Alibaba’s model is very efficient, but won’t undo the Walmart model. I am not even sure if it is appropriate to compare those two titans as they are in different industries. Alibaba is an internet based B2B trading platform, its famous affiliation Taobao is an online C2C trading platform. Walmart, on the contrary, is doing the retail business. It’s like comparing Uber to traditional yellow cabs on the street. Both of them are successful models, they fulfill different needs of customers. Such models are highly likely to coordinate and complement each other instead of killing one another.

Thanks. I did not know that the average was 200+, but do read 10ks and I am aware of the length. For investors, yes, 200+ pages of information could be overwhelming as they come from different backgrounds and they might not have previous experience in finance and related fields. Annual reports are long and we do not expect many changes of the length in the foreseeable future. As a result, investors have two choices in dealing with this “details challenge”, hire analysts to prepare the work for them, or learn how to tackle the proper information and relevant skills.

Agreed with the part "footnotes matter". However, don't think details are devil as long as you are able to filter the details and put your time on the right information.

"Correlation is not causation"-- this really depends. Some correlations lead to further investigations toward sources of cause, they are "correlations on the surface". Others, on the other hand, directly present to "why this happens". In the real world , chances for us to see "correlations on the surface" are much higher than "direct causes". I would say correlation is by and large not the single direct causation, it does matter sometimes.

This conclusion is too early. Some concerns based on your assumption: first of all, Apple's stock is not yet $180. How do you know Apple will not be large enough to support its stock price when it reaches $180? Furthermore, If your assumption is true, stocks like Google should have exploded already. The fact is, Google is still growing. When evaluating high-growth technology companies, story is a bit different.

Turn bad into good, eco-friendly!

Apple's stock price is within expectation. Current price is $100.39, before-split price should be $702.73. Assuming Apple is able to grow at 3% per year, which is identical to the economy's growth rate, with a 13% discount rate, stock price should be $707.44 according to my calculation back in 2013. And, of course, Apple's growth rate is faster than the economy's average growth rate.

Good post, great ideas sometimes come from random situations without expectation!

Seems like Apple learned from the underperformance of its last generation iPhone in China, a market that is surrounded by big screen smart phones. Go big screen!

Hi Moon, thanks for your comments. Yes, you’d want to expect some time to see the company’s growth. I didn't say "electric cars are new and novel", only expressed it would be a trend for the future. Yes, it was first developed about a decade ago, it means the context and technology, and even people's concepts about electric power at that time are not mature enough, which means this particular technology cannot be adapted at that time. Also, the players back in a decade ago were different, they failed in bring this idea to an opportunity, that does not mean Tesla need to do the same. Right now the context and players have changed. Was iPhone 1 a huge success back in 2007? The market and customers need time to accept new concepts so that the product could cross the chasm. As for the battery, yes, I've stated the battery need improvements in my writing, that's the weakness. Does that mean the company must keep using the outdated battery technology for the next generation? Of course not. That's why I mentioned the company's location. Silicon Valley's strong engineer forces would allow the company to keep their battery technology up to date. As for the price, I expressed the company's earning is one negative element, what caused its negative earnings? Invested heavily in R&D to ensure the quality of the products and complementary services to make sure customer experiences - which are so critical for a company under its development stage - good feedback from early customers will build the company's brand and eventually help the company cross the chasm. Brand is such an important intangible asset for companies like Tesla. When you buy a car, will you choose a well-known name with great feedback or a brand name you never heard of? Those are the fundamentals for a company’s success. Stock price itself is not enough to value a company, companies like Google, its stock price is extensively high and does not reflect its earnings if you do a calculation, does that affect Google’s continuing growth? At least I didn’t see any. Companies like Facebook, its earnings obviously cannot support its current stock price, but the stock price is still rising. Why? Its products and markets make it happen.