[" url="/t/155430/apples-jan-23-earnings-conference-call-viewed-as-most-important-in-10-years#post_2257675"]According to the first result on a real quick Google search, there are 6,973,738,433 + people on the planet. Don't blame me if that figure is inaccurate or not up to date, blame Google. A bunch of people probably got murdered while I was typing this post, but that's not my fault either.
But who gives a shit really? It's not Apple's goal to sell as many phones as they can to every person on planet earth in every possible market, so why do certain people keep claiming that Apple has to release some crappy, cheap ass phone?
If there are too many compromises on a cheap product, then it would no longer be worthy of having the Apple logo on that device. And again, why does Apple need a few more customers who have no money? Where is the profit in cheap ass phones and where is the profit in cheap ass customers? I doubt that Apple will be receiving a cut of the monthly cell phone bills paid to the telecom companies. So what exactly does Apple gain from this?
Ever since Apple starting giving into the analysts and other douchebags, the stock has been going down. Nokia has been a much more profitable stock than Apple lately.
Analysts keep bringing up the low-cost iPhone and the Apple TV because they lack vision and have become parrots repeating the same predictions that every other analyst has said for months. Apple is busy developing the next big thing. These analysts are just looking for more ways they think apple could squeeze more money out of existing tech.
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamC
Don't you hate that.
iPhones are the premium of the smartphones just as BMWs are the premium of cars.
Does BMW make more than one model? Is one of their models "less expensive" ie cost less than the other model(s)? Does that make it "cheaper"? Answers: yes, of course, and not necessarily. Critics of a mythical 'iPhone mini' should open their minds (think different). Just because Apple would never make a "cheap" iPhone does not mean they would never make an iPhone that cost less to manufacture and sell at a lower price. They have a history of doing just that with the iPad (iPad Mini, the idea of which many people scoffed at) and the iPod touch before that. The question is; is their any rational (financial) reason for doing so?. I think so. With just a small investment in time, effort and cost (relative to the perceived incremental benefit) apple could reengineer the iPhone 4(S) to make it thinner, lighter, power saving, and perhaps, most importantly, less costly to not only manufacture but also to package and ship. Doing so would not necessarily tarnish Apples image, just as producing a smaller BMW (and selling it a lower price) does not tarnish their image. Furthermore, the lower costs would allow Apple to offer it a lower price which would increase the market for them without cutting into their margins.
People were skeptical (and made similar disparaging comments) regarding the mythical 'iPad Mini'.
Yes they were, but I was not one of them.
OK, let me rephrase my point of view:
A larger or same size (as is currently doing the rumour rounds) specifically designed cheap iPhone aint gonna happen.
A smaller and cheaper iPhone is more likely. But I seriously doubt it will be throwaway cheap because Apple simply don't care for that end of the market.
I've seen several articles that say Apple should report the highest profits in corporate history this month..
Where are you reading this? The only articles I read are chock full manipulation trying to beat AAPL down! The internet is swamped by them. I have never seen such a desperate attempt in all my years of watching AAPL. Some of it is really quite comical.
Where are you reading this? The only articles I read are chock full manipulation trying to beat AAPL down! The internet is swamped by them. I have never seen such a desperate attempt in all my years of watching AAPL. Some of it is really quite comical.
Check out these idiots...
Damn, there was an amazing one I read this morning but I can't seem to find it right this second.
Factual reporting will report that Apple is expected to report record profits. If you read partisan stock advice you'll get whatever the writer wants to say. The writer of those posts you linked (by the way, why would you link them? You realize the poster is just trying to ring up views) would not argue that Apple is expected to report record results this quarter. You shouldn't be surprised that people try to trumpet information that supports their world view. It happens here every day, just on the positive, instead of the negative like in the posts you linked.
But because of the general negativity surrounding Apple there is a lot of room for upside for the stock after earnings if they dispel some of the negativity. For me it will require information showing that production of the new iPhone and iMac have not in fact been as difficult as it seems, and that the reason for the extended stock-outs has been demand, not lack of supply. I have a hard time believing that is true with regard to the iMac. The iPhone, however, I think will surprise solidly to the upside.
Contrary to what the blind homers around here will tell you, Apple doesn't have to astound the market on all fronts to go up. It's all about expectations. While they have been high in the past (that's how you get to $700, duh), they are not high right now. It will be much easier than in the past to drive the stock to higher levels this month.
…Apple doesn't have to astound the market on all fronts to go up. It's all about expectations. It will be much easier than in the past to drive the stock to higher levels this month.
You know if you look at their past behavior, they've shown steady growth, yet the stock has always faltered after shooting way up, sometimes significantly. You saw the same thing when it was around $450. I wouldn't worry about its daily behavior if you aren't being forced to eat losses.
You know if you look at their past behavior, they've shown steady growth, yet the stock has always faltered after shooting way up, sometimes significantly. You saw the same thing when it was around $450. I wouldn't worry about its daily behavior if you aren't being forced to eat losses.
Oh, sure; you're absolutely right about that. But he did mention a month's timeframe, which for Apple is virtually "day trading".
You have no way to hold anyone to anything, despite your lofty position here. Tell you what, if I'm wrong, I will forgive the amount you owe me for all the free advice I've given you. If I'm right, you disappear for a month. Deal?
You know if you look at their past behavior, they've shown steady growth, yet the stock has always faltered after shooting way up, sometimes significantly. You saw the same thing when it was around $450. I wouldn't worry about its daily behavior if you aren't being forced to eat losses.
