Originally Posted by newbee
Originally Posted by DCNoble
why do these forums always fall for apple's supply constraint rumors? they're obviously put out by apple to spur lines and push forward demand. none of their major launches ever have supply constraints. you'd think by now people would catch on to the ruse..
AFAIK Apple did not comment on supply issues, one way or another. It was all of the rumor sites and the "financial experts" that were doing all of the commenting. Apple put out nothing .... big difference from what you are claiming. Think first.
Originally Posted by solipsism
ReallY? Piper Jaffray has lied about contacted stores and measuring line densities because they are employed by Apple? Do you have anything
to back up such a claim?
newbee already trumped the allegations of DCNoble quite well, and I agree with newbee's point.
However, having read a number of Gene Munster's projections, the basis of his predictions or projections would not pass muster what would be considered to be valid statistical sampling. For example, if his readjusted projection was based mainly on this statement:
.. Checks with 20 Apple stores found that 19 of them still had iPads in stock at 7:30 p.m. on Saturday. Munster said ...
and the stores themselves were not randomly sampled throughout the US, it would not meet the criteria of valid statistical sampling.
As a result, as far as a I recall from reports comparing analysts projections [I do not have the data in front of me], quite a number of his Gene Munster's projections about Apple products and earnings, or the products and prices Apple would introduce, are not always correct and often, not even close.
I am sure a number of others here could cite more predictions and projections of Munster that did not pan out.
In fact, he usually has to re-assess his prior projections; and still he usually is off or at best just close.
Munster was infamous for predicting in June 2007 (?) that Apple would sell 45 million iPhone units (annually) by 2009 ***
He maintained the aforementioned projection even after the economic and market collapse that started in the summer of 2008. If you review the basis of Munster's projections, the assumptions turned out to be faulty or too exuberant. He also tends to base them from unreliable sources.
Nonetheless, Munster is the "darling" among Apple proponents because he tends to provide predictions and projections that are very positive for Apple product. This seems to be a blindspot among us who not only like but love what Apple creates for us -- we tend to accept rumors or, "predictions and projections" even if their bases are at best flimsy or unreliable, and accept them as "facts" to be the starting point of our own projections and speculations.
In fairness, many business analysts, as well as business and technoloigy analyses of newspapers and their own analysts (including prestigious papers like NY Times) tend to have a premise or "perspective" already, and then they try to find what they consider as facts to corroborate their premise or "perspective".
To illustrate the aforementioned on a day-to-day basis, read the headline of the stock market (in the US) in the morning and at the end of the day -- you may find that the same "facts" may be used to justify the direction of the market at the start of the day, and may be reinterpreted (or new information) introduced, if the direction of the market are contradictory when it opens and closes during the day.
My own bias right now is that many business analysts, have the same tendency to provide the alleged "facts" to justify their predictions and projections.