or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › Shares of Apple sink after supplier Cirrus warns of weak results
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Shares of Apple sink after supplier Cirrus warns of weak results - Page 7

post #241 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by igriv View Post

Haven't you noticed the very considerable price drops in the MacBook Pro line? This is a sign that there is too much supply.

Back at work, é ése?

Could be a sign that their production has improved and costs have come down.
Edited by Flaneur - 4/18/13 at 8:52am
post #242 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdnc123 View Post


Said it before and will say it again, no CEO has ever destroyed this much value in a bull market. Has never happened before. Not once. He will go down in infamy.

Between Dec 28, 2007 and Feb 25, 2008 (less than two months) I watched (and held my stock) as Steve Jobs "destroyed" an equivalent amount of AAPL value on a percentage basis as Tim has done over a longer period of time.  From 200 down to 120 in two months.  Ouch.  Ultimately, AAPL made its way down to 78, meaning that Steve "destroyed" over 50% of AAPL's value.  On a percentage basis, that's MUCH greater than AAPL's current drop from its current all-time-high.  Leaving the absolute market cap out of it for the moment (I'll get back to that) that means that individual investors that bought in at or near 200 were much more burned by Steve than current investors have been by Tim.  In your own portfolio, percentage is what matters.  You decide how much you can risk based on potential reward, as a fraction of your net value, and you get enough shares to reach that amount, individual share price be damned.  Steve's decline burned more than Tim's.  But I held, as did others, and AAPL came back.  It can happen again.  ( I think it will.)

 

Now, with regard to the absolute market cap, the only reason that Tim's absolute destruction of market value is greater than any previous CEO is that his current decline (lower percentage than Steve's) came off of an incredibly high peak that he was partially responsible for getting to in the first place.  Days after Steve Jobs died, AAPL was sitting at $370.  As of today, Tim has AAPL up a little less than 10% from that level, and I agree that that is not great, especially in the current investment climate.  But it is not as hideous as you make it.  The "destruction" you tout came from a peak that Tim produced in one year after Steve passed.  I'm sure that you want to totally credit Steve for the initial climb from $370 to $700, post-mortem based on his influence in the products that came out then, but also lay all of the the blame for the subsequent decline at the feet of Tim.  This interpretation is nothing but confirmation bias.  YOU believe that Tim has destroyed things, so YOU adopt an interpretation that would support it. 

 

Here's the funny thing.  When (not if) Apple finally releases whatever they have been cooking for so long, and IF it is the hit I think it will be, then the stock will come roaring back and eclipse the $700 figure and beyond.  If that happens, then I predict this:  every Tim Cook hater out there (e.g. Rocco Pendola, you, etc, etc) will claim that Steve deserves the credit for that product because he laid out an idiot-proof roadmap before he passed.  Steve will get all of your credit once again.  See what I mean?  Confirmation bias.  That's my prediction for what will occur in a few more years.

 

Thompson


Edited by thompr - 4/18/13 at 8:40am
post #243 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Gee, I wonder why we wouldn't care.


It's not like the pro-all-the-time-anytime-anything Apple people on this forum haven't made really lame ass statements. Why should we care about them?

na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #244 of 304

I bought more shares today, here are the reasons why (I'm a developer):

 

1.  Developers like developing for iOS.  

2.  Apps are more profitable on iOS and therefore it will remain the go to platform for releasing new paid apps.

3.  All the headlines are bad for AAPL right now (suggesting to me that the stock is being oversold).

4.  Apple products are still seen as the "premium" or higher quality product.  I have a droid 3 and consider it a POS (as does my gf who tells me that every day).  I have had so many problems with it and have been left without an OS update for as long as I can remember.  This is a common theme among android phones.  They are buggy, cheap, and some get left behind (and there is no way to tell if your new phone will be one of them).  When I bought this, it was on the roadmap to have its OS updated, but it never was.

