The Complete and Utter P.R. failure of Apple

Say the stock went all the way down to $200, what would be the effect on Apple's day-to-day business? Also, how would the public at large view the company differently as opposed to investors looking for an investment opportunity? Lastly, what would you expect them to do to fix the above problems? They can't and have never commented widely on false rumours - every time someone suggests they are working on a particular product, they can't dismiss it or they'll narrow down what they are working on.

 

1. Sales, revenue, and profit that prove the negative press is written by people who need to be in jail.

2. Lawsuits, worldwide, across the entire market.

3. They don't have to respond to this.

4. Sales, revenue, and profit that make this meaningless.

5. Invalid. No actual customers are saying this. You're listening to trolls; that's your problem.

6. Why should they care?

7. Your point being what? What "should" he say?

 

How are you so blind that you don't see this?

 

Answer: No.

Let the stock tank !

Apple then announces a buy back scheme - and you just watch all the hedge fund heroes climb all over it.

Apple a dying animal - jeez ! Where did that come from ?

 

And it's just as big a lie as the crap written about Apple to tank the stock. So what?

 

I'm just trying to understand why you believe any of this.

Just like every year.

 

And yet none of them have the customer satisfaction of Apple, nor are they on track to do so.

 

So what's your argument, again? Apple is doomed?

 

Okay. You're wrong.

Not directly though, the vast majority of buyers of Apple products won't even know there is such a thing as AAPL. The value of the stock has to be primarily controlled by the activities of the largest shareholders and they aren't average consumers even though many will respresent consumers:

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/mh?s=aapl

As you say, they are gambling with consumer money. This doesn't justify in any way Apple being more responsible for what happens with it. Expecting reckless behaviour to be mended by responsible people working harder is exactly the wrong way to go about it. It'll just encourage the stock manipulation through false rumours and use of automated transactions. If it's always Tim's problem then they can make the rollercoaster run as wild as they want.

And you think that would stop them buying a nice computer or phone? More accurately, would that stop over 100 million people per year buying a nice computer or phone?

Yeah, the iPhone 5 outsold the Galasy S3 and Note combined last quarter. Samsung really needs to start innovating when they can't even outsell essentially a stretched version of last year's iPhone. It must be worrying for them that all they can sell are cheap, low margin products even with a totally redesigned flagship model.

 

What evidence do you have for this?

Pure unadulterated FUD !

They're even copying the event strategy:

http://www.t3.com/news/samsung-galaxy-s4-will-surprise-and-delight-on-march-14-says-leading-analyst

"They didn’t announce the Galaxy S4 at CES – the so-called Super Bowl of Technology. They said “no” to MWC and said “we’re going to have our own event.”"

And some of their phone strategy by stretching the last model:



Oh no, lack of innovation! Their early release schedule suggests they are a bit desperate too. $200b market cap, has Samsung peaked? Time to start ditching the stock. I guess when you copy an innovator who stops innovating, your innovation supply runs out too.

As you can see though from the list of major investors in Apple, it's the same culprits you see time and time again involved in all financial turmoil. It only takes a few of them to trigger a major change. They have deliberately placed themselves in a position that everyone from government to the consumer is entirely dependent on their actions so they become untouchable. Everybody runs around pointing the finger at the only people actually behaving responsibly and doing better than they ever have to sort the mess out. The first step is to start pointing the fingers in the right direction.

Tim Cook's answer to a certain class of investors about his performance should simply be (NSFW):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=PSEYXWmEse8#t=187s

"I'm the guy who does his job, you must be the other guy"

but he could start here (NSFW):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=PSEYXWmEse8#t=65s

There are long term investors who are being screwed over and it's bad that this happens but it's the nature of the game they play. Apple has over 0.5 billion customers, which considering there are only 7 billion people in the world and half are in poverty, and they only sell a handful of premium products, is pretty impressive. I'd say they have a long way to fall before they are in any kind of trouble and it's not really trouble if they stop growing. Nobody takes a stepladder up Mount Everest. When you reach the top, that's as far as you need to go. Tim said he doesn't see a limit to where they can go but there is a human limit in everything and there is a tighter limit in a premium market, usually exponentially because of the wealth distribution.

Maybe the current market cap is more appropriate for Apple and it will stabilise but right now, people will get scared by the drop, dump the stock to save further losses and drive the price really low and then it will be undervalued and people will buy in again and it'll settle somewhere after a year or more. All Apple can do is keep selling their products and there's no evidence they are having problems there.

 

 

Finally I get to use this again.

 

We get a lot of "doom and gloomers" here. There's no real reason to let that go unchallenged. You've provided no disproven evidence for your position and aren't answering about half of the questions here. 

