Quote:

Originally Posted by poksi 

 

Nope. They spent miserable percentage on R&D.

One could levy any number of criticisms against Apple, but R&D spending shouldn't be among them.

Even during their strongest years over the last decade, Apple consistently spends less for their R&D than their competitors, and has more to show for it.

Direct comparison of expenditures may apply to marketing and some other areas, but in the field of invention the variance in return can be quite broad.

That Apple has consistently drawn a higher ROI for their R&D is certainly not a mark against them, but instead should be a question for other companies:  How can companies like HP, once the most innovative in the Valley, spend so much and have so little to show for it?

Quote:

Originally Posted by SolipsismX 

Apple:

2011 — $108 billion revenue and $26 billion in net income (24% net profit margin)
2012 — $156.53 billion and $41 billion in net income (26.2% net profit margin)

A growth of 69% in revenue and 63% in profits YoY.

Samsung:

2011 — $220.1 billon revenue and $21.2 billion in net income (9.6% net profit margin)
2012 — $183.6 billon revenue and $26.5 billion in operating income (cant find net profit and unwilling to hunt down each quarter and do the currency conversion)

That's looks like a substantial YoY drop in revenue and only a fraction of Apple's net profits and profit margin. Nice try but you won't get away with that shit on this forum.

Where from do you have those Samsung numbers? They are completely wrong.

And you don't need to do currency conversion as Samsung is providing their numbers also in $.

The numbers for Samsung Electronics are (CY = FY)

2010 - $136.28 B revenue and $15.60 B net income

2011 - $144.98 B revenue and $13.15 B net income

2012 - $187.26 B revenue and $23.45 B net income

The numbers for Apple are (Calendar Years!)

2010 - $  76.28 B revenue and $16.63 B net income

2011 - $127.84 B revenue and $32.98 B net income

2012 - $164.65 B revenue and $41.73 B net income

Samsung had a mediocre 2011 and an excellent 2012.

Apple had a fantastic 2011 and I really don't see why people think Apple had a bad 2012! 

Quote:

Originally Posted by SolipsismX 



It is simple stuff and you continually ignore that Apple's profits have increased YoY, that their profits are projected to increase for fiscal 2013, and they far exceeding Samsung in both profits and profit margins which are now claiming is some gold standard despite ignoring it previously.
And many will buy into those estimates in the hope they are true or at least with the hope that enough lemmings will buy into it so they can make bank. That doesn't make it true and someone who claims to have an MBA should understand a basic concept of how markets can be manipulated without any actually living to their fabricated projections.
Your original comment had nothing to do with the stock price based on projections but instead claimed as fact thing you are merely wanting to come true, but don't take my word for it, let's examine what you wrote…

"While everyone around them is getting better, Apple is getting worse. That is going to be the theme until they change it and unfortunately, a 5S won't change so we'll have most of the year where the mainstream view is that Apple is in decline because they whiffed on product cycles and further can't execute. Frankly, its hard to argue that isn't the case."

You're claiming that Apple is getting worse as a company. Now we might have been able to conclude that you were talking only about the stock price (which still wouldn't be accurate) but your next sentence followed up with a comment about about unreleased hardware and the pronoun "they" in regard to Apple needing to change how they conduct business.

You then restate your initial comment about the company getting worse — not the stock — by claiming they have had unsuccessful attempts on launching products, as well as being able to execute the products they do have, which you conclude as being proof that Apple is pathetic, piece of shit of a company that do nothing but falter in the wake of Steve Job's death despite breaking record after record. That about sum it up?


PS: This is the same ol' shit that has been spewing since before Steve Jobs came to Apple and while Steve Jobs was at all, yet they keep winning and everyone wishing for their death keeps failing. Keep it up, you may live long enough to eventually be right.

>>You have an MBA yet you think shareholders get a piece of the net income? You might want to ask for your money back from whatever college you attended because shares rise and fall based on a large variety of factors and not some direct, 1:1 relationship between increased profits otherwise Apple's share price would be much higher and Amazon's much lower.>>

Theoretically a value of a company is reflective of its discounted future cash flows.  Net income is where you start to calculate cash flow (+D&A, stock comp, deferred taxes, working capital, etc.).  In the short run, the market is a voting machine, in the long its a weighing machine and will weigh the value of those cash flows.  So yes, I agree with you that in the short run many factors come into play, but in the long run cash is king.

