This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Apple Is No Longer The World's Most Expensive Company

Tyler Durden's picture


Irony of all ironies; on the 1-year anniversary of AAPL replacing XOM as the world's most-expensive market capitalized company, the incessant fall of the formerly invincible has dragged it back below XOM once again. This one-year of glory is disappointing as when MSFT managed to top XOM in 1998, it held on to the top-spot for almost 3 years before relinquishing it back to the company that runs the world's most valuable limited resource.

One-year on - and AAPL is now less than XOM once again...


while MSFT managed to hold the #1 spot for almost 3 years...


Of course the day's volatility will likely swing AAPL and XOM in and out of each other...


Charts: Bloomberg


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Fri, 01/25/2013 - 13:14 | 3185815 LawsofPhysics
LawsofPhysics's picture

I am glad to see market fundamentals returning < sarc off > bah ha ha ha ha!!

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 13:15 | 3185823 spastic_colon
spastic_colon's picture we get to watch the S&P do the same thing for x number of years

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 13:28 | 3185868 tallen
tallen's picture

Exxon the provider of oil which runs the global economy vs Apple the supplier of a few fad gadgets. Maybe with XOM>AAPL the market is finally starting to make a bit more sense. Almost definately not tho.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 13:37 | 3185897 Mark Carney
Mark Carney's picture

Forget apple, NFLX is gong show.


Bought $150 put options.......

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 13:41 | 3185908 trav777
trav777's picture


This is warranted ANY TIME a company makes "too much profit."  I mean how much profit does Apple really NEED when they are selling products we all HAVE to use?

XOM made these type of profits on half a trillion in revenue, for a meager 8% profit margin.  Apple's margins are up around 40%.  Thus a windfall profits tax is more than justified for Apple.  If Apple had XOM's revenues, they would be earning $200B a year.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 13:52 | 3185943 LawsofPhysics
LawsofPhysics's picture

"selling products we all HAVE to use?"


What a load of horseshit.  No crapple products in this business.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:01 | 3185968 redpill
redpill's picture

Gosh, no one could have seen this coming.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:14 | 3185990 NoDebt
NoDebt's picture

Oh-so-close with the chart comparisons, Tyler!  Now just do one laying Apple share price peak-to-peak with Microsoft and you have your crystal ball into Apple's BEST CASE future.

It's OK if you don't want to.  I'll just keep asking.

You're right, Redpill.  Nobody could have seen this coming.  Truly a black swan event.  How such modest expectations from so many analysts could have been missed so bady by such a well run company is truly astounding.  They should fire Steve Jobs over this.  Oh, wait....

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:19 | 3185998 redpill
redpill's picture

Did I mention the Samsung Galaxy S IV is expected to have wireless recharging capability?  The iTards are going to be ssssooooo jealous.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:22 | 3186003 trav777
trav777's picture

uh...the Nok Lumia 920 already has this

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:25 | 3186013 redpill
redpill's picture

Yes but that's a POS Nokia and not relevant.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:44 | 3186073 James-Morrison
James-Morrison's picture

I love AAPL and their iDutchTulipBulb App...

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 15:41 | 3186222 Dr.Awkward
Dr.Awkward's picture

I would say it is relevant because if you read the same cnet rumour roundup that I did, then you would know that the supposed wireless charging capabilities of the s4 will require a kit that is sold seperately opposed to the nokia's out-of-the-box ability.

Sat, 01/26/2013 - 10:42 | 3187580 tango
tango's picture

Samsung wireless rechargable?  No big deal since the technology is about 10 years old.  And no, Apple (or any other company) will not be jealous they'll replicate it with improvements.  That's the way of technology/  I loved the Samsung Galaxy but traded it in on a non-smart phone since I had an IPAD and didn't need it.  My son got the Samsung tablet and loves it.  Is Samsung the new Google?

Sat, 01/26/2013 - 10:49 | 3187591 tango
tango's picture

Don't bitch just because you can't afford Apple products, Laws.  The reasons businesses stay with MSFt is certainly not out of brand loyalty.  It's corporate pressure on state governments (being forced to make websites only usable with IE), lucrative contracts and the infrastructure changes required for a complete overhaul.   It's certainly a crappy product in terms of durability, reliability, efficiency and integration.   They operate with all these non-related parts.  I used MSFT products for 20 years until I finally stopped bitching about something I had never investigated.  Not having to call a help desk every three minutes or reload the OS every other week is a great relief.  (Ready for the down arrows) 

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 13:59 | 3185960 TideFighter
TideFighter's picture

Yeah, it's a bitch when you have to 'expose' your profits in retained earnings, with nothing to buy except AuthenTec, a fucking bullshit thumbprint company.  

