That may be true, but I was just pointing out that since August 2012, Nokia has defeated Apple by 157%. I'm talking about their respective stocks of course.
I think everyone better stop looking at AAPL. The holiday quarter will be huge but these twits will be hanging on every letter in the forward statement. Any dirty bits and they'll all be screaming, "Apple is...."; well, you know the rest.
Be prepared for a short squeeze, though, right around the time that AAPL comes off its holiday quarter honeymoon. Cook is going to announce something huge, maybe 2 things and the stock will have its best week ever... hopefully followed by a slow rise upwards.
The market and the analysts have nothing to do with the company's operations from day to day.
Isn't that the opposite of what you were pitching earlier? Where you said that the market numbers (all the shorting and whatnot) are 1:1 related to Apple's real value?
"If Apple can prove yet again it is more than a handset company..."
Yeah, if only...
Why do analysts get any credibility? These are the same people who said 6 years ago that Apple couldn't possibly compete in the mobile phone business because of how different it was from the PC and music player business. Now they have to prove that they are more than a handset company?
these analysts also scoffed at the ipad and demanded Apple sell a cheap netbook. Thankfully Apple ignored those failed business people.
When the 5S is released, the 4 (with maybe a minor upgrade) will be sold off contract for $300.
All analysts do is have spread sheets with certain data they monitor and they use their own internal gut feeling on what they feel Apple will do from quarter to quarter and project what they THINK the stock price is going to do based on past history, trend lines, etc. and they put their project growth rate (+ or -) and that's all they do.
Most professional analysts have a fairly large (many times 30 or even 40) companies they follow and report on, so they have basically about an hour a week that they can devote to studying the company. Some spend more time on Apple because they are a higher profile company.
Some have been consistently wrong and underestimate or overestimate. It would be nice if there was a sight devoted to covering the percentage of accuracty amongst the various market analysts, and stock analysts to figure out WHICH ones to listen to and which one's not to.
Google Philip Elmer DeWitt. He actually tracks all the Apple analysts and bloggers and he's proven the so-called "pros" stink compared to a good many of the amateurs.
If Tim Cook was successful in signing on China Mobile, that will definitely be a big boon to Apple. T-Mobile will obviously add some increase market share in the smartphone market, but China Mobile will be UUGE.
I view China Mobile as gravy if Apple signs them up, but not earth-shattering if they don't. The problem as I see it is that China Mobile is Chinese government owned and may insist on technology transfer or a much higher cut of sales and ownership of customer information gathered in the App Store. IMO, Apple should make no special concessions to any country that would endanger their IP ownership or tilt the playing field in favor of the local provider.
Isn't that the opposite of what you were pitching earlier? Where you said that the market numbers (all the shorting and whatnot) are 1:1 related to Apple's real value?
Man, you're constantly not understanding something! It's like your constant state of being!
Not even sure what you're misunderstanding this time, but go ahead and find me whatever you think I said, and I'll explain it to you (yet again... explaining basic things to you seems to be MY constant state of being).
Pretty simple: Apple won't meet ludicrous expectations based on zero fact or reason (not having iMacs for sale genuinely won't help), stock plummets despite record profits, yada yada yada.
Isn't that the opposite of what you were pitching earlier? Where you said that the market numbers (all the shorting and whatnot) are 1:1 related to Apple's real value?
No. Professional forum trolls should not talk finance with finance majors. Uh oh... are you going to censor me again? Big forum moderator/flamer
How far would the stock have to drop to make it possible for Apple to use its cash to take the company private? If AAPL got to a market cap near Google or Microsoft would that do it? Then we wouldn't have to listen to this insane crap from analysts. No more fiscal reports, no more sales and margins to argue over, publicly anyway.
What would be the motivation?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Pretty simple: Apple won't meet ludicrous expectations based on zero fact or reason (not having iMacs for sale genuinely won't help), stock plummets despite record profits, yada yada yada.
I'm not sure why you're worried about it unless you bought in higher. I noticed several management figures sold off large portions of their holdings. The capital gains tax issues wouldn't have been enough to motivate that.
See, this is the sort of "analyst thinking" that just get's its facts in a twist and comes up with a conclusion that has nothing to do with the statements made.
Apple doesn't need to have the greatest market share in, say, smartphones, in China for it to be their "number one market". They don't, "have to compete with mid and low end Android products on a grand scale." For it to be Apple's number one market, they have to make more profit there than anywhere else, which, roughly means selling more of their own stuff in China, than they do in any other single market. So, in essence, Apple's markets are competing against each other to determine which is number one. Android crap is completely irrelevant in that equation.
So, no, Apple does not have to offer a cheaper iPhone for China to become their number one market.
Facts do not matter when it comes to investing. Apple HAS TO HAVE exactly what the street wants it to have or the stock will drop. If you are making an investment based on facts you better pull your money and put it in a money market because Wall Street rarely runs on facts or logic.
Only a true amateur investor and uneducated person would prefer Nokia to Apple stock despite the gain. A real dummy.
There is an argument to be made on betting against Nokia or trying a short term gain since the stock is low could be a smart and perhaps more profitable and stable bet than with Apple. Like in craps (the dice game) you can win on every role if you bet properly. If you have followed Nokia and how the public perceives them there is no reason not to be able to win by preferring a losing stock. I seem to recall there are plenty of people that bet against the housing market years ago.
I bet China is a big area of growth for BMW too, but I don't see them making a special "cheap" car for that market either. It would kind of defeat the purpose. The reason that people like Apple devices is that they can rely on a certain level of quality in everything they do (and that lends prestige to the brand, so people also buy the products because of this "prestige"). People are willing to pay extra for that guarantee, or the associated "brand prestige." If Apple started making cheap crap, they would lose this advantage. My sister had a Samsung Android phone, probably not one of the best ones, and she hated it so much that when I got her an iPhone for Christmas, she actually cried tears of joy. I think the best Samsung phones are probably pretty decent from what I can tell, but I doubt she'd get another Samsung anytime soon, just because her first experience with one was so bad. If her first Samsung was a Galaxy S3, maybe she'd be a repeat customer.
Oh stop the BMW Apple comparisons please. This has been beaten to death. Phones are not cars.
Comments
Anal cysts. Apple has record profit earnings and it's never good enough.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lightknight
Fixed.
That may be true, but I was just pointing out that since August 2012, Nokia has defeated Apple by 157%. I'm talking about their respective stocks of course.
I think everyone better stop looking at AAPL. The holiday quarter will be huge but these twits will be hanging on every letter in the forward statement. Any dirty bits and they'll all be screaming, "Apple is...."; well, you know the rest.
Be prepared for a short squeeze, though, right around the time that AAPL comes off its holiday quarter honeymoon. Cook is going to announce something huge, maybe 2 things and the stock will have its best week ever... hopefully followed by a slow rise upwards.
Originally Posted by cameronj
The market and the analysts have nothing to do with the company's operations from day to day.
Isn't that the opposite of what you were pitching earlier? Where you said that the market numbers (all the shorting and whatnot) are 1:1 related to Apple's real value?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmileyDude
"If Apple can prove yet again it is more than a handset company..."
Yeah, if only...
Why do analysts get any credibility? These are the same people who said 6 years ago that Apple couldn't possibly compete in the mobile phone business because of how different it was from the PC and music player business. Now they have to prove that they are more than a handset company?
these analysts also scoffed at the ipad and demanded Apple sell a cheap netbook. Thankfully Apple ignored those failed business people.
When the 5S is released, the 4 (with maybe a minor upgrade) will be sold off contract for $300.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank
All analysts do is have spread sheets with certain data they monitor and they use their own internal gut feeling on what they feel Apple will do from quarter to quarter and project what they THINK the stock price is going to do based on past history, trend lines, etc. and they put their project growth rate (+ or -) and that's all they do.
Most professional analysts have a fairly large (many times 30 or even 40) companies they follow and report on, so they have basically about an hour a week that they can devote to studying the company. Some spend more time on Apple because they are a higher profile company.
Some have been consistently wrong and underestimate or overestimate. It would be nice if there was a sight devoted to covering the percentage of accuracty amongst the various market analysts, and stock analysts to figure out WHICH ones to listen to and which one's not to.
Google Philip Elmer DeWitt. He actually tracks all the Apple analysts and bloggers and he's proven the so-called "pros" stink compared to a good many of the amateurs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank
If Tim Cook was successful in signing on China Mobile, that will definitely be a big boon to Apple. T-Mobile will obviously add some increase market share in the smartphone market, but China Mobile will be UUGE.
I view China Mobile as gravy if Apple signs them up, but not earth-shattering if they don't. The problem as I see it is that China Mobile is Chinese government owned and may insist on technology transfer or a much higher cut of sales and ownership of customer information gathered in the App Store. IMO, Apple should make no special concessions to any country that would endanger their IP ownership or tilt the playing field in favor of the local provider.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Isn't that the opposite of what you were pitching earlier? Where you said that the market numbers (all the shorting and whatnot) are 1:1 related to Apple's real value?
Man, you're constantly not understanding something! It's like your constant state of being!
Not even sure what you're misunderstanding this time, but go ahead and find me whatever you think I said, and I'll explain it to you (yet again... explaining basic things to you seems to be MY constant state of being).
Funny how you never see the word "rumors" associated with these stories anymore. You used to. Now they're called "Reports".
It's really f**kin sick.
Pretty simple: Apple won't meet ludicrous expectations based on zero fact or reason (not having iMacs for sale genuinely won't help), stock plummets despite record profits, yada yada yada.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Isn't that the opposite of what you were pitching earlier? Where you said that the market numbers (all the shorting and whatnot) are 1:1 related to Apple's real value?
No. Professional forum trolls should not talk finance with finance majors. Uh oh... are you going to censor me again? Big forum moderator/flamer
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][
Nokia has been a much more profitable stock than Apple lately.
Nokia stock fell from a high of $40 to $1.63. Now when it has gone up a little, it unfair to compare it to another stock and call it "profitable"
Quote:
Originally Posted by arch
Nokia stock fell from a high of $40 to $1.63. Now when it has gone up a little, it unfair to compare it to another stock and call it "profitable"
Sounds like something the moderator of this thread would have said!
Quote:
Originally Posted by arch
Nokia stock fell from a high of $40 to $1.63. Now when it has gone up a little, it unfair to compare it to another stock and call it "profitable"
Only a true amateur investor and uneducated person would prefer Nokia to Apple stock despite the gain. A real dummy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp
How far would the stock have to drop to make it possible for Apple to use its cash to take the company private? If AAPL got to a market cap near Google or Microsoft would that do it? Then we wouldn't have to listen to this insane crap from analysts. No more fiscal reports, no more sales and margins to argue over, publicly anyway.
What would be the motivation?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Pretty simple: Apple won't meet ludicrous expectations based on zero fact or reason (not having iMacs for sale genuinely won't help), stock plummets despite record profits, yada yada yada.
I'm not sure why you're worried about it unless you bought in higher. I noticed several management figures sold off large portions of their holdings. The capital gains tax issues wouldn't have been enough to motivate that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
See, this is the sort of "analyst thinking" that just get's its facts in a twist and comes up with a conclusion that has nothing to do with the statements made.
Apple doesn't need to have the greatest market share in, say, smartphones, in China for it to be their "number one market". They don't, "have to compete with mid and low end Android products on a grand scale." For it to be Apple's number one market, they have to make more profit there than anywhere else, which, roughly means selling more of their own stuff in China, than they do in any other single market. So, in essence, Apple's markets are competing against each other to determine which is number one. Android crap is completely irrelevant in that equation.
So, no, Apple does not have to offer a cheaper iPhone for China to become their number one market.
Facts do not matter when it comes to investing. Apple HAS TO HAVE exactly what the street wants it to have or the stock will drop. If you are making an investment based on facts you better pull your money and put it in a money market because Wall Street rarely runs on facts or logic.
There is an argument to be made on betting against Nokia or trying a short term gain since the stock is low could be a smart and perhaps more profitable and stable bet than with Apple. Like in craps (the dice game) you can win on every role if you bet properly. If you have followed Nokia and how the public perceives them there is no reason not to be able to win by preferring a losing stock. I seem to recall there are plenty of people that bet against the housing market years ago.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Retrogusto
I bet China is a big area of growth for BMW too, but I don't see them making a special "cheap" car for that market either. It would kind of defeat the purpose. The reason that people like Apple devices is that they can rely on a certain level of quality in everything they do (and that lends prestige to the brand, so people also buy the products because of this "prestige"). People are willing to pay extra for that guarantee, or the associated "brand prestige." If Apple started making cheap crap, they would lose this advantage. My sister had a Samsung Android phone, probably not one of the best ones, and she hated it so much that when I got her an iPhone for Christmas, she actually cried tears of joy. I think the best Samsung phones are probably pretty decent from what I can tell, but I doubt she'd get another Samsung anytime soon, just because her first experience with one was so bad. If her first Samsung was a Galaxy S3, maybe she'd be a repeat customer.
Oh stop the BMW Apple comparisons please. This has been beaten to death. Phones are not cars.