Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Jan 24, 2013, 12:42 PM   #76
oplix
macrumors 6502a
 
oplix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
the way it really works is that stock price is artifically driven down so that the rich can capitalize on low price opportunities. that's why you constantly see rebounds.
__________________
iPhone 5 32GB White 7.1.2 JB | Mid-2010 13" Macbook Pro | Apple TV 2g JB | Custom-built 2500k 4.8ghz GTX 680
oplix is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2013, 12:43 PM   #77
flux73
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: May 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by KnightWRX View Post
Media content is a small margin market. Apple is already in it, look at what its netting them, 3-4% of their revenue.



There's the 3rd scenario you're forgetting : the smartphone market will reach saturation at one point as it reaches maturity. Then where does the growth come from ? Remember, the reason the stock is down today is because Apple showed a stalled profit growth.

With 56% of their revenues depending on the smartphone sector and penetration already being 55% of the big markets for the segment, it means potential growth going forward might not be there. That's one of the big reasons you see Apple trying to expand into markets where smartphone penetration is still very low (India, China, Brazil) :

Thumb resize.

----------



The problem is we're discussing growth. You need to understand that the iPhone can't keep growing at the same pace as it did in the past with current market realities such as segment saturation, market penetration and current markets Apple operates in.

Then there's the fact that emerging markets might not show the same explosive growth that more established markets did when switching from feature phones to smartphones.

So really, going forward, iPhones being such a big part of the pie can end up hurting Apple on the growth front, which is the very reason they were hurt yesterday, the numbers were great, but signaled some stalling as far as potential growth goes.

Apple grew too much, too quickly and now the signs that the growth can't be sustained are showing (and frankly anyone who thought Apple could sustain such growth was living in a dream world).

Anyway, what's with the defensiveness gnasher ? What are you gaining here by twisting the facts around to make it seem Apple doesn't need to fix things ?
I respectfully disagree that market "saturation" is a problem. If that were the case, all the car and TV manufacturers would be considered crappy businesses. Smartphones have the added advantage in that the churn rate is much higher than cars or TV's. I don't see a problem with the iPhone comprising 56% of their revenue as long as Apple can maintain the base and from what I can see, odds are pretty good. Growth of iPhones is not the problem. It's what they plan to do with that huge base of users via software.

I realize that it's only anecdotal evidence, but among my non-techie friends, all of them plan on getting a new iPhone when their contracts with the 4 or 4S is up. I know a few people who have switched from Android to iOS. I don't know anyone who's gone the other way. Obviously there are. I'm just saying that I think the inflow outnumbers the outflow. Yes, the Android marketshare is growing, but that's because the pie is getting bigger, not because the iOS base is shrinking. If there's ever evidence of the base shrinking, I'll worry then.

Furthermore, I don't even think the US market is saturated. T-mobile has yet to announce their partnership with the iPhone, but it's definitely coming. And I believe it will happen without subsidies and that Apple will announce a similar financing program as the one have now for China. After all, most people are financing their iPhone without realizing it, except they continue to pay the higher rate after the phone has already been paid off and they're STILL locked to the carrier.

IMHO, as I alluded to above, selling iOS devices is just the first step in the long game with the purpose of establishing a large unified user base (like Facebook, but with profits). Once you have that large base, everything you do is suddenly magnified by a hundreds of millions. It's a virtual certainty that Apple is working on ways to monetize that user base because companies will want access. iAd, Passbook are what I view as early experiments by Apple to see how effectively they can monetize.
flux73 is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2013, 12:46 PM   #78
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hobe Sound, FL (20 miles north of Palm Beach)
Quote:
Originally Posted by AZREOSpecialist View Post
IMHO Apple would have a great 2013 if they would just give us a bigger screen to compete with the larger Android phones and a revamped iOS that gives us more and better features than Android. That shouldn't be too difficult for a company that is sitting on a $150B cash stockpile. Yet the perception is that Apple is sitting on its laurels - which I don't believe for one single second.
Apparently, I didn't make the point clear enough. I'm not saying newer version of old "next big things" are not needed. They are. They are needed to keep up the slope of revenue growth that they support. So yes, we need new versions of existing major contributors to Apple revenue & profit: that's new iPhones, iPads, iPods and Macs.

My point is that that this is not enough now to maintain record growth. New versions of existing NBTs are a given but Apple is now selling to the whole world and there are not markets beyond global markets (yet). In addition to those updates of old NBTs (iDevices + Macs), I'm saying they need a truly new NBT that is not a variation of an iDevice or a Mac. A different size, color, level of thinness, screen, etc is not enough to keep the record growth slope as steep as it has been.