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 13:42 | 3185910 SafelyGraze
SafelyGraze's picture


you Can't Eat Petroleum

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:05 | 3185974 astoriajoe
astoriajoe's picture

well, not raw petroleum anyway.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:48 | 3186084 SafelyGraze
SafelyGraze's picture

ps - Tyler, you should do an article about how the silver shortage killed apple

spoiler: it's a pre-quote. 

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 18:21 | 3186752 JuliaS
JuliaS's picture

Watch "Three Kings".

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 15:18 | 3186148 Seer
Seer's picture

Who could have known that PHYSICAL would be more valuable than VIRTUAL?  How could anyone have seen This coming? </sarc>

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 13:53 | 3185869 hedgeless_horseman
hedgeless_horseman's picture



I hate to rub salt on new wounds, Cupertino, but...

Exxon consolidating headquarters from Virginia, Dallas, and California to a new campus in The Woodlands, Texas.

Forbes' Photo


 Thanks, Feinstein and friends!

The some 8,000 local employees slated to move into the new campus include most of the people who work in the company’s upstream and chemical offices, along with various support staff. The campus will also house refining, specialities marketing, research and engineering groups from the Fairfax offices. The Akron office houses chemical operations.


The company also said Wednesday that select local relocations will come from ExxonMobil Research and Engineering Co. and ExxonMobil Chemical Co. now located at the Baytown refinery complex outside of Houston.

To sum it all up for you...

Texas businesses lead nation in private sector job growth. 


There are no state income taxes in Texas, and the legislature only meets every other year for only 140 days.

...coincidence?  I think not.



Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:17 | 3185995 theprofromdover
theprofromdover's picture

Exxon consolidating their HQs to one location?

Mark my words, the death knell of the company.

There will be civil war on that campus, all the aspiring managers will be doing their best to destroy the prospects of their rivals. The company will not innovate (what is there to innovate I hear you say), and multiple layers of management will be added.

It manages to work when you scatter divisions away from each other, but when you put the raptors in close to each other, they spend all their time obsessing.

Sack the guy who thought up that idea (must have been a bean-counter and tax-avoider).


Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:23 | 3186009 trav777
trav777's picture

XOM and all the other majors are having trouble replacing lost reserves with new finds.  Oil companies post-peak are all dying.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:35 | 3186048 LawsofPhysics
LawsofPhysics's picture

Indeed, but don't think they haven't already aquired a shitload of IP and have teams already working on alternatives.  Like the big banks, I don't see any of these boys getting broken up soon.  Fuck, there is a better chance Corzine would go to jail first.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 15:50 | 3186250 yrbmegr
yrbmegr's picture

XOM is not going to die quickly, but they do face the considerable challenge of dwindling petroleum reserves and prospects.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 15:48 | 3186246 yrbmegr
yrbmegr's picture

"There are no state income taxes in Texas, and the legislature only meets every other year for only 140 days."  But there are all kinds of other taxes, including property taxes, sales taxes, gas taxes, etc.  And the legislature meets for 140 days every other year, except when in special session called by the Governor because they didn't get everything done they needed to do.

It really is not paradise, actually.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 16:44 | 3186362 hedgeless_horseman
hedgeless_horseman's picture



But there are all kinds of other taxes, including property taxes, sales taxes, gas taxes, etc.

It is not paradise, however, in Texas the property taxes, sales taxes, and gas taxes you mention are all lower than California, and possibly Virginia as well.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 13:40 | 3185904 slaughterer
slaughterer's picture

It is highly unrealistic to think that the combined media fire power and HFT manipulative force of over 200 hedge funds will let AAPL sit for very long at this level.  Once the fundies are done cashing in their W Puts today, we will see a highly coordinated and engineered rise in AAPL, just like we did with PCLN and CMG and etc. etc. after they momentarily fell from grace.  Got to love the ZH bears calling for NFLX = 0 just a few months ago.    And now these same bears calling for AAPL $300.  Who is on the opposite side of the table here?

