Apple market cap tops Google

Apple's stock price, which has been on a steady upward tear for the last few years, closed at $179.30 on Wednesday, sending its market capitalization to $158.84 billion.

That figure, Apple fans were quick to note, is higher than that of search engine giant Google, which closed at $500.03 on Wednesday, with a market cap of $157.23 billion. (Market cap is simply the value of shares times the numbers of shares outstanding. While Google has a higher share value, it has far fewer outstanding shares than Apple, 314.45 million vs. 885.88 million.)

Both companies are still behind tech stalwarts like Microsoft and IBM, which closed with a market caps of $254.83 billion and $170.44 billion, respectively.

Exxon Mobile, which topped the Financial Times 500 list of largest companies by market value as of June, closed Wednesday with a market cap of $406.02 billion.

[bommai]

These bragging rights are short lived. MSFT used to be almost $600 Billion, GE used to be $600. Even CISCO was once the most valued company in the world.

[bigpicture]

Bragging rights is all this is too, it is no indicator of share value. MS has an annual revenue of $60B per year on a market cap of $254B, IBM has an annual revenue of $100B on a market cap of $170B. Exxon Mobil has an annual revenue of of over $400B on a market cap of $400B and profit of over $40B. With no other information, which shares do you think represent the best value?

[Kwasiowusu]

Apple has bigger market cao than Google?
Well Apple has been in bussiness for close to 40 years, while Google has not been been in business for even 10 years. Apple had no business having a lower market cap than Google in the first place.
Its like a guy that was in university when some guy was in kindergartern, boasng that he just got promoted over the guy that was in kindergarten when he was in university.

[kelmon]

Er....OK. I'm fairly certain that the age of a company does not have a direct correlation with its value but whatever keeps you happy. There's plenty of businesses older than Apple that have less value, even in the technology industry.

[Kwasiowusu]

True lots of firms are older than Apple and have lower market caps. But then that is more a reflection of how badly those companies have done, more than a justification for Google having a higher market cap than Apple for years till yesterday. Apple was already a very big firm before Google was even founded, and they are both tech companies, with potentially huge markets to grow into. Why on earth should Apple have had a smaller market cap than Google for years?

[Penguinisto]

Do you even have a clue as to what the term "market cap" actually means? I'm very sure that a smaller market cap is not "a reflection of how badly those companies have done".

Of course, the fact that Apple has almost as much cash in the bank as MSFT (likely more by now), coupled with Apple's explosive growth over MSFT's near-stagnation? That item indicates that Apple is definitely punching above its weight.

[Kwasiowusu]

@ Penguinisto , I know exactly what market cap is.Real question is do you?You have no idea what you are talking about do you?
I might also point out that Microsoft has vastly more money in the bank than Apple does, not to mention Microsoft currently makes a massive over FOUR times as much in profits as Apple every single quarter . With Apple's over priced stock doing a P/E of over 35, to Microsoft's low P/E of just 15, Microsoft's stock price is set to do a heck of lot betetr than that the massively overpriced Apple.

[Kwasiowusu]

@ kelmon,equally there are firms that are older than Apple and have bigger market caps.
In fact Apple used to be much bigger than even Microsoft, untill Microsoft clobbered them.

[Tony McCune]

I guess spelling isn't an important part of Kindergarten any more.

[Kwasiowusu]

Naaaah
It was typing fast that wasn't.
Your attempt to change the subject is not working.

[joetesta70]

APPLE TOPS GOOGLE AND $TEVE JOB$ HORDES IT ALL

$teve Job$ has done nothing philanthropic (neither has Scott McNealy), whereas Gates, Brin, Lazaridis, Ellison all have donated significant amounts to REALLY change the world. He doesn't make the Forbes list of philanthropists.

There's a new Evil Empire in town. Proprietary, buggy Apple.

[McAdams]

So, in your view, keeping the money you earned while providing innovation and technology to milliions, and the resulting employment of tens of thousands of people is evil? What have you provided/given to the public and charities?

[gsmiller88]

Proprietary? Maybe, buggy? Not so much

[Gromit801]

And it seems this is all you ever have to say about Steve Jobs.

As McAdams said, what have you done for others? What have you contributed besides recycling?

[Kwasiowusu]

@ Penguinisto , I know exactly what market cap is.Real question is do you?You have no idea what you are talking about do you?
I might also point out that Microsoft has vastly more money in the bank than Apple does, not to mention Microsoft currently makes a massive over FOUR times as much in profits as Apple every single quarter . With Apple's over priced stock doing a P/E of over 35, to Microsoft's low P/E of just 15, Microsoft's stock price is set to do a heck of lot betetr than that the massively overpriced Apple.