None of this says Apple is doomed or is going to crash & burn. But if you don't maintain the slope of growth, AAPL must come down. Investors go where the accelerating profit potential is... and other companies will show the steeper slope to draw them away from AAPL. No big deal- that's how it's always been. But if we're interested in AAPL returning to record highs, we need Apple to roll out the next big thing (that is not one of the existing big things tweaked or refined) and roll out great new version of existing NBTs too. They've milked the existing NBTs for several years now. The milk doesn't keep achieving blowout records forever.
HobeSoundDarryl is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2013, 12:51 PM   #79
Rogifan
macrumors G3
 
Rogifan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryth View Post
Yep....

I wish Apple would take some of that cash and buy up a ton of the stock back.

Fundamentals are more sound then any company out there.

The true 'bubble' is GOOG and MSFT...both don't have rosy futures.
You forgot Amazon. And people think only Steve Jobs sold kool-aid.
__________________
"I have a very optimistic view of individuals. As individuals, people are inherently good. I have a somewhat more pessimistic view of people in groups." -- Steve Jobs , Wired interview
Rogifan is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2013, 12:52 PM   #80
Oletros
macrumors 603
 
Oletros's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: PremiÓ de Mar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryth View Post
Yep....

I wish Apple would take some of that cash and buy up a ton of the stock back.

Fundamentals are more sound then any company out there.

The true 'bubble' is GOOG and MSFT...both don't have rosy futures.
Why Google don't have a rosy future?
__________________
There are four kinds of lies: Lies, damned lies, statistics, and analyst projections.
Oletros is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2013, 12:55 PM   #81
Ryth
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by flux73 View Post
I respectfully disagree that market "saturation" is a problem. If that were the case, all the car and TV manufacturers would be considered crappy businesses. Smartphones have the added advantage in that the churn rate is much higher than cars or TV's. I don't see a problem with the iPhone comprising 56% of their revenue as long as Apple can maintain the base and from what I can see, odds are pretty good. Growth of iPhones is not the problem. It's what they plan to do with that huge base of users via software.

I realize that it's only anecdotal evidence, but among my non-techie friends, all of them plan on getting a new iPhone when their contracts with the 4 or 4S is up. I know a few people who have switched from Android to iOS. I don't know anyone who's gone the other way. Obviously there are. I'm just saying that I think the inflow outnumbers the outflow. Yes, the Android marketshare is growing, but that's because the pie is getting bigger, not because the iOS base is shrinking. If there's ever evidence of the base shrinking, I'll worry then.

Furthermore, I don't even think the US market is saturated. T-mobile has yet to announce their partnership with the iPhone, but it's definitely coming. And I believe it will happen without subsidies and that Apple will announce a similar financing program as the one have now for China. After all, most people are financing their iPhone without realizing it, except they continue to pay the higher rate after the phone has already been paid off and they're STILL locked to the carrier.

IMHO, as I alluded to above, selling iOS devices is just the first step in the long game with the purpose of establishing a large unified user base (like Facebook, but with profits). Once you have that large base, everything you do is suddenly magnified by a hundreds of millions. It's a virtual certainty that Apple is working on ways to monetize that user base because companies will want access. iAd, Passbook are what I view as early experiments by Apple to see how effectively they can monetize.
The market is definitely not saturated...that's a myth. Apple has so much growth potential in the US and the world, especially Asia it's absurd. Samsung/Android should be scared especially as the iPhone moves to the LTE carriers and China Mobile.

Plus the upgrade cycle of a smart phone is every 2 years or so vs every 5 or so for a car and even more for appliances.

The issue is these analysts are clueless and would rather see 'new' customers vs 'returning'...which essentially is the same thing but to them it's different. Growth is what they want. Not revenues.

Imagine if there are say 50 million total smart phone users and Apple has 25 million and the competition has the other 25. If Apple takes say 20 million and then has 40 million and the competition 10 million the next year..the stock market looks at Apple and goes...Apple can only grow another 10 million...that's not good. EVEN THOUGH Apple is pulling in 40 million customers revenue. If Apple then got all 50 million customers..the stock market would then go..there is no more growth potential for Apple in smart phones and would go negative on it...even though Apple would have literally locked up 100% of revenues.

That's how stupid Wall Street is.
Ryth is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2013, 12:56 PM   #82
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hobe Sound, FL (20 miles north of Palm Beach)
Quote:
Originally Posted by tknelson View Post
Let's see... 2010-2007 = 3 years.
2012 - 2010 = 2 years.

Needed? Methinks you are being a little unrealistic.
Not at all. Let's try it again...

iPod (2001)
iPhone (2007) 6 years later
iPad (2010) 3 years later
Needed next big thing (2012) 2 years later

The point was that if any company is going to maintain crazy record growth year after year so that it's stock price is going to go ever-higher at a rapid clip, it's pace of rolling out big innovations must accelerate over time.

In other words, Apple could ride iPod's contribution for about 6 years to grow to where they were when iPhone launched. iPod + iPhone fueled records thereafter. Then iPad rolled out to throw more fuel on that fire just 3 years later. iPods, iPhone & iPads pushed Apple to records (and pushed AAPL to $700).

Funny thing about blowout results year after year though. It takes more and more core product success to replace last year's results before you even have a chance of building on top of last year's numbers. Thus, the need for a new, next big thing a bit faster than the time between the prior NBT and the one before it.

And yes, per my beliefs here, that would mean they needed a NBT in 2012 and then would need another in late 2013 (1 year). And in 2014, they would need 2. And so on.

Else, a giant company selling a finite market (earth in this case) the same small bundle of products will eventually reach a point where they're selling just about everyone who wants one and still not able to blow out last year's numbers to achieve new records (to drive the stock to new records). Thus, the need for a new NBT to add to the pool of products to pile a fresh bundle of revenues & profits on top of those yielded by the existing product mix.

Apple missed the launch window and AAPL is paying for it. Hopefully, whatever was hopefully planned to go in 2012 is just about ready to surprise in early 2013.
HobeSoundDarryl is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2013, 12:59 PM   #83
Rogifan
macrumors G3
 
Rogifan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by HobeSoundDarryl View Post
None of this says Apple is doomed or is going to crash & burn. But if you don't maintain the slope of growth, AAPL must come down. Investors go where the accelerating profit potential is... and other companies will show the steeper slope to draw them away from AAPL. No big deal- that's how it's always been. But if we're interested in AAPL returning to record highs, we need Apple to roll out the next big thing (that is not one of the existing big things tweaked or refined) and roll out great new version of existing NBTs too. They've milked the existing NBTs for several years now. The milk doesn't keep achieving blowout records forever.
Investors are eating up Amazon though they've been waiting forever for these phantom profits. When it comes to tech stocks I don't see much that's rational out there. Do Apple's results really warrant an 11% drop in the stock especially considering its been on a downward trajectory basically since September? Did anything came out yesterday that wasn't already priced into the stock? Seems to me it's panic overselling not based on rational thought but based on emotion. Or people just like kicking someone when they're down.
__________________
"I have a very optimistic view of individuals. As individuals, people are inherently good. I have a somewhat more pessimistic view of people in groups." -- Steve Jobs , Wired interview
Rogifan is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2013, 01:01 PM   #84
KnightWRX
macrumors Pentium
 
KnightWRX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Quebec, Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by flux73 View Post
I respectfully disagree that market "saturation" is a problem. If that were the case, all the car and TV manufacturers would be considered crappy businesses. Smartphones have the added advantage in that the churn rate is much higher than cars or TV's.
The problem is we're not discussing about sustaining sales and profit. We're talking about growth. What caused the stock to drop today is Apple showing signs of simply going to a sustaining mode. AAPL has been hailed as a growth stock and its traded as a growth stock.

Would AAPL transition to a car manufacturer that's essentially "sustaining sales" (with slow growth as families expand slowly from 1 to 2 to 3 vehicules average, which is years in the making) ? Would that work in the tech sector, a sector that's been about growth for the last 40 years ?

The fact is, you can disagree that lack of growth potential is a problem for Apple, I don't disagree there, Apple can very much be healthy without massive growth, but Wall Street and the people investing in the stock don't see it that way.

And as such, Apple's administrators are stuck trying to keep growth going, trying to expand their offerings where they can and how they can to not reach a plateau of sales that'll result in their transition away from a growth stock.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryth View Post
Plus the upgrade cycle of a smart phone is every 2 years or so vs every 5 or so for a car and even more for appliances.

The issue is these analysts are clueless and would rather see 'new' customers vs 'returning'...which essentially is the same thing but to them it's different. Growth is what they want. Not revenues.
You call the analysts clueless, but then you say that "returning" customers are growth. They're not. Only new customers are growth, anything else is simply sustaining the current numbers.
__________________
"What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others."
-- Pericles
KnightWRX is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2013, 01:11 PM   #85
Ryth
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oletros View Post
Why Google don't have a rosy future?
  • Clicks are down
  • Click revenue is down
  • Continually losing money on mobile deal with Motorola.
  • Apple moving into Asia where Android has it's last stronghold.
So basically Google is working harder for less of a profit on their main business (search/advertising) and their last Android sandboxes where Apple hasn't entered are about to be breached. LTE carriers and China Mobile.

We've all seen what happens when the iPhone goes on to a new carrier. Last quarter in the USA on the major 2 carriers (Sprint sold 1.7 million iPhones but can't find their total smart phone sales)

- AT&T sold 10.1 million smart phones. 8.1 million were iPhones. 80% of AT&T smart phones sales were Apple.

- Verizon sold 9.3 million smart phones. 6.2 million were iPhones. 66% of Verizon smart phone sales were Apple.

So Apple has a massive majority of all sales on AT&T and the majority of sales on Verizon.

It's going to happen here shortly with T-Mobile where Android has the advantage since T-Mobile doesn't sell the iPhone.

It's obvious..the facts are there. When the iPhone comes to a carrier, it becomes the dominant sale of that carrier.

So do you see why GOOG future isn't too rosy?

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by KnightWRX View Post
The problem is we're not discussing about sustaining sales and profit. We're talking about growth. What caused the stock to drop today is Apple showing signs of simply going to a sustaining mode. AAPL has been hailed as a growth stock and its traded as a growth stock.

Would AAPL transition to a car manufacturer that's essentially "sustaining sales" (with slow growth as families expand slowly from 1 to 2 to 3 vehicules average, which is years in the making) ? Would that work in the tech sector, a sector that's been about growth for the last 40 years ?

The fact is, you can disagree that lack of growth potential is a problem for Apple, I don't disagree there, Apple can very much be healthy without massive growth, but Wall Street and the people investing in the stock don't see it that way.

And as such, Apple's administrators are stuck trying to keep growth going, trying to expand their offerings where they can and how they can to not reach a plateau of sales that'll result in their transition away from a growth stock.

----------



You call the analysts clueless, but then you say that "returning" customers are growth. They're not. Only new customers are growth, anything else is simply sustaining the current numbers.
Sorry but they are clueless because any logical person would take up 100% locked up revenues year over end vs growth. Locking up a market is what a company wants. Revenues should be all that matters. Growth doesn't matter once you have the market locked. The only thing growth matters to is a new competitor or for a new product (and for some, a new iPhone or iPad is considered a "new" product and should actually be considered a new growth/product chain).

Myself buying an iPhone the first time and myself buying a new model two years later is the same thing. I can't help it a bunch of morons on Wall Street like to classify them differently or try to view them differently because they aren't. My $$$ is the same thing both times. Same revenues. Going to the same company.

What they should be concerned about is not growth. It's revenues.
Ryth is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2013, 01:14 PM   #86
Oletros
macrumors 603
 
Oletros's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: PremiÓ de Mar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryth View Post
Clicks are down
Click revenue is down

Clicks are up and click revenue is up. Cost per click is what was down and it was better than expected. Have you read the quarter results?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryth View Post
Continually losing money on mobile deal with Motorola.
And lowering the loses. Have you read the quarter results?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryth View Post
Apple moving into Asia where Android has it's last stronghold.


We've all seen what happens when the iPhone goes on to a new carrier.
Have you seen how Apple and Android is doing outside USA?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryth View Post
So basically Google is working harder for less of a profit
Revenue up and profit flat, where I have seen that?
Oletros is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2013, 01:15 PM   #87
adildacoolset
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Lusaka, Zambia(If you know where it is)
Quote:
Originally Posted by crackbookpro View Post
The unfortunate things is - Apple has to make a change. They have to offer a cheaper iPhone now, because Android has started to saturate the market through cheap adoption of cheap smart phones.

I really wish Apple never signed the 4-5yr exclusive with AT&T way back in '07... it only gave way to this now. This is 5 years in the making now...

GOOGLE IS A BUNCH OF POSERS!

Now, Apple has to make a cheap iPhone for the masses... just you all wait. I hope Tim mentions this to his fell Appleinions... SJ would be pissed if here now, and somehow get the market back in his favor - Android is gaining momentum.
They have to offer a cheaper iphone just like how they had to offer netbooks. What's next? Maybe Mercedes Benz should start making budget cars. Or Hugo boss should start making budget clothing. Heck, call Rolex to start making children's watches that teach them to tell the time.

My point is that companies make their names by what they stand for
adildacoolset is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2013, 01:15 PM   #88
Ryth
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post
Investors are eating up Amazon though they've been waiting forever for these phantom profits. When it comes to tech stocks I don't see much that's rational out there. Do Apple's results really warrant an 11% drop in the stock especially considering its been on a downward trajectory basically since September? Did anything came out yesterday that wasn't already priced into the stock? Seems to me it's panic overselling not based on rational thought but based on emotion. Or people just like kicking someone when they're down.
You're exactly right and not crazy.
Ryth is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2013, 01:19 PM   #89
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hobe Sound, FL (20 miles north of Palm Beach)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryth View Post
Imagine if there are say 50 million total smart phone users and Apple has 25 million and the competition has the other 25. If Apple takes say 20 million and then has 40 million and the competition 10 million the next year..the stock market looks at Apple and goes...Apple can only grow another 10 million...that's not good. EVEN THOUGH Apple is pulling in 40 million customers revenue. If Apple then got all 50 million customers..the stock market would then go..there is no more growth potential for Apple in smart phones and would go negative on it...even though Apple would have literally locked up 100% of revenues. That's how stupid Wall Street is.
If you sell your product to 100% of the people that want it, there are no more buyers. Yes, they may be repeat buyers next year, but there is no more growth (unless you are going to raise prices and still magically keep them all). Investors invest in companies with growth potential. If you are presented with an investment in a company and that company can tell you that everyone who wants one of what they sell already has purchased one, why are you going to invest?

In such a situation, the dividend becomes the profit potential of the investment and other companies pay higher dividends than Apple (on stock that costs a lot less than AAPL stock). The dividends are "ho hum" in a market where other stock prices can rise much quicker and some pay good dividends too.

For example, the dreaded Facebook FB stock was around 18 when AAPL was still in the stratosphere. An investor in FB needs it to rise to only 36 to make 100% on their money. An investor in AAPL needed it to rise to $1400 to make the exact same return. Which seemed more doable? FB has now risen to about $30 while AAPL has fallen to about $460. The FB investor aiming for a double needs $6 more dollars in gains. The AAPL investor needs nearly $940 in gains. Which seems more likely now?

Lastly, I don't recall people finding fault with Wall Street Analysts projections when AAPL was on the rise. Just now are they so "stupid" because we can't possibly find fault with Apple itself here. It's got to be someone else making something bad happen to Apple (like "patent system is great" when Apple is winning patent cases- "Die Samsung Die", but "patent system is stupid" when Apple is losing patent cases). The analysts want AAPL to rise as fast and as far as any of us (because they are paid from a flow of commissions which are more easily made by people buying than people selling); that's why there is such an overwhelming bias to "buy" vs. "sell" from Wall Street in general.

My suggestion: recognize that AAPL is not an Apple product. Loyalty to Apple products is very different than loyalty to a stock. Investors are finding better opportunities elsewhere (and thus selling a stock at potentially huge profits to go buy some other stock). When Apple can do things that gets AAPL upside roaring again, they'll flock right back. Investors are simply trying to make money. Blind loyalty to a stock has wiped out many a paper profit.
HobeSoundDarryl is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2013, 01:24 PM   #90
Ryth
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oletros View Post
Clicks are up and click revenue is up. Cost per click is what was down and it was better than expected. Have you read the quarter results?
Yah and they were only better due to a longer holiday season. Lets see Q2. And yes I mean to say clicks up revenue down hence the work harder for less.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Oletros View Post
And lowering the loses. Have you read the quarter results?
So lets continue to celebrate less of a loss...gotta love Wall Street logic. Meanwhile Apple stockpiled 16 billion more with no losses anywhere.




Quote:
Originally Posted by Oletros View Post
Have you seen how Apple and Android is doing outside USA?
Yah..great wherever they have the same presence as Android. The issue again is Apple isn't in every sandbox while Android is and at all price points. We'll see what happens shortly won't we...36 new LTE carriers, T-Mobile and China Mobile.




Quote:
Originally Posted by Oletros View Post
Revenue up and profit flat, where I have seen that?
You tell me.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by HobeSoundDarryl View Post
If you sell your product to 100% of the people that want it, there are no more buyers. Yes, they may be repeat buyers next year, but there is no more growth (unless you are going to raise prices and still magically keep them all). Investors invest in companies with growth potential. If you are presented with an investment in a company and that company can tell you that everyone who wants one of what they sell already has purchased one, why are you going to invest?

In such a situation, the dividend becomes the profit potential of the investment and other companies pay higher dividends than Apple (on stock that costs a lot less than AAPL stock). The dividends are "ho hum" in a market where other stock prices can rise much quicker and some pay good dividends too.

For example, the dreaded Facebook FB stock was around 18 when AAPL was still in the stratosphere. An investor in FB needs it to rise to only 36 to make 100% on their money. An investor in AAPL needed it to rise to $1400 to make the exact same return. Which seemed more doable? FB has now risen to about $30 while AAPL has fallen to about $460. The FB investor aiming for a double needs $6 more dollars in gains. The AAPL investor needs nearly $940 in gains. Which seems more likely now?

Lastly, I don't recall people finding fault with Wall Street Analysts projections when AAPL was on the rise. Just now are they so "stupid" because we can't possibly find fault with Apple itself here. It's got to be someone else making something bad happen to Apple (like "patent system is great" when Apple is winning patent cases- "Die Samsung Die", but "patent system is stupid" when Apple is losing patent cases). The analysts want AAPL to rise as fast and as far as any of us (because they are paid from a flow of commissions which are more easily made by people buying than people selling); that's why there is such an overwhelming bias to "buy" vs. "sell" from Wall Street in general.

My suggestion: recognize that AAPL is not an Apple product. Loyalty to Apple products is very different than loyalty to a stock. Investors are finding better opportunities elsewhere (and thus selling a stock at potentially huge profits to go buy some other stock). When Apple can do things that gets AAPL upside roaring again, they'll flock right back. Investors are simply trying to make money. Blind loyalty to a stock has wiped out many a paper profit.
I understand their definition of growth. It's just not logical.

If a person is a repeat customer of a new model, many people feel that should be considered 'growth' because it's not the same model. And I believe that is the correct way to classify tech..especially mobile tech.

Actually lots of people had issues with the analysts when Apple was on the rise. Just go out and look at Apple 2.0 blog on CNNMoney. The amateur analysts were killing Wall Street and basically showing how out of touch they were with Apple and their products. Now those same Wall Street analysts are over estimating.

And yes APPL the stock is not the same as APPLE the company. We know that.
Ryth is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2013, 01:27 PM   #91
tknelson
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by HobeSoundDarryl View Post
Not at all. Let's try it again...

iPod (2001)
iPhone (2007) 6 years later
iPad (2010) 3 years later
Needed next big thing (2012) 2 years later

The point was that if any company is going to maintain crazy record growth year after year so that it's stock price is going to go ever-higher at a rapid clip, it's pace of rolling out big innovations must accelerate over time.

In other words, Apple could ride iPod's contribution for about 6 years to grow to where they were when iPhone launched. iPod + iPhone fueled records thereafter. Then iPad rolled out to throw more fuel on that fire just 3 years later. iPods, iPhone & iPads pushed Apple to records (and pushed AAPL to $700).

Funny thing about blowout results year after year though. It takes more and more core product success to replace last year's results before you even have a chance of building on top of last year's numbers. Thus, the need for a new, next big thing a bit faster than the time between the prior NBT and the one before it.

And yes, per my beliefs here, that would mean they needed a NBT in 2012 and then would need another in late 2013 (1 year). And in 2014, they would need 2. And so on.

Else, a giant company selling a finite market (earth in this case) the same small bundle of products will eventually reach a point where they're selling just about everyone who wants one and still not able to blow out last year's numbers to achieve new records (to drive the stock to new records). Thus, the need for a new NBT to add to the pool of products to pile a fresh bundle of revenues & profits on top of those yielded by the existing product mix.

Apple missed the launch window and AAPL is paying for it. Hopefully, whatever was hopefully planned to go in 2012 is just about ready to surprise in early 2013.
Except Apple is already priced lower than other mature tech stocks. So, even with minimal to moderate growth, the stock is already undervalued. P/E of 10 is just silly and the stock is oversold.
tknelson is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2013, 01:28 PM   #92
Oletros
macrumors 603
 
Oletros's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: PremiÓ de Mar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryth View Post

So lets continue to celebrate less of a loss...gotta love Wall Street logic. Meanwhile Apple stockpiled 16 billion more with no losses anywhere.




Yah..great wherever they have the same presence as Android.
Now it is clear that you don't know what your talking about. Have a nice day.
__________________
There are four kinds of lies: Lies, damned lies, statistics, and analyst projections.
Oletros is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2013, 01:30 PM   #93
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hobe Sound, FL (20 miles north of Palm Beach)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post
Investors are eating up Amazon though they've been waiting forever for these phantom profits. When it comes to tech stocks I don't see much that's rational out there. Do Apple's results really warrant an 11% drop in the stock especially considering its been on a downward trajectory basically since September? Did anything came out yesterday that wasn't already priced into the stock? Seems to me it's panic overselling not based on rational thought but based on emotion. Or people just like kicking someone when they're down.
Amazon is an entirely different proposition. What makes up the bulk of Apple revenues? You can name the handful of products. What makes up the bulk of Amazon revenues? You would have to talk in broad categories or you'll be talking a very long time. Amazon can't feel much pain if any single product they sell would be significantly harmed by new competition. For example, a Samsung-like competitor could easily publish a better book (but Amazon sells millions of different books), or they could publish a Kindle-like tablet, but Amazon doesn't really even need Kindle, etc. More simply, Amazon's product mix is ridiculously diversified compared to Apple who's "biggest company in the world" revenues might be seen as hanging on just 2 product lines (iDevices & Mac).