5.  I am a long term investor, so I only care about long term performance.

6.  AAPL stock is cheap.

7.  The stock market as a whole is irrational, and right now it is overly sensitive to negative news. 

 

If you wait until you see some forward momentum in the stock, or AAPL announces something that causes positive investor sentiment, you will have already missed your buying opportunity.  Buying a company at a low point will never feel safe.  If it does feel safe, you are probably buying at the wrong time (or your name is Warren Buffett).  I can't imagine a more frightening time to buy AAPL.

post #245 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by thompr View Post

I watched (and held my stock) as Steve Jobs "destroyed" over 50% of AAPL's value from its (then all-time-high) 200 down to 78 in a fairly brief period of time.  On a percentage basis, that's greater than AAPL's current drop from its current all-time-high.  Leaving the absolute market cap out of it for the moment (I'll get back to that) that means that individual investors that bought in at or near 200 were much more burned by Steve than current investors have been by Tim.  In your own portfolio, percentage is what matters.  You decide how much you can risk based on potential reward, and you get enough shares to reach that amount, individual share price be damned.  Steve's decline burned more than Tim's.  But I held, as did others, and AAPL came back.  It can happen again.

 

etc. etc. etc.

 

Thompson

 

Well, now we're all waiting to see if Tim can increase the stock price over 400% from this low... or will it just keep dropping.

na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #246 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by paladyr View Post

I bought more shares today, here are the reasons why (I'm a developer):

 

etc. etc. etc.

 

 I can't imagine a more frightening time to buy AAPL.

 

Next Wednesday?

 

I guess we'll find out.

na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #247 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

 

Next Wednesday?

 

I guess we'll find out.

Haha maybe!  But I'll only be worried if it's lower than I bought today in 5 years :p.

post #248 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

 

Well, now we're all waiting to see if Tim can increase the stock price over 400% from this low... or will it just keep dropping.

Increasing 400% from here is a pretty tall order given the shear magnitude of the implied size of the market cap and (by extension) the earnings.  At this size, I don't think anyone's going to grace AAPL with the huge growth multiples of yesteryear, regardless of the impact of a new product.  Max PE will probably be 15 (ignoring cash).  Steve never had to face the condition where growing AAPL another 400% meant greatly exceeding the record market caps of all companies for all time.  Apple can't grow larger than the universe (tongue-in-cheek) and certain investors don't like the feeling of an overhang.  Some are looking for the next 10-bagger, and AAPL isn't THAT anymore.  There goes that crowd from the potential AAPL market.

 

By all actual statistics so far, Tim is doing a fantastic job running the company.  They will ultimately release another hit product, and things will be better for the stock.  Then we'll look back and say, "it wasn't so bad", except for those nervous-nellies that sold in panic.  Of course, Tim Cook's detractors will just credit Steve and say "now innovation really IS over for Apple."

 

Thompson

post #249 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by thompr View Post

Increasing 400% from here is a pretty tall order given the shear magnitude of the implied size of the market cap and (by extension) the earnings.  At this size, I don't think anyone's going to grace AAPL with the huge growth multiples of yesteryear, regardless of the impact of a new product.  Max PE will probably be 15 (ignoring cash).  Steve never had to face the condition where growing AAPL another 400% meant greatly exceeding the record market caps of all companies for all time.  Apple can't grow larger than the universe (tongue-in-cheek) and certain investors don't like the feeling of an overhang.  Some are looking for the next 10-bagger, and AAPL isn't THAT anymore.  There goes that crowd from the potential AAPL market.

 

By all actual statistics so far, Tim is doing a fantastic job running the company.  They will ultimately release another hit product, and things will be better for the stock.  Then we'll look back and say, "it wasn't so bad", except for those nervous-nellies that sold in panic.  Of course, Tim Cook's detractors will just credit Steve and say "now innovation really IS over for Apple."

 

Thompson


My comment was only made to balance your comment.

 

... and... by the way... kudos to all of those who sold above $600. Time to buy back in is nigh.

na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #250 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by igriv View Post

Maybe you are right. My personal experience is that the best work is done in garages and temporary office space (trailers and such), as soon as the interior decor gets fancy, creativity tends to decay.

Wow. So Google, Twitter, Apple, Pixar employees work in rented out trailers. What a genius post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdnc123 View Post

Sweet. BMO out today saying S4 will outsell iPhone5 in calendar 13 and they won't even have it available for the full year. Epic, epic implosion. Cook needs to go and the new HQ damn well better be cancelled or altered. He and the board already look like epic failures.

