or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Successful iPad debut expected to propel Apple stock past $300
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Successful iPad debut expected to propel Apple stock past $300

post #1 of 20
Thread Starter 
Aided by nearly 5 million iPad sales in the first 12 months, one prominent Wall Street analyst believes Apple stock will skyrocket to $305, while a number of others believe the iPad launch was a resounding success.

Mark Moskowitz with J.P. Morgan Research issued a note to investors Monday, lifting his December 2010 price target for AAPL stock to $305, up from $240. The strength for Apple is strong sales of the Mac and iPhone, but with a successful launch of the iPad and the product carrying an estimated 51 percent gross margin, he expects the new product to contribute significantly to Apple's bottom line.

"Currently, we estimate the iPad to exhibit a slightly lower unit sales trajectory compared to that of the first generation iPhone, but we acknowledge this gap could change as iPad volumes are reported in coming quarters," Moskowitz wrote. "We expect the iPad to benefit from Apple's content ecosystem and the favorable user experiences of the iPhone and iPod touch."

J.P. Morgan has forecast 4.805 million shipments of the iPad in the first 12 months, compared with 5.047 million for the iPhone. In the June quarter alone, the iPad is projected to ship 825,000 units, followed by 1.23 million in the September quarter.

The iPad will contribute to Apple's core businesses, in the Mac and iPhone, which Moskowitz expects to grow even further in 2010. He has raised his estimates for Mac sales in the March quarter to 3.179 million, and iPhone sales to 7.348 million.



Piper Jaffray

Analyst Gene Munster issued the results of a survey of 448 iPad buyers to give a better understanding of the product's early user base. The survey found:
Just like with the original iPhone, 74 percent of iPad buyers on launch day were Mac users.
Another 66 percent own an iPhone, and 99 percent of those plan to use their iPhone alongside their new iPad.
Just 13 percent of those surveyed had an Amazon Kindle, and more than half of those said they would replace their Kindle with an iPad.
Early buyers were sold on the iPad from the start, with 78 percent saying they did not consider any other gadgets when purchasing an iPad. Just 10 percent considered a kindle, and 6 percent eyed a netbook.
Munster said the survey suggests that Apple has successfully carved out a new product category, as it would appear that the iPad does not have a significant impact on iPhone and Mac sales. The analyst raised his price target for AAPL stock to $289, from $280.

Over thew weekend, Piper Jaffray's poll of 20 Apple stores found that most still had the iPad in stock, suggesting a strong supply for launch. Munster has predicted Apple sold between 600,000 and 700,000 in the first 24 hours.

Needham & Company

Analyst Charlie Wolf expects Apple to top 300,000 units sold in the iPad's first weekend, and the number could reach as high as 500,000 depending on the initial production run. The frenzy whipped up on Saturday across the country is evidence of Apple's presence in the U.S.

"The iPad launch says less about the ultimate success of the iPad and more about the prominence of Apple in our culture," Wolf wrote. "But the iPad itself is stunning. Once again, Apple has redefined a category called the tablet. The iPad is a device nobody needs but most everybody wants based on the continuing long lines at the Fifth Avenue Store and the "wow" reactions of customers on their first encounter with the device."

From here on out, though, the burden falls on software developers and content creators to turn the iPad, like the iPhone, into a "cultural phenomenon."

Broadpoint AmTech

Brian Marshall said spot checks over the weekend found that a couple of stores in San Francisco and Boston were completely out or had very little supply of the 16GB and 32GB iPad models. But the analyst said the 64GB model was still plentiful at all locations, suggesting supply was not an issue for most customers over the weekend.

He also noted that many Best Buy and Apple stores were closed on Sunday due to the Easter holiday, potentially limiting sales.



Marshall has predicted that Apple sold 525,000 units over the launch weekend, with 250,000 online preorders, 221,000 Apple retail store sales, and 55,000 sold from Best Buy.
post #2 of 20
LOL Good luck with that. Even if it did it would sink before you could say, "I'm first mo' fo's".
post #3 of 20
imo the stock will have a short "correction" before it goes back up, the fact is it raised too fast in the last months.

But if you look at the estimated P/E, just to keep the current P/E, the stock need to get to around 250 at least. If you take into account the cash they have, you end up with a current P/E of 15 , something you see for profitable company that have little chance of growth, like Wall Mart, IBM, HP, ...

