What's old is new again

[MLG]

Looks like old JonyI just brought back his old version of iOS that got shot down in 2005, dusted it off, and now it's the "new" iOS. So much for those that feel this is a more modern version.

http://m.cultofmac.com/cultofmac/#!...ted-ios-to-look-like,51b66977c5f0cf15b376480d

I give it less than a year before they are forced to revert to some of the old style, otherwise the stock will continue to plummet. C'mon Apple!!

 

[tl01]

If he had his own ideas of what it should look like... Why shouldn't he incorporate some of that now? Really the only similarities I see are the dots for signal strength and the music icon. Personally I love the new look!

 

[SuperSnake2012]

The stock would plummet if you were going on year 7 of iOS looking exactly the same. A change was necessary.

 

[MLG]

The stock would plummet if you were going on year 7 of iOS looking exactly the same. A change was necessary.

Well of course the stock already has plummeted 40% since they released the iPhone 5 last fall, for the very reason that it was perceived that they had stopped innovating. I agree a change was necessary, but not the Fisher Price kind of change. There are plenty of nice, elegant ways they could have substantially updated the software without making it look like a toy. After such a stock drop, it was speculated that Apple was working on something big to turn things around.

The stock price dropped another 5 points after the presentation yesterday when there was no announcement of an iPhone 5s or 6 that might help recapture market share, or another new product. All they announced was a free software update that is going to be polarizing and increase the fragmentation that they always use against Android.

With decreasing sales growth and tightening margins, Apple no longer holds all the cards. They no longer have the ability to dictate to the market what the market wants. They have a duty to the shareholders (myself included) to take appropriate action or the stock will continue to drop. They SHOULD have made a new phone announcement yesterday, and they should have integrated the new features in an innovative way without removing the premium feel. It's really not that hard...we have seen mockups posted on the net made by people that are probably unemployed that were vastly nicer than what they gave us.

 

[Satori]

They have a duty to the shareholders (myself included) to take appropriate action or the stock will continue to drop. They SHOULD have made a new phone announcement yesterday, and they should have integrated the new features in an innovative way without removing the premium feel. It's really not that hard...we have seen mockups posted on the net made by people that are probably unemployed that were vastly nicer than what they gave us.

If they took notice of what shareholders thought, Apple would never have been a company worth investing in at all.

 

[MLG]

If they took notice of what shareholders thought, Apple would never have been a company worth investing in at all.

Well that's a circular argument, but I guarantee they care what the shareholders think. They have to...it's a public company and the shareholders are the owners. That's the way the system works. I own 0.00001% of Apple...granted a relatively small stake...but all shareholders have a voice. When the stock tanks 40% in 6 months while the rest of the stock market is going up 40%, something is seriously wrong.

 

[Jare]

Article link just takes you to the homepage of the website.

 

[MLG]

Article link just takes you to the homepage of the website.

It looks like they might have taken the article down...guess Apple wasn't pleased...but it shows the original iPhone software design from Ive from 2005 that bears a striking resemblance to then "new" software released yesterday...very similar icons, same old-school looking dock, even the same 5 dots for signal. I guess it's 2005 all over again.

Edit: just checked...link works fine for me.

 

[zorinlynx]

Well that's a circular argument, but I guarantee they care what the shareholders think. They have to...it's a public company and the shareholders are the owners. That's the way the system works. I own 0.00001% of Apple...granted a relatively small stake...but all shareholders have a voice. When the stock tanks 40% in 6 months while the rest of the stock market is going up 40%, something is seriously wrong.

That high AAPL price was a bubble. The 40% drop was just Apple returning from fantasyland to reality.

I made a nice chunk of change from that bubble... but it wasn't realistic. I sold as soon as I saw it start falling.

 

[cirial]

The stock would plummet if you were going on year 7 of iOS looking exactly the same. A change was necessary.

FYI, AAPL went down yesterday despite all the announcements/buzz..

 

[Zombiechow]

With decreasing sales growth and tightening margins, Apple no longer holds all the cards. They no longer have the ability to dictate to the market what the market wants. They have a duty to the shareholders (myself included) to take appropriate action or the stock will continue to drop. They SHOULD have made a new phone announcement yesterday, and they should have integrated the new features in an innovative way without removing the premium feel. It's really not that hard...we have seen mockups posted on the net made by people that are probably unemployed that were vastly nicer than what they gave us.

I'm curious. Why did Apple need to announce a new phone yesterday when the iPhone 5 isn't even a year old yet. Why did they need to put prioritize a new phone release instead of focusing on the innovations presented with the new Mac Pro?

I personally would find a new phone launch to be incredible alienating given the current age of the iPhone 5. In fact, outside of app store exposure, I don't even see how a cheaper iPhone "nano" would be innovative, let alone help their slumping stock price.

 

[guineapig]

That high AAPL price was a bubble. The 40% drop was just Apple returning from fantasyland to reality.

My thought exactly.
"If it looks like a bubble, smells like a bubble, behaves like a bubble, it is a bubble."

And btw, other than the dots for the signal, I too see as much similarity as there is to iOS 1 and following.

