3 ms·

> the (2nd) most valuable company The most valuable, not 2nd (as of right now.) Apple's market cap is 536.49B while Google is 485.79B

sliverstorm 11y ago
http://www.wired.com/2016/02/alphabet-passes-apple-to-become-the-worlds-most-valuable-company/ http://www.wired.com/2016/02/alphabet-passes-apple-to-become... But both play a distant second fiddle to Saudi Aramco
- pilsetnieks 11y ago
  Yes, they're comparing the market cap in the article, which changes like every 5 minutes or with stronger gusts of wind. At current market cap AAPL is about 50B more valuable than GOOG. Hence Apple is again the most valuable publicly traded company in the world.
- danieltillett 11y ago
  The hypothetical value of a sovereign company that you can’t purchase shares in is not really a good comparison. I have to say if Saudi Aramco ever went on sale I would refuse to buy shares in it on principle.
  - idanoeman 11y ago
    Fair enough, although that has the unintended side-effect of very slightly enriching people without your scruples. Slight tangent - this is a variant of the Trolley Problem. I think it is sometimes morally good to do something slightly morally bad in order to acquire significant resources which can be used in a much more impactful way. For example, I don't think it's hard to argue that it is net morally good to make millions in slightly sleazy mid-2000s affiliate advertising and then give away most of the money to the Against Malaria Foundation.
    - danieltillett 11y ago
      I agree that it is always difficult to know where to draw the moral line in cases like this, but if the Saud’s decide to sell Aramco then it will be because they are desperate for money. Anyone buying shares will only increase the price and hence the amount of money going towards propping up what is a totally corrupt theocracy. The sooner the House of Saud is forced by lack of cash to join the 21st century the better.
      - pilsetnieks 11y ago
        The sad thing might be that lack of cash forces them to join the 14th century, not the 21st.
        danieltillett 11y ago
        I doubt very much that this transition is going to be smooth, but I don’t think it will be made any easier by delaying change.

sliverstorm 11y ago

http://www.wired.com/2016/02/alphabet-passes-apple-to-become-the-worlds-most-valuable-company/ http://www.wired.com/2016/02/alphabet-passes-apple-to-become... But both play a distant second fiddle to Saudi Aramco

pilsetnieks 11y ago
Yes, they're comparing the market cap in the article, which changes like every 5 minutes or with stronger gusts of wind. At current market cap AAPL is about 50B more valuable than GOOG. Hence Apple is again the most valuable publicly traded company in the world.
danieltillett 11y ago
The hypothetical value of a sovereign company that you can’t purchase shares in is not really a good comparison. I have to say if Saudi Aramco ever went on sale I would refuse to buy shares in it on principle.
- idanoeman 11y ago
  Fair enough, although that has the unintended side-effect of very slightly enriching people without your scruples. Slight tangent - this is a variant of the Trolley Problem. I think it is sometimes morally good to do something slightly morally bad in order to acquire significant resources which can be used in a much more impactful way. For example, I don't think it's hard to argue that it is net morally good to make millions in slightly sleazy mid-2000s affiliate advertising and then give away most of the money to the Against Malaria Foundation.
  - danieltillett 11y ago
    I agree that it is always difficult to know where to draw the moral line in cases like this, but if the Saud’s decide to sell Aramco then it will be because they are desperate for money. Anyone buying shares will only increase the price and hence the amount of money going towards propping up what is a totally corrupt theocracy. The sooner the House of Saud is forced by lack of cash to join the 21st century the better.
    - pilsetnieks 11y ago
      The sad thing might be that lack of cash forces them to join the 14th century, not the 21st.
      - danieltillett 11y ago
        I doubt very much that this transition is going to be smooth, but I don’t think it will be made any easier by delaying change.