Notes of interest for Apple's Q3 2008 financial results call

24

Comments

  • merdheadmerdhead Posts: 587member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Olternaut View Post


    Can someone please investigate what the heck is that secret product transition???



    Please?



    Maybe something to do with new laptops. They haven't changed very much since the Intel transition.
  • merdheadmerdhead Posts: 587member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sausage&Onion View Post


    Previously they have lied about Steve's health at the conference. The fact that they do not deny problems now does not bode well at all. Certainly they don't want to lie, but they would definitely talk up his good health if it were true. Makes me sad. I believe the stock just jumped down about 10% in after hours trading, most likely because of this fact. I can't see anything else that would make it plunge so suddenly.



    Makes sense. Four or so years is typical for recurrence of many cancers.
  • minderbinderminderbinder Posts: 1,703member
    I don't really see how they're moving *away* from desktops, especially given the gain in sales this quarter.



    Apple likes to say that the iMac and mini cover consumer needs, but they're lying and they know it. If they really want to gain some market share, a reasonably priced midtower would be one of the quickest ways to do it.



    The argument against it is that it would hurt apple's margins. Now that apple has said they're willing to sacrifice margins to launch a new product, that argument is off the table.
  • merdheadmerdhead Posts: 587member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post


    Although your negativity usually grates on me, there may be more truth to this rumor than we know because there is no outright denial forthcoming. Oy!



    Hey no need to diminish my contribution just because I take a different view. Sometimes you have to go against the flow to balance the discussion a bit.
  • shanmugamshanmugam Posts: 1,200member
    $17 down, WTH?
  • mh71mh71 Posts: 44member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Olternaut View Post


    Can someone please investigate what the heck is that secret product transition???



    Please?



    Time to reheat your favorite xMac rumors.
  • SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 24,152member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by merdhead View Post


    Hey no need to diminish my contribution just because I take a different view. Sometimes you have to go against the flow to balance the discussion a bit.



    No diminution of your guess this time. I basically agreed that this could be a "true rumor".
  • shanmugamshanmugam Posts: 1,200member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Olternaut View Post


    Can someone please investigate what the heck is that secret product transition???



    Please?



    macbooks!



    three different macbooks will be merged in two



    MacBooks

    $1099

    $1299



    New parts - alu new cpus, and other designs - low profits ...
  • walshbjwalshbj Posts: 864member
    Headline from Reuters:

    Futures fall after Apple, American Express disappoint



    The article says "Apple....reported results that disappointed investors."



    Either Wall Street needs to take ownership for their own expectations or Reuters needs to write a responsible story. I don't expect either to happen.
  • mh71mh71 Posts: 44member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    Apple's "Other Music Related Products and Services" segment accounted for $819M in revenue. The figure represents a 35 percent surge year-over-year, but a 7 percent dip versus the previous quarter.



    Anybody know how much of that money they actually keep for themselves. Rumor has it that they pay 70c for every 99c download and that they actually loose money on movie rentals.
  • solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by minderbinder View Post


    I don't really see how they're moving *away* from desktops, especially given the gain in sales this quarter.



    Notebooks are growing faster than desktops, therefore gaining a larger marketshare.



    [/QUOTE]Apple likes to say that the iMac and mini cover consumer needs, but they're lying and they know it. If they really want to gain some market share, a reasonably priced midtower would be one of the quickest ways to do it.[/QUOTE]

    You are looking at it as if Apple's market is everyone, when Apple has a very defined consumer in mind. They aren't trying to compete in this area at this time so there is no need arguing about it.
  • solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by shanmugam View Post


    macbooks!



    three different macbooks will be merged in two



    MacBooks

    $1099

    $1299



    New parts - alu new cpus, and other designs - low profits ...



    I dont see that happening but the MB. MBP and Mac Mini are all up for a chassis overhaul.
  • johnqhjohnqh Posts: 242member
    "Regarding the mystery transition, Apple doesn't want to leave a margin so high that it creates an "umbrella" for competitors to rest under; it often releases products at a high price but lowers their prices later."



    It is not a mid-range Mac. It is not new MBP. None of those would change the margin much.



    It could be an iPhone Nano (let's say "FREE with 2-year contract"), an Apple TV Take 3 (with DVD player and Tivo-like recording), or something completely different.



    An iPhone Nano will make sense. Keep in mind how the iPhone revenue is recognized - the initial price is recognized right away, but the carrier subsidies are recognized over two years. So, if there is an "iPhone Nano" which is free with contract, Apple won't recognize any revenue upfront.



    If that's the case, we can even estimate how many iPhone Nano plans to sell this quarter. Without "iPhone Nano", the EPS should be around $1.25. That means, the production cost for the iPhone Nano introduction will be about $200M. Assuming the iPhone Nano's production cost is $100 to $125/unit (lower than iPhone), that means 1.5M to 2M at introduction, which is also about the number Apple ordered for iPhone 3G introduction, so it fits.
  • SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 24,152member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mh71 View Post


    Anybody know how much of that money they actually keep for themselves. Rumor has it that they pay 70c for every 99c download and that they actually loose money on movie rentals.