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 13:53 | 3185948 gjp
gjp's picture

Who is on the opposite side of the table for AMZN?  2% short interest, universally bullish analysts no matter how many times they disappoint and how distant the promised cash flow may be ... these 'other side' contrarian arguments only seem to work when they imply a bullish outcome, no?  Basically Ben's funny money is floating all boats, that's all there is to it.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:04 | 3185973 tango
tango's picture

I'm not exactly sure why posters go after Apple so heartily - probably because the Tylers do and if the tylers said the FED was a wonderful institution, many would suddenly find their new hero.  APPLE may make "plastic" products but these are incredibly complex inventions that are some of the best productivity tools around.   These complaints remind me of the time when everythingn financial went from paper to machine and all the cries for the good old days.

People use APPLE because their products work (unlike the perenially broken MSFT model).  Forget the $$$ for anti-virus / malware / spam prevention (again like MSFT).  The key to APPLE's success (and no, they won't stay at these levels with a PE of 6 - 7) is the ability to personalize one's system, selecting only the parts you want to use.  As a former IT consultant I can truthfully say that the difference between APPLE and MSFT is like Ron Paul and Obama - one has consistently good ideas and the other is always trying to apply a patch to "fix" whatever is always broken.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:28 | 3186031 trav777
trav777's picture

craapl hit a HR with the iPhone; prior to that, MSFT had conquered almost half of the smartphone market.  Their product was the best by far for most of the 2000s.

There were no viruses for Aapl because nobody CARED.  What is the Crack, like 5% of the global computer market?  What type of zombie spam farm creators would want to limit themselves to that?!?!

People use Craapl because their products have CACHET.  Nobody gives a fk about how they WORK.  The average Iphoner can't tell you a dang thing ABOUT it OTHER than "it's an iPhone."

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:56 | 3186081 EscapeKey
EscapeKey's picture

Microsoft have essentially been nowhere in the Smartphone market ever since the Symbian days.

Symbian took the early lead. However, that lead was taken over by RIMM's version of QNX, then came the dominance of iOS and now we have Android.

Microsoft have always been a bit-player in the smartphone market.

They DID however start to make serious inroads versus Palm in the PDA market, just as it collapsed.

Sat, 01/26/2013 - 10:02 | 3187546 tango
tango's picture

trav777 - As I sadi (and still think) the vast majority bashing Apple would not give a rat's ass (or even know about APPLE)  if Tyler had not got this bug in his bonnet.  Plus, as often stated, MSFT is the fast food of computer technology.  It's cheap, ubiquitious, has no real value and makes you sick!  LOL    Apple is pricy but you pay for ease of use, quality, not calling the "Help" line every two seconds are reloading your OS every other day.   You shouldn't bash a product just beause someone else does or because you can't afford it. 

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:32 | 3186039 NotApplicable
NotApplicable's picture

Regardless of an IT perspective, even an idiot can understand the idea of market saturation, and the impossibility of sustaining their growth rate.

Which is exactly where the focus is here. Sure, they're cash flush. Sure, they're P/E is still very low relative to their competition. But that is today, while stock valuations are based on expectations of future returns. This is why the Tylers and Reggie both pound on them. Do you honestly believe that Apple is the most valuable company in the entire world?

As for the idea that the crowd here would follow the Tylers any direction??? LOL Once again, you've got the wrong perspective. Since you've brought up Ron Paul, I'll use him as an example. I'd bet there aren't more than 1% of Ron fans here who feel the same way about his son Rand.

See, there are limits imposed by the followers when following any leader. We follow, only when it leads in a direction we agree with. There are any number of us here, who, while being fans of the Tylers, have openly sparred with them over the content of articles (self included).

So, I'm not so sure exactly why posters go after other posters so heartily - probably because they feel the need to score points in some verbal battle where they insert their own words into the mouths of others then display their superiority by defeating a strawman of their own making. (self included?)

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:42 | 3186069 syntaxterror
syntaxterror's picture

The Loserfornia Governor's grand fucking budget is based on FB @ $80 and AAPL @ $1000. Fucking losers.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:59 | 3186104 EscapeKey
EscapeKey's picture

Don't forget another housing bubble, which friends tell me is well back underway in San Diego.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 15:29 | 3186180 Seer
Seer's picture

I'm bearish ALL discretionary consumer products, especially electronic gadgets.

Any REAL investor in things long-term will see that this iCrap stuff is NOT going to be of significant importance in tomorrow's world, a world where PHYSICAL resources are becoming scarcer.  And, the markets are over-saturated, no real "new" markets are coming up (China was supposed to be the next big market; and while it might grow, its growth will not offset the decline elsewhere, let along prop up any total/net growth).