[Constable Odo]

Yeh, temporary market cap bragging rights means very little. Apple has been around for umpteen years and should have had a market cap as high as Microsoft's. Of course, there are plenty of companies such as Motorola that have also been around for so many years and now have market caps of next to nothing. Tomorrow some other company will come around and surpass all the currently reigning companies. Some energy company in Russia called Gazprom is supposed to do that in a few years.

[Penguinisto]

Gazprom will likely be nationalized (thus pretty much mooted) long before it gets there if Putin has any say in it...

[richard.watson]

Bit crazy, really. Which has more risk over the next 10 years? I'd say Google has a pretty good lock-in, whereas Apple has to reinvent its product line each year or so. If Google makes a mistake, it simply doesn't take a product out of beta. Apple bets the farm each time.

[Perry_Clease]

"APPLE TOPS GOOGLE AND $TEVE JOB$ HORDES IT ALL

$teve Job$ has done nothing philanthropic (neither has Scott McNealy), whereas Gates, Brin, Lazaridis, Ellison all have donated significant amounts to REALLY change the world. He doesn't make the Forbes list of philanthropists.

There's a new Evil Empire in town. Proprietary, buggy Apple"

This story is about Apple stock not Steve Jobs

[samkass]

Richard, Apple has two product lines-- Macs and iPods (into which I clump the iPhone). Each are roughly half the company's revenues, give or take. If either one falters, the other can prop up the company. Google, on the other hand, gets almost all its revenue from online advertising, mostly driven from its search engine dominance. All those beta apps are just ways to drive people to their site and let them advertise something to you. If that single revenue source has issues, the stock will crash.

And despite Apple's meteoric rise in share price, it's trailing P/E is only 35-- about the same as Google.

[oneoclock]

Anybody who believes this has anything to do with bragging rights is a fool. These figures have been compiled and published for what they are: economic indicators, which investors monitor to assist them making decisions on how to manage their portfolios, nothing more, nothing less. Mind you there are other such indicators and they make sense only when looked at as a whole and in context. In any event, if you don't own AAPL shares and you are not an employee either, then you can safely ignore these indicators, you have nothing to worry nor do you have any reason to get upset or excited, move along.

[Penguinisto]

@Richard: Advertising is (and always has been) more volatile than the consumer products market. Google gets its entire bread-and-butter off of advertising. Apple gets its income from three main sources: iPods, Macs, and now iPhones - all of which are growing, the latter two outperforming their rivals in growth by orders of magnitude (enough so that Symbian went open source out of defensive reaction, and that the once-dominant MSFT is fast losing marketshare that it once held a lock on).

[Kwasiowusu]

IPod growth is down to just over 10% currently. That kind of growth doesn't even come close to justifying a P?E ratio of 35 for Apple. Apple stick is massively overpriced. Over the next year, it has nowhere to go but down.

[Penguinisto]

Funny, but the iPod sold 90 million iPods during the whole time that Zune has existed... two years ago. Nobody has been able to reduce the iPod's marketshare.

OTOH, MSFT marketshare for Windows has been reduced. AT&T reports that they have sold twice as many phones in the US now as they did w/ the first generation iPhone (which means that iPhone's marketshare in North America is about to slam WM into the basement, and RIM is about to be in for a rude shock). Mac sales practically double each year... which justifies the P/E ratio quite nicely, thanks much.

/P

[Kwasiowusu]

@ Penguinisto, nice way to try and change the subject.
FACT: iPod growth rates are massively down. Last quarter, iPod grew at just over a measely 10%. With iPod accounting for close to half Apple's sales, that simply just doesn't justify a 35 P/E ratio.
Apple Mac sales double every year?
On what planet is that?
Its sure not on this planet. I suggest you go read Apple's earnngs report.
Not to mention, Apple Mac's tiny sales in China, the second biggest PC market on the planet, and soon to be the biggest PC market on te planet. With close to zero Mac sales in China, Apple's market share price is bound to go down

[Kwasiowusu]

@ Penguinisto, ummmmm.... about them iPhone sales, Nokia is selling a massive 1.3 million cell phone every single day. That "twice iPhone 3G sales as the original iPhone" still comes to just 10 days worth of Nokia cell phone sales as Apple's total iPhone sales for the entire year. Lemme kniow when Apple begins to even get on the same universe as Nokia.

[cvil0707]

Do they even have to be compared? I don't think they're similar companies so this doesn't really count. Maybe the person who wrote this didn't have anything else to write about.