 

[MLG]

That high AAPL price was a bubble. The 40% drop was just Apple returning from fantasyland to reality.

I made a nice chunk of change from that bubble... but it wasn't realistic. I sold as soon as I saw it start falling.

Yes it was a bit of a bubble, but it was fueled by speculation over the iPhone 5. Once the phone was announced and people saw that it really was just a stretched iPhone with an extra set of icons, people let out a collective "meh" and lost interest. It's widely viewed that Apple has stopped innovating, and hence their stock price drop. If they had released something more impressive and innovative than the iPhone 5 last fall, their stock would have continued to climb with the rest of the market. Instead, people started jumping ship.

 

[guineapig]

Yes it was a bit of a bubble, but it was fueled by speculation over the iPhone 5. Once the phone was announced and people saw that it really was just a stretched iPhone with an extra set of icons, people let out a collective "meh" and lost interest. It's widely viewed that Apple has stopped innovating, and hence their stock price drop. If they had released something more impressive and innovative than the iPhone 5 last fall, their stock would have continued to climb with the rest of the market. Instead, people started jumping ship.

You really blame it all on the iPhone 5 (even after you've been told that it sold better than anything before)?
I don't think that finance dynamics are as simple as that.
Especially if you consider other inceptions like the iPad mini announce, the Q3 and Q4 results, etc.
Just go a bit back and see how the market responded to every Apple keynote in recent times. I doubt you'll find easy, linear correlation to AAPL ups and downs.

 

[MLG]

I'm curious. Why did Apple need to announce a new phone yesterday when the iPhone 5 isn't even a year old yet. Why did they need to put prioritize a new phone release instead of focusing on the innovations presented with the new Mac Pro?

I personally would find a new phone launch to be incredible alienating given the current age of the iPhone 5. In fact, outside of app store exposure, I don't even see how a cheaper iPhone "nano" would be innovative, let alone help their slumping stock price.

For several reasons

1. The iPhone is their premier product, leading sales and giving them a high margin with each unit. The Mac Pro is a low-volume product. They probably sell 100 iPhones for every Mac Pro, at least. The Mac Pro has very limited effect on their bottom line. On the other hand, the iPhone has put billions into their coffers.

2. iPhone 5 sales have underwhelmed and Apple is losing market share to Android. They need to play catch up in some areas. It was widely speculated that Apple was rushing a 5S to market with new features in order to turn things around, in addition to a low-cost entry phone and a large screen iPhone. None of this happened.

3. The market expected it, analysts reported it. Therefore the market anticipated it and was disappointed when it didn't appear. Just like the rumored iWatch, upgraded iPad mini, Apple TV, and a revamped iPad. All no shows.

4. A cheaper iPhone would greatly improve their market reach...get one of those into the hands of someone who isn't willing to pay $700 for an unsubsidized phone and they will still buy songs, apps, etc...big profits.

5. Alienating to who? Current iPhone 5 owners? What about everyone else? There are a lot of people still sitting on the fence or using an iPhone 4 or 4S waiting for a bigger upgrade...myself included. Believe me, you won't be alienated for long if they come out with something new and innovative. You'll just go buy it.

 

[marksman]

https://forums.macrumors.com/profile.php?do=addlist&userlist=ignore&u=718117

 

[guineapig]

For several reasons

1. The iPhone is their premier product, leading sales and giving them a high margin with each unit. The Mac Pro is a low-volume product. They probably sell 100 iPhones for every Mac Pro, at least. The Mac Pro has very limited effect on their bottom line. On the other hand, the iPhone has put billions into their coffers.

I agree, still it's great to see they strive to improve all their product lines.

2. iPhone 5 sales have underwhelmed and Apple is losing market share to Android. They need to play catch up in some areas. It was widely speculated that Apple was rushing a 5S to market with new features in order to turn things around, in addition to a low-cost entry phone and a large screen iPhone. None of this happened.

You confuse wildly speculated with unreliable rumours.

3. The market expected it, analysts reported it. Therefore the market anticipated it and was disappointed when it didn't appear. Just like the rumored iWatch, upgraded iPad mini, Apple TV, and a revamped iPad. All no shows.

Again, rumors for the new products with more evidence that the new products were still no-goers. And it was clear in the last weeks that no new products were going to be announced except for a refresh in the notebook line.

4. A cheaper iPhone would greatly improve their market reach...get one of those into the hands of someone who isn't willing to pay $700 for an unsubsidized phone and they will still buy songs, apps, etc...big profits.

True, and very likely we will see it in the future.


So, your advice to Apple is to release a new iPhone every, let's say, 3 months?

 

[MLG]

You really blame it all on the iPhone 5 (even after you've been told that it sold better than anything before)?
I don't think that finance dynamics are as simple as that.
Especially if you consider other inceptions like the iPad mini announce, the Q3 and Q4 results, etc.
Just go a bit back and see how the market responded to every Apple keynote in recent times. I doubt you'll find easy, linear correlation to AAPL ups and downs.