"As a former IT consultant"

Former?  Too successful or not successful enough?

When one is far into the woods it's sometimes hard to see the forest.  We're reached Peak Consumer Tech.  Only those heavily biased, deep in the woods or playing markets, will claim otherwise.

Sat, 01/26/2013 - 10:06 | 3187548 tango
tango's picture

You could not be more wrong.  We recently built a house and the builder said that new technology has let them shave 40% off building time.  The end of consumer products is a mantra heard throughout the ages.   "Former" because I retired 10 years early (Jeez what a childish remark)   Again, I like Chris Martensen but like many other prophets I have learned to be skeptical.  I agree that primary wealth used to come from the ground (I own a farm) but what we do with it, how we alter it and improve it is so much more powerful.  If that were not the case you'd be freezing (no one bitches about heating systems - LOL) or riding a horse or your woman would be dedicating a day to scrubbing clothes.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:11 | 3185984 spastic_colon
spastic_colon's picture

and next time AAPL rallies, it will be somehow highly correlated to the rise in ES, unlike the current disconnect

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 15:37 | 3186211 Seer
Seer's picture

"It is highly unrealistic to think that the combined media fire power and HFT manipulative force of over 200 hedge funds will let AAPL sit for very long at this level."

It is highly unrealistic to believe that physical realities can continue to be trumped by algos (for much longer).

Since you cannot force people to buy stuff (though there's plenty of effort to do so), and since wages are dropping and total jobs/employed is dropping, I'd say that it's pretty much a given that reality will break through all this shit.

Anyone capturing the meaning/tilt of capital shifting from AAPL to NFLX?  I'll let others take a shot at it before I present my thesis.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 15:04 | 3186123 FL_Conservative
FL_Conservative's picture

Another day, another opportunity to have one's face ripped off by the manipulators of this BS market.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 13:15 | 3185818 Spastica Rex
Spastica Rex's picture

iStuff has a lot of plastic in it. Can it be reclaimed for liquid fuel?

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 13:15 | 3185822 max2205
max2205's picture

Shits not done yet TD....theres a gargantuan amount of money looking for a home...look at nflx

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 13:24 | 3185853 CrashisOptimistic
CrashisOptimistic's picture

Cash on the sidelines is waiting to get into the asset the Fed has said they are buying.  Bonds.  Don't fight the Fed, after all.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 13:25 | 3185858 Skateboarder
Skateboarder's picture

Trudat. Braeburn is not going anywhere, and they got a shitton of dough.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 13:19 | 3185832 EscapeKey
EscapeKey's picture

...soon to be AMZN - who can withstand that BARGAIN of a 3,300 P/E-ratio priced company?

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 13:34 | 3185883 gjp
gjp's picture

AAPL's fall has just opened the floodgates for pie-in-the-sky bubbles everywhere.  AMZN, CRM, FB, LNKD, NFLX, etc.  Just full on frothing madness.  Tech companies with real earnings like MSFT, INTC, AAPL, CSCO are boring, what can you do with those.  But get a name with no earnings, there's no limit to what it could be worth!  Surely this is a sensible way to allocate capital, right?

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 15:54 | 3186264 Seer
Seer's picture

"Tech companies with real earnings like MSFT, INTC, AAPL, CSCO are boring, what can you do with those."

If the markets are indeed ARE forward-looking then what could we take from all of this?

Companies with "real earnings" today might not be seen as being able to deliver in the future, not because they aren't good companies, but perhaps because there won't be the continued ability by consumers to consume their products?

Consumers are basically taxed-out (as in burned out from consumption- how many times can you get excited with buying a new version of the same basic thing every couple of months?- instant gratification is losing its traction), closets full of shit, broke.

The companies that you list as producing "real earnings" produce things that tend to require substantial costs, either initial or via some long-term contract.

The other companies provide goods and or services that are lower in cost and tend to be non-contractual.  Yes, for these companies it's harder to maintain a customer base (and to grow it!), but when consumers are really down to their last pennies this is where the last money is.  These companies are also more advertiser-sponsored: less exposure to finicky consumers (though the sponsors are exposed).


Sat, 01/26/2013 - 09:06 | 3187517 flapdoodle
flapdoodle's picture

Hmmm, lets see

MSFT = betting the farm on Windows 8 being what will transition them into the future which is smartphones and tablets

INTC = getting out of the desktop motherboard business since desktop is dying and let ARM and others get the jump on them in smartphones and tablets

AAPL = losing their technological edge and their cachet to the Google/Samsung juggernaut while pricing their products as if people still had the extra money to buy a fashion statement

CSCO = growth came on the backs of the first two companies on this list - much more competition these days.

