I Bought Apple

There are some people that just love to take in wounded birds and believe that somehow that can nurse the poor wounded creature back to health. For some sainted few that is their “raison d’etre.”

I bought shares of Apple (AAPL) this morning after it was wounded by downgrades from Bank of America (BAC), UBS (UBS), Piper Jaffray (PJC) and Credit Suisse (CS).

You’re welcome, but I’m not saint. I certainly can’t be categorized as an “Apple lover.” Neither the products nor the shares have had consistent appeal for me, but the subjectivity is out of place when it comes to capitalizing on opportunity.

Clearly, this opportunity stems from the high profile downgrades. Such downgrades confirm for me that there is greater value placed on not missing out on potential gains than there is in protecting portfolios from disappointments.

Recent history has not given strong indication that Apple shares will rally after product launch events, particularly as the quality of the leaks regarding the “news” seem to get better and better. There are few, if any, upside moving surprises. In fact, one wouldn’t be terribly far off base to suggest that the sum total of predictions of what will be announced easily exceed the capability of squeezing all of the new options into a single device. As a result there is always bound to be someone leaving the party disappointed.

For those further expecting the announcement of new relationships, such as in China, there has to be some thought that the downside to disappointment may likely exceed the upside of what may already be partially built into the price.

Yet, protecting a client’s assets takes a back seat.

My basic understanding of math tells me that it’s more difficult to recover from a $5 loss than it is to find an opportunity to make $5 in place of the opportunity you missed.

But with a short-sighted view of what the future holds, analysts have created opportunity, just perhaps not for their clients.

I almost never buy shares without concomitant sale of option contracts, but in this case I listened to my own advice from just a few weeks ago when Carl Icahn entered into the picture.

In addition to now having a more favorable entry point to re-establish a position that was recently assigned, so too does Apple find itself in a better position to further implement its buy-back program. There’s no shortage of money still unspent in that program and there may be more added to the bucket.

No doubt this will be a topic of Icahn and Tim Cook’s upcoming dinner, which Icahn confirmed a few days ago would be this month.

But now that the product offerings are well known, they have no doubt been dissected by many who can extol or pan the virtues and relative value of the innovations. To attempt to analyze the advances incorporated into the iPhone 5c and 5s is somewhat meaningless with regard to short term investing, which is all I hope to ever do.

What I hope to do is turn shares into short term realized profit vehicles. For that reason I don’t dwell on the possibility that the fingerprint reader may be an entry way into mobile secure commerce solutions.

What I dwell on is how likely is Apple to withstand this onslaught and then I’m likely to sell call options into price strength, as I expect a bounce in shares, particularly as Syria is temporarily off the table.

Apple will continue being an incredible cash machine with these new devices. Argue about their price points as much as you want, argue about cannibalization, too. The reality will be that the phones will fly off the shelves and tie up the consumer base for another year or two. After all, it’s not just about selling product, it’s also about making certain that your consumer base is effectively barred from going to the competition without the burden of additional cost.

I’m still a product holdout, but the rest of my family isn’t, some of whom only joined the parade this week.

Scoff at the superficial changes, but Apple knows better than most others that bold colors will not only drive new sales. but will instantly help distinguish itself in the hands of one adolescent as another is watching.

While everyone enjoys talking about “the big picture,” today’s downgrades and market reaction have been anything but mindful of that more encompassing view.

This is what opportunities are made of, despite the fact that risk shares the same parent. Having been very critical of Apple over the past 15 months, and questioning why people had not taken profits before they evaporated, I’ve nonetheless found a number of opportunities over that time to re-establish short term positions. In the past the drivers of those decisions were predominantly based upon option premiums and dividends. This time, however, the catalyst is share appreciation as the market will realize that its immediate reaction was unwarranted.

Microsoft: What Would Munger Do?

For a company that many have said represents nothing but “dead money,” Microsoft (MSFT) has certainly been up and kicking lately.

Fresh off the post-Ballmer resignation news and subsequent rally, Microsoft shares gave back everything in this day’s trading, as it announced plans to purchase its smart phone partner, Nokia (NOK).

Nokia itself is no stranger to having been left for dead, as it’s one-time dominance has seen it eclipsed by Apple (AAPL) in sales, and by others in perceived technological prowess.

In executing a purchase of Nokia it also started speculation that they were in effect “buying” their one-time employee, Stephen Elop, most recently CEO of Nokia, as a prime candidate to be Ballmer’s successor.

