Apple target demographic is the fashion aware teenager and the fashion aware teenager that has aged, but not matured. Don't get me wrong, Apple makes great products, but its management is about being on the magazine cover, not about taking care of loyal customers. As such Apple is at the whim of the fashion environment. Of course they could release non-fashionable products to handle us power users, video producers, music producers, etc., but they have proven that is not Apple anymore. I have never seen a company throw away so many customers and not have it bite them at some point. There are products that keep the loyal base loyal and Apple has said screw it, we don't care for loyalty anymore. So their stock is going to be up and down with the time of day and whim of wall street.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Stock Forecasted to Rise as Lifetime iPhone Sales Reach 1 Billion
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Still glad I sold my stock last year. I never looked back. Made a healthy take away too.
So a simple rugged iPhone is a cure for all that "ails" Apple?
More likely, there's only so many people for Apple to sell phones to, and we're reaching the point of critical mass for smartphone sales as a whole. Why else do you think Apple is trying to get into emerging markets in China and India? Huge untapped populations yet for sales
I don't. That is the problem. 1.4 billion was provided in Sept 2015 - as I stated, from late last year. Since then we have see all kinds of percentages but nothing in the quantity arena to back it up. The Apple numbers are apparently more recent. The percentages from all over. The actual Android numbers are tbd.
I personally found this a very interesting article. It expresses all my concerns especially about the Chinese vendors.
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/07/25/china-could-shake-apple-earnings-to-the-core-heres-why.html
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/07/25/china-could-shake-apple-earnings-to-the-core-heres-why.html
Perhaps I am naive`, but why would stock prices go up magically because Apple has sold a lot of iPhones overall? Does market saturation + low interest in upcoming model + sizable decrease in year over years sales numbers = stock price gains? Where do analysts think this 185 dollar price point is going to come from in the next two years? iCloud? Services? Apple Music? Apple Watch?
This story is so ridiculous that I am having a hard time figuring out why MR wasted time publishing it.
[doublepost=1469470577][/doublepost]
This story is so ridiculous that I am having a hard time figuring out why MR wasted time publishing it.
[doublepost=1469470577][/doublepost]
It's really not. Generally stock prices don't go up twice on one sale. Stock prices are in most cases set by what will/might happen, not what has already happened. At this point, no one is excited about Apple hardware this year and while Services has been making gains, it still accounts for a very small fraction of the revenue pie so investors aren't even looking at it seriously in the greater scheme of things.
I got Amazon's $60 BLU R1 HD this weekend (this one has ads, but you can buy it ad free for $110). I have just started playing around with it, but it seems a very solid phone. I don't know how the android phone makers are going to be able to compete if Amazon is basically going to give away a phone this nice at this price. I'm not of the view that Apple is doomed. But I do think the price of its iPhone will need to come down eventually.
One analyst is forecasting $185 over the coming year, but probably few are in that range. For that to happen, we'd need to see Apple's earnings rise by 30-40% at least and the multiples increase by as much. Not sure where that much optimism comes from except that the base has been beaten down quite a bit by the most recent quarters.
To everyone arguing over the 1.4B number...Keep in mind, Apple is expected to sell their 1 billionth PHONE by the end of the month. Google only reported 1.4B Android DEVICES. Pretty sure they are counting every single item ever sold with the Android/modified Android operating system, not just Android phones... I've gone back to look at several articles related to the Google announcement, and they never once say 1.4B android phones, just android devices...
While he wasn't ultimately right about a keyboard being necessary for business users, he was dead on with the primary objection he had, which was the upfront price:
He was mostly mocking the $500 cost to get one, as being too far out of American's comfort zone for a device that also had a required data plan (which would normally subsidize a phone).
And he was totally correct. It took less than two months before Apple figured out the same thing, and dropped the price by $200. Moreover their next model was subsidized normally, just as Ballmer said would be necessary to get lots of sales.
No it's not a cure all. But it could expand their customer base a bit more, perhaps steal a few customers who are using ruggedized Android phones not because they prefer Android but because they need a tougher phone for their work or other activities.
A ruggedized iPhone would also be a boon to customers in the emerging markets Apple is trying to enter as there is a booming construction trade in many of these up and coming economies, and therefore possibly some workers who would be interested in a ruggedized SE type of phone with extended battery life. And I'm proposing just one possible idea for a different kind of iPhone.
Even in a saturated market there are still many users that could be won over from Android if Apple decides to carefully expand their iPhone product line a bit. But this may entail taking Apple in a direction that might harm the brand in the eyes of longtime fans/customers. I can easily also make many arguments why they should not go in this direction. I'm just tossing around ideas. I prefer a company take a proactive approach rather than just roll over and say that the market is saturated and use that as an excuse to release products that look very much the same over two to three years.
At the very least give customers, men in particular, a look with more gravitas than my beloved slender little rose gold iPhone.
All of which still beggars the question of a 3 year device replacement strategy ...
A friendly reminder that the stock ticker symbol for Apple Inc. is AAPL, not APPL. APPL was a steel manufacturer or something.
[doublepost=1469479248][/doublepost]
[doublepost=1469479248][/doublepost]
That's what I used to always ask when someone said the stock would go down, but I got tired of it.
I can see why you fear the competition.. it's only natural when you see their 2016 releases compared to the upcoming 6ss.
Market share is simply the percentage sold over a period of time. That's all it is.
For example:
300 million total smartphones sold in a quarter... and Apple sold 51 million... gives Apple 17% market share.
That's market share.
However... other measurements... such as active installed base or total cumulative sales... are completely different and have nothing to do with market share. Those would be handled by different statistics.
But whenever you see market share reports from IDC and others... they are measuring market share for the quarter. That's all.
You could certainly argue the importance of market share... and I actually agree with you there. Who cares if five junk phones are sold for every one iPhone?
But be aware that market share simply measures one specific thing: percentage of sales over a period of time. That's all they ever were.
Overall... I agree with you... it's silly for someone to take the quarterly market share numbers and apply them to other areas. Apple's 15% or whatever has nothing to do with the strength of the company, customer satisfaction, etc.
People seem to forget that Apple sells over 200 million high-margin smartphones a year. They are the #2 smartphone OEM by volume.
Other companies would kill for that.
It just so happens that Apple only represents about 15% of smartphone sales in a quarter. But that's fine.
Last edited:
The idea of the stock market is to invest in a company and it will pay off as the company gives dividends to the shareholder at a better rate than for example putting the money in the bank.
Last 4 quarters (a year), Apple paid about $2 per share to it's shareholders, at at stock price at about $100, which means you got 2% a year, and this is from one of the most profitable companies in the world.
The biggest problem here is that Apple puts a spotlight on the main problem of the stock market: it doesn't work.
All you can do on the stock market is to trade in future dividends, but as the story goes: it doesn't happen and all that's left is the speculation.
If the richest company in the world can't give better than 2% return on invested money, the entire idea of the stock market is bust.
The real value of Apple is where the $2 a year in dividends would be considered a great return on investment, and I'd say that would be around $40 tops.
Last 4 quarters (a year), Apple paid about $2 per share to it's shareholders, at at stock price at about $100, which means you got 2% a year, and this is from one of the most profitable companies in the world.
The biggest problem here is that Apple puts a spotlight on the main problem of the stock market: it doesn't work.
All you can do on the stock market is to trade in future dividends, but as the story goes: it doesn't happen and all that's left is the speculation.
If the richest company in the world can't give better than 2% return on invested money, the entire idea of the stock market is bust.
The real value of Apple is where the $2 a year in dividends would be considered a great return on investment, and I'd say that would be around $40 tops.
Stock prices go up and down, today because the wall street press fuel the game for advertising and others for commissions. What is the game you ask? The press praises a major company, like Apple, then investment managers go out and get everyone they talk with to buy (they get a commission), then the press publishes some bad thing about the company, then the investment managers go out and get everyone to sell (they get a commission), then the process starts over. This is not an investment process for the media/professionals, it is simply a way to generate commissions and ad revenue.
The trick is to not buy into the game and not get broadsided by the game. For small investors that can be terribly difficult especially when 60 to 75% of the trades on a given day are computer algorithm trades between the big money managers.
You couldn't make this stuff up, folk getting their panties all up.in a bunch over a number of devices sold by a company they have no interest in..
1 question.. whether the number is 1, 2 or 57 billion. Does your enjoyment of your Apple device alter depending on the number?.. nope.. didn't think so..
Well, no, that isn't the idea. The idea is for the company to improve their earnings and in turn increase the market price of their stock. Dividends are in addition to equity value. What you are trading on is earnings, not dividends.
That is an afterthought. The rise in stock price would be equal to the return on invested money, more dividends, higher stock price. Since that doesn't work, as Apple perfectly proved, the stock market trades in higher stock prices.
This is sort of a pyramid scheme though. People getting in late would need the company to keep growing and that is not possible in eternity, eventually the market will be saturated and the only thing left is dividends.
This is why companies that reach Apples point no longer sees incredible stock prices. Apple could keep up doing what they do and have great earnings, and the stock holders would live happily on dividends, but the market want growth as that has the promise of future dividends and drives stock prices, which is what the market trade in.
A company like Apple that is almost unbelievable profitable should be the share holders dream regardless of the growth, but as the stock market trades in the promise of future dividends, growth is what drives the stock price up.
This is sort of a pyramid scheme though. People getting in late would need the company to keep growing and that is not possible in eternity, eventually the market will be saturated and the only thing left is dividends.
This is why companies that reach Apples point no longer sees incredible stock prices. Apple could keep up doing what they do and have great earnings, and the stock holders would live happily on dividends, but the market want growth as that has the promise of future dividends and drives stock prices, which is what the market trade in.
A company like Apple that is almost unbelievable profitable should be the share holders dream regardless of the growth, but as the stock market trades in the promise of future dividends, growth is what drives the stock price up.