Who the frak is BMO? What has its track record been on predicting market share?
post #251 of 304
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post
…Apple… …employees work in rented out trailers.

 

Well, rented-out buildings, at least. At least for now.

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #252 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post


My comment was only made to balance your comment.

 

... and... by the way... kudos to all of those who sold above $600. Time to buy back in is nigh.

Well, if I implied a completely analogous chart trace to what Steve had before, post-78, I concur with the need for balance.  To be clear, I don't expect a 400% rise from AAPL nor is such a thing necessary for AAPL to be a great investment for folks that don't need a ten-bagger or more to be happy.  For example, if an individual has only a thousand bucks or a bit more to invest as a one-time seed to riches, I certainly wouldn't recommend AAPL.  However, if you have a 401K that allows self-management, I would heartily recommend it.  Furthermore, if one has already passed the retirement threshold in net assets, AAPL should be a part of their portfolio for the income that is generated through dividends (and hopefully more soon).

 

Personally, I am an AAPL two-bagger away from early retirement, so I am highly motivated to pay attention to more than just near or mid term peaks and troughs.  I seek reasons and measure them against my expectations and understanding of the tech landscape, which to date have proven more accurate than that of the analysts, pumpers, and doom-sayers.  I have time on my side.

 

Thompson

post #253 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by thompr View Post

 

Personally, I am an AAPL two-bagger away from early retirement, so I am highly motivated to pay attention to more than just near or mid term peaks and troughs.  I seek reasons and measure them against my expectations and understanding of the tech landscape, which to date have proven more accurate than that of the analysts, pumpers, and doom-sayers.  I have time on my side.

 

Thompson

 

... but you also have to remember that some people bought in above $600 on all the hype. [... or, what the hell, above $450]

 

It could be a while or never for them to realize a positive return... and with a new CEO at the helm we don't know yet if these are just peaks and troughs. There are enough examples around to show what can happen to once lofty companies... dashing the hopes of small investors to ever break even on their investment.

 

Just saying that not everyone bought at $10 adjusted.

na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #254 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazy_mac_lover View Post

Those mother fuxker is like the blind people touch an elephant below , each one of them says differently , but all of them are just blindly wrong and insist elephant is like what they think.

 

He's more like the seventh:

 

The Seventh blind man, staff in hand,
Upon his bare feet goes.
I clearly sense, he calmly said,
And wish for all to know
The Elephant is warm and squishy
In between the toes!

post #255 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

 

... but you also have to remember that some people bought in above $600 on all the hype. [... or, what the hell, above $450]

 

It could be a while or never for them to realize a positive return... and with a new CEO at the helm we don't know yet if these are just peaks and troughs. There are enough examples around to show what can happen to once lofty companies... dashing the hopes of small investors to ever break even on their investment.

 

Just saying that not everyone bought at $10 adjusted.

I sympathize with such people's position.  I was in it too, once upon a time, as my initial investment dropped 40% or so before recovering.  I held on because I saw what was happening to the music industry and knew that Apple was in the catbird seat.  I have old posts on AAPL's Yahoo MB from 2002 that prove this.

 

Each individual needs to do their due diligence to understand what the differences are - if any - between Apple's current circumstances and those of the examples you allude to.  If individuals aren't up to that task,then it's my belief that they really shouldn't be playing the stock market to begin with and would be better off investing in ETFs or trusting professionals to manage their money for them.  (Ugh... not for me.  I do better.)

 

The best way to analyze the markets that companies play in (not the stock markets... their sales markets) is to visualize the long term and then work backwards... especially for technology where the capabilities morph over time.  For instance, there is no doubt in my mind that the TV/entertainment market is going to be a very different beast 10 years from now.  It will get majorly disrupted.  But it is going to take a lot of time, focus, and understanding of what people would like.  I would be very disappointed if Apple took the Microsoft or Google approach on this, which is throw a bunch of stuff against the wall and see what sticks.  That isn't going to bring about the disruption I am seeing, because the current status quo and all of its players are entrenched in complicated ways that go way beyond just technology.  Exclusive contracts for content and/or advertising come to mind.  Ugh.  But time will rectify this, and my money is on Apple to win the race.  The things that will have to be in place to win that race are enormous.  It goes beyond the device level, into the ecosystem level, and both horizontal and vertical integration.  Areas where Apple has advantage by their experience and their current position.  This will be a huge disruption, biggest yet, and Apple is going to get even bigger.  That's my prediction, and it may take some time.  I have the patience.

