or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Gene Munster's iPhone launch estimates off by 5M units for the second year in a row
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Gene Munster's iPhone launch estimates off by 5M units for the second year in a row

post #1 of 128
Thread Starter 
Industry observers had been snickering about a promise made by Apple's chief executive Tim Cook to "double down" on security, but a series of jaw-dropping surprises have proven that, outside of a steady stream of immaterial leaks, the company remains an opaque mystery to its competitors, to pundits and even to analysts tasked with understanding the inscrutable innovation factory.


Gene Munster, Piper Jaffray

Gene Munster, Piper Jaffray


From the 64-bit A7 that still remains shrouded in secrets to the company's strategy for maintaining its industry leading profitability in an increasingly competitive smartphone landscape, nobody tasked with knowing Apple seems able to guess its next steps.

That includes Piper Jaffray analyst Gene Munster, who has maintained a bullish outlook on the firm since before it was even fashionable. But rather than just admitting that Apple is a tough nut to crack, Munster had started copying other analysts in simply insisting that up is down and that Apple is wrong about its own business in a field where it has been trouncing established veterans and proving experts wrong for years.

Munster wrong on the iPhone 5c



In August, just a month before Apple launched its new iPhones, Munster described the iPhone 5c (which had already made several appearances in a series of spy photos) as having "lower end internal specs (processor, camera, memory, etc.) than the 5S/5 line up," estimating that the device would be priced at $300 without a contract.

He also wrote his clients saying, "we believe that Apple may exclude some software features, such as Siri, which we note was not an option on the iPhone 3GS or iPhone 4 upon launch." He also expected Apple to discontinue the iPhone 4S, leaving it to sell an iPhone 5c, 5 and 5s.

This was profoundly wrong in every respect. The only things Munster got right were already public knowledge: the 5c having a plastic case and the same 4 inch display. Munster not only got all of his predicted details wrong, but also demonstrated that he had no idea of what Apple's overall strategy for the 5c actually was.


iphone-5c-color-lineup.jpg


Munster appeared to be describing facts he knew, or perhaps educated guesses he made based on industry checks or historical trends. But even there he was wrong across the board. Apple never even hinted that it planned to make a cheap phone, nor has it released iPhones with stunted new hardware before, nor has it has ever launched a new iPhone model lacking the previous year's software features.

The only iPhones that lacked support for Siri were those that appeared before Siri was released as a feature, and that was only because they lacked hardware that the new feature required to function adequately, including specialized noise reduction circuitry that debuted in the A5-powered iPhone 4S alongside Siri two years ago.

Rather than dumbing down the iPhone 5's internals to deliver a more affordable alternative to the new top of the line iPhone 5s, Apple enhanced the iPhone 5 to produce a better 5c, adding a larger battery, new baseband components for broader LTE compatibility with new carriers and an improved front facing FaceTime camera sporting a backside illumination sensor for better low light selfies.

iPhone 5s, 5c features


When the new iPhone 5c was released by Apple as "a better 5" at a price tier identical to the previous year's "affordable" iPhone 4S ($99 on contract, or $549 unlocked), Munster followed other analysts (including Jefferies' Peter Misek) in critically attacking the company, even though it wasn't Apple that was wrong in every respect, it was Munster (Misek was wrong, too).

Cook attempts to rein in rogue analysts



Munster has a historical reputation of being aggressively bullish on Apple, unlike many of his peers who often doubt the company at every turn. But Munster's wild enthusiasm for Apple has been a problem for the company, too. Last year, Munster joined other analysts in setting sky-high expectations for Apple that were far in excess of the actual guidance Apple was issuing."The supply chain is very complex, and we obviously have multiple sources for things... 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.? - Tim Cook

When Apple beat its own guidance but "missed" the expectations of "the Street," it was punished severely by downgrades that helped establish the company's stock price far below the relative prices of industry peers bringing in less revenue, earning less and sitting on far less cash, forcing Apple to expressly state in January that analysts should stop blindly adding a thick layer of bonus expectations to its guidance going forward.

Cook also added a second warning directed at analysts who were making vast leaps of logic based on supposed "checks" with Apple's suppliers. "The supply chain is very complex, and we obviously have multiple sources for things," Cook said during Apple's January quarterly earnings conference call. "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."

This didn't stop analysts from making wild claims about billions of dollars' worth of business based on scraps of data coaxed from its suppliers. Misek, for example, ignored Cook's comments and ran with the idea that Samsung's "wafer starts" from June were a clear sign that Apple was severely cutting back on iPhone chip production in the critical months leading up to its September new model launch. The market appeared more willing to listen to Misek than Cook, further driving down Apple's stock prices to ridiculous levels over the summer.

Munster wrong on iPhone launch weekend sales, back to back



Last September, Apple's overall performance had earned it a stock price above $700 as it ramped up to launch iPhone 5. Apple didn't estimate how many iPhones it planned to sell at launch, but over the previous two years Apple had announced iPhone 4 selling 1.7 million units over its launch weekend and that iPhone 4S sales had "topped" 4 million at its launch.

Munster predicted a massive leap in iPhone 5 sales to 6-10 million over the fall 2012 launch weekend, calling sales of 6 million a "worst case scenario." When Apple announced sales of 5 million phones over three days, Munster's figures were cited as contributing to the malaise of disappointment and general negativity that dogged Apple over most of the next year.

iPhone5launch051713.png
Source: Business Insider


Bizarrely, the next summer when Samsung announced its "confidence" that it would pass ten million channel shipments of Galaxy S4 units four weeks after it went on sale, the same journalists reported it as a strong start for the new model. Exuberance around Samsung lasted for months, until the company began scaling back its own estimates as its flagship phone proved to truly be a disappointment.

GS4launch051713.png
Source: Business Insider


Fast forward to this year's iPhone lauch: Munster, after observing iPhone 5c & 5s launch day lines and taking notes, reiterated his firm's prediction of weekend sales of 5 to 6 million, detailed as "2.5 million iPhone 5s" and "3 million units" of iPhone 5c.

In parallel, KGI analyst Ming-Chi Kuo predicted sales of 6 to 8 million.

When Apple announced sales of 9 million iPhones over the weekend, Munster told Bloomberg, "When I saw that 9-million number, I basically fell out of my chair."



Rather than being impressed, however, Munster explained that "the real number was 5.5 million," that is, his prediction was right, despite being off by miles. He continues to insist that he wasn't wrong, and Apple was in some way, perhaps in reporting figures that meant something other than what the company's announced sales meant the previous year, or the year before that, or the year before that, or the year before that, or the year before that when it launched the original iPhone.

Munster knew Apple was selling two new models this year, he knew what carriers and in what countries Apple was launching the new phones, and he had some indication that inventories were constrained and that demand was enthusiastic. His explanation that Apple did something new and different this year is absolutely incredible, given that there wasn?t anything unknown about what Apple was doing when he reaffirmed his far too low prediction the day the new models went on sale.

He simply guessed wrong by a huge factor, and yet after the fact blamed Apple for his error. That's far worse than simply acknowledging that his model was wrong and that Apple turned in surprising, unanticipated results.

Exactly the kind of data Joe Wilcox desperately needed



Munster's bizarre explanation of Apple's sales not really being what Apple said they were, but rather some Byzantine, inscrutable enigma that must be processed by the Munster Algorithm to extract the true Munster Predicted Number, was enough to impress Joe Wilcox, who is easily impressed by any figures that flatter any company other than Apple, or which appear to cast Apple in a bad light.

When Strategy Analytics invented numbers suggesting that Microsoft's Surface tablet had sold 3 million units in the spring quarter, Wilcox uncritically bought it because he desperately wanted good news about the Surface.

Three months earlier, Wilcox had insisted in print that "Surface RT sales are quite good, you just don't know about it," so with some analyst data supporting what he wanted to believe, Wilcox was ecstatic. "Now there are real numbers, and they're quite good," he wrote. It turned out Strategy Analytics was wrong and Microsoft's Surface wasn't really selling at all.

Wilcox's relief in finding data that supported his desired version of reality for the Surface was forced to make an unscheduled pitstop in Backwards-land when he had to grapple with iPhone launch numbers that didn't support what he wanted to believe. Apple had actually sold three times as many iPhones in a weekend than Strategy Analytics had incorrectly claimed Microsoft had shipped in Surface tablets across three months.

Munster's elaborate explanations of how Apple's record iPhone launch sales were actually nothing special because they weren't in line with his predictions is exactly what Wilcox wanted to hear, empowering his clever-by-half headline: "Apple's iPhone 5s failure,? along with a stock photograph associating the biggest smartphone launch in history with the idea ?below average."

JoeWilcoxBelowAverage.jpg
Source: Below Average


Wilcox warned his readers that Apple was "carefully managing the launch for maximum marketing benefit, twisting truth as so many companies try to but few achieve as well as iPhone's maker."

What was Apple twisting? According to Wilcox, the fact that Apple's discontinued iPhone 5 was no longer piled up in mountains of unsold inventory like the Surface RT meant that the company's reported launch sales were really just replenishing the channel, and therefore could be safely ignored as data from which to make any sort of conclusions.

Wilcox was so upset about Apple's sales that he began churning out daily reports on the subject, one day pleading with readers to understand that "iPhone 5c sales of any kind mean lower margins at launch," and the next day explaining that new data indicating that the more expensive and profitable iPhone 5s had actually been outselling the 5c by a factor of more than 3x meant that Apple's inventory must be positively clogged with unsold 5c boxes.

Wrong about the cheap iPhone 5c in China



The data that confounded Wilcox' hope that Apple's sales would be dominated by the less profitable iPhone 5c (which is still more profitable than any Samsung phone, and by extension, any other smartphone) was research by Localytics that suggested that Apple's high end iPhone 5s was dominating its initial launch sales.

Localytics
Source: Localytics


The firm reported that not only was the iPhone 5s making up three fourths or more of Apple's sales, but that the tilt toward premium sales was most noticeable in the country that analysts had been flogging as desperately needing a cheap model: China.

Localytics said that while the 5s made up 76 percent of sales in the U.S., it averaged 82 percent of launch weekend sales in other countries and made up a whopping 91 percent of sales in China.

Apple's game plan going forward is anyone's guess, but with guesses like these, there should be some apologies in order.
post #2 of 128
This isn't surprising. Most `analysts' in the financial worlds are completely ignorant of applied engineering products and how they will be received. Munster is but one of endless numbers who get paid exceedingly well to be completely devoid of any reasonable predictability in their analyses.

Wall Street may have many former struggling physicists/engineers/mathematicians gaming the system for microsecond transactions, but they are completely devoid of any applied physicists/engineers/mathematicians who actually create advancements in technologies typical of mass consumption.
post #3 of 128
Analysts should publish who pays them. Samesung is well known for funding guerilla marketing tactics.
post #4 of 128
This guy has been predicting the release of the Apple smart TV. The only smart TVs are those from Samsung, LG and Xiaomi.
post #5 of 128
@mdriftmeyer - spot on. Having met some people like this, despite slick suits and manner, they are as thick as two short planks, and in the position they are because they are completely lacking in any skills or intellect and instead make a living talking pure BS and hope that 'one day' they will be right and make a killing. What is worse is there are so many people like this world-wide today who don't actually know how the things they own are made or operate. Blame celeb TV and all the other dumbing down going on to stop us protesting oil wars, fracking etc.
post #6 of 128

It doesn't matter how intelligent you are, if you try to draw conclusions from too little data, you will screw up. And Apple is very secretive. All you can do with Apple is watch the long terms trends, and predict in broad strokes not specifics (and based on those you would have to be very positive).

post #7 of 128
I guess there's a reason Gene isn't on Pipers' Leadership Team

PIPER JAFFRAY, A (MIS)LEADING INVESTMENT BANK AND ASSET MANAGEMENT FIRM.

Their marketing sucks, too:
Quote:
Community Leadership

Piper Jaffray is a leading middle market investment bank and asset management firm. Since our founding in 1895, we have kept our company solidly rooted in our time-tested core values. These values ensure we stay a course of integrity, client focus and community partnership, regardless of fluctuations in the markets.

I think DED should send this article to all these investment firms. Presuming it's from DED; can't tell without going to the homepage, but who in their right mind goes to this sites' homepage?
"Fibonacci: As easy as 1, 1, 2, 3..."
Reply
"Fibonacci: As easy as 1, 1, 2, 3..."
Reply
post #8 of 128
This is not journalism; this is tabloid trash.

This sort of article, whose sole purpose seems to be character assassination, reveals gossipy, agenda-driven, pro-company propagandists, and separates the author(s) from blogs of real journalistic integrity.

Can pure editorials please be better labeled and separated from news articles? I quite honestly must be missing something.

Edit - Note: There is no label for editorial content displayed on the mobile apps for iOS or web.
Edited by ApplesInCider - 9/26/13 at 1:05am
post #9 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApplesInCider View Post

This is not journalism; this is tabloid trash.

This sort of article, whose sole purpose seems to be character assassination, reveals gossipy, agenda-driven, pro-company propagandists, and separates the author(s) from blogs of real journalistic integrity.

Can pure editorials please be better labeled and separated from news articles? I quite honestly must be missing something.

It's clearly labeled as an editorial. Attacks on these analysts are more than deserved. What you're quite honestly missing is that analysts are fundamentally dishonest: the successful ones mislead huge numbers of people for profit.
post #10 of 128
"the less profitable iPhone 5c"

This sounds like something that an analyst would say. There's no reliable data on what Apple's costs for the 5c and the 5s are. There are some estimates, but neither the A6 nor the A7 is available to anyone else, nor is tearing down the phone exactly the same as building it.
post #11 of 128

Failed again, huh?

 

Back to university for Mr Munster...

 

post #12 of 128
If anyone care, I wrote right here in this forum a few months ago about 3 things (all prove to be correct)

1. iPhone 5c won't be cheap (or cheap as in Apple standard)
2. China don't want cheap iPhone.
3. iPhone 4 is the answer to cheap iPhone in China.

Shame the rest of the world gone insane. Drove the stock down, but mind you I never think the $700+ price was justify that time anyway. It was just another Wall Street trick to get bunch of suckers in the game ...
post #13 of 128
Seeing and hearing Munster make excuses makes me want to puke. They're always trying to cover their own asses when they make a huge mistake. Why doesn't he just admit he made a prediction error and let it go at that? His credibility is already shot.
post #14 of 128
Finally! Someone calls out the greediest, most manipulative analyst out there. He was a client of some friends and they had to dump him after the gross display of greed finally caught up to him and his erroneous estimates time and time again. What a despicable human being. And by covering his tracks by placing the blame of apple getting their own numbers wrong just exemplifies his uselessness as a greedy analyst.
post #15 of 128
Great article about ignorant, misleading analysts. This should be sent to Munster and to CNBC - so more people read it.
post #16 of 128
Munster and all of the other analyst are idiots.

The only reliable analyst we've seen is Kuo, the rest can shut up.
post #17 of 128
I don't fault Gene Munster for not being able to come up with the correct numbers. It's a tough business predicting the future. The disturbing thing to me is that, even when given the correct numbers, he still gets it wrong. I don't think the man is incompetent. So it really begs the question: What's going on here? Why would he publicly shout: Hey, everybody, look at me, I'm an idiot? What does he have to gain? Some are suggesting it's ego, or an inability on his part to admit when he's wrong, but I doubt that.

Which brings us back to the big question: Why would he do this? What does he get from this?

Any suggestions?
post #18 of 128
Don't go picking on analysts, nobody gets it 'right'. It's kind. Of amazing that they keep trying and failing in the spectacular manner they do. It makes me wonder if there are rumor and insider websites dedicated to other companies. I imagine that the knic of speculation Apple endures is visited on other companies, just not with the same amount of public dedication. Gene Munster is not the worst of the bunch, and there is a bunch.
post #19 of 128

I think analysts and the things they say should be talked about far more than they currently are. I think companies would be far better served if they were really put under the microscope. Personally, if I had the time, I would start a website and do a "Consumer Reports" kind of thing JUST on analysts. I'd report their accuracy on every prediction that came out of their mouths. I'd chart it, and quantify it, and let the numbers do the talking.

post #20 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulfhednar View Post

I don't fault Gene Munster for not being able to come up with the correct numbers. It's a tough business predicting the future. The disturbing thing to me is that, even when given the correct numbers, he still gets it wrong. I don't think the man is incompetent. So it really begs the question: What's going on here? Why would he publicly shout: Hey, everybody, look at me, I'm an idiot? What does he have to gain? Some are suggesting it's ego, or an inability on his part to admit when he's wrong, but I doubt that.

Which brings us back to the big question: Why would he do this? What does he get from this?

Any suggestions?

 

He makes money doing this—more money than most of us—even those of us with honest, good-paying, beneficial jobs. He and his ilk are a lot like Miley Cyrus and her ilk: the only thing remarkable about them is that anyone cares. Unfortunately, enough people listen/watch/whatever to make them prodigious amounts of money. It’s marketing without substance i.e., they have no desirable product for sale (unlike teachers; real musicians; Apple Inc. etc.); but it works anyway.

post #21 of 128
Thank you for this article. I don't fault Gene Munster for having his estimates wrong. I do fault him for trying to blame others for his poor estimate this year. Apple is not an easy company to analyze and this was a unique year with 2 new iPhone models being released along with the prior year model being retired. It was also difficult with the 5c going on sale a week earlier online yet the flagship 5s not going on sale until online until launch weekend. But Mr. Munster knew all of this and it should have been part of his estimate. He just "guessed" wrong. Something he has done too much lately.

Another HUGE miss for Mr. Munster was the day of the iPhone event when he said there was a 99% chance of a China Mobile announcement at the Beijing iPhone event. That did not happen either. Statements like this from Mr. Munster only add to the volatility of Apple stock. He raised expectations for a China Mobile announcement to a high level and the stock was then punished when it did not happen. This other "miss" by Mr. Munster should be included in your article.
post #22 of 128

Gene, please admit your mistakes, apologize, learn from your errors to improve the accuracy of your reporting or simply go away. You are adding to the noise that diminishes the stock value of a quality company. I shall recall the link to this article and continue to publish this comment when I feel it is appropriate.

post #23 of 128
Was this article written to counter the piece in Business Insider where Munster said Apple only sold 5.5 million on launch weekend?

http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-actually-only-sold-55-million-iphones-during-opening-weekend-says-gene-munster-2013-9
post #24 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackbook View Post

The only reliable analyst we've seen is Kuo, the rest can shut up.

Yes, he seems to have real sources. And the WSJ and NYT seem to get it right when they predict a day or two out from an event: once again, real sources (I suspect).

post #25 of 128
Daniel Eran Dilger delivers again, and again, and again!
post #26 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApplesInCider View Post

This is not journalism; this is tabloid trash.

This sort of article, whose sole purpose seems to be character assassination, reveals gossipy, agenda-driven, pro-company propagandists, and separates the author(s) from blogs of real journalistic integrity.

Can pure editorials please be better labeled and separated from news articles? I quite honestly must be missing something.

 

 

If you are an analyst you should shame the bad ones.

If not, you should expose their tricks.

It is a civic behaviour.

post #27 of 128
So when Munster released his 5-6 million figure was he including channel inventory? And if not, why? Apple hasn't changed the way it reports stuff. Also since we know Cook hates inventory (he once called it evil) its highly doubtful Apple would make a shitload of phones to sit on store shelves somewhere just so they could report some big launch weekend figure. Apple manufactures what it thinks it will sell.
post #28 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doxxic View Post

Daniel, you wrote a big, rather triumphant article about what it meant that Samsung almost certainly did not make the A7. I'd like to hear your thoughts about the fact that they actually do.

Is that you Gene?
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #29 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApplesInCider View Post

This is not journalism; this is tabloid trash.

This sort of article, whose sole purpose seems to be character assassination, reveals gossipy, agenda-driven, pro-company propagandists, and separates the author(s) from blogs of real journalistic integrity.

Can pure editorials please be better labeled and separated from news articles? I quite honestly must be missing something.

You sure do sound like you must be missing something: the ability to read, for starters.
post #30 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post
 

It doesn't matter how intelligent you are, if you try to draw conclusions from too little data, you will screw up. And Apple is very secretive. All you can do with Apple is watch the long terms trends, and predict in broad strokes not specifics (and based on those you would have to be very positive).

True.

 

These analysts are doing what they always do: making educated guesses.  Anyone who treats their advice as fact should not be allowed to make their own investment decisions.

 

I would really like to know who is issuing better or more accurate information?  No one?  Anyone?  Bueller?

 

Can DED do better?

post #31 of 128
Those 'Analysts' should be named and shamed in a blacklist! They need to take accountability about what they said. Unfortunately some investors listen and follow their crap! The Lesson learned: listen only APPLE own official numbers and do your own research and analyse. Always remember people from the wall street are not smarter than you!
post #32 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by SwissMac2 View Post

Analysts should publish who pays them. Samesung is well known for funding guerilla marketing tactics.

Excellent question.

I was wondering and I am sure experts here will enlighten me.

How far can manipulators like this directly benefit from that manipulation and stay legal? Also what are the a gray areas that can be used by the Musters and Cramers of this world to so benefit from stock manipulation using their powerful soap boxes and what clear is a line they cannot cross?

Lastly, is there any legislation afoot to curb this or is it just the modern day snake oil salesman and 'let the buyer beware' rule applies?

I would have thought at the very least every article they print should carry a list of disclaimers! Just listen to the last 15 seconds of every pharmaceutical ad on television! Your testicles dropping of and going blind might be worse than losing your shirt but not by far for some.
Edited by digitalclips - 9/25/13 at 5:29am
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #33 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacManFelix View Post

He makes money doing this—more money than most of us—even those of us with honest, good-paying, beneficial jobs. He and his ilk are a lot like Miley Cyrus and her ilk: the only thing remarkable about them is that anyone cares. Unfortunately, enough people listen/watch/whatever to make them prodigious amounts of money. It’s marketing without substance i.e., they have no desirable product for sale (unlike teachers; real musicians; Apple Inc. etc.); but it works anyway.


It's time to give these folks a new name/moniker. They are NOT actually or truthfully "analyzing" anything, so it molests the name "analyst"* for sake of a better title.

I would like to propose, in the same vein as the now common term for those parties abusing copyright and patent law (Patent Trolls), the following:

Market Trolls

I just checked a quick Google seach to see if it's being used, and it is not. Maybe AI could start the trend?

Naturally if someone has something better, let's here it..... 1smoking.gif

* I'm tired of using anal-cyst, and naturally that can't be in any serious headline discussing these puss-invested-provocateurs and manipulators..
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
post #34 of 128
The best article I've ever read about apple on appleinsider. I also think all of these analyst can also be included in this write up.
Thanks
post #35 of 128
Munster stated that when he heard the 9 million sales figure he almost fell out of his chair. What calls did he make in less than a day that would provide the 3.5 million iPhones surplus on store shelves. This is the same guy that watches traffic at One mall for a few hours to create estimates. Come on, let's get past this. There's no way he could scramble that fast to come up with a good number. More importantly, why does it matter. It's all sales that will hit 3rd quarter.
post #36 of 128

There's an interesting article ("Apple Can't Win") by Forbes discussing the same thing as DED's piece.

 

"It will be fair to judge anything less than 170 million iPhones over these next 4 quarters as an utter failure of Apple’s strategy."

...

"Tim Cook and Apple management don’t talk sales goals, but I imagine somewhere in Cupertino they’re looking at a figure that many a Hollywood blockbuster shoots for these days — 200 million."

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/markrogowsky/2013/09/25/apple-cant-win/?partner=yahootix

post #37 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR View Post

Failed again, huh?

Back to university for Mr Munster...



I much prefer this Munster.

"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #38 of 128

Thank you for writing this. I am so sick of these so called analysts that try to manipulate the news to benefit their pocketbooks. They are all fools and you can add Jim Kramer into that group.

TechnoMinds

We are a Montreal based technology company that offers a variety of tech services such as tech support for Apple products, Drupal based website development, computer training and iCloud...

Reply

TechnoMinds

We are a Montreal based technology company that offers a variety of tech services such as tech support for Apple products, Drupal based website development, computer training and iCloud...

Reply
post #39 of 128

He was only off by 5 million.  Twice.  Let's cut him some slack.  I mean he and his analyst friends did do potential stock buyers a big favor by causing Apple's stock to drop, and quite significantly at that.

 

/s

post #40 of 128
I agree that saying the 5C is less profitable than the 5S may not be true as the 5C is a much improved iPhone5 but then again, this assumes that input costs remain low and given how JPM and Goldman Sachs have been overtly manipulating commodity markets of late... and given that one of the commodities in question was being manipulated by driving the material from one part of Detroit to another over and over would change the costs of one of the iPhone models.

The 5S, to me, is more iPhone 6 given the CPU alone. To me, the problem with Apple is what are they going to add to the iPhone 6 next year now that iOS7 has been revamped and these new features added?

Only thing I can think of is wireless charging.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Gene Munster's iPhone launch estimates off by 5M units for the second year in a row
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Gene Munster's iPhone launch estimates off by 5M units for the second year in a row