250 estimated would be the price if Apple didnt had the Ipad. Anything above that is Ipad sales speculation.
post #4 of 20
I'm really surprised to see the initial sales numbers so close to those of the iPhone. I think Wolf is right that it says more about Apple in our culture. Marketing blogger John Tantillo did a post back when the iPad was first announced, basically saying the same thing in branding speak--that the buzz surrounding a product about which so little was known was due to Apple's brand strength (its consistent track record with producing new, innovative products that we then develop a need for..)

I personally don't have a use for an iPad and can't see myself getting one. I still think it's not too late to...change the name..obviously no women were invited to this marketing meeting. But the utility of the iPad will center around the apps that are created for it--even moreso than is true for the iPhone, I think. Here's a good article on that idea, from when the iPad was first announced.
post #5 of 20
APPL volume is insane at openning. So far its going up, but that may change in an heartbeat.
post #6 of 20
So Apple sold 5 million iPads in the first 12 months?

And here I thought it only shipped this past Saturday. Who has Apple been selling iPads to, and why did it take an entire 12 months for us to hear about this?
post #7 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by EWTHeckman View Post

So Apple sold 5 million iPads in the first 12 months?

And here I thought it only shipped this past Saturday. Who has Apple been selling iPads to, and why did it take an entire 12 months for us to hear about this?

Reread the sentence. It is written in the future tense.

"Apple stock will skyrocket to $305" , "aided by nearly 5 million iPad sales in the first 12 months"
post #8 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Aided by nearly 5 million iPad sales in the first 12 months, ...

It is "statements" like this that gives a bad name to website information. When did a prediction/projection become a fact before it even came to past?

First, was that really how the so-called "prominent" Mark Moskowitz predicated his prediction? If so, everyone should run away from the guy.


Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Piper Jaffray

Analyst Gene Munster issued the results of a survey of 448 iPad buyers to give a better understanding of the product's early user base.

Improper statistical sampling led to the headline that Dewey won over Truman as President of the United States.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Over the weekend, Piper Jaffray's poll of 20 Apple stores found that most still had the iPad in stock, suggesting a strong supply for launch. Munster has predicted Apple sold between 600,000 and 700,000 in the first 24 hours.

How does the first statement correlate with the second statement? Was the first the basis of Munster's prediction? If so, it explains why Munster missed the mark by a very wide margin, unless his prediction was to be interpreted:

650,000 +/- 300,000

Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

From here on out, though, the burden falls on software developers and content creators to turn the iPad, like the iPhone, into a "cultural phenomenon." -- Charlie Wolf

Among the predictions and statements quoted, the aforementioned made the most sense.

CGC
post #9 of 20
And you can believe it, because its an analyst prediction posted on Appleinsider, and those are NEVER wrong. ...ahem... Notice the headline doesn't read "One analyst predicts..." Yes, once again Appleinsider shows that they don't just eschew journalism, they beat it over the head with a lead pipe in a back alley.
post #10 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by sloane View Post

I'm really surprised to see the initial sales numbers so close to those of the iPhone. I think Wolf is right that it says more about Apple in our culture. Marketing blogger John Tantillo did a post back when the iPad was first announced, basically saying the same thing in branding speak--that the buzz surrounding a product about which so little was known was due to Apple's brand strength (its consistent track record with producing new, innovative products that we then develop a need for..)

I personally don't have a use for an iPad and can't see myself getting one. I still think it's not too late to...change the name..obviously no women were invited to this marketing meeting. But the utility of the iPad will center around the apps that are created for it--even moreso than is true for the iPhone, I think. Here's a good article on that idea, from when the iPad was first announced.

That might well remain the case but this is a new product with which none of us have had much hands-on experience. Also, as you note, the software that is developed for the product will have an impact.

Unlike you, though, I can see a use for this device in that if I want to remain within the Apple range of products (and I do) then an iPad in combination with a good desktop system makes a lot of sense. Instead of a compromise, which most laptops have become, I can have power and screen real estate on my desktop system while enjoying portability, battery life, etc. on a companion unit for use at other times. The cost, meanwhile, is attractive in that if I go with a basic iPad, not needing more memory etc. because of its intended use as a secondary device, it will cost me less than a Macbook, pro or otherwise. A 17" Macbook Pro in Canada retails for $2,599. I have a 24" Cinema Display ($999), a Mini ($899), a terabyte firewire 800 hard drive ($150), and eventually will own a basic iPad ($550). In other words, for the cost of one MacBook Pro, I will have two set-ups, each better suited to their intended uses than the MacBook would be. Granted, I do lose some processing power but the Cinema Display is a superior display by virtue of its size and it being set up in a more controlled environment. Also, the Cinema Display will last far longer than the laptop, meaning a cost saving when at some point I will be replacing my computer but not my monitor. In addition, when I do buy a new computer, the power advantage currently enjoyed by the Pro will likely be wiped out considering entry-level performance always improves when new models are brought to market.

