Stein "forgets" to mention that the stock split in 1999 and again in 2003. So, if you owned it say in mid 1998 when it was worth $30.00 you would be sitting on a stock that has done quite well (100 shares @ $30 mid 1998 for a $3,000.00 investment would be worth $12,060 today counting two splits for 400 shares now worth $10860 + 400 shares X $3.00 dividend = $1,200 for a total of $12,060).
Meanwhile, IBM, which the author touts, has managed to prop up its stock price by selling billions of dollars in assets. A couple of years ago, it sold its entire disk drive business to Hitachi. This year it sold its desktop and laptop business to Lenovo. Meanwhile, IBM has stated at various times that it has invested a billion dollars in Linux. However, we never hear of the profitability of that investment. hmmmm . . . .
Oh yeah, I almost forgot. If you had bought IBM at the same time - say mid 1998 you would have paid about $80. It split in April 1999. So you would have doubled your investment.
Now, which one would you have rather owned? Which has better prospects for the future? Name one product that IBM is selling today or will soon bring to market that has anywhere near the growth potential and profitablity of the several Microsoft products like SQL 2005, Visual Studio 2005, X-Box 360 (all coming out this next quarter)?
Typical NYT crap . . .
|