If they're losing so much money, maybe they shouldn't be selling the Lumia 900 at such a blatant loss. There's your first mistake. Let the handset stand up on its own, not a $150 million ad campaign.
I suspect we are a looking at another person who can do no more than criticize (meaning he invents nothing, manufactures nothing, and contributes nothing to the lives of others or to the country in which he lives) who is looking for two things:
1. A way to increase his name in the news so he can sell his criticisms for more $$$.
2. Trying to influence the opinion of telecoms by getting some negative into print. It often works well because newsies normally just quote each other rather than actually discover something about which to report.
As someone once said, "Nobody has ever erected a statue to honor a critic."
The analysts have been right one quarter out off the last ten years. Even a monkey throwing darts at a random chart could do better than that.
This isn't about predicting the market. It's about manipulating the market. It starts with a few analyst seeding doubts about Apple's sustainability. Then a few more spread more worries. After a while a few brokers dump their clients stocks to drop the price. A few more rumors and they could move the market 200 points. After all Apple has just grown exponentially in the last 3 months. Prime time for the brokers to cash in.
"Of course, our thesis will not be supported in the current quarter as the pent up demand in China and the launch of the iPhone in 30 additional markets is likely to drive strong sales that will offset the sequential declines in other markets," Piecyk says.
Translation: Don't blame us when we turn out to be completely wrong, because we said we'd be wrong before we were right. By the time it's time for us to be right, we'll have some other thesis entirely.
?We expect post-paid wireless operators to remain firm in their plan to stunt the pace of phone upgrades in 2012 and we expect to see some initial evidence of their success in the current quarter,? Piecyk says.
In regard to how greatly this will affect Apple, Piecyk expects that "in the United States, we expect iPhone sales to decline 4 million sequentially to 9 million with the largest impact coming from AT&T, Apple?s largest customer." This would relate to a worldwide drop in sales of 27.5 million units in Apple's fiscal quarter third quarter, "resulting in a revenue estimate that is $1 billion below consensus.?
I don't buy this argument, and even if he is right about the situation in the US I'm not sure how he's extrapolating the worldwide drop from the US decline. Has he factored in the fact that in China, most people pay full-price for their phones?
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
Adding to his iPhone assertions, Piecyk dismisses the rumors of an Apple HDTV launch in 2012 and downplays the Chinese iPad market citing the tablet's high price point.
Right, Chinese are too poor to afford iPads. Just like they they are too poor to afford luxury cars, such as Bentley.
Analyst blah blah blah. All I know is that I am used to a new subsidized iPhone each year, every year. If this changes, it'd suck. I am ready for The New iPhone this fall, but I happened to check my upgrade date yesterday and the upgrade date is May 2013. Screw that.....
It is plausible the carriers will try to get greedy. Sure AT&T would love to have more people embrace Microsoft or Android based phones because it can 1) force people to pay the same price for the same data plan as iPhone, and 2) pay less in a subsidy for a lower quality phone.
However, people making this argument seem to suggest the carriers are losing money with the iPhone. That simply isn't the case. The subsidy is paid off before the first year is up. THe second year is profit.
For carriers to abandon Apple, people will have to ditch Apple in significant numbers for the carriers other options. In truth, I think the carriers likely will embrace other offerings, especially those by Microsoft because Microsoft is desperate to get its foot in the door and it is paying big dollars to try and make that happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmmx
I have to say, of all the purveyors of negativity on Apple, this guy at least has a reasonably plausible argument. I think he does exaggerate the impact and ignore compensating growth factors. But at least it is a coherent argument.
The carriers are unlikely to stop subsidizing the iPhone UNLESS they are prohibited from locking customers into a 2 year contract. Since I see no indication this is happening anytime soon I'd say this analyst's opinion is just that. An opinion and you know what they say about options. Opinions are like assholes and everybody has one
Another reason I like T-Mobile. You do pay less if the phone isn't subsidized.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip
I wasn't aware the carriers were supposed to make money from selling the phones. The carriers sell services... which is what they charge a monthly fee for.
I'm an American... so I only know subsidies. My 16GB iPhone only cost me $200 because Verizon subsidized it. Basically... Verizon then wrote a check to Apple for the remaining $450.
But Verizon does that because they will make it up by me paying a monthly fee over the life of my contract... or at least that's what's supposed to happen.
If that's not working anymore... the carriers need to fix it.
I could certainly afford paying the full $650 for an iPhone.... but not if I'll be paying the same monthly fee as a subsidized customer.
Subsidized:
$200 phone + $90 a month
Unsubsidized:
$650 phone + $90 a month (?)
That doesn't make any sense at all...
If the carriers aren't gonna "finance" new phone sales anymore... then it's back to the drawing board...
The iPhone subsidy isn't outrageous and given what the carriers charge for data, it's clear that they're doing just great with their current pricing. If they choose to tighten their upgrade policy, it will only delay new iPhone purchases (upgrades) by 3-6 months. Those who want to stick with an iPhone will continue to do so. So really the impact to Apple's earnings in quarters where a new phone is launched may be pressured by the lack of early upgrades, Apple will still make it up in the following quarters as consumers become eligible to upgrade.
Moreover, this analyst fails to consider the faster pace of international rollouts that Apple now does. With each successive year and each successive product launch, it seems Apple is getting their latest products into more markets more quickly. The additional sales that they pick up internationally, more than makes up for a few less early upgrades in the US during new iPhone launches.
These sad clowns are under no obligation to tell the truth in their little PR fluff pieces, and time after time they've proven the are only out for their own interests... which is what anyone should assume anyway.
Half of them are wrong half the time.
So, he flaps his arms and cries, "The stock is falling, the stock is falling."
And Ballmer laughed at the original Apple iPhone because it cost a whopping $500... five years later, he's shaking the piggy bank to buy a tiny piece of that big joke.
And Ballmer laughed at the original Apple iPhone because it cost a whopping $500... five years later, he's shaking the piggy bank to buy a tiny piece of that big joke.
CNBC is apparently the Fox News of the Business news channels. I can't back it up, but when I watch twitter for AAPL , apparently CNBC moves markets, often in the opposite direction. Bloomberg on the other hand doesn't move the market when they have people on that talk about AAPL.
The AAPL pattern is, up on monday and tuesday, down on wednesday, thursday, and then the last 30 minutes of friday is a market-correction to push up or down below weekly option expiry. When the analysts were predicting unicorns and rainbows to make AAPL "miss" it didn't even miss it's own numbers, just the analysts numbers. Yet the stock price went down to the 200DMA and then shot straight back up 4 weeks before Janurary's earnings. Talk about no confidence in supposed weakness.
So it's pretty safe to say that the Analysts are just making guesses. If anything, AT&T would have deserved the downgrade if that was in fact what AT&T was considering doing. This is a non-event. Ultimately what you'll see is that wireless companies will raise the price of the phone, or stop subsidizing using their own money (As in requiring more expensive post-paid plans.)
Perhaps Ed Zabisky\tACI Research\t$270\t 25-Jan-12
should go on TV and explain how AAPL should be $270 and is now $639.
I like the position of "It has done so well, it can't possible go any higher." First time I heard that was when AAPL was $30. That was when I loaded up.
Perhaps Ed Zabisky\tACI Research\t$270\t 25-Jan-12
should go on TV and explain how AAPL should be $270 and is now $639.
I like the position of "It has done so well, it can't possible go any higher." First time I heard that was when AAPL was $30. That was when I loaded up.
Comments
If they're losing so much money, maybe they shouldn't be selling the Lumia 900 at such a blatant loss. There's your first mistake. Let the handset stand up on its own, not a $150 million ad campaign.
Microsoft is subsidizing that loss.
I'd like to see them back it up by shorting the stock.
Than you!
This is total BS!
When the next iPhone drops later this year it will sell like 4 million units in a few days.
1. A way to increase his name in the news so he can sell his criticisms for more $$$.
2. Trying to influence the opinion of telecoms by getting some negative into print. It often works well because newsies normally just quote each other rather than actually discover something about which to report.
As someone once said, "Nobody has ever erected a statue to honor a critic."
The analysts have been right one quarter out off the last ten years. Even a monkey throwing darts at a random chart could do better than that.
This isn't about predicting the market. It's about manipulating the market. It starts with a few analyst seeding doubts about Apple's sustainability. Then a few more spread more worries. After a while a few brokers dump their clients stocks to drop the price. A few more rumors and they could move the market 200 points. After all Apple has just grown exponentially in the last 3 months. Prime time for the brokers to cash in.
I can't seem to locate the word "coroporation" in the dictionary.
Really I honestly like the thought. Coroporation. Maybe we need to change the english dictionary terereminlology. LOL. Get it.
Than you!
This is total BS!
When the next iPhone drops later this year it will sell like 4 million units in a few days.
Hence the reason why this article surfaced, also, today.
http://www.valuewalk.com/2012/04/app...loser-to-1001/
Translation: Don't blame us when we turn out to be completely wrong, because we said we'd be wrong before we were right. By the time it's time for us to be right, we'll have some other thesis entirely.
?We expect post-paid wireless operators to remain firm in their plan to stunt the pace of phone upgrades in 2012 and we expect to see some initial evidence of their success in the current quarter,? Piecyk says.
In regard to how greatly this will affect Apple, Piecyk expects that "in the United States, we expect iPhone sales to decline 4 million sequentially to 9 million with the largest impact coming from AT&T, Apple?s largest customer." This would relate to a worldwide drop in sales of 27.5 million units in Apple's fiscal quarter third quarter, "resulting in a revenue estimate that is $1 billion below consensus.?
I don't buy this argument, and even if he is right about the situation in the US I'm not sure how he's extrapolating the worldwide drop from the US decline. Has he factored in the fact that in China, most people pay full-price for their phones?
Adding to his iPhone assertions, Piecyk dismisses the rumors of an Apple HDTV launch in 2012 and downplays the Chinese iPad market citing the tablet's high price point.
Right, Chinese are too poor to afford iPads. Just like they they are too poor to afford luxury cars, such as Bentley.
http://www.insidermedia.com/insider/...mes-top-market
However, people making this argument seem to suggest the carriers are losing money with the iPhone. That simply isn't the case. The subsidy is paid off before the first year is up. THe second year is profit.
For carriers to abandon Apple, people will have to ditch Apple in significant numbers for the carriers other options. In truth, I think the carriers likely will embrace other offerings, especially those by Microsoft because Microsoft is desperate to get its foot in the door and it is paying big dollars to try and make that happen.
I have to say, of all the purveyors of negativity on Apple, this guy at least has a reasonably plausible argument. I think he does exaggerate the impact and ignore compensating growth factors. But at least it is a coherent argument.
I wasn't aware the carriers were supposed to make money from selling the phones. The carriers sell services... which is what they charge a monthly fee for.
I'm an American... so I only know subsidies. My 16GB iPhone only cost me $200 because Verizon subsidized it. Basically... Verizon then wrote a check to Apple for the remaining $450.
But Verizon does that because they will make it up by me paying a monthly fee over the life of my contract... or at least that's what's supposed to happen.
If that's not working anymore... the carriers need to fix it.
I could certainly afford paying the full $650 for an iPhone.... but not if I'll be paying the same monthly fee as a subsidized customer.
Subsidized:
$200 phone + $90 a month
Unsubsidized:
$650 phone + $90 a month (?)
That doesn't make any sense at all...
If the carriers aren't gonna "finance" new phone sales anymore... then it's back to the drawing board...
Moreover, this analyst fails to consider the faster pace of international rollouts that Apple now does. With each successive year and each successive product launch, it seems Apple is getting their latest products into more markets more quickly. The additional sales that they pick up internationally, more than makes up for a few less early upgrades in the US during new iPhone launches.
These sad clowns are under no obligation to tell the truth in their little PR fluff pieces, and time after time they've proven the are only out for their own interests... which is what anyone should assume anyway.
Half of them are wrong half the time.
So, he flaps his arms and cries, "The stock is falling, the stock is falling."
Methinks Walter is a little chicken.
Microsoft is subsidizing that loss.
And Ballmer laughed at the original Apple iPhone because it cost a whopping $500... five years later, he's shaking the piggy bank to buy a tiny piece of that big joke.
Apple market cap: $593B
share price: $636
MS market cap: $260B
share price: $31
I like Apple's version better.
And Ballmer laughed at the original Apple iPhone because it cost a whopping $500... five years later, he's shaking the piggy bank to buy a tiny piece of that big joke.
They had this guy on CNBC this morning.
CNBC is apparently the Fox News of the Business news channels. I can't back it up, but when I watch twitter for AAPL , apparently CNBC moves markets, often in the opposite direction. Bloomberg on the other hand doesn't move the market when they have people on that talk about AAPL.
The AAPL pattern is, up on monday and tuesday, down on wednesday, thursday, and then the last 30 minutes of friday is a market-correction to push up or down below weekly option expiry. When the analysts were predicting unicorns and rainbows to make AAPL "miss" it didn't even miss it's own numbers, just the analysts numbers. Yet the stock price went down to the 200DMA and then shot straight back up 4 weeks before Janurary's earnings. Talk about no confidence in supposed weakness.
So it's pretty safe to say that the Analysts are just making guesses. If anything, AT&T would have deserved the downgrade if that was in fact what AT&T was considering doing. This is a non-event. Ultimately what you'll see is that wireless companies will raise the price of the phone, or stop subsidizing using their own money (As in requiring more expensive post-paid plans.)
should go on TV and explain how AAPL should be $270 and is now $639.
I like the position of "It has done so well, it can't possible go any higher." First time I heard that was when AAPL was $30. That was when I loaded up.
I believe Apple can make good on that $1000 a share.
Perhaps Ed Zabisky\tACI Research\t$270\t 25-Jan-12
should go on TV and explain how AAPL should be $270 and is now $639.
I like the position of "It has done so well, it can't possible go any higher." First time I heard that was when AAPL was $30. That was when I loaded up.
I can't seem to locate the word "coroporation" in the dictionary.
You could have fun making your own definition up for that one, it's a doozy!