I say “most recently” because Elop has stepped down as CEO of Nokia so as not to give the appearance of Nokia actually being the superior party in the deal, in the event that Elop becomes Microsoft’s new CEO.

While Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.A) has no current position in Microsoft, the ties between their founders, Warren Buffett and Bill Gates, respectively, is well know and runs deep, much like a river, which is coincidentally the origin of the name “Nokia.”

Buffett’s less known partner, Charlie Munger, who is almost 90 years old, is rarely in the public eye. He is, however, a legendary investor who takes a back seat to no one. When asked the secret to his success his reply was simply “I’m rational. That’s the answer. I’m rational.”

Today, that seemed to be in short supply, as news came out of Microsoft’s $7.2 Billion deal. The immediate reaction in share price was to drop market capitalization by about $17 Billion.

That seems irrational, perhaps as irrational as a similar increase in market capitalization barely a week ago when Ballmer announced his plans.

WWMD? What Would Munger Do?

For me, that was reason to purchase shares, just as Ballmer’s resignation announcement was reason to sell shares. I was willing to pick up new shares had Microsoft fallen back to $33, never expecting an opportunity to occur so quickly in the absence of a general market meltdown.

As with most of my holdings the Microsoft shares were covered with options. In this case the $33 strike price was eclipsed, but buying back the options at a loss was rational, because the share price accelerated more than did the “in the money” premium. In those rare occasions that I do that, I always sell the shares as soon as the options positions are close. To do otherwise invites the possibility, or with my lick, the probability that the underlying shares will drop just as quickly as they rose, thereby making it a losing proposition all around.

Of course, you might also make the case that you wouldn’t have expected a major deal, such as this one to have occurred under the leadership of a lame duck CEO, but Microsoft is no ordinary company and Steve Ballmer is no ordinary CEO. Whatever talk you may hear about “the law of large numbers,” there is no denying that those large numbers allow you to act with a certain amount of impunity and have a greater long term vision.

That’s the rational thing to do.

Tellingly, the decision to consummate this deal was made without informing ValueAct Capital Management of the decision. The activist shareholder was just informed that they would be receiving a seat on the Board of Directors, but they were not in the loop on this deal. Besides, how rational would it have been to let a 1% equity stake get in the way?

However, even if the Nokia purchase follows in the path of other Microsoft initiatives and its purchase is written off in its entirety, the $7 Billion purchase price is of little significance to Microsoft and presents a far less liability than it seems on the “Surface,” which is in its own liability category.

To start, the funds for this purchase are from cash held overseas. Unless there is a sudden change in United States corporate tax laws, those funds sit idly, reducing the Price to Earnings ratio. The only use for the funds is further overseas investment. The $7 Billion being spent on Nokia represents approximately 10% of Microsoft’s overseas cash. Even if Ballmer goes on a wildly drunken global spending spree it would be incredibly difficult to make a dent in that overseas pile.

For their money Microsoft escapes US taxes and receives tax advantages related to the purchase. The taxes saved alone are approximately $1.5 Billion had they repatriated the money. Additionally any expenses incurred in the United STates further reduce tax liability.

But there is more to the deal to offset the cost that just financial optics and tax engineering. The margins on Lumina units will jump from approximately $10 for software royalties to $50 for hardware. With a projected sale of 30 million units net revenue just increased by $1.5 Billion. Again, in absolute terms that’s not much for Microsoft, but relative to the cost of the Nokia purchase, it is substantial.

What is clear is that what we now think of as smart phones, in some form or another, will evolve into our personal computers. Without a strategy to be part of that evolution money in the bank is insufficient to ensure continued relevance.

Google (GOOG) gets it and secured their foothold with Motorola, a cell phone manufacturer that had also seen better and more heady days, but with a great patent portfolio. Microsoft is now making a commitment to go down a similar path and also securing potentially valuable patents along with the manufacturer of 80% of the Windows OS phones on the market.

I’ve long liked Microsoft because of its option premiums when utilizing a covered call strategy and its recent history of dividend increases. The company is widely expected to announce yet another dividend increase, but even at its current rate of nearly 3% it is far ahead of the mean yield for S&P 500 companies, even when considering only those that pay dividends.

WWMD?

It would be presumptuous to pretend to know, but Microsoft at the currently irrationally depressed level appears to be poised to out-perform the broad index and is preparing itself to leave behind its reactive ways for what we all know to be a lucrative communications market.

Just ask Verizon (VZ).

Disclosure: I am long MSFT. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Additional disclosure: I may add additional shares of MSFT

Dividends

I received a very nice text message from a subscriber this morning.

I think that if I’m ever in the market for a publicist for Option to Profit, my search need go no further.

His message, in its entirety was “Option to Profit: Come for the premiums, stay for the dividends.”

My guess is that he’s been seeing a stream of dividends coming in lately. Today alone had Lorillard, Weyerhauser and Molson-Coors.

Some of you know that I have mixed feelings about dividends and am not really a big fan.  (I Don’t Understand Dividends and The Myth of Dividends) but as long as there appear to be some pricing inefficiencies in option premiums when dividends are about to be paid (Double Dipping Dividends), why would you want to pass up that opportunity?

I’ve been increasingly putting an emphasis on dividends as market volatility has declined, in order to increase over all yield and I have to admit that I don’t mind receiving those brokerage alerts telling me when a dividend check has been deposited into my account (Dividends? Forget DRIP and Go PRIP).

Because of my belief in attempting to exploit those pricing inefficiencies when they appear is why I send out queries on ex-dividend mornings for those positions that were in the money at the time of going ex-dividend. It’s all about collecting the data and validating the strategy and the information that so many of you regularly provide is very helpful and appreciated.

I’ve been looking for a good way to express the OTP portfolio’s dividend yield for a while but it’s difficult to really get a good fix and one that accurately depicts the reality, especially if seeking to project annual return.

Since I like to compare everything to the S&P 500 Index, it makes sense that I do the same for dividend yield.

Currently the average S&P 500 stock offers a 2.06% dividend yield. However, that is impacted by the 82 stocks in the index that pay no dividends.

So for the 412 dividend paying stocks in the index, the average yield is 2.46%. In 2012 the average dividend paying stock had a 2.7% yield. The current year’s lower yield reflects generally higher stock prices.

If you look at the Weekly Performance spreadsheet you may have noticed for the past two months or so some calculations on each page that assesses dividend yield of open positions and projects that yield on an annual basis.

I had not been planning on saying anything about those spreadsheet scribblings until the end of the year, until having received this morning’s message.

The good news is that with increased data collection the model for creating projections is beginning to resemble reality.

The better news is the reality.

The dividend yield for positions closed in 2012, all 272 of them was 2.9%

Thus far the yield for positions closed in 2013 is 2.7%

Both of those reflect all positions and not just those paying dividends. As a result the gap is 0.7% and in a very favorable direction.

At the moment, not including new purchases this week, the remaining open positions in the OTP portfolio are delivering an annualized dividend yield of 2.9%, again that includes both dividend and non-dividend paying positions.

For those that are a bit more traditional than I am and have long appreciated dividends I finally see your perspective as those account credits have been adding up.

Jumping Into the Market

Maybe coincidentally, but over the past two days I’ve had a number of subscribers mention that they had a large amount of cash to invest.

That isn’t unusual. Whether as a result of a 401k rollover, an inheritance or just having sat on the sidelines for a while or saving up for just the right moment, it happens.

Additionally, looking at a market that seems to be able to fight off any attempts to make it back down makes people want to be a part of the fun and that means putting to money into play and to work at the same time.

And you know what? It is fun, at least until you lose some money.

I have always believed that we all come pre-packaged with bad luck and that we have to take actions to minimize the bad luck. Admittedly, it’s not really about luck but rather bad judgment, emotions or other factors that somehow seem to conspire to get in the way of forward progress.

For those with a big pile of cash and the inclination to put the money into the stock market I don’t really think there is anything like a good time or a bad time. I think it’s always a good time, as long as you follow some rules.

  • What are your objectives?

Everyone should have identifiable objectives. Are you seeking to create income streams in addition to capital appreciation? Are you looking to generate capital appreciation and are less concerned about income?

If you’re going to be selling covered options understanding what it is that you hope to achieve will determine, to a degree, what kind of strike prices you may utilize and what portion of your shares held will be hedged with option sales.

 

  • What are your goals?

Once you know what you are seeking in broad terms, quantifying those objectives is a good idea.. Whether it’s on the basis of comparing performance to an index or whether your income stream meets your needs, goals are the report card necessary to know whether you’re on the right path.

 

  • Don’t put all of your money in at once

Part of that feeling that bad luck is pervasive is the belief that If I had a big lump sum of money to invest I would probably do so at the very peak of the market and the following day my big lump sum would be that much less.