Absolutely...it was all about expectations for the iPhone 5. The run up before the fall event was pure speculation about what was coming next. After people had been expecting the iPhone 5 the year before and got the 4S, they had big expectations from the 5 when it finally appeared.

And the disappointments were right...sales were not as good as initial expectations, and they have lost market share since that time. Margins have eroded, and sales growth has slowed. All as a result of the iPhone 5.

It's a fixable situation, but the new iOS is not the solution. Apple can no longer afford to keep its head in the sand.

 

[trouble747]

That high AAPL price was a bubble.

Exactly.

 

[MLG]

I agree, still it's great to see they strive to improve all their product lines.


You confuse wildly speculated with unreliable rumours.


Again, rumors for the new products with more evidence that the new products were still no-goers. And it was clear in the last weeks that no new products were going to be announced except for a refresh in the notebook line.


True, and very likely we will see it in the future.


So, your advice to Apple is to release a new iPhone every, let's say, 3 months?

There's a fine line between speculation and rumor, but certainly when numerous connected sources report the same information, speculation grows.

I wouldn't recommend a new phone every 3 months at all. That would be terrible for their bottom line, with new tooling costs, development, etc. Ideally they should make one new phone a year as long as they get it right. But the iPhone 5 was seen by many as a disappointment...an incremental improvement when what people wanted was a game changer. As a result, many people felt that Apple would accelerate its development in this case to get a new phone to market to kick start sales.

I still have my iPhone 4 that I got 3 years ago and see nothing that makes it worth upgrading. Instead I got an HTC One X to do all those things that Apple won't do...bigger screen, widgets, swype, quick reply, customization, live wallpaper, etc etc etc. I would have happily given that money to Apple if they had only given me an option.

 

[aristobrat]

They have a duty to the shareholders (myself included) to take appropriate action or the stock will continue to drop.

Last year, Apple's stock closed down -00.22%.
In 2008, Apple's stock closed down -33.41%.
In 2003, Apple's stock closed down -41.91%.

What actions did Apple take in 2004 and 2009 that makes you believe that are a company that pivots their product plans based on "duty to shareholders"?

And as a shareholder, what's your reaction to the analysts rating Apple's stock, based on what they saw yesterday? Looks like you've got some pretty big names in there showing some very optimistic values (for a stock that's trading at $441 today).

JP Morgan - $545
Goldman Sach's - $500
Merrill Lynch - $540
Morgan Stanley - $540
Deutsche Bank - $480
Needham - $710
Piper Jaffray - $655
ISI - $600
Topeka - $888
RBC - $475
Nomura - $420

 

[guineapig]

There's a fine line between speculation and rumor, but certainly when numerous connected sources report the same information, speculation grows.

I still think you're mistaking speculation with rumours.
Here on MR, I can't find any recent rumors about an iPhone 5S july release. No dates at all (just as it were expected to be released in the fall like last year). The only release date I find in this rumors is an expected late 2013-early 2014 launch of the cheaper iPhone, and it's in the "blurry photos in plastic case" article, a rumor without a doubt.
Again, in latest rumor recaps, it was clear that nobody was expecting new iDevices to get launched at WWDC.

 

[aristobrat]

But the iPhone 5 was seen by many as a disappointment...an incremental improvement when what people wanted was a game changer.

You can spend about 30 minutes searching the forums here to see that literally every iPhone release has been viewed by many as a disappointment.

But every year, the new disappointing iPhone sells more units than the previous year. Every year.

Can you name a consumer electronics company that puts out a game changing device literally every two years?

 

[MLG]

Last year, Apple's stock closed down -00.22%.
In 2008, Apple's stock closed down -33.41%.
In 2003, Apple's stock closed down -41.91%.

What actions did Apple take in 2004 and 2009 that makes you believe that are a company that pivots their product plans based on "duty to shareholders"?

And as a shareholder, what's your reaction to the analysts rating Apple's stock, based on what they say yesterday? Looks like you've got some pretty big names in there showing some very optimistic values (for a stock that's trading at $441 today).

JP Morgan - $545
Goldman Sach's - $500
Merrill Lynch - $540
Morgan Stanley - $540
Deutsche Bank - $480
Needham - $710
Piper Jaffray - $655
ISI - $600
Topeka - $888
RBC - $475
Nomura - $420

Well as I say, it's a fixable situation. It's not all bad and I'm happy that the stock is holding steady today. And I'm not saying Apple has ever changed anything out of duty to shareholders...except for the recent stock buybacks and increased dividends to return some of the pile of cash. What I said was that Apple no longer holds all the cards...so they are more compelled to listen to what buyers and shareholders want, rather than telling them.

That said, opinions and price targets are only that. If sales drop or come in under expectations, those price targets will be revised quickly.

Regarding the yearly drops...

Last year - what's really more telling is the rapid 30% drop from Oct-Dec.
2008 - this was the year of the crash, so you can't count it. Almost all stocks dropped by 30%.
2003 - clearly not a good year for Apple, but it was before the big boom that started with the introduction of the iPhone.

 

[dejo]

FYI, AAPL went down yesterday despite all the announcements/buzz..

And AAPL is up today. Wonder what the reason is.