    I would expect Jobs to axe any part of their business that did not actually make them money, so I disagree with your estimate.
  • jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,927member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by walshbj View Post


    It would be a blow if Steve had to step down, obviously. But it wouldn't be the end of Apple as many (media, wall street) have implied. Something Jobs brings to the table in addition to his master of sales ability: DISCIPLINE.



    Jobs stops Apple from releasing too many products, and he keeps the flow of new features and products down to a trickle. In a nutshell, he leaves everyone wanting more. The practice makes not-new technology seem exciting. Example: tons of phones can shoot video. iPhone can't. When the iPhone does video people will rave and upgrade.



    I predict a glut of crappy video posted to the Internet shortly afterwards.



    Apple holds back major features in large part because they can, and Apple buyers seem to be easily herded into re-buying product anyways. Some of them don't even seem to be aware of what else is out there anyway.



    I don't think any other company can do that and still sell products.
  • aapleaaple Posts: 78member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by johnqh View Post


    "Regarding the mystery transition, Apple doesn't want to leave a margin so high that it creates an "umbrella" for competitors to rest under; it often releases products at a high price but lowers their prices later."



    It is not a mid-range Mac. It is not new MBP. None of those would change the margin much.



    It could be an iPhone Nano (let's say "FREE with 2-year contract"), an Apple TV Take 3 (with DVD player and Tivo-like recording), or something completely different.



    An iPhone Nano will make sense. Keep in mind how the iPhone revenue is recognized - the initial price is recognized right away, but the carrier subsidies are recognized over two years. So, if there is an "iPhone Nano" which is free with contract, Apple won't recognize any revenue upfront.



    If that's the case, we can even estimate how many iPhone Nano plans to sell this quarter. Without "iPhone Nano", the EPS should be around $1.25. That means, the production cost for the iPhone Nano introduction will be about $200M. Assuming the iPhone Nano's production cost is $100 to $125/unit (lower than iPhone), that means 1.5M to 2M at introduction, which is also about the number Apple ordered for iPhone 3G introduction, so it fits.



    What the heck is the point of an iPhone nano? If the screen gets much smaller the touchscreen and most features of the iPhone become pointless.
  • foobarfoobar Posts: 102member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by shanmugam View Post


    $17 down, WTH?



    This always happens. People get scared about low guidance, and now they've got SJ's health to get scared about, too. AAPL is one stock to think long-term, otherwise you're gonna jump out of a window sooner or later.
  • minderbinderminderbinder Posts: 1,703member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Notebooks are growing faster than desktops, therefore gaining a larger marketshare.



    Sure, but that doesn't mean apple is bailing on desktops. Apple already has a pretty strong laptop line while their desktop line is not particularly competitive - there's much more room for improvement, and more easily gained market share on the desktop side.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    You are looking at it as if Apple's market is everyone, when Apple has a very defined consumer in mind. They aren't trying to compete in this area at this time so there is no need arguing about it.



    Apple's potential market IS everyone. They have been blowing off potential customers for years, and they have suffered for it.



    And whatever they are doing "at this time" is now a moot point - they just said that they're doing something to change their product strategy - "but they've never done that before" doesn't apply.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by aaple View Post


    What the heck is the point of an iPhone nano? If the screen gets much smaller the touchscreen and most features of the iPhone become pointless.



    An iPod with a phone in it?
  • johnqhjohnqh Posts: 242member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by aaple View Post


    What the heck is the point of an iPhone nano? If the screen gets much smaller the touchscreen and most features of the iPhone become pointless.



    Remember iPod Nano? It has same resolution as Video iPod.



    OK, let's look at it another way - the revenue estimate is certainly conservative. The back-to-school season is certainly big for Apple, and they are estimating only 5% increase in sales? Forget about new products, I will say their sales will be 15% to 20% higher this Q than last Q even if they keep everything the same.



    If the new product has so much impact on the EPS, it is not pocket change. The EPS is 20% lower than otherwise, that is a major portion. It is a mass market product.



    Yet, their estimate only says 5% higher revenue. Other than always giving conservative estimates, another explanation is that Apple is not recognizing the revenue of this new product.



    What product can it be? Think about it.
  • probablyprobably Posts: 139member
    You guys are losing talking about SJ health.



    The lead story and EPS avg that every subsequent story cited was Bloomberg's internal consensus of 1.24. If any of you had been reading AppleInsider today, the most generous EPS estimate available today or late yesterday was 1.20 (by the Bull Cross, not a juggernaut player, contributor from today). The most generous from the older school of Apple analysts was 1.10 (Shaw Wu)



    What was the figure they supposedly didn't meet with 1.19? 1.24



    When were all the search results relevant to the google query "apple 1.24 eps" published? After today's report.

    It's diving because media 'agrees' it did not make the mark even though that number didn't exist prior. (As far as I can see - please link something to prove me wrong so I don't feel so depressed about capitalism)



    They'll recover, but it's so ridiculously easy to short them if such things are fabricated.
Sign In or Register to comment.