Most everyone empathized with the George Costanza character on Seinfeld when he finally came to the realization that he was far better off doing exactly the opposite of what his instincts led him to do.

I suppose that it is possible that the very next day the market could sky rocket, but ask yourself, given your luck, which direction do you think that it would go if you made the commitment?

That’s what I thought.

 

  • Keep some money back in reserve

When looking to put a large amount of money to work the first thing I think about is how much I want to keep in reserve in the event of a sudden decline in stock prices that may represent an opportunity. Even though you’re thinking about putting your money to work, simply think of reserve cash as a sector that is part of an overall strategy to be diversified.

To make this simple, lets talk about a hypothetical $100,000 that’s begging for a home.

 

  • Don’t invest your rainy day fund

Let’s also assume that this is purely discretionary money. That is, there is virtually no chance that you would have to turn to it to meet an expected or even an unexpected expense. I’ve made that mistake and I never want to make it again. In fact, when I made the mistake the market was at unheard of levels in October 1987. No one in his right mind thought that we would ever look backward again. It was a time of incredible optimism and freely flowing margin.

 

  • Don’t use the financial world’s answer to “Hamburger Helper”

Don’t use margin. Leverage is for other people, like those who buy options. I hate to harp on the concept of luck, but you just know that as soon as you start to leverage up will be the very moment that the market heads lower. The use of margin just serves to magnify your losses and you get to pay interest for that privilege.

Normally, I have been 100% invested over the past years,  aiming to end each week with a 20-40% turnover of portfolio from assignments and then quickly re-investing that money. But the past few months I’ve tried to bring my cash up to a 40% level at the end of each option cycle and have then proceeded to try and get the level down to about 25-30% cash. That’s because I want at least 25% cash in the event of unexpected opportunities. You may have a different amount to keep in reserve, but whatever it is, keep something. In hindsight, there’s probably very little reason to ever be fully invested.

So let’s use that amount in this example, such that of the original $100,000, I would seek to keep $25,000 available for unforeseen bargains.

 

  • Have a timeframe for your investment strategy

That means I have $75,000 to invest, but next I need to know over what period of time I want to funnel the money into the market. Doing so is the same as the well known “dollar cost averaging” technique. But you really need to have the discipline not to chase the market if it keeps going higher and you have to resist throwing all of your money in because you’re afraid of missing out. That’s called “FOMO,” the fear of missing out. It’s like envy and is definitely one of the seven deadly sins.

To make the math easy, let’s just assume that I want to have my $75,000 fully invested over a period of 5 weeks.

That means that I can commit $15,000 each week to new positions (or to add to existing positions).

 

  • Be diversified by sector

The first thing that you may see is that $15,000 isn’t that much to begin a diversified investment plan.

The next issue that becomes part of the equation is just how do you achieve diversification when you’re just starting out. That’s especially true if you’re also selling options, because there is a minimum number of shares that need to be purchased, yet your funds may be limited.

For those selling options, there’s also a good chance that your brokerage rewards you with lower total commissions per contract based on the number of contracts transacted.

Pricing power is always nice but sometimes purchasing more than 100 shares of a specific stock may put you over that $15,000 weekly limit.

More importantly, putting all of your weekly eggs into a single stock puts you hostage to that stock and leaves you entirely undiversified.

In such situations, I think you’re better off giving up some pricing power on commissions, accepting a lower ROI in return for being able to buy more than a single stock with your weekly allocation.

Again, think about your luck. The stock or the sector that you would have happily thrown all of your money toward may have picked just the wrong time to fall out of investor favor. Unless there’s a  generalized market downturn, the chances of picking two out of favor sectors just before they go out of favor is less likely, even with your luck.

And when I say “your luck,” I mean my luck, too.

 

  • Be diversified by risk

Part of having a diversified portfolio is not only doing so by sector, but also by risk.

For example, you know that I classify selections as either being “TRADITIONAL” or “MOMENTUM.” The TRADITIONAL category encompasses shares that are less likely to have minute to minute gyrations, or at least are more likely to revert to their mean more quickly than a MOMENTUM kind of stock.

Think of Dow Chemical as a TRADITIONAL stock and Abercrombie and Fitch as a representative MOMENTUM stock. Although Dow Chemical is currently trading with a “beta” of 1.58, as opposed to Abercrombie and Fitch’s 1.30, that measure of volatility is somewhat misleading, as anyone owning both knows that Dow Chemical will typically let you sleep more soundly at night.

Certainly their respective option premiums tell the story. Dow Chemical is simply less risky. Do you want a portfolio full of Dow Chemicals or do you want a portfolio full of Abercrombie and Fitchs?

When you set up your portfolio give strong consideration to having the risk profile of your holdings reflect your own temperament for risk.

 

  • Don’t stress over predictable gyrations

Stock prices go up and stock prices go down. It’s a very predictable process.

The Biblical story goes that whenever King Solomon felt extremely happy or extremely sad, he would look at his ring, which was engraved with the expression “This too shall pass.”

If the gyrations bother you, consider using longer term duration option contracts. For example, a large adverse move in share price may create less anxiety when there is a monthly contract with weeks to go as opposed to a weekly contract with only a day left until expiration. Plenty can happen over the course of weeks, while it’s much less likely that significant movement will happen in a single day.

 

  • Have an exit plan

For those exercising a buy and hold strategy the conventional wisdom has always been that the individual investor rarely knows when to exit a position, whether to take profits or limit losses.

There is relatively little conventional wisdom that I agree with, but this is one of the ones that I can’t find fault with. Among the things that I love about covered options is that you define an exit strategy as soon as you open the position. It’s called the strike price.You define your ROI and your time frame, although it doesn’t always work out as planned.

But in the world of “Buy and Hold,” it’s not just that the individual investor doesn’t know when to exit, neither does their investment advisor. That’s especially true when it comes to locking in profits and less so when it comes to exiting losing positions.

Professional advisors typically use a variation of the old Bernard Baruch axiom that you should liquidate positions when they hit 10% losses.

That’s great, but of course, you know that with our luck that is the precise time that the stock begins its recovery.

Again, look at enough stocks and you’ll notice that most don’t stay depressed forever. In hindsight, how many times have you sold shares at a loss and then watched them recover?

While you’re doing that little mental exercise, how many times have you watched your paper gains evaporate and then come back and maybe evaporate again? It’s as if taking profits is a bad thing.

Now add another piece of pessimism to the mix. What makes you believe that the same person that selected a loser of a stock that is now down 10% suddenly has the skill and intelligence to exchange that stock for a winner? With my luck I tend to think that I would simply exchange it for something that was about to begin its price descent.

I don’t abide by the Bernard Baruch rule, but that has potential consequences. Some stocks simply don’t recover or take a very long time to do so and may also become non-performing assets.

I generally sell big losers in order to take advantage of tax codes that allow a portion of the losses to receive favorable tax credits, but that may not be appropriate for everyone or for every kind of account.

So set your own limits. Is it 10%, 15% 25%? But whatever it is, apply it consistently. Don’t fall prey to using a rational thought process to decide which to sell and which to keep.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wintel for the Win

There was a time that most everyone who had a computer knew exactly what the word “Wintel” meant.

The combination of Microsoft (MSFT) and Intel (INTC) vanquished the competitors. You don’t hear or see too many Commodore, Tandy or Kaypro computers these days running on their own operating systems, or at all, for that matter. The combination became especially potent after MS-DOS became simply the shell for the graphic user interface that Microsoft was luckily able to render from Apple (AAPL) for nothing more than the cost of a legal defense. Although Advanced Microdevices (AMD) computer chips are still finding their way into lower priced computer systems, others, such as Cyrix and Zilog have long since ceded the computer microprocessor space to Intel.

The timing couldn’t have been better. If you’re going to be at the top of the competitive heap what better time than during a phase of tremendous marketplace growth? The real heyday of “Wintel” began with the introduction of the Windows 95 operating system and the mass production of cheaper hardware by the likes of assemblers like Dell (DELL) and Gateway, who back during that era never manufactured a machine with anything other than a Microsoft operating system and an Intel chip.

Wintel. Windows and Intel.

While Apple and its operating system powered by varied IBM (IBM) and Motorola (MSI) chips may have been, according to devotees, a far superior consumer product, it’s market penetration was no more than a nuisance to the Wintel alliance.

But as so often happens with size comes complacency and perhaps losing sight of events going on where your toes used to be. Add to that an occasionally less than inspired leadership and supremacy can devolve into mediocrity.

Not seeing or not being adequately nimble enough to recognize and react to the revolution in personal computing, beginning with the smartphone and then the tablet, Microsoft and Intel both ceded ground to Apple and smaller chip manufacturers in markets that hadn’t previously existed. Those new markets also had the ability to cannibalize existing markets, particularly for personal computers.

