Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I just don't expect smartphones to change dramatically year over year. I also don't expect normal users to change their smartphone more often than every two year (or when they break or lose their phone, a not insignificant number by itself). The question isn't how good is iPhone 5S compared to i5, because I don't think the vast majority of i5 owners will be on the market when i5S is launched. The question is how does the i5S compare to the other premium phones on the market. I think it will compare very nicely as I believe we now know most of the premium Androids for 2013 and I believe the i5s will compare very nicely to the HTC One and the GS4. As long as Apple can hold its 20% of the smartphone market at its premium prices, I see no issues.

Also, I believe the tablet market is going to be bigger than the phone market eventually. "Normal" for the middle and upper class folks in the world will be to own one phone and three or four tablets. Just like "normal" is now to have a computer at work and a computer at home.

If the upgrade from the 5 to 5S is similar to the 4 to 4S, I don't see Apple holding a lead over the competition. I've seen the HTC One and it is a nice phone. IMO, the iPhone 5 looks dated next to it.
 
You should have seen the conspiracy nut jobs at CNN who thought Samsung's illuminati connections shorted Apple's stock. It was the funniest thing ever.
Also, notice how the most paranoid people own Apple products. Alex Jones and Rush Limbaugh come to mind. Is there something about Apple products that entice weirdos and the black helicopter crowd?

Welcome to the site. I am sure we can all see how valuable your contributions will be. Busy first day!
 
What conspiracy theory? I'm not suggesting any conspiracy - simply suggesting that the level of boom in the smartphone and tablet industries gave an overvalued stock price for AAPL, when the reality was, those types of margins and growth weren't sustainable in the long term.

Everybody knows how something should be valued after the fact. If profits had continued to grow at the rate they had been growing, the valuation would have been entirely justified. The conspiracy theory (heard here every quarter, without fail) is that the analysts are deliberately getting it wrong, a storyline that doesn't seem to change even when they get it almost exactly right.
 
I agree. The stock was vastly overvalued. But still. Until profit margins start improving, there is no way AAPL can sustain any growth.

Why? They already have better margins than most of the industry (if not all). Are you seriously suggesting they need to maintain the levels of profit they've enjoyed during these smartphone and tablet booms?

Do people not realize what an anomaly it is that a manufacturer, which sells (worldwide) roughly half the number of phones the top dog does (Samsung) would still have 3x the profit share of that top dog?

How does anyone assume this is sustainable in the long term......if they keep their profit margins around 35-40% and maintain a majority of the profit share in these markets, while creating new markets with products like the iWatch and iTV, AAPL should see growth - then again, no one ever accused the market of moving intelligently......
 
- 97% of mobile malware on Android.
- iPad accounted for 82% of all North American tablet traffic in March.

Someone please tell me how security through obscurity works again. :D

It's been a bunch of BS every time its been uttered. ;)
 
What conspiracy theory? I'm not suggesting any conspiracy - simply suggesting that the level of boom in the smartphone and tablet industries gave an overvalued stock price for AAPL, when the reality was, those types of margins and growth weren't sustainable in the long term.

By what metric do you believe Apple was/is overvalued? Please compare to other companies in the industry. I would be particularly interested in companies with higher growth but lower P/E ratios.
 
Earnings were down, significantly, year over year.

That's because their margins fell by 22%, from 47% to 37% due to component and supply costs which Apple does not control. And by the way, their margins are still roughly double the norm in the industry. Apple is an incredible growth engine. From year-ago... revenue up 11% but profit down 22%. Hmm... funny how the profit reduction matches up with the margin reduction attributed to higher production costs and product updates.

Mac sales down only 2% in a market that has declined 14% overall - that's a win. iPad sales up 65% - not too shabby. iPhone sales up 7% - new record for Apple. Keep pointing out the gloom... :p
 
Everybody knows how something should be valued after the fact. If profits had continued to grow at the rate they had been growing, the valuation would have been entirely justified. The conspiracy theory (heard here every quarter, without fail) is that the analysts are deliberately getting it wrong, a storyline that doesn't seem to change even when they get it almost exactly right.

Oh I don't think they are deliberately getting it wrong - they just expected too much.....

Case-in-point, Apple hits and slightly exceed guidance last quarter but analysts were all over the place with outrageous expectations. The stock plummets.

I just think analysts got caught up in the huge growth explosion and didn't recognize the end coming. Nothing deliberate about it (at least I don't think so).
 
You should have seen the conspiracy nut jobs at CNN who thought Samsung's illuminati connections shorted Apple's stock. It was the funniest thing ever.
Also, notice how the most paranoid people own Apple products. Alex Jones and Rush Limbaugh come to mind. Is there something about Apple products that entice weirdos and the black helicopter crowd?

Or maybe there's some truth the "higher ups" ... Maybe the "weirdos" are the one's who think it's nonsense, which could be exactly what the "they" want you to believe; Not to believe they're real, but they are and you're powerless against them and don't even know it.

Make sense? No? Yea it's not supposed to make sense, just go about your daily life...

- Weirdo
:mad::rolleyes::cool::p;):D:eek::(:):confused::eek:
 
Why? They already have better margins than most of the industry (if not all). Are you seriously suggesting they need to maintain the levels of profit they've enjoyed during these smartphone and tablet booms?

