Analysts Eyeing Record Highs for Apple's Stock Price, Rushing to Raise Price Targets

[lincolntran]

Most analysts = iSheep

On the other hand, most analysts = anti-apple.

Most news articles are trying to create controversial issues about Apple to generate page view. They always try to blow tiny issues in to imaginary huge problems that all hell will break loose if Apple don't fix it. Examples are: antenna gate (only a very small fraction of users effected), stock price changes (Apple is doomed), new device designs (Apple lost it blah blah), etc.

 

[GeneralChang]

If you are serious, could you link to this plugin?

It’s a Firefox plugin called Fox Replace, so if you’re using Firefox you could check it out (I don’t assume most people on here are using Firefox, so I won’t bother to link to it, but if you search for Fox Replace on their plugins browser it’s easy to find).

It’s actually configurable, and you can have it replace any text on any page with whatever you want. It’s stated purpose is for replacing curse words and expletives, but I’ve got it doing the analyst replacement, changing “bird” to “dinosaur” for kicks, and about a dozen other things to make reading online a little more spontaneous. I got the idea from an XKCD comic, so credit where credit is due.

 

[Small White Car]

Ya lost me there.

Analysts do talk about more than stock price. That number is a function of their forecasts for sales, revenues and earnings.

If that were completely true then a computer program could replace them and the stock market would be easy to invest in.

Of course those things are all relevant to them and they'll talk about them, but they're only a small part of it all. As you noted, the profits were great last year and the stock was down.

 

[SusanK]

Backtracking the new innovation from Apple

So if we are really, really lucky we may get back to where we were two years ago. All it took was a little market risk and a lot of wasted opportunity.

 

[alitarbegshe]

And the cycle continues.

On an industry built on short term volatility, it takes heed not to take anything as said too seriously.

Speculation is as speculation, playing on FUD.

Seeing market sentiment swing one end to the other, with no real change to the underlying numbers? (, which has always been sound)

Tis a fools errand and to no semblance to reality


But watch people lap it up, eager to cash in. And then be the first to complain when it all goes south.

 

[rmatthewware]

Most analysts = iSheep

Nope. Most analysts are concerned with making money. They aren't so much interested in how Apple does as much as they are interested in buying and selling at the best time.

 

[ownamac]

AAPL target = $84

I'm buying more at $85 or below.

 

[rmatthewware]

incremental updates do not create stock value in a over saturated mobile market

nor does a do nothing head of retail

nor does an over hyped stupid wearable no one "needs"
(people need phones they don't need a watch)

nor does an iMac with the speed and power of a mobile device

AAPL target = $84

Every industry makes incremental updates year after year. The only reason smart phones evolved so fast is that they were new. At this point a smart phone has reached a near-maximum of features considering these limitations: size, price, battery life.

Also, most electronics feature incremental updates, and their companies do just fine: TVs, cameras, refrigerators, cars. Video game consoles don't change year after year, the Xbox releases were 2001, 2005, and 2013; Playstation releases were 1994, 2000, 2006, and 2013; Nintendo releases were 1985, 1991, 1996, 2001, 2006, and 2012.

And the mobile market isn't over-saturated. Even if everyone has a smart phone, most people replace theirs every 2-3 years. There is plenty of market there, as well as emerging markets in Brazil, India, and China, among others.

As for the do-nothing retail head, she's only been in the job for two months. You should wait at least three months before you call for her resignation.

You complain about wearable tech that no one needs, but you also complain that Apple isn't innovating. Which is it? You can't have it both ways. And when it comes to what people need or don't need, people don't need smart phones, let along cell phones. People don't just buy what they need. They buy what they want and the market will determine what they want. Steve Jobs didn't look at the world and ask what it wanted. He looked in the mirror and asked what he wanted. And it mostly worked well.

And the low-power iMac? It's a desktop with the power of a Macbook Air, which is sufficient for a lot of people. It's a desktop that's priced for people who just need a good computer, without having to spend the money on a higher-end machine. There's nothing wrong with offering products with various price points and specifications. You can still buy the other iMacs.

 

[kerrikins]

incremental updates do not create stock value in a over saturated mobile market

nor does a do nothing head of retail

nor does an over hyped stupid wearable no one "needs"
(people need phones they don't need a watch)

nor does an iMac with the speed and power of a mobile device

AAPL target = $84

I'm sure that everyone will listen to you over the actual stock analysts who make their living doing it.

If Apple *doesn't* have a bumper year this year I will be surprised.

 

[The Barron]

Big Mistake

incremental updates do not create stock value in a over saturated mobile market

nor does a do nothing head of retail

nor does an over hyped stupid wearable no one "needs"
(people need phones they don't need a watch)

nor does an iMac with the speed and power of a mobile device

AAPL target = $84

Apple will never see $84 again unless it splits again when it hits $300 and sees more resistance.

 

[The Barron]

They Woke Up.

Aren't these the same people who were trashing Apple not that long ago?

Many analysists saw the train leaving the station with their company's credibility, hence the quick turnaround. "All aboard!"

 

[IJ Reilly]

If that were completely true then a computer program could replace them and the stock market would be easy to invest in.

Of course those things are all relevant to them and they'll talk about them, but they're only a small part of it all. As you noted, the profits were great last year and the stock was down.

Now you've really lost me. The stock was not down last year, it was up by more than 50%. You also can't replace analysis with a computer program. Not that I care much what the analysts say one way or another, but I do still know that they are estimating how much revenue and earnings will come from anticipated products. They are looking 6-12 months down the road.