 

So you see, from my perspective, the fact that Apple is taking their time and not just throwing out the new thing is a relief to me:  Apple is still being Apple and saying "no" until they get this big product move right.  Steve would have done the same, and in fact, did just that during the 6 years between iPod and iPhone.  He suffered stock plunges too but kept his eye on the ball.

 

Right now the observation that Tim is not Steve is a tautology, but it cannot be used to indict the man on the basis of what has yet to occur.  When Apple brings out their new move and it flops, I'll buy into this fear, but not a moment before.  Apple without Steve may not be the same, but they still have a boatload of talent that I believe can run rings around the other companies that may vie for the same vision of TV/entertainment.  Other companies (Google, Samsung, Microsoft) are throwing out stuff for internet connected TVs or boxes, and it isn't sticking.  Apple will come along and do it right.  Subsequently, others will attempt to copy Apple's approach, with varying degrees of success, and then claim it to be an obvious approach all along, so why not copy it?  Hilarious.

 

Thompson

post #256 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by thompr View Post

I sympathize with such people's position.  I was in it too, once upon a time, as my initial investment dropped 40% or so before recovering.  I held on because I saw what was happening to the music industry and knew that Apple was in the catbird seat.  I have old posts on AAPL's Yahoo MB from 2002 that prove this.

 

Each individual needs to do their due diligence to understand what the differences are - if any - between Apple's current circumstances and those of the examples you allude to.  If individuals aren't up to that task,then it's my belief that they really shouldn't be playing the stock market to begin with and would be better off investing in ETFs or trusting professionals to manage their money for them.  (Ugh... not for me.  I do better.)

 

Thompson

 

... and, sometimes, people just get lucky.

na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #257 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

 

... and, sometimes, people just get lucky.

Indeed.

 

But if instead of seeing just other people's actions and results, which could have been governed by luck, you also had access to their reasons, explanations, predictions of what will transpire in a global sense (not small details) throughout the decade, and everything pretty much played out the way they predicted... you probably shouldn't call that luck.  You should probably start to emulate the approach.  Make sense?

 

Thompson

post #258 of 304
Amazing, Google has a meh quarter and their stock is up after hours. Same with Microsoft and their up over 1.5%. If Apple has a meh quarter (which everyone is expecting) their stock will probably drop $20 after hours. 1rolleyes.gif
post #259 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Amazing, Google has a meh quarter and their stock is up after hours. Same with Microsoft and their up over 1.5%. If Apple has a meh quarter (which everyone is expecting) their stock will probably drop $20 after hours. 1rolleyes.gif


1) I can't believe this thread is still going. I have no idea what happened since page 6 or 7 but I assume it was mostly the same.

2) I think their results look good. They did miss the "estimates" for their profits which means that the stock would drop if it were AAPL, but for these results I think the market should react favourably. In fact, I see the after hours response as not strong enough.

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply
post #260 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by thompr View Post

Indeed.

 

But if instead of seeing just other people's actions and results, which could have been governed by luck, you also had access to their reasons, explanations, predictions of what will transpire in a global sense (not small details) throughout the decade, and everything pretty much played out the way they predicted... you probably shouldn't call that luck.  You should probably start to emulate the approach.  Make sense?

 

Thompson


If anyone can predict what will transpire a decade in advance and it happens as they say... well, that's either luck or they can see the future... global sense and all.

 

The only things I listened too were that gold would become king in the first decade and that Apple would prosper under Jobs.

 

... and I still consider that dumb luck.

na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #261 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Amazing, Google has a meh quarter and their stock is up after hours. Same with Microsoft and their up over 1.5%. If Apple has a meh quarter (which everyone is expecting) their stock will probably drop $20 after hours. 1rolleyes.gif


$30

na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #262 of 304
Island,

Example:

(1) Within 10 years, television will be changed in developed markets such that there no longer is any need for the user to consider "channels". Multiple remotes will no longer be needed either. There will be a great deal of access to subscription based content, like Netflix except with tons more content - basically everything but first run and live, for a healthy monthly fee that is on par with what cable is now, bu significantly more user centric and less annoying. Best of all: no bundles of BS channels.

(2) The infrastructure, integration chops, and significant investment to buy or woo content owners (think of Apple's cash hoard) it takes to pull this off makes Apple far and away the most likely winner. But even if not the "winner", they WILL end up with a respectable seat at the big table. And I mean big. Think of the money flowing through various disparate elements of it right now. Pay per view. Advertising. Cable fees. Netflix fees. Network fees. DVD sales. DVD rentals. So many middle men between the content owners and those of us that consume it. All of this will congeal into fewer players, and those players will be enriched beyond our current metrics. Apple will be one of them, if not the biggest. Biggest is not necessary.

Conclusion: can't predict the interim. AAPL will be much higher eventually. Buy AAPL.

Now, if AAPL does end up much higher in the future AND my description in number (1) above pans out, AND you see the logic of number (2) above, then it wasn't just dumb luck. I used similar logic, but with appropriate observations, regarding iPod/iTunes and then after that iPhone and iPad.

Maybe I'll get lucky in result and reason for a 4th time in a row.

So we'll see in a decade, right?

Thompson
post #263 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by thompr View Post

Island,

Example:

(1) Within 10 years, television will be changed in developed markets such that there no longer is any need for the user to consider "channels". Multiple remotes will no longer be needed either. There will be a great deal of access to subscription based content, like Netflix except with tons more content - basically everything but first run and live, for a healthy monthly fee that is on par with what cable is now, bu significantly more user centric and less annoying. Best of all: no bundles of BS channels.

(2) The infrastructure, integration chops, and significant investment to buy or woo content owners (think of Apple's cash hoard) it takes to pull this off makes Apple far and away the most likely winner. But even if not the "winner", they WILL end up with a respectable seat at the big table. And I mean big. Think of the money flowing through various disparate elements of it right now. Pay per view. Advertising. Cable fees. Netflix fees. Network fees. DVD sales. DVD rentals. So many middle men between the content owners and those of us that consume it. All of this will congeal into fewer players, and those players will be enriched beyond our current metrics. Apple will be one of them, if not the biggest. Biggest is not necessary.

Conclusion: can't predict the interim. AAPL will be much higher eventually. Buy AAPL.

Now, if AAPL does end up much higher in the future AND my description in number (1) above pans out, AND you see the logic of number (2) above, then it wasn't just dumb luck. I used similar logic, but with appropriate observations, regarding iPod/iTunes and then after that iPhone and iPad.

Maybe I'll get lucky in result and reason for a 4th time in a row.

So we'll see in a decade, right?

Thompson

 

Hmmm... I didn't bother looking at anything except that Steve retook the reins of Apple. That's all I needed to know. To heck with music industry etc.

 

As far as gold... the chatter about gold was incessant. I knew it was a no brainer.

 

I'm not so sure, anymore, that AAPL will be that much higher... if any... in the future. I left in the mid 5s and haven't looked back. (oh... there was a brief ill timed foray after 600 where I lost $100... but got the hell out quickly).

na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #264 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

Hmmm... I didn't bother looking at anything except that Steve retook the reins of Apple. That's all I needed to know. To heck with music industry etc.

As far as gold... the chatter about gold was incessant. I knew it was a no brainer.

I'm not so sure, anymore, that AAPL will be that much higher... if any... in the future. I left in the mid 5s and haven't looked back. (oh... there was a brief ill timed foray after 600 where I lost $100... but got the hell out quickly).

OK, well then I would call you lucky if that's the depth of your consideration. Likewise, you will probably not remember, let alone appreciate, my dissertation above a decade from now in any case.

Fortune to you, Island,
Thompson
post #265 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by thompr View Post


OK, well then I would call you lucky if that's the depth of your consideration. Likewise, you will probably not remember, let alone appreciate, my dissertation above a decade from now in any case.

Fortune to you, Island,
Thompson

 

Lucky that I chose to ride on Steve's back... now there's a fresh new opinion on this Forum.

na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #266 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

1) I can't believe this thread is still going. I have no idea what happened since page 6 or 7 but I assume it was mostly the same.

2) I think their results look good. They did miss the "estimates" for their profits which means that the stock would drop if it were AAPL, but for these results I think the market should react favourably. In fact, I see the after hours response as not strong enough.
Hmm..I was following on CNBC and they were pretty meh on Google, Microsoft and IBM.
post #267 of 304

jdnc123 left for the day and is now writing at The Onion:

 

 

Weeping Tim Cook Spotted Screaming For Help At Steve Jobs’ Tombstone

http://www.theonion.com/articles/weeping-tim-cook-spotted-screaming-for-help-at-ste,32104

post #268 of 304

" I was in it too, once upon a time, as my initial investment dropped 40% or so before recovering.  I held on because I saw what was happening to the music industry and knew that Apple was in the catbird seat."

 

Oh man I remember that: dropped from 70ish to 35 and scared the spit out of me.  But I REALLY liked my iPod and iTunes on my new MacBook Titanium was just such a revelation that I hung on. The phone and the pad have been happy additons...

 

This drop from a possible 20x yield to a possible 11x has been upsetting but not nearly as scary.

post #269 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post


If anyone can predict what will transpire a decade in advance and it happens as they say... well, that's either luck or they can see the future... global sense and all.

 

The only things I listened too were that gold would become king in the first decade and that Apple would prosper under Jobs.

 

... and I still consider that dumb luck.

In a world that permits Amazon's P/E to exist is there any other rationale?

post #270 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfc1138 View Post

In a world that permits Amazon's P/E to exist is there any other rationale?

Note that this quarter there has been no P/E since the last previous quarter they took a loss. They may want to take a loss over having the world's first 100,000 P/E.

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply
post #271 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

Lucky that I chose to ride on Steve's back... now there's a fresh new opinion on this Forum.

If you chose that at the time he came back, before iMac, iPod, etc, and not just saying that with today's hindsight, then I would say you gambled. He was a legend because of the Macintosh, but his business track record was not established by any means. Same for basing choices on "chatter" re Gold.

I prefer to envision the likely future, if and when I can, like in the earlier post. I am either right or wrong, but never lucky, good or bad. If I end up right for the wrong reason, I am humble and learn my lesson.

Thompson
Edited by thompr - 4/18/13 at 5:34pm
post #272 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by thompr View Post


If you chose that at the time he came back, before iMac, iPod, etc, and not just saying that with today's hindsight, then I would say you gambled. He was a legend because of the Macintosh, but his business track record was not established by any means. Same for basing choices on "chatter" re Gold.

I prefer to envision the likely future, if and when I can, like in the earlier post. I am either right or wrong, but never lucky, good or bad. If I end up right for the wrong reason, I am humble and learn my lesson.

Thompson


I envisioned the future with Steve.

na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #273 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdnc123 View Post


  Honestly, just block me if you don't want to read my posts.

 

Can we just move on from this guy-  Blah Blah Blah....

post #274 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post


I envisioned the future with Steve.

 

Good.

 

So what do you envision now?  How does it compare with what I posted?  Let's compare notes, for you may have some valuable insight.  

 

Thompson

post #275 of 304

I don't understand how so many people can think that the AAPL decline isn't expected and/or that the stock isn't still overvalued.

 

If you were to try and think of one company that might have its stock price inflated by company "fans" and/or amateur investors looking for the "next big company", I think 99.9% of people would think of AAPL.

 

Honestly, did you all think that apple was worth more than every non-state oil company in the world? I'm no investor myself, but that always seemed ridiculous to me - those are companies who have no real competitors, whose product is guaranteed to rise in value in the future, and whose product will never be replaced by a "better" product in our lifetimes.

 

Also, as soon as Apple became "the biggest company in the world", you also had to expect that a bunch more idiots would gobble up stock because it was a "sure investment" because bigger is somehow better. I highly doubt any experienced/smart investors bought Apple when it starting passing Shell Oil and Exxon; it just doesn't make any sense.

 

I look at Microsoft's value when it was at it's absolute peak of dominance (and overinflated stock prices), installed on something like 90% of computers in the world in 1999, when personal computers were still a huge growth market and then see Apple pass those levels with, what 25% of smartphone sales, 50% of tablet sales and maybe 5% of global PC sales, and really there's no way I can see the Apple market cap being anywhere near realistic, even though Apple's profit margins are much higher than Microsofts have ever been. In '99, Microsoft was profiting on almost every computer sold (with no real competitors) at a time when global market penetration of computers was still growing exponentially. Compare that to Apple nowadays, with a thin sliver of PC sales in an industry that is stagnating, a non-dominant share of smart-phones, which is a segment with slowing sales the past 2 years, and a major share in Tablets, which is really an unknown in terms of future value. Nothing suggests Apple should be worth more than Exxon to me.

post #276 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by igriv View Post

Google had a massive bottom line beat (10% or so), IBM was worse than meh.
Yeah because their effective tax rate dropped from 18% to 8%. At least that's what John Fort said on CNBC.
post #277 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Superbass View Post

I don't understand how so many people can think that the AAPL decline isn't expected and/or that the stock isn't still overvalued.

If you were to try and think of one company that might have its stock price inflated by company "fans" and/or amateur investors looking for the "next big company", I think 99.9% of people would think of AAPL.

Honestly, did you all think that apple was worth more than every non-state oil company in the world? I'm no investor myself, but that always seemed ridiculous to me - those are companies who have no real competitors, whose product is guaranteed to rise in value in the future, and whose product will never be replaced by a "better" product in our lifetimes.

Also, as soon as Apple became "the biggest company in the world", you also had to expect that a bunch more idiots would gobble up stock because it was a "sure investment" because bigger is somehow better. I highly doubt any experienced/smart investors bought Apple when it starting passing Shell Oil and Exxon; it just doesn't make any sense.

I look at Microsoft's value when it was at it's absolute peak of dominance (and overinflated stock prices), installed on something like 90% of computers in the world in 1999, when personal computers were still a huge growth market and then see Apple pass those levels with, what 25% of smartphone sales, 50% of tablet sales and maybe 5% of global PC sales, and really there's no way I can see the Apple market cap being anywhere near realistic, even though Apple's profit margins are much higher than Microsofts have ever been. In '99, Microsoft was profiting on almost every computer sold (with no real competitors) at a time when global market penetration of computers was still growing exponentially. Compare that to Apple nowadays, with a thin sliver of PC sales in an industry that is stagnating, a non-dominant share of smart-phones, which is a segment with slowing sales the past 2 years, and a major share in Tablets, which is really an unknown in terms of future value. Nothing suggests Apple should be worth more than Exxon to me.
So you think that's why Apple is down 38% in the last 6 months? Because investors realized it shouldn't be worth more than an oil company? Would you agree that Apple's P/E of 8 makes sense when Google's is 23 and Microsoft's is 15?

Seems to me the drop in Apple stock is more to do with emotion than fundamentals. The meme in the media is that Apple isn't cool any more, is out of ideas, Samsung is the new cool kid on the block, etc. This meme keeps getting recycled over and over to the point where perception has become reality.

Where I would fault Apple is I don't think its done enough to try and turn around this sentiment. When Steve was running the show they could afford to be totally silent because everyone just assumed something good was being cooked up in Cupertino. Unfortunately now that Steve is gone that assumption is no longer being made. So Apple goes 6 months or more with no news, no product announcements and that gets spun as Apple being out of ideas, paralyzed, no idea how to counter Google, Samsung, etc. Apple's stance is to let the products do the talking. Which is fine if there's a steady stream of product launches spaced throughout the year. But going 6 months with nothing and allowing a vacuum to be created and filled with FUD and D&G is nuts.
post #278 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Superbass View Post

...even though Apple's profit margins are much higher than Microsofts have ever been.

 

You just destroyed any vestige of understanding of the situation with that one little line, showing a mind-blowing level of ignorance.

 

Why don't you go check what Microsoft's profit margins have traditionally been?

A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
post #279 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by igriv View Post

Money is money.


No it isn't.  Wall street will discount it as seen by the stock price today.

post #280 of 304

Do you have any ideas as to how low Apple stock price will fall before it rebounds?

When approximately do we hit bottom?

Fall 2013? 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AAPL Investors
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › Shares of Apple sink after supplier Cirrus warns of weak results