Dell

While we have long-argued that the discussion over the use of Apple's cash pile is somewhat circular (lower cash equals higher risk, less ability to withstand any shock, and investor perception growth/value shift) in its 'value' for the company, Bloomberg's always-sharp Jonathan Weil has a slightly different tack on the mega-firm's accounting conventions and why it may not be so cheap. As he points out, analysts (and talking heads) persistently argue that the firm's value is cheap at 14.3x T12M earnings (in line with the S&P) in spite of far higher growth (revenues and earnings). Competitive threats are often cited, future uncertainty of the consumer comes up, and the use of the cash argument we already mentioned but as Weil highlights, it seems that Apple's less than conservative accounting methods (that they lobbied for and heaven forbid Obama would re-consider a tax-the-rich opportunity) with regard to booking the revenues of bundled products more quickly than it used to (which caused, for instance, 2009 revenue to jump 44%). So while there may indeed have been record demand for the i-everythings, record 'blow-out' earnings is as likely a symptom of accounting inflation as unpaid mortgage cash being put to work. It seems the market realizes this and so the next time we are told to 'buy-the-dip as Apple is cheap', remember there is a reason for that 'cheapness' - that, as Jonathan so eloquently points out "not all iEarnings are created equal" as economic and accounting realities diverge once again.