Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Separating noise from facts
Apple stock and quality is driven by iPhone sales. They formed 65% of its Q2 revenues. The smartphone market is peaking or maturing*; everyone who needs a smartphone has one. This is why Cook is busy kissing Indian and Chinese butts to get a better chunk of those markets. They are far from making losses but what's certain is that subsequent family jewel ( iPhone sales) will keep disappointing.

The foray into India has some headwinds already while sales from China for Q2 dropped by 26%. China is overheated and is already slowing. Then they may devalue the Yuan, whose effect is to make iphone even more dear in that market depressing the sales further. That Icahn guy is a genius; he only studied China and closed his position on Apple. So Apple needs something else to keep the price up there but not the iPhone. Maybe Apple Car?

You can either read the writing on the wall or study Buffet tea leaves.


*Why is smartphone market maturing? Because smartphone technology is peaking; each newer upgrade has far less impressive or plain unconvincing features. This is why Cook lamented that there were lesser upgrades contributing to the declining sales.
 
Last edited:
Absolutely. The article mentions he has an effect on stocks. Not that he effects them. Buffet actually affects the stocks, which resultes in an effect on the stocks. Got it?
 
This is why a company's stability shouldn't be judged based on stock price alone. This jump in price has absolutely nothing to do with Apple's strengths and weaknesses, it is the result of one rich person telling other rich people he bought something.

Also, I wonder if the stock would have jumped higher had Buffet been wearing an Apple Watch when he announced his stake.
 
*affect
Grammar Police out.

See rule #8 in the forum rules for how to effectively (affectively? ;)) deal with spelling/usage errors in published news articles. I regularly send in corrections; the staff always thanks me for doing that. I usually send a link to the appropriate entry in the Paul Brians usage error list, but I'd guess they don't need it.

Absolutely. The article mentions he has an effect on stocks. Not that he effects them. Buffet actually affects the stocks, which resultes in an effect on the stocks. Got it?

No, it doesn't. The article was corrected. Rather than make jokes about usage errors, just send a private message to the editors. Simple.
 
Last edited:
All Buffet has to do is buy some stock, tell people he has bought it, and when it skyrockets sell it off again. Rinse repeat.

Until the market crashes or some new bad news about that company appears before he sells. Then he loses big time. On paper.

But the deal is that AAPL has a low P/E compared to other companies in the same sector, and pays a dividend above 2%, which is exactly the type of deal into which a Dodd "value investor" looks to beat the market over a much longer time frame, well past short term market volatility and random up-and-down pricing noise.
 
Until the market crashes or some new bad news about that company appears before he sells. Then he loses big time. On paper.

But the deal is that AAPL has a low P/E compared to other companies in the same sector, and pays a dividend above 2%, which is exactly the type of deal into which a Dodd "value investor" looks to beat the market over a much longer time frame, well past short term market volatility and random up-and-down pricing noise.
He would never sell at a loss. You don't lose money until you lock it in.
 
He would never sell at a loss. You don't lose money until you lock it in.

Instead he held Dexter Shoes and Energy Futures Holdings until they went into the ground. Combined Billion-plus dollar loss. He has made a lot more good bets than bad bets in total, but that doesn't mean zero investment losses. Never say never.
 
Until the market crashes or some new bad news about that company appears before he sells. Then he loses big time. On paper.

But the deal is that AAPL has a low P/E compared to other companies in the same sector, and pays a dividend above 2%, which is exactly the type of deal into which a Dodd "value investor" looks to beat the market over a much longer time frame, well past short term market volatility and random up-and-down pricing noise.


Warren losing big time? Doubtful. One of the smartest and wealthiest investors in the world. I sold my shares last year and never looked back. It's to shaky of a market right now, unless you have the back up collateral to provide a buffer, in which case is why Icahn and Tepper moved on. In any case, Market Timer stated Apple Shares could tumble by $75.00 at the end of the Summer. Buy in at 89% and leave very little room for marginal error. Maybe even walk away with a healthy dividend.

This up and down fluctuation is to rattle the cages, nothing more. Well versed holders understand the market and hold on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: koolmagicguy
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.