Do people not realize what an anomaly it is that a manufacturer, which sells (worldwide) roughly half the number of phones the top dog does (Samsung) would still have 3x the profit share of that top dog?

How does anyone assume this is sustainable in the long term......if they keep their profit margins around 35-40% and maintain a majority of the profit share in these markets, while creating new markets with products like the iWatch and iTV, AAPL should see growth - then again, no one ever accused the market of moving intelligently......

The profit margins fell 10% YoY. If they can grow revenue only at the expense of the profit margins it means that the profits will keep falling. Why exactly should the stock grow then?
 
By what metric do you believe Apple was/is overvalued? Please compare to other companies in the industry. I would be particularly interested in companies with higher growth but lower P/E ratios.

AAPL, not Apple - and WAS overvalued due to their immense growth and profit margin during the smartphone and tablet booms when they all but owned both industries.

Now that competitors are getting better, prices will come down to add to the competition, hence lower profit margins - which are already higher than most other companies out there.

I just think analysts got caught up in the growth and a buying frenzy caused the stock to skyrocket, when the reality was the growth (or those outrageous profit margins) wasn't sustainable.
 
If I was Tim, I would be very concerned about the fact that 53% of my revenue was coming from a single product line that gets refreshed just once a year.

At some point, everyone who wants an iPhone will have one (or two).

Along with the low profit margins on the iPad Mini, I would be concerned with reports saying around 30%-40% of iPhone purchases since the iPhone 5 launch were for one of the older models. If iPhone sales growth is slowing as the earning reports seems to indicate, this is going to be a huge concern for investors going forward.
 
If the upgrade from the 5 to 5S is similar to the 4 to 4S, I don't see Apple holding a lead over the competition. I've seen the HTC One and it is a nice phone. IMO, the iPhone 5 looks dated next to it.

So if a new service comparable to the addition of Siri gets added to 5S, you don't think the 5S will compare nicely to the HTC One?

Do you just need a new skin on the OS? I don't mean that to seem sarcastic, but is that the only way to make the phone look less dated?
 
I admit that i'm a complete dumb ass when it comes to the stock market but can somebody clarify what Apple is doing for me?

1. They're going to spend an additional $50B of their own cash to buy back shares.

What exactly would that accomplish for them?

How much of the stocks do Apple already own and/or how much do they have to spend to go private or even semi-private based on the current prices?

2. I keep seeing $100B would be spent through 2015 on buying shares and issuing dividends if I understand correctly.

Does that mean that assuming that Apple does not earn anymore profits (to keep this simple for me), by the end of 2015, Apple would only have $45B in cash and own a bigger share of itself?
 
The profit margins fell 10% YoY. If they can grow revenue only at the expense of the profit margins it means that the profits will keep falling. Why exactly should the stock grow then?

You're assuming profit margins will continue to fall as revenue increases. Wrong.

Introducing a new product, with lower profit margins than the outrageous margins previously kept by Apple cause the reduction NOW, but as that product ages, the margins level out and can start to grow again with new products releases.

The margins had to fall.....they weren't sustainable.

Technology also advances and breakthroughs happen causing reductions in cost-to-build which could also grow profit margins in a mature market.
 
AAPL, not Apple - and WAS overvalued due to their immense growth and profit margin during the smartphone and tablet booms when they all but owned both industries.

Now that competitors are getting better, prices will come down to add to the competition, hence lower profit margins - which are already higher than most other companies out there.

I just think analysts got caught up in the growth and a buying frenzy caused the stock to skyrocket, when the reality was the growth (or those outrageous profit margins) wasn't sustainable.

So, relative to other companies in the industry, you agree AAPL (your distinction is meaningless, but ok) is very undervalued? Even at $700 AAPL was undervalued relative to other companies in the market (based on real or anticipated growth). Today it is just silly.

I believe you think that shareholder behavior is somehow rational.
 
Oh I don't think they are deliberately getting it wrong - they just expected too much.....

Case-in-point, Apple hits and slightly exceed guidance last quarter but analysts were all over the place with outrageous expectations. The stock plummets.

I just think analysts got caught up in the huge growth explosion and didn't recognize the end coming. Nothing deliberate about it (at least I don't think so).

Guidance is virtually meaningless. I figured everybody knew that by now. It's hardly shocking to see a stock fall when instead of 18% growth in earnings they report an 18% decline. Add the differential swing and right away you can account for most of the stock's decline. To that add the tendency of markets to overshoot in both the upside and downside directions, and you can account for the rest. None of this was the analysts' fault, it's what happened to Apple's earnings, and how the narrative has shifted. Blaming things on unseen forces? Not for me, thanks, not when I can see what has actually happened, and it isn't difficult to comprehend.
 
Along with the low profit margins on the iPad Mini, I would be concerned with reports saying around 30%-40% of iPhone purchases since the iPhone 5 launch were for one of the older models. If iPhone sales growth is slowing as the earning reports seems to indicate, this is going to be a huge concern for investors going forward.

? I don't get this concern.

iPhone 5 sales are still outpacing iPhone 4S sales at the same time in its lifecycle. They are selling MORE iPhones overall. Until the new version falls behind its predecessors, I don't think there's anything to be worried about.

Of course, all of this is moot if they end up doing what I think they'll do - that is release the cheaper and larger iPhone models and refresh all three annually.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.