Is there panic overselling on AAPL? Sure. Hype & hope are a big part of a stock's price. When hype & hope thin, people exit. As people sell, others reach their price threshold and they sell. And down it goes. This has happened over and over with countless stocks over even the last decade. It's not the world saying Apple is bad, Apple products are bad, Samsung is better, iPhones are crap, or anything like that.

Some AAPL investors are just saying, "been a great ride to here, I'm stepping out now." With stocks, there's plenty of fish in the sea. People can cash out of a long-term high flyer and into what they hope will be the next high flyer. Should Apple roll out some new goodies that starts blowing out records again, they'll cash out of other stocks and come back into AAPL.

I think too many of us are seeing AAPL stock like we see Apple products and we're applying brand loyalty to it as if falling AAPL stock is people calling our precious iDevices bad or something like that. Not the case at all. In fact, it's very simple. Even at this level, AAPL will need to run to about $930/share to generate a double. That means they have to beat an all time record by more than $200. There's plenty of other stocks that could double by rising only $10 or $30. To investors, it can look easier to double their money on other stocks than to double their money on AAPL over the short-term.

Is AAPL a bad investment right now? Only if you bought higher than this and it keeps falling while you keep holding onto it. Is it a bad buy right now? Only if you buy it and it falls while you hold it. Looking at AAPL as some kind of proxy of whether Apple products are good or bad is misplaced loyalty. A stock is just a stock. There's lots of others in which to invest that don't need to rise $460 to yield a double.
HobeSoundDarryl is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2013, 01:32 PM   #94
designs216
macrumors 65816
 
designs216's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Down the rabbit hole
I wonder what it must be like to address a group of employees and know that their effort for the quarter has created a bonus for me that exceeds the combined collective salary of nearly the every sub-mgmt employee in the company. As a secondary thought, I already have more than I can possibly spend.
designs216 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2013, 01:34 PM   #95
KnightWRX
macrumors Pentium
 
KnightWRX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Quebec, Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryth View Post
Sorry but they are clueless because any logical person would take up 100% locked up revenues year over end vs growth. Locking up a market is what a company wants. Revenues should be all that matters. Growth doesn't matter once you have the market locked. The only thing growth matters to is a new competitor or for a new product (and for some, a new iPhone or iPad is considered a "new" product and should actually be considered a new growth/product chain).

Myself buying an iPhone the first time and myself buying a new model two years later is the same thing. I can't help it a bunch of morons on Wall Street like to classify them differently or try to view them differently because they aren't. My $$$ is the same thing both times. Same revenues. Going to the same company.

What they should be concerned about is not growth. It's revenues.
Sorry, but in this case, the analysts are right. 2.65$ dividend per share is not going to result in massive growth for investors, which in this economy is what you want.

Without growth of the stock price and a small dividend, investors are losing money even if Apple stays even. You have to remember one thing about investments : anything that has lower return than inflation is losing you money, even if it is getting more valuable. You have to beat inflation.

Apple stock does (Dec '11 - Dec '12 resulted in a massive 32% growth off the top of my head, and that's with Dec '12 being at 515$/share, not the 52 week high of 700$) still beat inflation, but moving forward, if they don't find a way to sustain growth, their stock being a growth stock will stop growing itself, which will hurt investors if Apple doesn't up dividends to compensate.
__________________
"What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others."
-- Pericles
KnightWRX is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2013, 01:38 PM   #96
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hobe Sound, FL (20 miles north of Palm Beach)
Quote:
Originally Posted by tknelson View Post
Except Apple is already priced lower than other mature tech stocks. So, even with minimal to moderate growth, the stock is already undervalued. P/E of 10 is just silly and the stock is oversold.
You can't look at it that simply. There's plenty of stocks with P/E lower than AAPL. Does that mean they are even better investments than Apple? Even with "minimal to moderate growth" of their businesses should apply just as well.

It looks like AAPL has turned into a fair dividend stock for now for those that refuse to sell it. It's hard to grow into the biggest company in the world AND keep the growth curve roaring to run the stock to record highs year after year. No company has ever done that before and sustained it forever. Not even the monopolies of Standard Oil or AT&T could pull that off. Can Apple grow from here? Sure. Can AAPL rise from here? Sure. Will AAPL roar back to $700 and beyond in the near term? Only time will tell. But history does show that it is often a much faster fall than a rise when it comes to stock prices.