Looks like a list of has-beens to me...




Fri, 01/25/2013 - 13:36 | 3185891 rubearish10
rubearish10's picture

We've seen this movie before.....haven't we?

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 13:52 | 3185945 Squid Vicious
Squid Vicious's picture

You'd be much safer buying a pizza or coffee chain for only 30x earnings...  /sarc

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 13:20 | 3185840 Spastica Rex
Spastica Rex's picture

Curiously, Exxon Mobile has been on an undulating plateau for about 8 years.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 13:37 | 3185892 Dr. Engali
Dr. Engali's picture

Undulating......sounds a little kinky.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:25 | 3185992 wee-weed up
wee-weed up's picture


Imagine former Exxon Mobil CEO Lee (Jabba the Hut) Raymond belly dancing.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 15:30 | 3186188 Matt
Matt's picture

How about their profits and cash flow? Also undulating? Perhaps while CapEx is increasing?

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 15:58 | 3186273 Seer
Seer's picture

I think it goes back a bit farther that this.  Think Exxon Valdez...

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 13:23 | 3185848 Never One Roach
Never One Roach's picture

No one saw this coming!

A company that produces a hard asset outperforming one that produces iBoxes ?



Fri, 01/25/2013 - 13:25 | 3185860 SmoothCoolSmoke
SmoothCoolSmoke's picture

But, but...... AAPL fade was supposed to = SP fade.  ZH told me so!

Sat, 01/26/2013 - 09:11 | 3187518 flapdoodle
flapdoodle's picture

The Matrix programmers replaced the SP algorithm on Ben's instructions.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 13:29 | 3185870 rubearish10
rubearish10's picture

Yeah well, there should be news shortly that at least one of the Hotel Hedge Appliers may fade to black as I'm hearing of a few stressed funds having a thing called "a liquidity problem". They're not long enough gold!

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 13:42 | 3185911 blinky
blinky's picture

Tyler, you should do an article about how the silver shortage killed apple

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 13:46 | 3185922 fuu
fuu's picture

Thanks for that first post evar in 84 weeks!

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:36 | 3186049 NotApplicable
NotApplicable's picture

Good catch!

Blinky the sock puppet. Sounds like a damn cartoon character.

Is anyone keeping a list?

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 15:40 | 3186218 blinky
blinky's picture

A list of what.....

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 13:41 | 3185912 blinky
blinky's picture

Tyler, you should do an article about how the silver shortage killed apple

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:45 | 3186078 syntaxterror
syntaxterror's picture

He should do a post on why he banned Blinky the chat bot.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 15:42 | 3186229 blinky
blinky's picture

was never banned fool.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 13:45 | 3185915 falak pema
falak pema's picture

only normal, Aapl is a sheeple product and Exxon an Oligarchy product. As we enter into biflationary deleveraging the sheeple products will get blocked whereas the Oligarchy products will continue to grow.
Thats the price you pay when 6 Walton family owners of Walmart are as rich in terms of wealth as ONE third of the lowest echelon of the US population. 

100 millon people and 6 people have same wealth; in the USA!

The Walton Family Has As Much Money As The Bottom Third Of The US - Business Insider

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:03 | 3185970 fuu
fuu's picture

"Thats the price you pay when 6 Walton family owners of Walmart are as rich in terms of wealth as ONE third of the lowest echelon of the US population. 

100 millon people and 6 people have same wealth; in the USA!"

And to suggest that there may be something wrong with that picture means you are a communist who hates America.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:09 | 3185983 trav777
trav777's picture

have you EVER looked at how the bottom 3rd behaves?  They have zero ability to ever have any wealth...a 5th grade education is a marvel if it sticks with them.  Function in a civilized society is a stretch.  Their basic concept of what civilization IS ain't the same as yours.

I have no idea where you idiots get the notion that everyone deserves a comfy outcome.  Walton kids are PRECISELY WHY hot chicks chase rich dudes, SO THAT THEIR OFFSPRING/GENES have EXACTLY THIS ADVANTAGE.

You freakin marxists hate nature, hate science, hate evolution, hate biology.

There is no price being "paid" by virtue of wealth disparity. 

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:15 | 3185993 Spastica Rex
Spastica Rex's picture

The greater the wealth disparity, the better the system is working. Without losers, how would anyone know who's winning?

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 15:37 | 3186210 Matt
Matt's picture

There wouldn't be so much disparity if the poorest people didn't have 8 children. I suspect the difference in reproduction rate between the wealthiest and poorest people is a factor in the inevitable increase in disparity over time.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 18:25 | 3186760 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture

zygote personhood.

there's a *lightbulb* moment.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:37 | 3186047 fuu
fuu's picture

Oops. I should have said "Marxist who hates America", my bad.

Sat, 01/26/2013 - 09:18 | 3187527 flapdoodle
flapdoodle's picture

What's wrong with Communism? I think it makes a lot of sense: What's mine is mine and what's yours is negociable...

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 16:10 | 3186318 Seer
Seer's picture

And the top behaves?

"There is no price being "paid" by virtue of wealth disparity. "

I disagree, but do so in a completely (to most folks here) counter-intuitive way.  I think that it's the "wealthy" whom are in the worst position.  I think this way for two reasons:

1) The masses have always tended to strike out at the "wealthy" when things get bad;

2) "Wealth" is generally a condition of "excess;" nature doesn't do excess, that is, nature doesn't support excess (for any significant amount of time); it's Goldilocks and the Three Bears- the porridge is either too hot, too cold, or just right; "too hot" means too much; "too cold" means not enough; just right means sustainable; if you're not sustainable then you're in a bit of a tenuous position.

In the case of Exxon and Wal-Mart I believe that they should be more entitled to "wealth," as these entities provide things that are more essential.  How long they can do so, in the face of over-all decline, is the question; but, it's certain that they'll outlast the likes of Apple, FaceBook, Microsoft et al.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 17:59 | 3186686 secret_sam
secret_sam's picture

     You freakin marxists hate nature, hate science, hate evolution, hate biology.

It's not nature/science/evolution/biology that causes the Fed to prop up our TBTF banks.  Don't be an idiot.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:15 | 3185991 tango
tango's picture

I don't understant your point.  So what if the Waltons have a boatload of money?  They worked hard, took risks and succeeded.  Please state exactly why this is so bad.  If the 100 million want more they have to do something besides draw welfare, food stamps, housing support, health care, child care, Obama phones, etc.   Do you honestly think that redistributing the Walton money will create permanent prosperity?

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:22 | 3186008 Spastica Rex
Spastica Rex's picture

Why did we get rid of kings?

It was stupid. The 100 million are basically begging for them again. The Royal Waltons are as good as any, I reckon.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:31 | 3186029 falak pema
falak pema's picture

you only look at the end result; you should concentrate on the PROCESS. 

TO get to such a dominant position there is a LOT of corruption and master plans that have biased the working of the so called free market. Nobody gets this big without having an inside track and that is ONE track that feeds the political rat race.

Once you understand that you understand why/how empires are made and why they HAVE to fall.

The process, the mind set; the result is just the consequence.

We have to change the process and the mind set of impunity of "anything goes".

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:34 | 3186044 Spastica Rex
Spastica Rex's picture

It's all an expression of nature. Competition ultimately leads to kings and queens. If humans are indeed solely bestial, solely competitive by natue, that is our destinty.

Getting pissed at the Waltons is maybe like getting pissed at honey bees in a hive for not being competitive with one another. It's their nature to be little fucking communists.


Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:41 | 3186060 falak pema
falak pema's picture

good philosophical question : are we reptilian in our primal instincts and do we stay that way ad vitam aeternam?

the invisible hand does not exist alas. 

WHat is not right is a model that destroys general well being for the benefit of a few; and which is distorted in regulatory capture by those very interested parties; judge and party to their own success/impunity. That is how empires rise on manifest lies. Those values have to be defined and then defended. That is basically what being civilized is.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 15:42 | 3186227 Matt
Matt's picture

Perhaps civilization is inherently unsustainable.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 16:12 | 3186258 falak pema
falak pema's picture

absolutely, in each formal expression; it has to move and change its skin like a reptile. But the quest goes on.

TO REX : Human nature knows no absolutes in this world; that's why it invented the "supreme being" mantra! 

You are looking for metaphysical truths...

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 15:57 | 3186276 Spastica Rex
Spastica Rex's picture

But what is "right?"

We are reaping what we have sown, it's that simple. We can't have our cake, and eat it too, etc., etc.

