ease” into a change, so they stick with what has worked, wonky as it is.
The real question is why everyone else doesn’t “ease” away from the Dow.
Share splits may give short term bumps, but in the long term, which is my view, price will follow earnings and splits are meaningless. I would like to see more interest in raising dividends. I don’t want to have to sell shares for income in retirement!
SBN
Depending on your tax bracket dividends will possibly cost you more in taxes than selling shares.