What exactly does stock price only have to do with anything?  Just referencing stock prices without share count, cash, leverage tells us nothing about the value of a company.

Let me clear things up, it is getting worse as an investment and I am generally throwing out perceptions that are hurting the stock.  That really isn't saying much as the gains of yesteryear won't happen again.

There is no denying Tim has made some mistakes recently.  CEOs don't send out apology letters when they do good things.  Heck all CEOs make strategic mistakes from time to time, its order of magnitude that is the big deal.  Apparently folks here believe no mistake are ever made in Cupertino, that Tim Cook is infallible, despite the fact he himself put out a letter saying they make mistakes.  Do you think the stock would be at this price without the maps mistake?  I don't.

Lets talk facts.  The value of this company is less than it was when Tim Cook took over.  That isn't rumor, conjecture or anything else, its a fact.  Stock price is higher, but the value of the enterprise is lower by about $30 billion despite selling all those products the last year and a half.  Of course it was much higher at one point.  Your response was sharp witted enough that I shouldn't have to explain how the value of the company is lower with the stock higher.

Current sellside estimates show a profit decrease this year (based on 45 analysts).  Marginal decrease, but decrease nonetheless.  Goog is expected to increase its profits by 40+% and Samsung by nearly 100%.  Google and Samsung are currently preferred investments because they are growing profits and Apple isn't.  Listen, the law of large numbers is tough to deal with, but this is a large market and competitors are growing.

This is the angst people have with the company AND stock.  The total amount of profits being generated in mobile is increasing this year and next and foreseeable future, but they have flatlined profit-wise, so is it just a pause or can they re-accelerate profit growth.  That is the issue people care about from an investment perspective, not whether Apple has better products (they do), not whether they can innovate (they will).  Of course these are tied together.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jetz 

But as an investor, you will not see a dime of that success.

Instead of a dime you see $10.60 per share p.a.

Quote:

Originally Posted by anantksundaram 


Cash flow based is even better. I await your answers. (I am surprised you now say you need time, since you bragged earlier that you had a 'model'. Why don't you just share it with us?).

Until then, stop pontificating on Apple stock. Or stick to credit analysis, not equity analysis.

You are a real joy.  I didn't 'brag' I said I had one.  Like virtually every person on wall street, I didn't build a model like you want.

You obviously have one, I assume that will be shared as a quid pro quo.

I've been wrong on the stock.  If I though they were doomed I'd sell.

As if there is a difference between credit and equity analysis at the end of the day.  Fact that you think so is quite funny.

Quote:

Originally Posted by geekdad 

you forgot Jon Ive...He will design Apple's future

I didn't forget Jon Ive. I had hopes for him but he hasn't appeared as spokesman -- and I was expecting him to when he was promoted to upper management. And the few times I've watched him speak, he is the quiet, thoughtful guy, perhaps charming, but decidedly not a salesman. 

Now, at upper management, they still have to bring in a retail guy. Can they bring somebody in to run retail and ooze enthusiasm, joy, excitement, knows retail, sees the market as it can be?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdnc123 

Those aren't lies.  The lack of innovation is routinely discussed, so I was discussing perception.  Of course I think they are innovating.  Whether that innovation leads to a commercial product that can move the needle for a $40+ billion bottom line company remains to be seen.

 

I guess it depends what the 5S has.  Lets hope the fingerprint and NFC rumors are true.  Roll out same phone with a new camera and it will get ugly.

 

I don't think i said they will miss, but maybe I did.  They have missed 3 of the last 4 quarters so not exactly a stretch to assume it happens again.

 

Tim knows the buyback is a mirage and not particularly beneficial to shareholders as it simply offsets dilution, so why say we are returning $45 billion?  Shareholders will get the divvies in that number, they get none of the buyback, its smoke and mirrors.

 

Are you naive enough to believe Tim when he insinuated they aren't going to come out with a large screen phone.  C'mon!  Of course they will

They have never missed a quarter. They have missed the analyst's estimates, not their own guidances.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdnc123 

 I personally am not a fan of Tim Cook and think he is delusional if he thinks he can run the company the same way Steve did.  

You realize that Apple's phenomenal margins and supply chain management for the past 15 years is all a result of Cook's hard work at Apple? You should be praising him for any gains on your stock. You're delusional if you think Jobs rebuilt Apple all by himself. 

Jefferies can go **** itself. Does it have any evidence of all these claims? Of course not. All they need to do is pull random shit out of their asses with "supply chain checks" in order to denigrate Apple. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by fastasleep 

 

You realize that Apple's phenomenal margins and supply chain management for the past 15 years is all a result of Cook's hard work at Apple? You should be praising him for any gains on your stock. You're delusional if you think Jobs rebuilt Apple all by himself. 

I clarified that statement to mean he can't deal with Wall Street the way SJ did.  A fair retort otherwise.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slurpy 

Jefferies can go **** itself. Does it have any evidence of all these claims? Of course not. All they need to do is pull random shit out of their asses with "supply chain checks" in order to denigrate 

What really makes me almost vomit is that by next week Jefferies and Co. will have made hundreds of thousends of $ just by spreading completely unsupported BS.

Quote:

Originally Posted by waldobushman 

They have never missed a quarter. They have missed the analyst's estimates, not their own guidances.

Good point.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rabbit_Coach 

What really makes me almost vomit is that by next week Jefferies and Co. will have made hundreds of thousends of $ just by spreading completely unsupported BS.

Beyond the channel checks, Misek says their survey of 16-25 year olds show Samsung is the most popular phone for that category at the moment.  Believes Apple is losing the high end purely due to screen size and that they won't have one until middle of next year.  Sees massive earnings miss vs street consensus in fiscal 3Q (June qtr) and fiscal 4Q (sept qtr).  

If any of this is true, I hope they hold off on buyback as stock gonna go a heck of a lot lower.

Don't shoot the messenger. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdnc123 

 

You obviously have one, I assume that will be shared as a quid pro quo.

Listen, you're the one that bragged in your prior post, the one that I responded to first ('bragging' is what I call this) ➡: "Listen, I have an Apple model, it is very tough to see any earnings growth this year,...... blah blah."

All I am doing is calling you out on it. I have to assume that you're obviously b-s'ing unless you could tell us what the 'model' is.

------

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdnc123 

 

As if there is a difference between credit and equity analysis at the end of the day.  Fact that you think so is quite funny.

------

The fact that you don't know the difference between the two tells me all I need to know!

PS: I see that you've picked up MacRulez as an admirer! In these parts, that's not a compliment...... 

Need waders for this thread. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by anantksundaram 

Listen, you're the one that bragged in your prior post, the one that I responded to first ('bragging' is what I call this) ➡: "Listen, I have an Apple model, it is very tough to see any earnings growth this year,...... blah blah."

 

All I am doing is calling you out on it. I have to assume that you're obviously b-s'ing unless you could tell us what the 'model' is.

 

------

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdnc123 

 

As if there is a difference between credit and equity analysis at the end of the day.  Fact that you think so is quite funny.

------

 

The fact that you don't know the difference between the two tells me all I need to know!

 

 

PS: I see that you've picked up MacRulez as an admirer! In these parts, that's not a compliment...... 

Send me your email, i'll send you what I have, its not very complex or prettied up at moment is all, I was going to spend some time building it out.  I asked for a day to do so, but you would rather not wait.  That is fine. 

Right, so guys like me that have work with converts or put on bond vs equity trades, vol vs credit, options vs credit and thus have exposure to credit and equity..... you think there are two analysts one that focuses on equity and the other credit?  The fact that you are implying that would have to be the case tells me all I need to know about you.  Tell me how you buy a convert, short the stock against it (or vice versa) on a neutral hedge and don't care if the stock goes up or down and can still make a ton of money.  How does that work?  Tell me what you know about merton or kmv models that show credit is nothing more than a derivative of equity volatility (what I meant by vol, which I'm sure you didn't know).  Tell me the correlation between the VIX and high yield credit spreads.  Tell me the correlation between a single company option vol and its credit default swaps or credit spreads.  All these model and correlations exist based on the theory and historical relationships that show equity value is nothing more than a long-term option on the underlying value of a company's assets with a strike price of the company's debt.

But sure, big difference between being a credit and equity analyst.  Other than knowing how to read and indenture and credit agreement, no difference between analyzing company fundamentals.  None.  

Go ahead an google what I'm explaining  and respond so you can pretend you have any idea what I just said. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdnc123 

While everyone around them is getting better, Apple is getting worse. That is going to be the theme until they change it and unfortunately, a 5S won't change so we'll have most of the year where the mainstream view is that Apple is in decline because they whiffed on product cycles and further can't execute. Frankly, its hard to argue that isn't the case.

