or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by thompr

Not for me.  Oh, I will definitely get one, but I'll still be rockin' an iPhone of some kind indefinitely.  That's because 90% of what I use the iPhone for is web surfing and email.  I want a bigger screen for those things, so the watch just aint gonna cut it. Thompson
I'm not skeptical of that at all.  Amongst the set of people that would pay $5K for a high-end watch, I would venture to say that a large fraction of them are so wealthy that they consider that amount to be "peanuts" and would continue to replace it as often as they felt the need to flaunt their top-end status.
 Many people that have that kind of coin (for a watch) may not care about "resale value" and will probably just keep buying new "Editions" every couple of years as advancements happen, handing down the previous to family and/or friends.
I don't believe that Google will give up on Android anytime soon.  I'm talking a decade, at minimum, not just a few years.
You over-bashed Apple due to ignorance of the contracts they had put in place (and which we only have partial information about now).  Go back and look at some of your early claims as to what Apple had lost, etc, etc.  It only took a couple of days to see how off-base some of those knee-jerk claims were. I don't think Apple's choice of GTAT was a huge mistake.  Apple apparently made a bid for some really aggressive quantity and quality goals such that if GTAT couldn't meet...
As I recall it, you began your tirade by bashing Apple almost within hours of GTAT's bankruptcy filing.  Then you changed later when a few more details started coming out.  You get as many mea culpas as you give.
That is his MO.  He does not have an opinion that he isn't passionate (and way too confident) about.   And he offers a LOT of opinions.  He will typically denigrate you if you disagree, as you point out.  I have seen him end up wrong on many occasions but have rarely seen a mea culpa.
The "scuttlebutt" in the industry is that the CCs & banks agreed to give Apple a tiny cut in return for Apple shouldering the burden of liability.  We do not know the truth of the matter, but it seems plausible to me.
I believe that the 179M units in calendar 2014 is accurate.  It would require that the first 3 Qs only averaged 38.67M units, and I think that's correct.
Well, given all of their financial assets, there is probably some price at which Apple would come in and scoop up some shares whenever it touches that level, even if Apple had to hit the debt markets again.  That sets a floor, of sorts.  Unfortunately, we don't know what that number would be, so it is an unknown (and only temporary) floor.  So this is probably just an academic point instead of a useful one.  Thompson
New Posts  All Forums: