Nothing last forever. Sony was once a top player in the portable music device scene, but their own hubris brought them down. Look at Nintendo recently as well. Anyone with an ounce of sense should understand that this growth of Apple's (while quite nice) won't last forever. The moment the growth slows Apple will (while still making $$$) will be seen as a company that has reached maturity and is heading downward. I am not saying this will happen soon, but it will happen.
Also, I really don't expect Jobs to last much longer, health-wise. I hope Apple has a strong and wise replacement for Jobs, because right now people equate Apple and Apple's success with Steve Jobs...they see them as one in the same. When he goes...???
You don?t even need to do the math to be able to tell that is wrong. It didn?t take them decades to $60B and they are GROWING even faster, so at the same rate they will reach $100B within a few years.
Anyone want to crunch the actual YoY net profit for Apple from 2009 to 2010? I estimate about 3.5 years.
If it's total cash reserves we're talking about here, based on this quarterly report, the current accumulation rate is close to $3b a month. Assuming no continued acceleration, they'll get to $100b by early next year. Then Apple can retire.
If it's total cash reserves we're talking about here, based on this quarterly report, the current accumulation rate is close to $3b a month. Assuming no continued acceleration, they'll get to $100b by early next year. Then Apple can retire.
1) You used a lower-case ?b?, not an upper-case ?B?. does that mean that?s ⅛ of that value?
2) How are they gaining $9 BILLION per quarter in cash when there bet quarter in net profit was only a ⅓ of that?
3) Maybe there is some corporate giveaway. Every $10B you accumulate you get your card punched and on the tenth one you get a free start up or a free ticket to the movies and free popcorn and soda upgrade, excluding special events, and premieres.
You don?t even need to do the math to be able to tell that is wrong. It didn?t take them decades to $60B and they are GROWING even faster, so at the same rate they will reach $100B within a few years.
Anyone want to crunch the actual YoY net profit for Apple from 2009 to 2010? I estimate about 3.5 years.
Hmmmm... wasn't Stevemost talking about fiscal year $100B? That's what I thought... maybe not.
You don?t even need to do the math to be able to tell that is wrong. It didn?t take them decades to $60B and they are GROWING even faster, so at the same rate they will reach $100B within a few years.
Anyone want to crunch the actual YoY net profit for Apple from 2009 to 2010? I estimate about 3.5 years.
Oh, CASH RESERVES! I thought he meant quarterly revenue. Yes, Apple will definitely hit $100 billion in cash soon.
1) You used a lower-case ?b?, not an upper-case ?B?. does that mean that?s ⅛ of that value?
2) How are they gaining $9 BILLION per quarter in cash when there bet quarter in net profit was only a ⅓ of that?
3) Maybe there is some corporate giveaway. Every $10B you accumulate you get your card punched and on the tenth one you get a free start up or a free ticket to the movies and free popcorn and soda upgrade, excluding special events, and premieres.
2> accounting. earnings = what is deemed taxable. free cash flow is the actual amount of cash you generated that you didn't have to spend (yet)
Hmmmm... wasn't Stevemost talking about fiscal year $100B? That's what I thought... maybe not.
Oh, that’s possible. I came in at the post and was focused on the previous discussions with Dr. Millmoss about about their cash holdings. Mea culpa to Tallest Skil.
That said, $100B in revenue for a fiscal year (or for an accumulative four consecutive quarters) has probably already begun. I’d think they will announce that milestone.
$100B in revenue for a quarter could actually happen in about 3.5 years if they do a 50% increase in revenue YoY per Holiday quarter.
1) You used a lower-case ?b?, not an upper-case ?B?. does that mean that?s ⅛ of that value?
2) How are they gaining $9 BILLION per quarter in cash when there bet quarter in net profit was only a ⅓ of that?
3) Maybe there is some corporate giveaway. Every $10B you accumulate you get your card punched and on the tenth one you get a free start up or a free ticket to the movies and free popcorn and soda upgrade, excluding special events, and premieres.
Probably you've already got your answer to this question, but unless I heard wrong, Apple's cash reserve grew from around $50b to nearly $60b during the quarter, so that's where I get the rate of free cash flow.
I don't get your reference to lower case vs. upper case. Sometimes a "b" is just a "b."
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
Oh, that?s possible. I came in at the post and was focused on the previous discussions with Dr. Millmoss about about their cash holdings. Mea culpa to Tallest Skil.
That said, $100B in revenue for a fiscal year (or for an accumulative four consecutive quarters) has probably already begun. I?d think they will announce that milestone.
$100B in revenue for a quarter could actually happen in about 3.5 years if they do a 50% increase in revenue YoY per Holiday quarter.
Q1 2009 ? $10.17 billion
Q1 2010 ? $15.68 billion (54%)
Q1 2011 ? $26.74 billion (71%)
Q1 2012 ? $40.11 billion (50% ?)
Q1 2013 ? $60.17 billion (50% ?)
Q1 2014 ? $90.26 billion (50% ?)
Q1 2015 ? $135.39 billion (50% ?)
I wondered if the question was about revenue or cash reserves, but I figured it had to be cash since nearly all of the analysts cited here project revenues near or exceeding $100b in FY 2011.
I don't get your reference to lower case vs. upper case. Sometimes a "b" is just a "b."
Just a bad joke about byte ?b? and byte ?B?. \
Quote:
I wondered if the question was about revenue or cash reserves, but I figured it had to be cash since nearly all of the analysts cited here project revenues near or exceeding $100b in FY 2011.
Those analysts are predicting for the fiscal year. My states are for the holiday quarter of each year.
As I recall, in their last earnings conference call they stated they would longer be discussing Blackberry unit numbers. By extension I suppose that also means no info on the average selling price per handset.
I think their actual comment was that they would not provide net subscriber data. That is where they are going to really hurt; margins come from additional BES users. A net loss in BES users means they have to rely entirely on handset margin for growth. Tough equation.
I think they are required to give enough information to back out revenue. Maybe not as granular as some would want, but enough to be able to see what is happening relative to their competition.
On a whole, the bloggers are far more accurate. The Street missed by a wide margin.
Amusingly, many of the analysts that AppleInsider often quotes did horribly: Katy Huberty (Morgan Stanley), Gene Munster (Piper Jaffray), and Shaw Wu (Kaufman).
On a whole, the bloggers are far more accurate. The Street missed by a wide margin.
Amusingly, many of the analysts that AppleInsider often quotes did horribly: Katy Huberty (Morgan Stanley), Gene Munster (Piper Jaffray), and Shaw Wu (Kaufman).
Dear AI writers,
Can we please never have articles with analysis and predictions from Huberty, Munster and Wu due to their ever increasingly poor track record.
On a whole, the bloggers are far more accurate. The Street missed by a wide margin.
Amusingly, many of the analysts that AppleInsider often quotes did horribly: Katy Huberty (Morgan Stanley), Gene Munster (Piper Jaffray), and Shaw Wu (Kaufman).
Not totally surprising. One thing to keep in mind is that the analysts are conservative by design.
Basically, any time one reads something by those three, it should automatically be discounted as wrong.
It would be newsworthy if those analysts were ever right about anything, but it appears that one should not expect such a thing to occur.
Not discounted as wrong, but discounted as discounted. Long ago I learned that the professional analysts are always going to be low in their forecasts, some more than others, but still always low. The market knows this, which is why the actual results have to beat the street by a substantial margin, or they will be seen as having disappointed. It's all baked in, really.
This (quote below) is a first as far as I can remember. Apple always conservatively under estimate. Perhaps this is a move to offset market fears related to the announcement by Steve that he is taking a leave of absence. I cannot imagine it is a sign of a change of leadership style this early on. Cook is so on the same page as Steve I have to think this has Steve's fingerprints on it.
"Apple has predicted it will report revenue of about $22 billion in its next earnings release, higher than Wall Street's anticipated $21 billion."
I'd have loved to have been a fly on the wall at RIM when this was released ... as they prepare their 'superior' product. I bet it was a case of "Pass the diapers please!"
It's entirely possible that is a conservative estimate. The only thing that holds apple back is their ability to produce more iPhones and ipads. As production increases they can keep moving into new countries. Demand is there.
So if Apple is always conservative with their estimates and the analysts are also conservative, so basically we are getting a low-low estimates. But, at end of the day at the earning reports, this company continues to have record quarters and not my margin, but significantly! But, the stock got punished today. Today, was a very good example of that. Not that is matters to me as I am long term on this one!
Comments
Nothing last forever. Sony was once a top player in the portable music device scene, but their own hubris brought them down. Look at Nintendo recently as well. Anyone with an ounce of sense should understand that this growth of Apple's (while quite nice) won't last forever. The moment the growth slows Apple will (while still making $$$) will be seen as a company that has reached maturity and is heading downward. I am not saying this will happen soon, but it will happen.
Also, I really don't expect Jobs to last much longer, health-wise. I hope Apple has a strong and wise replacement for Jobs, because right now people equate Apple and Apple's success with Steve Jobs...they see them as one in the same. When he goes...???
You don?t even need to do the math to be able to tell that is wrong. It didn?t take them decades to $60B and they are GROWING even faster, so at the same rate they will reach $100B within a few years.
Anyone want to crunch the actual YoY net profit for Apple from 2009 to 2010? I estimate about 3.5 years.
If it's total cash reserves we're talking about here, based on this quarterly report, the current accumulation rate is close to $3b a month. Assuming no continued acceleration, they'll get to $100b by early next year. Then Apple can retire.
If it's total cash reserves we're talking about here, based on this quarterly report, the current accumulation rate is close to $3b a month. Assuming no continued acceleration, they'll get to $100b by early next year. Then Apple can retire.
1) You used a lower-case ?b?, not an upper-case ?B?. does that mean that?s ⅛ of that value?
2) How are they gaining $9 BILLION per quarter in cash when there bet quarter in net profit was only a ⅓ of that?
3) Maybe there is some corporate giveaway. Every $10B you accumulate you get your card punched and on the tenth one you get a free start up or a free ticket to the movies and free popcorn and soda upgrade, excluding special events, and premieres.
You don?t even need to do the math to be able to tell that is wrong. It didn?t take them decades to $60B and they are GROWING even faster, so at the same rate they will reach $100B within a few years.
Anyone want to crunch the actual YoY net profit for Apple from 2009 to 2010? I estimate about 3.5 years.
Hmmmm... wasn't Stevemost talking about fiscal year $100B? That's what I thought... maybe not.
You don?t even need to do the math to be able to tell that is wrong. It didn?t take them decades to $60B and they are GROWING even faster, so at the same rate they will reach $100B within a few years.
Anyone want to crunch the actual YoY net profit for Apple from 2009 to 2010? I estimate about 3.5 years.
Oh, CASH RESERVES! I thought he meant quarterly revenue. Yes, Apple will definitely hit $100 billion in cash soon.
1) You used a lower-case ?b?, not an upper-case ?B?. does that mean that?s ⅛ of that value?
2) How are they gaining $9 BILLION per quarter in cash when there bet quarter in net profit was only a ⅓ of that?
3) Maybe there is some corporate giveaway. Every $10B you accumulate you get your card punched and on the tenth one you get a free start up or a free ticket to the movies and free popcorn and soda upgrade, excluding special events, and premieres.
2> accounting. earnings = what is deemed taxable. free cash flow is the actual amount of cash you generated that you didn't have to spend (yet)
Hmmmm... wasn't Stevemost talking about fiscal year $100B? That's what I thought... maybe not.
Oh, that’s possible. I came in at the post and was focused on the previous discussions with Dr. Millmoss about about their cash holdings. Mea culpa to Tallest Skil.
That said, $100B in revenue for a fiscal year (or for an accumulative four consecutive quarters) has probably already begun. I’d think they will announce that milestone.
$100B in revenue for a quarter could actually happen in about 3.5 years if they do a 50% increase in revenue YoY per Holiday quarter.
1) You used a lower-case ?b?, not an upper-case ?B?. does that mean that?s ⅛ of that value?
2) How are they gaining $9 BILLION per quarter in cash when there bet quarter in net profit was only a ⅓ of that?
3) Maybe there is some corporate giveaway. Every $10B you accumulate you get your card punched and on the tenth one you get a free start up or a free ticket to the movies and free popcorn and soda upgrade, excluding special events, and premieres.
Probably you've already got your answer to this question, but unless I heard wrong, Apple's cash reserve grew from around $50b to nearly $60b during the quarter, so that's where I get the rate of free cash flow.
I don't get your reference to lower case vs. upper case. Sometimes a "b" is just a "b."
Oh, that?s possible. I came in at the post and was focused on the previous discussions with Dr. Millmoss about about their cash holdings. Mea culpa to Tallest Skil.
That said, $100B in revenue for a fiscal year (or for an accumulative four consecutive quarters) has probably already begun. I?d think they will announce that milestone.
$100B in revenue for a quarter could actually happen in about 3.5 years if they do a 50% increase in revenue YoY per Holiday quarter.
I wondered if the question was about revenue or cash reserves, but I figured it had to be cash since nearly all of the analysts cited here project revenues near or exceeding $100b in FY 2011.
I don't get your reference to lower case vs. upper case. Sometimes a "b" is just a "b."
Just a bad joke about byte ?b? and byte ?B?.
I wondered if the question was about revenue or cash reserves, but I figured it had to be cash since nearly all of the analysts cited here project revenues near or exceeding $100b in FY 2011.
Those analysts are predicting for the fiscal year. My states are for the holiday quarter of each year.
As I recall, in their last earnings conference call they stated they would longer be discussing Blackberry unit numbers. By extension I suppose that also means no info on the average selling price per handset.
I think their actual comment was that they would not provide net subscriber data. That is where they are going to really hurt; margins come from additional BES users. A net loss in BES users means they have to rely entirely on handset margin for growth. Tough equation.
I think they are required to give enough information to back out revenue. Maybe not as granular as some would want, but enough to be able to see what is happening relative to their competition.
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/01/...eet-blew-it-2/
On a whole, the bloggers are far more accurate. The Street missed by a wide margin.
Amusingly, many of the analysts that AppleInsider often quotes did horribly: Katy Huberty (Morgan Stanley), Gene Munster (Piper Jaffray), and Shaw Wu (Kaufman).
Fortune has an interesting analysis of about bloggers and professional analysts did in predicting Apple's results.
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/01/...eet-blew-it-2/
On a whole, the bloggers are far more accurate. The Street missed by a wide margin.
Amusingly, many of the analysts that AppleInsider often quotes did horribly: Katy Huberty (Morgan Stanley), Gene Munster (Piper Jaffray), and Shaw Wu (Kaufman).
Dear AI writers,
Can we please never have articles with analysis and predictions from Huberty, Munster and Wu due to their ever increasingly poor track record.
Sincerely,
AI readers
Fortune has an interesting analysis of about bloggers and professional analysts did in predicting Apple's results.
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/01/...eet-blew-it-2/
On a whole, the bloggers are far more accurate. The Street missed by a wide margin.
Amusingly, many of the analysts that AppleInsider often quotes did horribly: Katy Huberty (Morgan Stanley), Gene Munster (Piper Jaffray), and Shaw Wu (Kaufman).
Not totally surprising. One thing to keep in mind is that the analysts are conservative by design.
Dear AI writers,
Can we please never have articles with analysis and predictions from Huberty, Munster and Wu due to their ever increasingly poor track record.
Sincerely,
AI readers
Basically, any time one reads something by those three, it should automatically be discounted as wrong.
It would be newsworthy if those analysts were ever right about anything, but it appears that one should not expect such a thing to occur.
Basically, any time one reads something by those three, it should automatically be discounted as wrong.
It would be newsworthy if those analysts were ever right about anything, but it appears that one should not expect such a thing to occur.
Not discounted as wrong, but discounted as discounted. Long ago I learned that the professional analysts are always going to be low in their forecasts, some more than others, but still always low. The market knows this, which is why the actual results have to beat the street by a substantial margin, or they will be seen as having disappointed. It's all baked in, really.
This (quote below) is a first as far as I can remember. Apple always conservatively under estimate. Perhaps this is a move to offset market fears related to the announcement by Steve that he is taking a leave of absence. I cannot imagine it is a sign of a change of leadership style this early on. Cook is so on the same page as Steve I have to think this has Steve's fingerprints on it.
"Apple has predicted it will report revenue of about $22 billion in its next earnings release, higher than Wall Street's anticipated $21 billion."
I'd have loved to have been a fly on the wall at RIM when this was released ... as they prepare their 'superior' product. I bet it was a case of "Pass the diapers please!"
It's entirely possible that is a conservative estimate. The only thing that holds apple back is their ability to produce more iPhones and ipads. As production increases they can keep moving into new countries. Demand is there.
Anyone know how many times the stock has split since the low of $12 in 2001 (I think it was 2001)?
Once, in 2005.
Anyone know how many times the stock has split since the low of $12 in 2001 (I think it was 2001)?
There was a 2:1 split in early 2005.
It looks like the low was $6.46 (after accouning for the split; so $12.92 at the time)intraday on 4/17/2003.