No it wouldn't because Apple wouldn't invest the same amount of money in new iPhones then as a result of the low sales. Meaning we would get ******** iPhones to keep costs down.
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.
iPhone X Shipping Estimates Improve to 1 to 2 Weeks in United States and Canada
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No it wouldn't because Apple wouldn't invest the same amount of money in new iPhones then as a result of the low sales. Meaning we would get ******** iPhones to keep costs down.
Agreed. Though from 2007 to now, who would have thought an iPhone would be the price of a MacBook or iMac
Guess now that the early adopter fans have one, and the demand is less than expected, because too little, too late, too expensive: https://rene.rebe.de/2017-09-13/apple-continues-to-overcharge-eu-customers/ too notch, too little headphone hack.
Two days ago I received the credit card charge and the email and sms from apple that the Iphone X has been sent.
From yesterday morning the tracking is:
Wednesday, November 22, 2017 Location Time Piece
1 Shipment information received EINDHOVEN - NETHERLANDS, THE 04:32
so has the Iphone X been sent or not?
Does it mean that they only book the shipment without sending the phone?
From yesterday morning the tracking is:
Wednesday, November 22, 2017 Location Time Piece
1 Shipment information received EINDHOVEN - NETHERLANDS, THE 04:32
so has the Iphone X been sent or not?
Does it mean that they only book the shipment without sending the phone?
which sane consumer would want a sim-free version? If you think eSIM: even more user un-friendly, travel headache, etc. why take even more choice away?
Agreed. Though from 2007 to now, who would have thought an iPhone would be the price of a MacBook or iMac
Who would have thought that pocketable device would be this powerful? Price is understandable for the amount of tech inside.
Using that logic, an MP3 player should cost many many times that of a old school Walkman. so much more power, and holds thousands of tapes
Looks like every device in Germany arrives in two weeks from now? Ordered mine 4 weeks ago and when I asked my carrier, they said they receive shipments from Apple within 14 days, so it’s gonna be a 6 week delivery. Orders placed two weeks ago got 3-4 week shipment, orders from last week 2-3 week shipment and this week they start 1-2 weeks, so to me it looks like all orders since pre-order will just arrive the same early December.
Any Germans here who already received their devices?
Any Germans here who already received their devices?
These kids are slaves. They're abused, coerced, and are not afforded the most basic human right: the right to say "No." *They want to work and the work ethic is strong* what drivel. Keep telling yourself that while you play with your new "X" mas toy. Take a good whiff too and smell the reek of blood and tears.
I live in China too, speak fluent Mandarin, and live in the Chinese world not some foreigner bubble.
Foreigners have no clue about what really goes on here; if they did, they wouldn't live here, they wouldn't have the courage.
Last edited:
I wonder if demand is tapering off because everyone who wanted one rushed to pre-order, now that those orders are fulfilled maybe demand is on more of a normal curve?
only MR haters would be able to use the mental gynamstics required to twist a 1-2 week backlog after almost a month released, to mean it’s a flop. LOL. right...sorry, how long is the back order on your samsungs and other knockoffs? oh yes, there is no back order because they don’t matter...
nope. fact: iphone X, one of two flagships and the most expensive, is killing it. i know it hurts.
nope. fact: iphone X, one of two flagships and the most expensive, is killing it. i know it hurts.
Fact: there actually are almost no facts. Just idle speculation and people—on both sides—twisting tiny and insignificant nuggets of information in ways that match their own narratives.
Fact: we won't have a very good picture until early in 2018, and even then, this stupid debate will go on because it's somewhat likely that "units sold" won't have substantial year-over-year growth but revenue and earnings both will.
What costs? They just wouldnt have as big of a marging. I think one of the reasons for a higher price was due to the fact that less phones in general will be sold in the near future and they make up those losses by a higher price per device.
Gotta keep those share holders happy
I wasn't expecting the numbers to come from Apple. Given all the commotion I'm fairly certain number will leak.
Thank you. Also, the original reference was to the “United States and PR”. It’s right there in the name! PR is not a state.
Based on the guidance numbers as well as the teardown cost estimates, this theory (for now) most closely matches the evidence. And that's why this debate is going to rage on and on.
It'll really only be instructive to talk about "success" when comparing year-over-year units sold to comparable Android flagship products. Which of course we can't do because that granular data isn't usually available. And then we would have to talk about corporate (balance sheet) success separately.
Unfortunately that's unlikely to happen on here. People confuse the topics and have axes to grind. So yay! We'll continue to have more meaningless fights about opinions than facts! I can barely wait.
Errr, maybe you should have gone to Wharton.
