Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

rubenbmathisen OP t1_j3agata wrote

Reply to comment by ghostmastergeneral in [OC] Apple VS 110 Countries by rubenbmathisen

I’m not sure what you mean by «mean». The comparison is simply one way of putting Apple’s market cap into a bigger perspective.

−85

RD__III t1_j3ahdml wrote

Market cap isn’t the equivalent of a corporations “GDP”. The appropriate comparison would be to compare gross revenue to GDP.

60

Eric1491625 t1_j3ajdes wrote

Even that is too much. You need to compare a company's Economic Value Added to GDP, not all revenues.

If a country imports $200 of components to assemble a $300 Apple product it generates only $100 of GDP. But from Apple's perspective, if Apple imports $200 of components to sell a $300 product it generates the full $300 as revenue (but only $100 of EVA, which would be the correct comparison).

39

rubenbmathisen OP t1_j3aliyf wrote

The comparison in the graph simply says that Apple’s market cap is approximately equivalent to the value of what 110 countries produce in a year. Nothing more, nothing less. There are certainly other interesting comparison one could make, but they dont undermine that fact.

−64

RD__III t1_j3anh4a wrote

Yes. I can read English. why do you compare the market cap to GDP. Why don’t you compare the value of what apple produces in a year to these other countries? That would make sense for a comparison. Market Cap to GDP doesn’t make sense.

To better phrase it, a monkey can throw two numbers on a bar chart. What makes your data beautiful compared to a monkeys?

39

[deleted] t1_j3as4x8 wrote

[deleted]

−34

dadarknight07 t1_j3bdfej wrote

That’s just it. It DOESNT show how massive apples market cap is via a comparison for perspective because the comparison is invalid.

It just shows apples market cap and then a separate number next to it. No perspectives obtained from a comparison.

18

[deleted] t1_j3ckuok wrote

[deleted]

−1

dadarknight07 t1_j3d897c wrote

Worth (stock) and income (flow) are two different categories of measurement. It doesn’t make sense to compare one of those of one entity with the other of those of an entirely different entity. It’s non sequitur.

Your example is more valid as a comparison as net income and revenue are both in the flow category of measurement.

OPs example is like comparing the total incomes of a neighborhood in LA with the total enterprise value of all the McDonald’s in Ecuador. You can put them next to each other in a chart. But doesn’t really make sense.

3

[deleted] t1_j3baql4 wrote

Next you might as well compare the number of iPhones manufactured to the GDP of these countries.

16

bosssx t1_j3bijle wrote

You labeled the chart and they still don't want to read.

I wonder if some on told them it would take 5 years of their income to buy a sports car. They would say that "income and cars are different you can't compare the two"

−8

homerjdimpson t1_j3bzgtk wrote

Isn’t the purpose of visual data to make it more easily understandable for valid comparisons? This is like Purdue pharma showing logarithmic data and saying, you labeled it and they still don’t wanna read.

Depending on OPs intended conclusions it’s sort of misinformation or manipulation.

5

rubenbmathisen OP t1_j3bjv8u wrote

Exactly. There is no rule that says you cant compare a flow to a stock (as many here seem to believe). Its freqently done in economics, and in general it can be quite helpful to understand the size of the stock (as with your sports car example).

−5