If the transformation of matter into energy is the ultimate expression of human nature, we're doing a pretty damn fine job. We'll transform the Earth, and maybe the rest of the entire fucking universe, too. There will be winners, and and an infinite shit-ton of losers. Eventually, bacteria in a petri dish all lose - but we don't castigate them for being immoral.

Nobody has entirely convinced me that they have an accurate and final description of human nature, however.

Sat, 01/26/2013 - 09:32 | 3187531 flapdoodle
flapdoodle's picture

Its not matter into energy, its matter into energy into information

The hope is that we are on the cusp of a leap of consciousness (maybe Ray Kurweil's singularity) which will transcend our reptiloid past - the problem is that TPTB continue to hold on to power and exploit modern technology using all the fruits and tools which progress has provided to tighten their control.

(the moral of the story is : don't be a fruit or a tool of TPTB!)

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:43 | 3186067 NotApplicable
NotApplicable's picture

Yep, if only all of the legimate mafias, as well as the ones posing as governments didn't exist, then WM wouldn't have had to get in bed with them, or else!

But since that's the nature of the beast today, there is no other way to accomplish what they've done.

I no more hate them than I do all of the lower classes on the welfare dole, as it's absolutely inevitable that it cannot be escaped.

As always, dont' hate the player. hate the game.

Oh, and in other news, those 6 WM people are not the whole of the Walton family wealth. Bud's two daughters have their pockets swolled too.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 16:21 | 3186346 Seer
Seer's picture

As much as I dislike BIG (and WalMart) I DO agree with your logic here.  I do so only based on the fact that they provide more necessary things (food and clothing) than do entities like Apple (and, esp, FaceBook).

I suspect that people push Apple et al because it's sexy, something that WalMart in no way is.  We as "sophisticated" people aiming higher wish to associate with stuff that's ABOVE the masses, above those that visit WalMarts and the like.

NOTE: WalMart WILL crash and burn, as will every BIG entity.  I recognize the current reality as well as the future one.

" If the 100 million want more they have to do something besides draw welfare, food stamps, housing support, health care, child care, Obama phones, etc."

This is a bit condescending.  And I hope that the down-arrows were for this (I'm not voting because of this, as it cancels out any positives that the rest of your post would have otherwise garnered from me).  To say that one could rise from the ghetto and beat out WalMart if only one wanted to do so is pure fantasy: we ought not confuse possibility with PROBABILITY; the probability of this occurring is near zero (even if someone were so inclined to challenge this statistic).

"Do you honestly think that redistributing the Walton money will create permanent prosperity?"

No.  NOTHING is permanent.  Even the entire Walton clan will disappear: those that decide to engage in sustainable living practices are more likely to continue, but I doubt that will happen.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 13:45 | 3185924 Squid Vicious
Squid Vicious's picture

where did Joe T say he was buying for his future generations of grease monkeys? 525?

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:04 | 3185976 TrumpXVI
TrumpXVI's picture

That was long enough IMO.

In a post Peak Oil world, I wouldn't expect any company that manufactures discretionary consumer products to have a higher market cap than a company that produces an essential product.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 15:44 | 3186235 Matt
Matt's picture

What you mean, I think, is in a low-energy world. It all hinges on whether we make the next breakthroughs to new sources of abundant energy, or whether we collapse into another dark age.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 16:26 | 3186355 Seer
Seer's picture

"It all hinges on whether we make the next breakthroughs to new sources of abundant energy, or whether we collapse into another dark age."

Your (loaded) premise is that there IS a new energy source (assumed to be able to replace the existing cheap energy sources in EROEI and volume).

How about:

It all hinges on whether we work to live sustainably in accordance with nature's laws, or whether we go on a wild goose-chase over the cliff in pursuing a new, abundant (and cheap) energy source.

Conjuring up "dark ages" is no different than loading up with the negative of "goose-chase over the cliff."  Further, the "dark ages" aren't necessarily as dark as most believe them.  I believe that "enlightenment" can exist w/o having to experience the meaning of Jevons Paradox.

Sat, 01/26/2013 - 20:35 | 3188406 Matt
Matt's picture

Without a massive amount of energy for things like Haber Bosch, there may only be enough food for 2 billion people. Do you think the starving ~6 billion people will just sit and die and let the other 2 billion live in peace? Hell no, they will bring war and death to the less-densely populated areas.

Living sustainably with nature's laws = mass die off, one way or another.

"Further, the "dark ages" aren't necessarily as dark as most believe them."

Well, if you have epidemics killing off 30 to 50% of the population every couple generations, how well do you think culture and science will thrive amongst the masses? Just because things weren't too bad for the top 1%, doesn't mean they were good.  

