or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Secrecy around Apple's new 64-bit A7 chip may have incited spurious $AAPL stock downgrades
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Secrecy around Apple's new 64-bit A7 chip may have incited spurious $AAPL stock downgrades

post #1 of 104
Thread Starter 
Apple's iPhone 5s announcement included a surprise leap to a new 64-bit ARM chip architecture, a subject that has sparked lots of confusion and misinformation. But the secrecy surrounding the A7 may also have fooled analysts into slashing their sales expectations and downgrading the company's stock targets.

iPhone 5s


Known Unknowns about Apple's new 64-bit A7



A variety of details are still unknown about Apple's A7 implementation. This includes exactly what CPU cores it is uses (it may be a extension of Apple's custom Swift cores in the A6, now implementing the 64-bit ARMv8 instruction set, or it could be either a stock or customized version of ARM's Cortex-A50 series cores); how many CPU cores it uses; and what GPU cores it uses (new support for OpenGL ES 3.0 suggests it uses Imagination Technologies "Rogue" Series6 GPU design).

It's also not known for certain who is fabricating the A7, despite mounting evidence suggesting that production may have shifted from Samsung to TSMC.

Apple may not want to promote this fact for competitive reasons, or to avoid a new wave of criticism decrying the inevitable shift from Samsung's chip fabrication in Austin, Texas to (apparently) TSMC's fabs in Taiwan.

It's interesting to note, however, that back in June, Jefferies analyst Peter Misek reported that Apple had cut production orders for iPhones, based on his "inventory checks." Misek didn't detail all of his research, but he did specifically note one reason for believing that Apple was cutting its iPhone orders.

"Our checks also indicate," Misek wrote, as covered by CNET, "that Apple's wafer starts at Samsung's Austin fab have likely been cut."

We don't know that Misek's understanding of Apple's "wafer starts" in Austin were accurate, but if they were, there's more than one reason for that to occur.

Peter Misek
Source: Bloomberg


Problems with Misek's supply chain checks



Misek interpreted his supply chain checks to mean that Apple was sharply reducing the number of iPhones it planned to build, but it's also possible that Apple was having another vendor fabricate wafers of chip that neither Misek (nor, apparently, Samsung) knew anything about.

This is an example of one of the supply chain checks that Apple's chief executive Tim Cook warned analysts at the beginning of the year not to base significant conclusions upon, due to the vast global complexity of Apple's operations.

"The supply chain is very complex, and we obviously have multiple sources for things," Cook said during the January quarterly earnings conference call. "Yields might vary, supplier performance might vary."

Cook added, "even if a particular data point were factual, it would be impossible to interpret that data point as to what it meant for our business."

Problems with Misek's product predictions



Misek's predictions based on cuts in Samsung's Austin wafer starts could be as off the mark as his outline of Apple's plans from last December, as detailed in a report by Philip Elmer-Dewitt, writing for Fortune Apple 2.0.

Misek described the iPhone 5s as having "new super HD camera/screen, a better battery and near field communications." He also wrote that Apple was building a new iPad for release in June, a new television set and a cheap new iPhone model.

"Our checks indicate a low-cost model would be a retooled iPhone 4 with a scaled-down modem, apps processor, etc," Misek reported, further warning that this predicted new cheap iPhone's gross margin "would be impinged in order to reach the desired $200-$250 price point."

In February, Misek predicted that Apple would hold an Apple TV-related event in March.

But when March arrived with no Apple TV event, Misek issued a steep $80 downgrade on Apple's stock and cut his estimates for the quarter's iPhone sales from 37.5 million to 35 million, while predicting revenues of $41 billion. He also shifted his price expectation for the cheap iPhone to cost between $350 and $450.

Apple's actual revenues for the quarter were $43.6 billion, and the company sold 37.4 million iPhones. However, fears that the predicted new cheap iPhone model would erode Apple's profits in the future continued to be repeated through the year, and were eventually overshadowed only by new concerns that the iPhone 5c model that Apple actually unveiled last week didn't turn out to be cheap at all.

Investors were so worried about the iPhone 5s not being as cheap as some analysts speculated that they ignored the news that Apple was in fact selling a new, broader range of iPhones in China and other key markets, anchored at the low end by an iPhone 4 without either "a scaled-down modem or apps processor," but selling for around $420, the very price target a variety of analysts thought Apple needed to reach to expand its market share in China.


iPhone range in China


Source: Apple China


Last Friday, after Apple's event delivered none of Misek's product predictions, including the "impinged" gross margins of a cheap iPhone he feared to would spark "high cannibalization," Misek issued another severe downgrade for Apple's stock from $450 to $425.

This appeared to spook Wall Street so much that investors forgot that all of Misek's scary previous predictions from last year had all been grievously wrong, too.
post #2 of 104
Peter Misik from jefferies told my daddy and grandpa to load up on bbry at 14 promised us 18 and now were going to lose the house.
post #3 of 104
Boy,

The more we learn about what Apple has been up to in the last nine months or so while they were 'stagnating' from 'lack of innovation' the more I'm impressed.

Mavericks, iOS7, the Mac Pro, the mobile 64 bit chop 'n' change, addressing labour issues, bringing jobs back to America, supply chain changes (jobs out of America - thank you, Samsung), and God only knows what software and iPad updates we'll see shortly.

They don't muck around...
Edited by GTR - 9/16/13 at 3:08am
post #4 of 104

So, I take it from this that when an analyst gets the picture so wrong, or perhaps completely wrong in Misek's case, that said analyst then downgrades Apple because it was Apple, in missing the analyst's (Misek's) goals, that actually got it wrong! Got it!

Where are we on the curve? We'll know once it goes asymptotic!
Reply
Where are we on the curve? We'll know once it goes asymptotic!
Reply
post #5 of 104
The Street makes decisions and predictions about lots of companies that have little to do with reality. Misek isn't any different than many financial prognosticators that have either no clue about Apple or are simply attempting to manipulate the market for financial gain.

It's sad that there is no recourse against these "analysts". The media should do a better job of pointing out their historical track record so both the public and the Street can see them for what they are.
post #6 of 104

Two interesting threads on SemiWIKI

 

http://www.semiwiki.com/forum/content/1940-debunked-tsmc-apple-rumors.html

 

http://www.semiwiki.com/forum/content/2763-intel-bay-trail-fail.html

 

In both, it is claimed that Samsung for A7 and TSMC for the next iPhone.

post #7 of 104
@gtr They don't muck around...

I could not agree more. They're doing the same all over again... at their own pace, bit by bit, before they go for the kill once again. Just watch and learn...
post #8 of 104

It appears Tim Cook was not referring to the angle of the chamfer or even the fingerprint scanner on the iPhone with his 'doubling down on secrecy' statement, but rather we now see that he meant the very well kept secrets that the so called analysts are only now discovering.

 

Touché Tim, he who laughs last certainly laughs the loudest.

post #9 of 104
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Last Friday, after Apple's event delivered none of Misek's product predictions, including the "impinged" gross margins of a cheap iPhone he feared to would spark "high cannibalization," Misek issued another severe downgrade for Apple's stock from $450 to $425.

 

How to be an Apple stock analyst:

 

1. Get a job at a major Wall Street parasite firm.

2. Rise up the ranks by hook or by crook, to the point where the media gives you credence.

3. Make sh*t up about future Apple products.

4a. Blame Apple if your sh*t was wrong by lowering your AAPL estimates, or

4b. Become the next analyst superstar if you guessed right and your sh*t came true.

 

Misek's career path has repeatedly led him to step 4a, obviously.

Don't give up, Peter.  Fake it 'till you make it.


Edited by SockRolid - 9/16/13 at 3:06am

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply
post #10 of 104

I could listen to Misek and short AAPL for a small profit or I could lose my shirt when the stock price goes back to $700.

post #11 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmgregory1 View Post

The Street makes decisions and predictions about lots of companies that have little to do with reality. Misek isn't any different than many financial prognosticators that have either no clue about Apple or are simply attempting to manipulate the market for financial gain.

It's sad that there is no recourse against these "analysts". The media should do a better job of pointing out their historical track record so both the public and the Street can see them for what they are.

 

What really sucks is that he downgraded them because they didn't do what he thought they should instead of re-building new models on what Apple is actually doing. He is an f'ing moron.

post #12 of 104
What's especially amusing about downgradng Apple for failing to do more than release iPhone updates last week is that we were told months ago by Mr. Cook that announcements about innovative products would be comng in October. Even so, we've gotten in the interim revisions shipping for the iPhone and an early unveiling of an upcomng major overhaul of the Mac Pro. I suspect Apple did an uncharacteristic early reveal of the Mac Pro to keep the natives calm while the company works on polishing up whatever is in the pipeline.

I find it, as well, curious that we're being told Apple isn't operating along the lines it had been in Jobs' final years in so much as moving deliberately, with smart, measured advances is very much Jobs-like. It has to be remenbered that Apple was late in coming to the smartphone party, ignored the whole netbook misstep and then simply stepped up with dominant, polished, well-executed products that have made Apple into a powerful force. Apple is about bringing to market products when they are ready and not a second before. Yes there are missteps like Apple's Maps debacle but nobody gets it right 100 per cent of the time.

Apple focuses on delivering a satisfying customer experience (hence no Apple netbook and a rather refined tablet right from the start) and as long as that remains the focus, Apple investors have nothing to worry about. Cheap, poorly executed, frustrating products abound. As long as Apple leaves such efforts to others, Jobs will have built a strong foundation. In a way, if Apple is successful and genuinely category leading over the long haul, it will go down as Jobs' greatest achievement. Apple would then be remenbered as the company Jobs built and less the company he worked for when he showed off his brilliance while alive. The former would be more impressive and valuable than the latter.
post #13 of 104
How can these analysts possibly understand 64-bit computing when they don't have 1-bit of common sense¿
post #14 of 104
Trying to overlay a rational explanation to explain stock movement is an exercise in futility. The stock went down because that was the "best" way shorts could make money. THAT is the real world explanation.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #15 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

How can these analysts possibly understand 64-bit computing when they don't have 1-bit of common sense¿

People working for these firms have 0 engineering knowledge (or knowledge about any kind).

 

They weren't smart enough to be engineers, doctors, lawyers, etc., so they became Analysts. What is an Analyst? In theory, it must be someone that works with statistics and numbers, but isn't good at it, otherwise it they would be teachers or engineers. On the other hand, they should be good at reading industry and seeing beyond everyday's news, but if they were good at it, they would be journalists.

 

They are losers, giving advice to more losers.

 

Things like the a7, require some knowledge to be understood. An analyst can't see that, so for them it becomes irrelevant. We have reached a time were analysts should become responsible for what they say. Stupidity must have it's price.

 

Apple cuts orders from someone (most likely in order to give those orders to someone else) and we have to deal with rumors of failing demand, and the stock goes down. Most stockholders are nothing more than ignorant gamblers, but they like their money and should understand things like these, so why no one sues guys like these is very strange.

 

I mean, this is the sort of thing we get because of guys like Misek:

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckjones/2013/09/13/jefferies-peter-misek-says-terrible-yields-on-iphone-fingerprint-sensor-hurting-production/

 

"terrible yields"? Even if it is true, it's temporary, people will wait longer. But this guy is really putting the hammer down at manipulating the stock.


Edited by pedromartins - 9/16/13 at 3:56am
post #16 of 104

So, let me get this straight.

 

Misek was downgrading Apple because he suspected they were going to introduce a super-cheap phone that would kill profit margins.

 

Then upon news that Apple wasn't going to do that, he downgraded them anyway for not introducing a super-cheap phone that would kill profit margins.

post #17 of 104

Moral of the Story. Don't listen to dumb ass analysts like Misek when it comes to buying / selling Apple Stocks !

These guys can't see beyond what there two eyes can interpret. His Career as an analyst is done. He might as well start looking out for other alternatives.

post #18 of 104

Apple's financial performance is based upon analysts' estimates and their CNN-style, super-star wannabe, character. They are the cheerleaders for the most pessimistic of rumors. They throw "stuff" against the wall and when they get lucky, they may hit some on some of their questionable research and highly questionable sources. They cheer against the successful and seemingly even cheer harder against their own country's most successful. Why? 

 

What happened to analyzing stock value by the tried and true "study the fundamentals" approach?

 

How could Apple's stock possibly be valued lower than Google?

 

Why is a company that consistently racks up record quarters, earnings, P/E ratios, and cash not be the best stock value and safest investment in the market?

 

Why is every event that happens at a factory in China blamed on Apple? Does anybody ever report on Sony, Samsung, LG, Hyundai, Panasonic, ..... factory conditions?

 

Why? Stupid, uninformed rumors, from stupid, un-informed wannabes who live to be quoted by Bloomberg, CNBC, WSJ, and the NYT.

 

There seems to be an growing American culture that enjoys watching successful companies and people fail. Stupidity!!! These people seem to think this all of the jobs created by successful companies were created by the government. Frightening.

 

China is Communist. Most of it's jobs were created by entrepreneurs when the government there learned that, if they get out of the way, that the economy will flourish. Now they are eating the rest of the world's lunch and will soon be taking breakfast and dinner away from the rest of us.

 

These analysts / business reporters seem not to be accountable to anyone. Insider trading is a major crime. Why isn't mis-informing the public through bad or devious reporting? What is their agenda? They aren't serving their readers, nor are they serving their country. It doesn't seem possible to even protect your own inventions and Intellectual Property. These same analysts cheer every time a case goes against their true IP creator. 

 

They don't report facts that are evident. Samsung, for example, out-sells Apple in Asia for one simple reason (and it isn't screen size!) ..... It is because APPS ARE FREE on Android. Not by design, but because they are exceptionally easy to rip off. Galaxy phone sellers in Asia will pre-install any apps you want for free when you buy a phone from them. It is much more difficult for the to do that in iOS. That's a story that should be investigated and published!!!

 

 

USA finally has a world-leading consumer tech company. Please tell us who is the last one of those you can remember. RCA? Motorola? Magnavox? Digital Equipment (DEC)? It's been a very long time!!!!

post #19 of 104
There's one reason for the downgrades: Wall Street expected the unlocked price of colored iPhone to be cheaper than it is. Plain and simple.

What I'd like to know is, does the carrier subsidy basically set a floor on price, so if Apple is getting $450 or whatever from AT&T an unlocked phone would never be cheaper than that? Or in markets where subsidies aren't the norm does Apple have more flexibility on the unlocked price?
post #20 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Barriault View Post

So, let me get this straight.

Misek was downgrading Apple because he suspected they were going to introduce a super-cheap phone that would kill profit margins.

Then upon news that Apple wasn't going to do that, he downgraded them anyway for not introducing a super-cheap phone that would kill profit margins.
That summed it up. It's his same song and dance from February and March. I don't know how he isn't held accountable by the FCC, let alone keeps his job.
post #21 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carmissimo View Post

What's especially amusing about downgradng Apple for failing to do more than release iPhone updates last week is that we were told months ago by Mr. Cook that announcements about innovative products would be comng in October. Even so, we've gotten in the interim revisions shipping for the iPhone and an early unveiling of an upcomng major overhaul of the Mac Pro. I suspect Apple did an uncharacteristic early reveal of the Mac Pro to keep the natives calm while the company works on polishing up whatever is in the pipeline.

I find it, as well, curious that we're being told Apple isn't operating along the lines it had been in Jobs' final years in so much as moving deliberately, with smart, measured advances is very much Jobs-like. It has to be remenbered that Apple was late in coming to the smartphone party, ignored the whole netbook misstep and then simply stepped up with dominant, polished, well-executed products that have made Apple into a powerful force. Apple is about bringing to market products when they are ready and not a second before. Yes there are missteps like Apple's Maps debacle but nobody gets it right 100 per cent of the time.

Apple focuses on delivering a satisfying customer experience (hence no Apple netbook and a rather refined tablet right from the start) and as long as that remains the focus, Apple investors have nothing to worry about. Cheap, poorly executed, frustrating products abound. As long as Apple leaves such efforts to others, Jobs will have built a strong foundation. In a way, if Apple is successful and genuinely category leading over the long haul, it will go down as Jobs' greatest achievement. Apple would then be remenbered as the company Jobs built and less the company he worked for when he showed off his brilliance while alive. The former would be more impressive and valuable than the latter.
Tim Cook never said October about anything. He said new products would be coming in the fall and across 2014. But he never gave a specific date or when exactly new product categories would drop.
post #22 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikilok View Post
 

Moral of the Story. Don't listen to dumb ass analysts like Misek when it comes to buying / selling Apple Stocks !

These guys can't see beyond what there two eyes can interpret. His Career as an analyst is done. He might as well start looking out for other alternatives.

Au contraire.

 

Since he said that the stock should go down because of "terrible yields" and AAPL should be 425, the stock will reach 425 because of those pessimistic "news". So, he was wrong about the "terrible yields", but he will end up right about the stock price, despite the fact that he was wrong. Confusing?

 

Two wrongs can really make a right.

 

He has an awesome career and will earn tons of $. It's a shame that he still is stupid, ignorant and useless... $ can't change that.

Unless he is a nice and smart guy and understands how the game is played, so he gives a "FU" to everyone and makes $ as fast as he can. Effective.


Edited by pedromartins - 9/16/13 at 4:22am
post #23 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Barriault View Post

So, let me get this straight.

Misek was downgrading Apple because he suspected they were going to introduce a super-cheap phone that would kill profit margins.

Then upon news that Apple wasn't going to do that, he downgraded them anyway for not introducing a super-cheap phone that would kill profit margins.
That's the fallacy with Wall Street. They want Apple to have high market share, high margins and high profits. But it's damn near impossible to do, at least long term. Someone will come in and undercut on price with a product that is "good enough" for the price conscious. I still think its too early to tell if Apple's pricing strategy with the colored iPhone was right or not. I'm sure some analysts will be expecting sales figures today but IMO unless they're off the charts I can't see Apple announcing anything. They'll do it a week from now when they can combine it with the flagship device sales.
post #24 of 104

Misek is the king of AAPL misinformation.  The only question is whether his mistakes are honest (i.e. due ignorance) or venal (stock manipulation). 

post #25 of 104
Misek is not working for the little guy in the stock market. He is working for himself and other program traders to swing the market for their own gain. He has no conscience, no integrity, no ethics. He is dumb like a fox. His predictions help to swing the market even though they are wrong. Some investors actually like this. It is the little guy in the market that gets hurt.
post #26 of 104
Is there anything like a league table for these analyst wuckfits? Something real easy for the media to reference, so cred could be checked with each "prophecy"?

Mind not for rent, to any god or government.

Reply

Mind not for rent, to any god or government.

Reply
post #27 of 104
This guy is terrible with his product predictions. He wants the stock to desperately go down to 420. His game is plan is to raise the expectation about product releases and downgrade the stock right after major apple events.
post #28 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

There's one reason for the downgrades: Wall Street expected the unlocked price of colored iPhone to be cheaper than it is. Plain and simple.

What I'd like to know is, does the carrier subsidy basically set a floor on price, so if Apple is getting $450 or whatever from AT&T an unlocked phone would never be cheaper than that? Or in markets where subsidies aren't the norm does Apple have more flexibility on the unlocked price?

 

Maybe we have a more competitive environment here in the UK, but if the phone only cost $300 then the $150 difference that the carrier didn't have to pay would be used to reduce the monthly payment. 100% of the saving probably wouldn't be passed on to the customer but you could see a $5 per month reduction.

post #29 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Equality72521 View Post

Is there anything like a league table for these analyst wuckfits? Something real easy for the media to reference, so cred could be checked with each "prophecy"?

 

It’s great to see so many others pointing out the indisputable fact that the widely reported Wall Street ‘analysts’ are completely and totally full of shit, all the time. I’ve learned much about the market managing my own investments—the single most important thing is the ubiquity of complete B.S. which goes hand-in-hand with the media’s desire to create buzz and the total impunity with which they report all manner of B.S. to that end, on every topic.
 

Years ago, I took a seminar with a well-known and respected trader; he told us the story about a time he was invited on TV to talk about the markets: backstage, the producers demanded he give their viewers a ‘hot tip’ for tomorrow. He told them repeatedly that he planned to take positions in a few months and that he had no ‘hot tip’ at the present time. Finally, they gave up badgering him, filmed his segment but never ran it on air. He was never contacted by any media to speak about the market again. (This is a man who makes millions—I, for one, would love to get more of his advise for free on TV.)

 

I hope this gives you further insight into the media agenda; and further insight into the integrity of the ‘analysts’ the media favors.

post #30 of 104

You know, I'm not bothered by the decrease in stock price because Apple is in the middle of a $100b stock buy-back.  The lower the price, the more stock Apple can take off the market.  While a long time coming, take the company private and be done with these Analysts once and for all...

 

I wonder if that had been Jobs goal all along with accumulating the vast amounts of money.

theFly
Reply
theFly
Reply
post #31 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheFly View Post
 

You know, I'm not bothered by the decrease in stock price because Apple is in the middle of a $100b stock buy-back.  The lower the price, the more stock Apple can take off the market.  While a long time coming, take the company private and be done with these Analysts once and for all...

 

I wonder if that had been Jobs goal all along with accumulating the vast amounts of money.

 

That would seem impossible, but perhaps not. It really would serve everyone right! LOL

post #32 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by fruitstandninja View Post

I don't know how he isn't held accountable by the FCC, let alone keeps his job.

He wears a disguise. See here, he has one of those false noses and glasses:

Peter Misek

All these analysts have to do this so they aren't held accountable for their rubbish. They'll be tracked down eventually though.
post #33 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phone-UI-Guy View Post

What really sucks is that he downgraded them because they didn't do what he thought they should instead of re-building new models on what Apple is actually doing. He is an f'ing moron.

Analysts also upgrade stocks due to their masterbatory predictions. The whole of the financial industry and certainly the stock market analysts is based on making money on nothing more than stochastic changes caused in large part by them.
post #34 of 104
I think apple will sell about the same amount of phones it sold last year, but with better margins.

That means market shares will continu to drop
post #35 of 104
Don't give the analysts too much credit. The switch to a 64-bit A7 possibly fabbed by TSMC had zero factor in the stock price predictions from these clowns. They are all about making money on the movement of the stock price over short periods of time not about the value of the company and its stock over an extended investment period.
post #36 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phone-UI-Guy View Post
 

 

What really sucks is that he downgraded them because they didn't do what he thought they should instead of re-building new models on what Apple is actually doing. He is an f'ing moron.

 

In fairness to Mr. Misek, he is only doing what the vast majority of the "financial analysts" do. The stock market today is so far removed from the original idea of what it was supposed to be in the beginning, it is laughable. The whole intent today, of the whole financial industries,  seems to be to find "new and improved ways" to remove money from the "investors" pockets. What other industry do you know of where the "company" makes money, no matter which way the "wind blows" .... the customer buys, you make money, the customer sells, you make money. The stock market/financial industry is nothing more than a huge gambling house ... one where only the "employees" know all the rules .... and whenever the customer starts to "win" .... they introduce more and more "esoteric" rules and technology to put themselves, not the customer that they are supposed to serve, in an even more advantageous position. The real sad part is that, for the most part, the customers keep coming back for more .... despite the "crashes" that happen more frequently ... despite the "scandals" that happen more frequently .. i.e. "the savings and loans scandal" ... the "bank crisis" brought on by so much wrong doings that, in any other industry, would demand incarceration for the "real" perpetrators  ... etc.  etc.  .... and a complete overhaul of the system to clean it up. It kind of reminds me of that old joke .... why do people keep banging their head on a stone wall? .... because it feels so good when they stop.


Edited by newbee - 9/16/13 at 6:43am
See, in the record business, you can show someone your song, and they don’t copy it. In the tech business, you show somebody your idea, and they steal it. (Jimmy Iovine)
Reply
See, in the record business, you can show someone your song, and they don’t copy it. In the tech business, you show somebody your idea, and they steal it. (Jimmy Iovine)
Reply
post #37 of 104
I have to say, his job is not an easy one. There are a lot of cats that have to be herded when making projections about Apple's stock. Their supply chain looks more like a squid than an octopus, it is a very big company, making a lot of moves, some more obvious than others. That said, I was listening to, I think it was, a Freakonomics podcast and they were talking about prognostications and the people who make them. It seems that in order to become a legend, you only have to make one big or extreme one correctly before everyone is paying to pull your coat, even if you go back to being in error for the rest of your life. So he's trying to make the big call for Apple among other entities. If you look at the financial page, it is filled with people making guesses about where the wheel will stop.

The sad thing is that Wall St prognosticators are playing with other people's money and taking their cut off the top, the bottom and both sides and they do so with impunity. They should be much more severely punished for being in error, like fifty to the head from Mike Tyson, which will make them, either more certain or more quiet. I'd place my bets on more quiet.
post #38 of 104
Most analysts were expecting the so called 'low cost' iPhone to come in between $300-$400 without contract thus making it more price-competitive in emerging markets. The 5C's $500-$600 price point is why the downgraded Apple's stock. Like it or not, this is how most financial analysts think. They believe that having a dominant marketshare will lead to profits. Apple somewhat defies this which is why the analysts tend to be so fickle on AAPL.
post #39 of 104

Forget about phone specs... what about technical analysis of AAPL. Did they downgrade because they saw that the 50 was going to go above the 200 and they wanted to put a lid on the stock.

 

Too late.

na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #40 of 104
Someone should forward this article to Misek. I hope he reads it in some way, shape, or form.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Secrecy around Apple's new 64-bit A7 chip may have incited spurious $AAPL stock downgrades
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Secrecy around Apple's new 64-bit A7 chip may have incited spurious $AAPL stock downgrades