Whether Qualcomm (QCOM), ARM Holdings (ARMH) or others, the mobile and tablet markets erupted with neither a “win” nor a “tel” along for the ride.

The past decade has been a veritable wasteland for both Microsoft and Intel with regard to their perceived place in consumer technology. Although Apple Computer successfully transitioned to Intel processors, they didn’t look to Intel for its explosive growth in the mobile market and for the new tablet market. When you’re the size of Intel, the addition of Apple computers to your stable isn’t the kind of stimulus that’s going to push the needle very much. It certainly wasn’t enough to fuel growth.

That’s not to say that neither Microsoft nor Intel have stood still in their own technological and product advances or taken the opportunity to expand into new areas, such as gaming consoles. But their stranglehold on households has diminished during an era when “eco-system” has become the new buzzword replacing “Wintel.”

But faster than you can say “Moore’s Law,” the landscape is changing, yet again, as it appears that Apple is now the one having some difficulty remembering where its toes are located. For more than a decade the very essence of engineering marvels that also captured the consumer’s fancy, Apple has slowed down and has become susceptible to competition.

Unless you have been hiding in a cave you haven’t seen the onslaught of Microsoft ads on television and in movie theaters. They are now pushing their own eco-system in tablets, smartphones and computers, as well as in the gaming world. Less well seen are the acquisition of data centers and ventures to move software into the cloud, including an impending partnership with Oracle (ORCL).

It was once a Windows world and Microsoft is addressing the convergence of the PC, laptop, tablet and communication devices through a singular operating system in order to ensure that it remains a Windows world, with or without Intel. Retaining control of that niche is far more important than capturing a nascent mp3-player market. Success of the Zune wasn’t necessary for continued sales of the Office Suite, but maintaining supremacy of the personal computing and tablet market is required in order for that cash cow to keep the enterprise afloat. It is far more important to get this battle won than some earlier generation diversions.

Even more of a signal of commitment toward the future is the rumored restructuring of Microsoft that will place greater emphasis on hardware as Microsoft takes control of its own destiny in support of vehicles to propagate its software platforms.

Borrowing a page from Ron Johnson, who was credited with the success of the Apple stores, and who didn’t survive his tenure as CEO at JC Penney (JCP) to see the store within a store concept play out, Microsoft, along with Samsung (SSLNF.PK) is employing the concept within a resurgent and re-energized Best Buy (BBY), putting itself directly in the eyes and into the hands of the buying public.

While Intel is no longer Microsoft’s sole and unqualified partner in their new ventures, their future is increasingly looking brighter than it has in years.

Intel is now under the new leadership of an individual who breathes operations, following a period of listless direction that was in sharp contrast to the great vision and leadership that had previously marked Intel’s executive offices. The announcement earlier in the year that Samsung, the very same company that has been eating away at Apple’s place in consumer’s hearts, had selected Intel for its new line of tablets should serve notice that Intel is back.

Add to that the growing presence of Intel chips in smartphones, including those made by Motorola Mobility, which is now owned by Google (GOOG), and you have the largest of the mobile phone operating systems able to be run by a new generation of Intel chips and easily transferred into Android tablets, as well.

Take that ARM.

Thus far both Intel and Microsoft have outperformed the S&P 500 in 2013.

In 2012 Microsoft continued to receive its share of disparaging comments by analysts taking delight in referring to it as “dead money.” Those jeers ended when shares surpassed $30 at which point everyone seemed to climb aboard. Of course that heralded the end of the upward climb. In 2013 very much the same phenomenon was repeated when shares again broke through the $30 barrier and it again became acceptable to admit that Microsoft was part of your portfolio.

I do not currently own shares but am anxious to purchase them once again if share price returns to the $30 level, as I have used Microsoft as an annuity for years, collecting dividends and premiums from having sold options.

Intel is a bit of a different story. While it too has traded in a fairly narrow range and hasn’t been terribly exciting unless collecting dividends and option premiums, I think that it is fair priced at current levels and would add additional shares below $25.

While the world may no longer be quite the Wintel world it was 10 years ago, as a stock investor, Wintel is a winning combination even if they are going increasingly their own separate ways in the consumer marketplace.

Individually or together, Microsoft and Intel can serve as linchpins of a portfolio, if you’re ready to go for the win.