My best guess: until Apple rolls out a truly new, next big thing (that is not a variation of a Mac or iDevice) that becomes another iPhone or iPad-like "must have", the existing mix of products (and their future variations) are not enough to fuel growth of AAPL back to $700 and beyond. I entirely believe that Apple needs a new next big thing to mix into the product lineup to give us all something entirely new that we feel compelled to also buy (while we update our iDevices every year or so and buy a new Mac every other year or so). What is that thing? I don't know... but I have great doubts a television is going to do this job.
HobeSoundDarryl is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2013, 01:41 PM   #97
Blu-Ray
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Colorado
Quote:
Originally Posted by adildacoolset View Post
They have to offer a cheaper iphone just like how they had to offer netbooks. What's next? Maybe Mercedes Benz should start making budget cars. Or Hugo boss should start making budget clothing. Heck, call Rolex to start making children's watches that teach them to tell the time.

My point is that companies make their names by what they stand for
Budget may not be the right word, but Mercedes is "broadening their customer base" LINK

By the way, anything interesting come out of the town hall meeting?
__________________
If a MOD sees this, feel free to change my username to BagOfHurt.
Blu-Ray is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2013, 01:46 PM   #98
iGrip
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Send a message via ICQ to iGrip Send a message via AIM to iGrip Send a message via MSN to iGrip Send a message via Yahoo to iGrip Send a message via Skype™ to iGrip
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRumors View Post
Apple CEO Tim Cook has sent out an email to employees (via 9to5Mac) congratulating them on the performance and announcing an employees-only town hall meeting scheduled for today.

Can you say "desperation"? How about "fear of losing key employees"?
iGrip is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2013, 01:54 PM   #99
Ryth
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oletros View Post
Now it is clear that you don't know what your talking about. Have a nice day.
Only Wall Street celebrates losing less money then before. In the real world, no one would be celebrated for that.

Wall Street is irrational and illogical and we all know that is factual. It's a rigged game and is basically legalized gambling with manipulation by the largest funds and managers.

The world would be much better off without it.
Ryth is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2013, 01:54 PM   #100
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hobe Sound, FL (20 miles north of Palm Beach)
Quote:
Originally Posted by blue rocket View Post
Here's the sad truth about Apple:

"Apple Shares Down 11 Percent on Fourth-Most-Profitable Quarter Posted by Any Company Ever"

...the 4th most profitable quarter posted by any company, in the history of time... and it's still not impressive enough.
Explore the concept of "priced into the shares". Over the last year, AAPL has roared up to over $700 per share. A hugely profitable quarter was priced into helping it get all the way up there.

The problem is not how much they made but how much they expect to make going forward. Apple has blatantly admitted that its growth is maturing and investors are choosing to cash out to chase faster growth with other stocks. That's what is driving AAPL down. It's been a great ride to $700. There's plenty of seats on other rides aiming for similar, fast growth to the moon. It's no cost to switch from the AAPL rocket to some other potential rocket but the commission to exit one trade and enter another. Over about the same time period that APPL has fallen from $700 to $460, FB has risen from about $18 to $30. $6 more dollars and that's a double for those who jumped on it at $18. Apple would need to go to about $930 from here to deliver a double.

Even if Apple had announced the most profitable quarter ever- not fourth... #1- what investors wanting to buy would need to hear is that the next quarter and year are going to grow even that much faster. Apple couldn't write that check so they are going to take profits or cut losses and go ride some other ride that seems more favorable along those lines.

Some of you guys seem to be taking it personally... like someone has called Apple products bad or something. One should not confuse brand loyalty with stock investing. You can buy shares of stock because Apple decided at some point that it would rather sell the stock for cash rather than keep it a private company. And if Apple thought AAPL was a great buy right now, it could take a big chunk of the cash hoard and buy a bunch of AAPL itself right now (which would drive the price up). But even Apple is not seeing enough value in AAPL shares to spend cash laying around doing nothing on it's own stock. Get over it. AAPL pieces of paper are not an iPhone or iPad. Nobody is arguing that Samsung pieces or paper are better than Apple pieces of paper.
HobeSoundDarryl is offline   1 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Tim Cook Auctions Charity Lunch Meeting at Apple HQ MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 35 Apr 26, 2014 10:26 PM
Video of Tim Cook's Lunch Meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Gives Inside Look at Apple HQ MacRumors Mac Blog Discussion 37 Mar 9, 2014 04:24 PM
China Mobile Confirms Another Recent Meeting Between Chairman and Apple CEO Tim Cook MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 42 Aug 1, 2013 10:06 PM
Tim Cook Offering Coffee Meeting at Apple HQ in Charity Auction MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 126 Apr 25, 2013 04:05 PM
Tim Cook Addresses Apple Employees After Lawsuit Victory MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 518 Sep 16, 2012 10:45 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:01 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC