On the biased nature of the media: Apple vs. Alphabet in the ‘most valuable company’ race

Currently, the market value of Apple Inc. is $534.22 billion. The market value of Alphabet Inc. (Google) is $499.67.

That’s a gap of $34.55 billion or, in other words, right around $8 billion more than the current value of Sony Corp.

Let’s pause here to let that fact really sink in.

Okay, now after being momentarily eclipsed due to the vagaries of the market, which generated a veritable avalanche of news articles, Apple quickly reassumed the throne as the world’s most valuable company.

You’d think this would be big news. Or at least equally as big. Close to as big? Somewhere in the ballpark, at least?

It’s not.

Here’s are the results Google News and Bing News searches for the following terms:

Bing:
• Apple retakes market cap lead – 272,000 results
• Alphabet takes market cap lead – 746,000 results
• Google takes market cap lead – 1,710,000 results

272,000 vs. 2,456,000. Of the total news stories Bing found involving market cap lead for Apple, Alphabet or Google, the number reporting Apple’s return to #1 account for 9.97%.

Google:
• Apple retakes market cap lead – About 1,160 results
• Alphabet takes market cap lead – About 42,400 results
• Google takes market cap lead – About 842,000 results

1,160 vs. 884,400. Of the total news stories Google found involving market cap lead for Apple, Alphabet or Google, the number reporting Apple’s return to #1 account for 0.13%.

MacDailyNews Take: Yet more proof that the media in general is biased against Apple Inc.

Here’s a better measure of how valuable each company really is:

Apple vs. Alphabet revenue (2008-2015) (in billion U.S. dollars)
Revenue comparison of Apple and Google from 2008 to 2015 (in billion U.S. dollars)

Apple vs. Alphabet net income (2008-2015)

Apple vs. Alphabet net income (2008-2015)
Source: Wolfram Alpha

SEE ALSO:
Apple again the world’s most valuable company – February 3, 2016
Alphabet Inc. surpasses Apple, now the world’s most valuable company – February 1, 2016

17 Comments

  1. This is nothing new, the media does not like Apple at all. There are so many negative articles out there against Apple on daily basic. Someone got to be behind this campaign, and someone got big paid for writing many negativities against Apple. Journalists don’t do it for free. Apple against the whole world. If they did not attack the products, they would attack the CEO’s bedroom. They stooped so low. While there are not many articles mentioned any Google losing billion of dollar on moonshots or losing money on acquiring of Motorola.

    1. You only have to check out the trolls who come on here to see just how rooted this prejudice is. Never have understood how a company like Microsoft with the shear evil they perpetrated on the masses still gets the soft touch. But I shouldn’t be perhaps, Apple has always been an outsider refusing to play ball with the establishment and the traditional powers that be. That can not be said of Microsoft who’s tentacles are still everywhere to the point unless you are powerful you leave well alone if you want to get on and Google is rapidly taking on a similar mantle. And because Apple is generally a competitor to Western companies (particularly large ones) whereas the other two have them on a leash even where uncomfortably so its not surprising that they have powerful commercial allies in a way that Apple certainly does not.

  2. This is just like the days of when Microsoft was always treated with kid gloves, and still is, where their failures aren’t ever mentioned. Googles “moonshots” are generally failures, and when something fails spectacularly like Google glass, they say it was an experiment and they get a pass… It’s complete bullshit. Wall Street complains that Apple is too dependent on the iPhone, but they don’t use the same criteria for Microsoft being dependent on office/Windows, or google being dependent on advertising. It’s a rigged game and it goes back to Steve never playing ball with financial analysts, or reporters. Plus some other companies basically bribing reviewers and the like.

  3. The last 3 days are one of those major AAPL / GOOGL inflection points where I suspect that people have sold massive amounts of peak GOOGL and put it into oversold AAPL. I know people who own one or the other, and people who own both. I know people who just hold and people who hit the sell button whenever one of the stocks peaks and buy the other one low. If you look for these points to sell GOOGL high and buy AAPL low, and vice-versa, and do this in a tax free roth IRA account, you would be wise.

    1. As I wrote elsewhere about GOOGL’s price diving in the past two days…

      Traders who pumped up GOOGL over the past six months are going to start dumping the stock. That was a 40% jump in six months. There was no other reason for such a jump except to inflate the price for an eventual sell off. This isn’t investing, it’s trading.

      It’s no coincidence that right around the same time traders started dumping AAPL, they start pumping up GOOGL. Soon after AAPL hit its low, GOOGL hit its high and now on its way back down.

      Alphabet’s quarterly financials aren’t as rosey as everyone thinks. As soon as all the schmucks bought on the “good” news causing the stock to jump, all the traders started dumping.

  4. Looking at the two charts in this article it’s obvious that AAPL with much better revenue growth and profit growth from 2009 to the present has a much higher P/E ratio than GOOG/ALPHABET. Oh, wait, no, it seems GOOG/ALPHABET has a much higher P/E ratio than AAPL. Either the charts are wrong or else Wall St. is insane. I’m going with the latter.

  5. The media is driven by the need to get page views and fill the airwaves 24/7. There are only rewards for being first, none for being correct or thoughtful. So they have no real meaning.

  6. A lot is said about Wall Street’s bias against Apple, but it’s interesting to think about Mass Media bias. I believe many readers will enjoy the book “Addicted to Distraction: Psychological Consequences of the Mass Media” by Bruce G. Charlton. He makes a convincing case for the Mass Media being an entity that has taken on a life of its own. It’s driven by destroying traditional structures in a type of permanent revolution from the status quo.

    In this context Apple doesn’t provide enough “newness” and “change” even though they make great products. Google’s “moon shots” are more provocative and exciting precisely because they are fantasy-based, not like boring, incrementally improved iPhones, even if they sell by the boatload.

    1. Very interesting, it’s harsh to live in a reality, so we’re yearning or escaping to fantasy even for one minute.
      Or I fancy that someday, I’d win $10 million dollars lotto and a great lover who love me till death do us apart. 🙂

    2. I do agree, but the fact of the matter is, Wall St. reacts to negative Apple RUMORS all the time. If they do indeed listen to the rumor mill, then they would also “know” Apple is pretty much investing and researching in a lot of things Google is doing as well. So, there’s really no rhyme or reason to it, is there? And even more mind boggling, if those Apple rumors do happen to come true, more often than not, Apple produces a successful product from it.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.