I have to laugh at the responses.  Perhaps only the Emperor's new clothes posts should be allowed on this site.  Wondering how Apple is getting "worse" (and I realize that is relative) consider that the iPad mini blew by the iPad in terms of sales and it carries a lower gross profit per unit.  iPhone 4s and 4s' are selling just as well as the 5s because people arent willing to pay for the difference.  If your flagship product cant outsell older phones it doesnt bode well for future releases (although it is a nice comment on the quality of the 4s).

With that said it's still a cash cow, but it's going to take some time to find a bottom in terms of EPS drop unless the dividend is raised significantly to support the share price.  The good thing is the free cash flow is strong enough to support a 50% increase.  However, a failure to raise the dividend this month should be taken as a sign next quarter is going to be bad.  I mean it's going to be bad relative to the same quarter last year because of compressed margins, but with lower profit devices unexpectedly making up a larger percentage of overall sales it probably will miss Apple's guidance.  When Cook explains they did not forecast 4s, 4s', and minis making up such a large percentage of sales you can all pretend like it is a big surprise because you refuse to acknowledge the obvious.

So if you really are in it for the long haul lets hope the dividend increase comes this month or at least prior to the next earnings release.  If not it's going to get rocky...as in 350-360 rocky.

Okay start throwing stones now.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdnc123 

I clarified that statement to mean he can't deal with Wall Street the way SJ did.  A fair retort otherwise.

And how exactly did Jobs "deal" with Wallstreet? He didn't. He completely ignored them. Cook is much, much friendlier to them. And look how they've rewarded him. It;s easy to blame the stock fall on the CEO or on specific decisions. But sometimes it's not that simple, and the answer is much more complex, and sometimes malicious.

Apple's performance lately has been phenomenal, continually breaking their previous records. Historically stock should reflect performance, but in Apple's case it does not. Most of the negative stories around Apple lately have been completely bullshit, and make statements that are either disingenuous or factually untrue. Some WANT the stock to tank, and it seems there's been a concerted effort by Wall Street and the media to get it to do so. There's nothing I've seen in Apple's fundamentals that warrants this drop. They're in a better position now than they were a year ago. Sales haven't been higher. Corporate, enterprise, and Education adoption is through the roof. They've addressed the smaller tablet market, and have completely dominated it, quelling those fears of cheaper tablets eating into Apple's share. The surface is pretty much a bomb. None of the fear-mongering that was going on came true, they're in the best position anyone can be with their control of the hardware, software, appstore, and entire ecosystem. Apple RIGHT NOW, ignoring the stock, is in the best shape it's EVER been, easily. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slurpy 

 

And how exactly did Jobs "deal" with Wallstreet? He didn't. He completely ignored them. Cook is much, much friendlier to them. And look how they've rewarded him. 

I think this just about hits on it.....the street believed in SJ, believed he had vision.

http://www.businessinsider.com/why-things-changed-for-apple-2013-3

Quote:

Originally Posted by tkell31 

 

I have to laugh at the responses.  Perhaps only the Emperor's new clothes posts should be allowed on this site.  Wondering how Apple is getting "worse" (and I realize that is relative) consider that the iPad mini blew by the iPad in terms of sales and it carries a lower gross profit per unit.  iPhone 4s and 4s' are selling just as well as the 5s because people arent willing to pay for the difference.  If your flagship product cant outsell older phones it doesnt bode well for future releases (although it is a nice comment on the quality of the 4s).

 

With that said it's still a cash cow, but it's going to take some time to find a bottom in terms of EPS drop unless the dividend is raised significantly to support the share price.  The good thing is the free cash flow is strong enough to support a 50% increase.  However, a failure to raise the dividend this month should be taken as a sign next quarter is going to be bad.  I mean it's going to be bad relative to the same quarter last year because of compressed margins, but with lower profit devices unexpectedly making up a larger percentage of overall sales it probably will miss Apple's guidance.  When Cook explains they did not forecast 4s, 4s', and minis making up such a large percentage of sales you can all pretend like it is a big surprise because you refuse to acknowledge the obvious.

 

So if you really are in it for the long haul lets hope the dividend increase comes this month or at least prior to the next earnings release.  If not it's going to get rocky...as in 350-360 rocky.

 

Okay start throwing stones now.

Apple is intentionally limiting its profit growth via its 'good at a few things mantra.'  To your point, when you start introducing new products that cannabalize your existing products but they come with lower asp's and lower gm's, that is a big problem for earnings.