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:06 | 3185978 dr_doom
dr_doom's picture

I like to read your stuff, Tyler. But hey, give me a break with aapl. Who cares what the market cap is?? The world is waking up to the fact, that iphone 5, 5s, 6, 6s and a repackaged 3 for emerging markets won't be enough. Let's move on now. I'm more interested in your thoughts about the complete idiotic trading in NFLX.....

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:38 | 3186052 syntaxterror
syntaxterror's picture

The world's most valuble resource after Channel #5 ($80k/gallon) is the ink in HP ink jet printers at around $5,000/gallon.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:51 | 3186086 NotApplicable
NotApplicable's picture

Nope. Absolutely untrue.

Price does not equal value. Price discovery is a market clearing mechanism, while value is wholly subjective, being completely unquantifiable. All one can do is to sort valuations in order of personal preference, assigning them a rank. Even these ranks are not permanent, but subject to change based upon our individual needs and desires.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 15:40 | 3186183 smiler03
smiler03's picture

Actually Chanel No 5 is closer to $54000 per gallon.


15ml = £137.50 = £9.16 per millilitre 

1 US gallon = 3 785.41178 millilitres = £34670 per gallon

£34670 = $54000

And the cost of this would pale into insignificanccompared to some vintage red wines.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 15:50 | 3186249 Matt
Matt's picture

The Chanel can be bought cheaper in bulk. Wines are not fungible, so you cannot trade them as a commodity.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:36 | 3186053 GeorgeHayduke
GeorgeHayduke's picture

"...the world's most valuable limited resource."

Now wait a minute. I have heard many folks, even on here, state that oil is abundant. All we need to do is drill, baby, drill. They tell me oil is abiotic and it's plentiful. Hell, you could start drilling in your own backyard. These abiotic oil folks know where the oil is, Screw the petroleum geologists with their core samples and mathematical equations. Oil is everywhere. XOM other oil companies cover it all up and keep supplies tight so they can make more profits. All aided and abetted by those wicked evil environmentalists who won't let them drill.  /stupidity

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:46 | 3186080 NotApplicable
NotApplicable's picture

False dichotomy much?

(please note that NOTHING you stated invalidates the quote you selected, as even abiotic oil has limits)

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 16:12 | 3186322 GeorgeHayduke
GeorgeHayduke's picture

Unclench. It was humor.

Did you see the "/stupidity" at the end of it? I was making fun of the limitless resources folks. 

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 16:36 | 3186387 Seer
Seer's picture

Cheer up, it's Friday! (need to start looking at all of this as the humor that it is- even I, the one always ready to pounce on pro-growthism, spotted the tongue-in-cheek delivery here) :-)

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 16:32 | 3186372 Seer
Seer's picture

Some missed the humor, I did not :-)

I'm just waiting (still waiting; still waiting, yet MORE waiting) for the crude (abiotic) to start bubbling up to the surface where my (limited) equipment (bucket) can be employed to scoop it up and sell it on the market where I'm sure to get rich! </SARC!>

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 18:10 | 3186722 secret_sam
secret_sam's picture

The abiotic oil replenishment idea would be a lot more credible if someone just started reopening the fields that were pumped dry decades ago and finding they're refilled.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:53 | 3186094 Sufiy
Sufiy's picture

$400, Guys $400


Apple To Break Down to 400 and Gold & Commodities To Break Out on China Move December 15th, 2012

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 15:36 | 3186209 GrinandBearit
GrinandBearit's picture

If there is no 5:1 or 10:1 split, I predict AAPL will hit $100 sometime this year.

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 16:52 | 3186425 syntaxterror
syntaxterror's picture

We're all waiting for the Kevin-Ramp to begin, but AAPL still down 1.6%, 10 minutes before the close! KEVVVV-IN! KEVVVV-IN! KEVVVV-IN! KEVVVV-IN! KEVVVV-IN!

Oh, and are the rumors that Family Dollar will start selling the iPhone true?

Sat, 01/26/2013 - 08:58 | 3187512 Grand Supercycle
Grand Supercycle's picture

AAPL Parabolic Irrational Exuberance. . .

As mentioned during 2012, vertical moves for any stock, commodity etc are unsustainable.

Charts don't lie.

AAPL monthly chart as of February 5, 2012 & posted February 10, 2012:

AAPL monthly chart as of April 4, 2012 & posted April 9, 2012:

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!