or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by TeeJay2012

  Perfect timing for calls due in a week. The WSJ has released negative Apple stories in past that seem suspiciously timed to earnings reports. I am sure that the SEC will react aggressively by raising their eyebrows for 5 minutes this morning...
    Hahaha   Exactly how it happened according to an 'iWitness'.
Agree completely. These are the kind of half baked stories that lead to AAPL volatility. Like supply chain problems that do not exist. Like lack of interest by Chinese. C'mon try harder AI.
Good questions and comments. Not familiar with BN so honestly do not know. I agree that Amazon is on 'this side of legal' as long as they show that their cut price model on the e-books allows a profit, as any company should expect. So gradually the competition disappears. Amazon can sustain losses for a long time - hell the shares will go up. Will the DOJ view this as predatory pricing and go after Amazon with the zeal they went after Apple for collusion? I bet not.   As...
Got it now. Sorry. The PE is a joke as well as Amazon share price rises each day, even as they lose money,  like fumes from a pile of ...
And when this is seen by the consumer as price lowering by the DOJ and Amazon, almost everyone is happy. For now.
Not sure. The math does not add up even for high volume. Amazon has been able to do this as within their 'model', they have not lost money on the book section, even though they must lose money on e-books. Until last quarter. They are running at a loss despite billions of revenue. Alarms should be going off.
This is just my personal view. Amazon has two faces. On one side, it is the customer service oriented online wonderchild. On the other hand it is a predatory piranha that will kill many businesses by the time it is done. Amazon has pulled the wool over the DOJs eyes, so that they see only the good side. In the past Amazon have avoided being charged with 'predatory pricing' (which is intended solely to put competitors out of business) because they have 'made' a profit...
It did come down to her sense of the 'infringement sum', and that Apple did not 'prove' that the infringing devices were selected over the Apple devices. From what I read, this will is a tricky ruling that will be studied closely as this will affect future IP rulings. Would it have been better if this was not a trial by jury for the precedence aspects?
Over the top rant warning.
New Posts  All Forums: