The thesis that Apple got to its one trillion market cap helped by buybacks is so absurd that it hurts to see how many people repeated it. Matt Levine also comm

The thesis that Apple got to its one trillion market cap helped by buybacks is so absurd that it hurts to see how many people repeated it. Matt Levine also commented on the issue (https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-08-07/buying-your-way-back-to-riches https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-08-07/buying-yo...): “The theory here is essentially that if Apple had 220 billion more dollars—roughly the amount of buybacks it has done in the last six years—then it would be worth less money. It doesn’t sound especially plausible. Presumably Apple plus $220 billion would be worth at least, like, a dollar more than Apple alone? And if the buybacks work so well, why not do more? Why not sell off all of Apple’s businesses, use the money to buy back stock, and leave Apple as an empty shell with a reduced share count and a $2 trillion valuation?”