The usual PE ratio that this dude brought up actually has nothing to do with future earnings, or with earnings growth, or with future revenue. (I'm not saying you said it did—just clarifying.) It's a 100% historical indicator. There are forward-looking PEs, but that's a different animal.
Aside from the historical vs forward looking thing, growth isn't a part of it. It's an absolute. (There's a separate metric (PEG) that is.) In fact, the only way growth works its way into PE ratios is indirectly: namely, to the extent growth expectations affect price.
(These prior two paragraphs are also the reason I was dismissive of PE ratios earlier. They suck.)
And that also is why it is NOT the case that what you said is true. Making earnings or revenue go "up" does not necessarily improve multiples. In fact, if those growth rates are lower than the ones "baked" into the price, the multiples can get worse.
Lastly, revenue can go up while net income (basically earnings, close enough) goes down. And vice versa.
I have a hunch you maybe know some of this. But I'm being pedantic for more casual readers so that they know there are LOTS of types of multiples, and there are thus different ways to spin the story depending upon which ones you use. It's not so cut and dried.
Fully understanding that PE is a trailing indicator, I'm going to stick by my story that high multiples are a prediction by investors of accelerating future earnings growth. That is actually were PEG comes in, though one can argue that PEG isn't exactly solid indicator of whether a multiple has gotten ahead of earnings growth. These are just a couple of the indicators to consider if you're buying individual stocks (which, full disclosure, I no longer do).
Where PE truly sucks as a predictor is when the PE for one company is compared to a sector or the markets overall to support a conclusion that a stock is either over or under-valued. It should go without saying (though apparently it can't be said often enough) that every company is a different earnings story. For one example, AMZN posts a sky-high multiple because they are growing the top line like crazy but using those earnings to capitalize like few companies in history. Apple salts away those earnings in sacks stored in the subbasement of Fort Cook. Totally different story.
[doublepost=1511454980][/doublepost]
Mine is, shortages at introduction and persisting for a few weeks afterwards are so routine we should be totally accustomed to it. In the end Apple has to bring supply and demand into balance, but this rarely occurs at the beginning of the product run.
If I weren't doing it for a living I wouldn't either. It's amazing how many people think they can beat the market despite a ridiculous amount of evidence and research to the contrary. There are historical market inefficiencies, but even if you know what they are, you need:
A) a very compelling case for why they still exist and haven't already been eliminated; and
B) an equally compelling case for how and why you can take advantage of them when a multi-billion dollar industry or highly paid players with sophisticated tools can't beat you to the punch.
Most people have neither and think they can pick stocks. And then if their picks go up, they ignore what the market did as well, or they mis-estimate the risk they took relative to their positions. And they attribute the gains to skill and the losses to bad luck. Retail investing is for 99% sheer madness.
Absolutely, although the large cash reserves are a definite caution flag for prospective investors. Ironically, the more successful a company has been historically, the more of a liability cash is on a relative basis for future returns. the dividends and share buybacks have been a good start, but if I were an investor, I'd like to see even more.
On PEs, you're right. People misuse them all the time, once again often to support a narrative. Fortunately in my experience this doesn't happen that much with finance professionals who know what they're doing, but retail investors do it constantly.
My point was that AAPL is cheap by any measure. Revenues and EPS aren't shrinking. They guided for their biggest Q ever. There can be good discussions on stocks and their valuations, but AAPL would be one near the bottom of the list.
Or (C) a helluva lot of luck. I had that when I guessed right on AAPL 20 years ago. I'll never do that again and I won't even try. The only way luck makes you smarter is to recognize when you've been lucky.
Except for the scale, Apple's story is pretty much the story of our economy. Using earnings to benefit investors rather than grow is not so much the exception but the rule. Don't get me started on that one.
[doublepost=1511459743][/doublepost]
Good luck, you're gonna need it!
I'd honestly like to know the specific stocks you see as "much better" value plays? Apple is cheap by any measure, particularly ex-cash.
I am long all stocks because I will always be right in the end. There are other wonderful companies which I own, but AAPL can make the case they are the best company in the world.
The "jury is out" on literally every company. If you wait until the end of time, they might all be bankrupt, merged, or acquired. The point is, with what we know today, AAPL is cheap and they guided for their best quarter ever. I also think they will sell the most iPhones ever in FQ1. They won't break out mix, but would you like to take that internet bet? Bragging rights. Deal? Or maybe you also agree they'll post the most iPhone sales ever in a quarter?
[doublepost=1511460115][/doublepost]
Nonsense post...you're not even trying to make reasonable points. You're just saying "good luck" when AAPL is at an all time high and every product is firing on all cylinders. When the facts change, I'll change. Right now, you're just a hater/bear if you are betting against Apple or trying to say they are doing anything but incredibly well.