Agree its a cash cow and agree EPS likely in big trouble next couple quarters versus a year ago.  Writing seems to be on the wall that 2013 is a down year, and have to hope they can rebound in 2014.  I think they guide the June qtr well below the Street again, but hopefully they aren't that out of touch with the reality of their business to miss their own guidance this qtr.

Really didn't need to be this way is the problem.  Take cash to $150 billion and the stock to $350 and the enterprise value/value of the company is back to 2010 levels, pre-ipad ($328b mkt cap less 150b cash = 178b value of Apple, down 67% from its peak).

Quote:

Originally Posted by gwmac 

I bet that if Apple simply uses the name iPhone 6 instead of iPhone 5S that would create enough buzz to shut the naysayers up. Rightly or wrongly people perceive the S versions as a slight tweak instead of an entirely new phone. It just doesn't seem to get people as excited as a whole number change. It can still be the exact same phone they are planning to release, just change the name and that will make most people happy. Perception is reality after all.

No, sales are reality and the 3GS and 4S sold like crazy — above and beyond their prior incarnations. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdnc123 

Send me your email, i'll send you what I have, its not very complex or prettied up at moment is all, I was going to spend some time building it out.  I asked for a day to do so, but you would rather not wait.  That is fine. 

 

Right, so guys like me that have work with converts or put on bond vs equity trades, vol vs credit, options vs credit and thus have exposure to credit and equity..... you think there are two analysts one that focuses on equity and the other credit?  The fact that you are implying that would have to be the case tells me all I need to know about you.  Tell me how you buy a convert, short the stock against it (or vice versa) on a neutral hedge and don't care if the stock goes up or down and can still make a ton of money.  How does that work?  Tell me what you know about merton or kmv models that show credit is nothing more than a derivative of equity volatility (what I meant by vol, which I'm sure you didn't know).  Tell me the correlation between the VIX and high yield credit spreads.  Tell me the correlation between a single company option vol and its credit default swaps or credit spreads.  All these model and correlations exist based on the theory and historical relationships that show equity value is nothing more than a long-term option on the underlying value of a company's assets with a strike price of the company's debt.

 

But sure, big difference between being a credit and equity analyst.  Other than knowing how to read and indenture and credit agreement, no difference between analyzing company fundamentals.  None.  

 

Go ahead an google what I'm explaining  and respond so you can pretend you have any idea what I just said. 

1) I can wait a couple of days. No problem. I don't need to send you my email: you can PM me within AI.

2) Your para 2 just reaffirms what I said earlier: you've got your jargon down. (I would be, however, intrigued to see the empirical evidence on the correlation between VIX and high yield credit spreads; I always thought that was silly trader lore, but I'd love to see a solid academic study on the topic).

3) Regarding credit analysis versus equity analysis: Where and when (and increasingly, I am wondering, why) did you do an MBA!? Just look up Chapter 1 of any basic Finance or Accounting textbook. Actually, let me help help you -- this once (since I found it easily)! Here's Chapter 1 of a well-known Accounting textbook, where you might want to look at pp. 8-9: http://highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/dl/free/0073379433/597452/Subramanyam_fsa_sample_Ch01.pdf

Quote:

Originally Posted by anantksundaram 

1) I can wait a couple of days. No problem. I don't need to send you my email: you can PM me within AI.

 

2) Your para 2 just reaffirms what I said earlier: you've got your jargon down. (I would be, however, intrigued to see the empirical evidence on the correlation between VIX and high yield credit spreads; I always thought that was silly trader lore, but I'd love to see a solid academic study on the topic).

 

3) Regarding credit analysis versus equity analysis: Where and when (and increasingly, I am wondering, why) did you do an MBA!? Just look up Chapter 1 of any basic Finance or Accounting textbook. Actually, let me help help you -- this once (since I found it easily)! Here's Chapter 1 of a well-known Accounting textbook, where you might want to look at pp. 8-9: http://highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/dl/free/0073379433/597452/Subramanyam_fsa_sample_Ch01.pdf

1)  No problem

2)  The VIX is simply implied vol on the broader equity market (s&p).  High yield bond indices are broadly diversified like the s&p, many of the same constituents.  Therefore the merton and kmv models that I referenced apply not only to individual companies, but also the market as a whole, so I would point you to those incredibly academic and rigorous model, although I will acknowledge gaussian copula/multivariate distributions are a little complex for anyone not holding an advanced math degree.

3)  Not sure I get the point.  You can't believe credit analysts can't do equity analysis and vice versa.  Happens all day, every day in the real world.  MBAs are easy anywhere if you put in the time, so where anyone went is irrelevant, imo.  CFA, not so much.  What is the point of the link, its basic accounting taught to undergrad students.  Reading that and understanding it are too vastly different things.  I know a lot of MBAs who can't build a fully functioning model that links IS, CF and BS and actually balances.  

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdnc123 

While everyone around them is getting better, Apple is getting worse. That is going to be the theme until they change it 

???
So nothing is going to change until it changes?

Brilliant!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris_CA 

???
So nothing is going to change until it changes?

Brilliant!

I love this forum.  Nobody wants to add anything intelligent.  As I stated I was discussing perception and sentiment. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdnc123 

2)  The VIX is simply implied vol on the broader equity market (s&p).  High yield bond indices are broadly diversified like the s&p, many of the same constituents.  Therefore the merton and kmv models that I referenced apply not only to individual companies, but also the market as a whole, so I would point you to those incredibly academic and rigorous model, although I will acknowledge gaussian copula/multivariate distributions are a little complex for anyone not holding an advanced math degree.

 

3)  Not sure I get the point.  

2) You didn't even understand the question I asked, did you? (Hint: It was about empirical evidence.)

3) Of course you don't. All you've done here in this forum is show a lot of useless jargon and overconfident bombast. You have little ability to back up a single claim you've made .

Any further conversation with you in this thread is a complete waste of time. (Just be aware that, on AI, you'll be called out for your BS again and again).

So 75 perent probability that Apple will NOT miss its guidance?

Quote:

Originally Posted by anantksundaram 

2) You didn't even understand the question I asked, did you? (Hint: It was about empirical evidence.)

 

3) Of course you don't. All you've done here in this forum is show a lot of useless jargon and overconfident bombast. You have little ability to back up a single claim you've made .

 

Any further conversation with you in this thread is a complete waste of time. (Just be aware that, on AI, you'll be called out for your BS again and again).

Useless jargon?  I wasn't the one referencing textbooks and throwing out terminal value, etc.  I am using jargon that people who invest more in the real world use.  I'm not surprised you can't or don't answer my questions as many of the answers can't be found in a textbook or via a google search, so you are at a loss.  You actually have to do it, not read about it to have a clue.  You don't need an empirical study to know equity volatility and credit spreads are linked, it is common sense if you have full grasp of balance sheets, and what volatility means.

I agree further conversation with you is a waste of time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by island hermit 

 

Then why are Samsung's sales growing.

Samsung's sales of the S3 dropped from 18 million in the September quarter down to 15.4 million in the December (Christmas!) quarter.

Quote:

Originally Posted by e1618978 

Samsung's sales of the S3 dropped from 18 million in the September quarter down to 15.4 million in the December (Christmas!) quarter.

Who's on top seems to depend on which analyst you ask:

Is Apple iPhone the world's best selling smartphone? Researchers disagree

http://www.macworld.co.uk/ipad-iphone/news/?newsid=3427253

Quote:

Originally Posted by Plagen 

I don't understand why people are so unhappy with the lowballing "analysts". If you are a long-term investor and have a reason to believe in your company long-term growth shouldn't you be happy with the stock price falling? Just use that as an opportunity to buy.

Without going onto this particular analyst's opinion, I think the risk in what you're saying is that if a stock is not participating when the market is moving up, then it may fall that much more when/if it goes down. Now that would likely be a shorter term concern. And I understand your point about the longer term. But one concern I've read about Apple is that if it becomes a value stock instead of a growth stock, then one might have the opportunity to buy "low" for years... like MSFT.

Personally, I think Apple is set to regain its mojo over the next couple of quarters. Assuming its next couple of product releases are successful, I think the market sentiment, which is really what's beating the stock price down, should turn positive again. I don't want it to soar. Just regain its presence in the $550-$600 range.

But with that said, I am not at all happy with Cook or how he's handled himself over the past six months or so. My unhappiness is not that he has lost focus. But he has done little to contain that criticism. From the Maps debacle, to the iMac shipping issues, to the public spat with Einhorn, to now facing the possibility that iPhone shipments are a little shaky, if not handled properly, these sorts of PR mud puddles can help sentiment remain negative. And then one finds himself seeing Steve Ballmer's face when he looks in the mirror in the morning. But I suspect the frightening prospect of that nightmare should be enough to get Cook to right the ship ASAP.