Right now, I don't think many are figuring that the iPad will be a good thing for desktop sales and may negatively impact laptop sales. Not everyone will want to lose the portability of having their main machine be a high-powered laptop. But for many, like myself, a desktop/iPad combo will be very appealing. It's like the compromise most of us make with our transportation, purchasing larger vehicles to handle certain scenarios yet using that same vehicle often to simply commute to work. Most of us can't afford the expense of multiple vehicles but when it comes to computers, that's really not the case. The iPad represents a very smart solution to offering just the right amount of functionality for particular scenarios. It makes sense that way and it isn't dependent on a customer using an Apple as the complimentary second device. As such, I anticipate Apple will have no trouble selling as many of these machines as they can produce.
post #11 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by sloane View Post

I'm surprised the initial sales numbers were so close to those of the iPhone.

And the devices had comparable price points.
Extrapolating the parallel: 66 days after iPhone's release, Apple cut its price 33% to boost sales to match production.
Is the iPad's current price-for-perceived value, a value which buyers know includes a giant AppStore the iPhone release lacked, not to mention the iPhone halo itself, sustainable?
post #12 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbapou View Post

imo the stock will have a short "correction" before it goes back up, the fact is it raised too fast in the last months.

But if you look at the estimated P/E, just to keep the current P/E, the stock need to get to around 250 at least. If you take into account the cash they have, you end up with a current P/E of 15 , something you see for profitable company that have little chance of growth, like Wall Mart, IBM, HP, ...

250 estimated would be the price if Apple didnt had the Ipad. Anything above that is Ipad sales speculation.

I presume by estimated P/E you mean forward P/E, which is indeed based on a consensus of estimated future earnings. AAPL's trailing P/E had been steadily declining for the last couple of years, with the possible exception of the last month or so. Unfortunately or not, cash (and debt) is not considered in P/E calculations.

The problem with these numbers is, both declining and increasing P/E ratios can be taken as indicators of completely contradictory trends. Grains of salt should be amply applied.

The entire market is due for a correction, at least in the opinion of many market watchers.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #13 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by sloane View Post

I personally don't have a use for an iPad and can't see myself getting one. I still think it's not too late to...change the name..obviously no women were invited to this marketing meeting.


I am not directing this at you in particular, but you mentioned it again.

This name thing is so infantile. The word 'pad' is used in many contexts from animals feet to NASA. Why don't the juvenile humorists have problems with 'ThinkPad' I wonder?

NASA, Given this fuss over Apple's use of the word, I assume is inundated with jokes about the gasp 'Shuttle Pad' from these same morons?

Get over the stupid remarks about the name already. I am sure any intelligent woman can read the word 'pad' without thinking of only one use of the word as it seems immature men do and have no need to be on panels to reject the word as you suggest.
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
post #14 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by EWTHeckman View Post

So Apple sold 5 million iPads in the first 12 months?

And here I thought it only shipped this past Saturday. Who has Apple been selling iPads to, and why did it take an entire 12 months for us to hear about this?

This for me is prime example of someone, who does not understand what is written and it shows. The quote is stating that stock is will rise to $305 and 5 million iPads will be sold at that future projected stock price in 12 months.

Hmm you thought you were being clever, the computer says
post #15 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by souliisoul View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by EWTHeckman View Post
So Apple sold 5 million iPads in the first 12 months?

And here I thought it only shipped this past Saturday. Who has Apple been selling iPads to, and why did it take an entire 12 months for us to hear about this?



This for me is prime example of someone, who does not understand what is written and it shows. The quote is stating that stock is will rise to $305 and 5 million iPads will be sold at that future projected stock price in 12 months.

Hmm you thought you were being clever, the computer says

Actually, it was a rhetorical criticism, bordering sarcasm, in regard Apple Insider's presentation of conjectures, rumors, predictions, projections, etc., as if they were already factual.