It is actually very easy to invest in the stock market, so long as you aren't trying to outguess it, which unfortunately is what most people try to do (and lose). You see it here all the time, buy at this price, sell at that price. Trying to time the markets. This is a very bad idea for individual investors, and even worse as advice given to others.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

incremental updates do not create stock value in a over saturated mobile market

nor does a do nothing head of retail

nor does an over hyped stupid wearable no one "needs"
(people need phones they don't need a watch)

nor does an iMac with the speed and power of a mobile device

AAPL target = $84

Incremental updates do not create stock value in an over saturated mobile market unless those incremental updates keep selling by the millions with a $200+ per unit profit.

nor does an over hyped stupid <insert product consumers are unaware they need here> unless that product actually is bought by millions of customers at a 30% profit margin.

nor does an iMac with the speed and power of a mobile device unless that iMac cost Apple nothing additional to manufacture and is chiefly intended for elementary school educational market where further discounts are given and which keeps Macs in schools and the Apple brand on kid's minds... so they will "ask" their parents for their own Macs and iPads and iPhones.

AAPL target -- based on likely actual 3Q earnings $105. Easily.

 

[Limboistik]

Of course they would raise their targets, so they can pump the stock up as much as they can before they dump it after earnings report

 

[IJ Reilly]

And the cycle continues.

On an industry built on short term volatility, it takes heed not to take anything as said too seriously.

Speculation is as speculation, playing on FUD.

Seeing market sentiment swing one end to the other, with no real change to the underlying numbers? (, which has always been sound)

Tis a fools errand and to no semblance to reality


But watch people lap it up, eager to cash in. And then be the first to complain when it all goes south.

Of course they would raise their targets, so they can pump the stock up as much as they can before they dump it after earnings report

Blech. I have to wonder how so many people seem to not remember or perhaps never knew that Apple's earnings had actually declined for three quarters running. Yet they still feel compelled to comment on why things happen, and lacking any command of facts, think that vague conspiracy theories will do just as well.

 

[Small White Car]

Now you've really lost me. The stock was not down last year, it was up by more than 50%.

What part of 2013 was 50% up from 2012? I'm looking at the chart and I'm just not seeing it.

I see a chart where 2012 hit $100 and where 2013 spent the year going from $75 to $80. That sure seems "down" to me when comparing the 2 years.

 

[bawbac]

Just like a pimple, it's not if it will pop but when, which usually happens unexpectedly.

 

[IJ Reilly]

What part of 2013 was 50% up from 2012? I'm looking at the chart and I'm just not seeing it.

I see a chart where 2012 hit $100 and where 2013 spent the year going from $75 to $80. That sure seems "down" to me when comparing the 2 years.

First of all, you said "the last year," which to me meant the last twelve months. The stock was at $60 at the beginning of July 2013 and is at $93 now. That is a gain of over 50%. If you prefer to measure during the current calendar year, it was priced at $79 at the beginning of January, which is a gain of nearly 18% today. During the calendar year 2013 the return was about 5%, despite the fact that this time period includes the 18-month low hit in April coming off the all-time high in September 2012.

 

[Small White Car]

First of all, you said "the last year," which to me meant the last twelve months.

You may have mixed me up with someone else's post because my sentence was talking about the stock price in the past, not the present.

I said "the profits were great last year and the stock was down" by which I meant "the profits were great in 2013 and the stock was down in 2013 from what it was at prior to 2013."

 

[IJ Reilly]

You may have mixed me up with someone else's post because my sentence was talking about the stock price in the past, not the present.

I said "the profits were great last year and the stock was down" by which I meant "the profits were great in 2013 and the stock was down in 2013 from what it was at prior to 2013."

You may have meant something else, but this what you said:

The last year has been a 'down' year for Apple.

Anyway, we seem to be talking at cross purposes.

I would describe only the last couple of quarters as being good (not great), and three before that as being flat or down, YoY. And as I said, the stock was not down in calendar 2013, it was actually up. Not by a lot, but not down.

 

[akm3]

I'm sure no one takes investing tips off a public forum, but even so, don't sell APPL now. This is a terrible time to sell. Buy or hold.

How is selling at or near a 52 week high a TERRIBLE time to sell?

I personally am holding, but when the analysts all go gaga for AAPL it usually is a sign they've all already bought and it will go sideways for awhile.

 

[SHNXX]

Although I'm long apple, I worry when all the analysts are bullish on the stock.

 

[nebo1ss]

There is such a wide range of prices that someone has got to be right.

 

[IJ Reilly]

How is selling at or near a 52 week high a TERRIBLE time to sell?

I personally am holding, but when the analysts all go gaga for AAPL it usually is a sign they've all already bought and it will go sideways for awhile.

No, not really. Trying to time the markets is a big mistake. Sell when you've met your own investment goals, not because of what anyone else says, or for any other arbitrary reason.

Although I'm long apple, I worry when all the analysts are bullish on the stock.

Do you know what the analysts were saying about the stock during the huge bull run of 2004-12? Unless you can answer that question, you shouldn't be worrying about what the analysts are saying today.

 

[SHNXX]

No, not really. Trying to time the markets is a big mistake. Sell when you've met your own investment goals, not because of what anyone else says, or for any other arbitrary reason.



Do you know what the analysts were saying about the stock during the huge bull run of 2004-12? Unless you can answer that question, you shouldn't be worrying about what the analysts are saying today.

I don't worry about it much.
I just don't take it to be a positive sign.

But apple is still a great company and the valuation numbers are not too high so I see no reason to sell the stock at this point.