So forgive me if I'm a little snarky with someone who wants to just say "Apple is doomed" while standing in front of their HUGE PILE OF MONEY and INVENTORY THAT TURNS OVER EVERY SINGLE WEEK.

 

No, I can't see where that would have happened.

 

Except they're not, which is sort of the point.

 

So 'modern' marketing began roughly five months ago? Because this is the same thing they've been doing the past fifteen years, and it worked through all of them.

 

The chasm in understanding certainly seems to be that large.

 

That basic math winds up with 13 billion in quarterly profit. Fourth highest of all time. And they sold almost a million fewer product.

 

Come on, man.

Firstly, Tim Cook is doing a GREAT JOB as Apple CEO. It isn't HIS FAULT that some seemingly illegal (should be) conspiracy to take his business down to benefit certain others with a dog in that race have become increasingly fabricated-ly off their rockers. I haven't seen bullsh*t pass of as "Journalism* ever. It's incredible that it can be legal.

However, secondly, I think the one area Tim Cooks MGMT has "failed" (THUS FAR) is in PR. Lots could have been done to maintain control. Either he/they don't care and just focus on the business, or they aren't doing their jobs in THAT regard. 

Even things like when they announced the Dividend. WHY on the weekend of reporting blockbuster iPad sales? When the stock was flying? WHY do they have the ex-date and record date so close together? They aren't even trying to get people to hold the stock for long periods of time, which is the whole point of a Dividend (stabilization). Why just give their money away like that? Most companies make you hold for a long time to receive your Dividend (as it should be).

IF you're gonna step in the ring and play W.S games, then don't make it look like you're doing it carelessly, kicking and screaming. You have to feed those arrogant idiotic sharks, give them something to chew, or control and divert the conversation.

Tim should be guarding the $400's with his life and job, which is how I see it. However, he's allowed the sentiment to get so powerful, it literally has BECOME the Wall Street perception of Apple. And it DOES start to effect public perception of the company to some degree. I.e like my Brother who barely knows what "Stocks" are, brings up "What happened to Apple stock"? The media is on a jointed effort to make Apple sound "finished", "uncool", and it's bullcrap, but they're trying to convince one mind at a time, and succeeding on some of those who are ignorant enough to believe it.

I am not an Apple doomsdayer, I think the company is doing better than ever, innovating at the top of its classes, and iPhone 5 is a HUGE HIT, annihilating the lousy GS3 in sales, which the media CLAMORED over in that it wouldn't happen.... then when it did? Nothing, crickets. It's a fixed sentiment right now, largely payed for by the record-breaking anti-Apple media budget of those thieves, Samsung, and Apple is letting it get the best of them, all whilst they're doing INCREDIBLY, posting the best quarters in HISTORY OF THE WORLD, and T.C has done a REMARKABLE JOB of transitioning a company who just lost the most prolific CEO perhaps in history.

 

The only thing left is to regain control of the sentiment, and they have the FACTS to prove it, to fight off the FABRICATIONS of the naysayers. IMO, Apple needs to become more transparent. Not on products, but on PR. Also, they've let their advertisements get lost in translation. While Samsung is damagingly bullying them in ads (which IMO makes Samsung look even worse than those thieves already do, but unfortunately generates some mind-control of the ignorant), Apple has seemingly a small and soft media presence. They barely advertised iPhone 5, it's like they gave up on that phone and it STILL posted record results. They let Samsung take the media momentum and shift it back their way.

 

I'm just trying to figure out why what you're saying matters or why you think it's somehow a rebuttal and not extra proof of what most say.

 

You can get an iPhone at Wal-Mart now. What's your point? And where's your proof that subsidies will disappear? 

T-Mobile looks to be one of the first:

http://arstechnica.com/apple/2013/01/t-mobile-says-iphone-coming-subsidies-going-in-3-4-months/

I saw a page suggesting they will offer discounts on the upfront cost though. The iPhone 5 is $650 off-contract according to AT&T and it looks like what they will do is apply a discount so they might ask for $450 up front and then lock the buyer into a contract in order to recoup the costs of the discount.

I think it will just drive people away from T-Mobile when other providers will offer the phones free on more expensive contracts. I reckon more people will pay $40 for 24 months = $960 vs $450 + $20 for 24 months = $930. After the contract is up, you can switch to a cheaper plan. They obviously feel that they will make more money without subsidies but I can see a lot of customers being put off by the initial price.

Some people think this will drive people away from Apple but the Galaxy S3 is only $100 cheaper and a worse product.

 

That's different from a subsidy in name only. 

 

Though you're right; it's probably what they'll do.