If you noticed, the observation was echoed in a number of posts here, and noted in other threads, in the past.

CGC
post #16 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgc0202 View Post

Actually, it was a rhetorical criticism, bordering sarcasm, in regard Apple Insider's presentation of conjectures, rumors, predictions, projections, etc., as if they were already factual.

I've pointed out flaws in AI articles in the past, but your criticism of this article is off-base. All of the opinions about future sales and stock performance were reported as opinions, not as facts or events which had already occurred.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #17 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post


Quote:
Originally Posted by cgc0202 View Post
Actually, it was a rhetorical criticism, bordering sarcasm, in regard Apple Insider's presentation of conjectures, rumors, predictions, projections, etc., as if they were already factual.


I've pointed out flaws in AI articles in the past, but your criticism of this article is off-base. All of the opinions about future sales and stock performance were reported as opinions, not as facts or events which had already occurred.

The comment you quoted was a rephrase (imy nterpreration) of EWTHeckman post, in his defense, in response to a criticism by another poster. I stand by my first post in this thread, and offer no apologies. I have no illusion that Apple Insider would change its editorial standards because of my comments, nor expect other posters to abide by my own standards.

Even professional journalists decry the deterioration in fact checking and need for corroboration in many internet sites. The irony is that even the most respected papers (like the NY Times) are not susceptible to such flaws. In fact, there was a celebrated NYT journalist who actually fabricated his information, and even won the Pulitzer prize, I think, before his fraud was uncovered. That is the worst kind though.

The reporter was able to get away with the fraud for a number of years because his superiors in the NY Times believed in him. I am not sure if race was another factor (the guy was African American), and if I read correctly, NYT was trying hard to diversify its newsroom. He was also quite smart so that helped. There was soul searching also after this.

But, personally, I think NY Times has deteriorated even further. I used to subscribe to the NY Times paper everyday when I was a student. I gradually got disillusioned though with the paper. Right now, I tend to browse only on the main events and some sections. But no longer regard it as always factural.

If you follow NYT closely, during the aftermath following the September 11, 2001 tragedy, newspapers like the NY Times, essentially became mouthpieces of the government. A top reporter (I think she eventually resigned or left the NYT) published government allegations without fact checking. Overall, many newspapers adopted similar positions. The protest against the war was not covered as much, or relegated to the inner pages. It was only around 2005-2006 (???) when many papers finally found their mistake and were now trying to outdo each other criticizing the government. Rightly or wrongly, depending on ones perspective, it led to shift in power in US Congress in the 2006 election.

I mentioned the above, not as a political statement. There was actually a PBS (Frontline, I think) post facto analysis of the reaction of the mass media to the event. PBS actually interviewed many top reporters and editors and publishers who admitted their mistakes, as well as the few reporters and editors from a MidWest (?) paper who did not follow the lemmings in mass media.

It is rare to find such soul searching about what is fact and fiction in many internet sites though. Even sites like Wikipedia have become battles of opposing perspectives. (S)he did the last edit, had the last say, until the next one comes along. Wikipedia was forced to review its "anyone can" editing policies, as a result.

The reality is that it is difficult if not impossible to be truly unbiased. Whether we like it or not, we are prisoners of our space and time (shaping our point of view).

What we can only hope for is the openness to listen to differing perspectives. Try to find common grounds, if possible. Or, at the very least, accept the diversity in our opinions.

CGC
post #18 of 20
Your lengthy diversions into unrelated topics do not address my point, which is that the article in question does not state opinions as fact nor does it state predictions as though they are current events. If this is the criticism of the article, then it is not fair or accurate. Under the circumstances, the screed against the state of journalism takes on no small amount of irony.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #19 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

Your lengthy diversions into unrelated topics do not address my point, which is that the article in question does not state opinions as fact nor does it state predictions as though they are current events. If this is the criticism of the article, then it is not fair or accurate. Under the circumstances, the screed against the state of journalism takes on no small amount of irony.

I have no interest in going into protracted exchanges here. If you did nto get the essence of my original post, you will not get it at all.

I am not here to enlighten you nor the other way around.

Such is life.

CGC
post #20 of 20
No kidding.

Seems you are more interested in protraction than I am considering the relative length of your posts on the subject.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Successful iPad debut expected to propel Apple stock past $300