Your definition of always is a little shaky.
Tell me how a stock gets from 80 to 700 in 5 years despite going down most of the time? Weird, huh? I thought only global administrators were this confused about the market
Edit: I think i misunderstood your first sentence. If you were actually saying that Apple, like all stocks, will grow steadily along with earnings and tend to correct downward after sharp rises, then I agree with you.
Oh, sure; you're absolutely right about that. But he did mention a month's timeframe, which for Apple is virtually "day trading".
That is a fairly short term purchase. He was referring to the conference call, and the stock typically doesn't remain static around that time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cameronj
Edit: I think i misunderstood your first sentence. If you were actually saying that Apple, like all stocks, will grow steadily along with earnings and tend to correct downward after sharp rises, then I agree with you.
That would be correct, although you worded it better. My anecdote was referring to when the stock first hit around $450 then dropped back into the $3xx range. They've still grown over the longer term. If you look at the company over the past decade, it's worth much more today, even adjusted for inflation.
That would be correct, although you worded it better. My anecdote was referring to when the stock first hit around $450 then dropped back into the $3xx range. They've still grown over the longer term. If you look at the company over the past decade, it's worth much more today, even adjusted for inflation.
Yep. People around here would have you believe that Apple does nothing but go down. Amazing how a company can be the most valuable in the world without ever going up in chunks!
Anyone else have an infraction on their account that's valid for 10,000 days? Apparently when I insulted a certain global moderator who also posts an awful lot, I got one of those. Isn't it funny Boy, power does go to one's head on the internet!
Ah, removed my other post. I wasn't sufficiently respectful of someone in a position of power, huh?
Let's make this deal formal. Let's come up with a measuring stick, and a real bet.
You seem to think that if Apple doesn't do astoundingly well, the stock will go down. I believe that even without an amazing blowout of expectations, but with a beat of them (and we can work out the details of where those lines are drawn) the stock will be much higher a few weeks later than it is now.
Punishment is banishment from ALLLLLLL AI boards for a month.
The kicker is, I think posting on this site is bad for me, a huge waste of time, and a drain on me life. I think you need it desperately for your self-worth. So basically it's a win-win for me. Now, of course you'd be allowed to continue your "job" moderating the board, but you would be forbidden from posting.
So, what do you say? Put your money where your mouth is, friendo?
Yep. People around here would have you believe that Apple does nothing but go down. Amazing how a company can be the most valuable in the world without ever going up in chunks!
I've never posted anything like that, although I've stated if the stock is lower than they purchased it, they don't necessarily have to lock in a loss, given the past long term performance of the stock.
Factual reporting will report that Apple is expected to report record profits. If you read partisan stock advice you'll get whatever the writer wants to say. The writer of those posts you linked (by the way, why would you link them?
I was linking them for fun. Read my post.
Actually, for trading, I find it is very useful reading the bullshit articles. I day trade, and if you learn to read between to lines, you can use the bullshit to your advantage. I don't really need to read the 'factual' reporting, because I know damn well where this stock is headed, and do not need anyone else's explanation to confirm what I already know.
Hold him to what? In the quoted text he made no fixed statement that the stock will go up this month, only that it will be easier which is not the same as it is guaranteed as his comment leaves plenty of room for other circumstances to work against it.
Hold him to what? In the quoted text he made no fixed statement that the stock will go up this month, only that it will be easier which is not the same as it is guaranteed as his comment leaves plenty of room for other circumstances to work against it.
He's assuming that it will go up based on the "reduced expectations" this time around. I figure they'll do marginally better than everyone is assuming and still go down, but that's making the assumption that they'll actually do better than expected.
He's assuming that it will go up based on the "reduced expectations" this time around. I figure they'll do marginally better than everyone is assuming and still go down, but that's making the assumption that they'll actually do better than expected.
Based on the comment you quoted "will be easier" is not the same as "will go up." His comment allows for other circumstances to be at work for any drop in the market. For instance, if you are a marathon runner it will be easier to clim Mount Everest than if yo are an invalid* but it is no guarantee that you will succeed, it just means that you have a single advantage in one area that will make it easier. If he had written more I didn't see it, only the part you quoted.
Based on the comment you quoted "will be easier" is not the same as "will go up."
You're right; I was operating under the assumption that Apple will outperform expectations. I apologize for not making that clearer. I built in an artificial condition that was not fully explained because I thought it would be assumed.
Comments
Analysts keep bringing up the low-cost iPhone and the Apple TV because they lack vision and have become parrots repeating the same predictions that every other analyst has said for months. Apple is busy developing the next big thing. These analysts are just looking for more ways they think apple could squeeze more money out of existing tech.
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamC
Don't you hate that.
iPhones are the premium of the smartphones just as BMWs are the premium of cars.
Does BMW make more than one model? Is one of their models "less expensive" ie cost less than the other model(s)? Does that make it "cheaper"? Answers: yes, of course, and not necessarily. Critics of a mythical 'iPhone mini' should open their minds (think different). Just because Apple would never make a "cheap" iPhone does not mean they would never make an iPhone that cost less to manufacture and sell at a lower price. They have a history of doing just that with the iPad (iPad Mini, the idea of which many people scoffed at) and the iPod touch before that. The question is; is their any rational (financial) reason for doing so?. I think so. With just a small investment in time, effort and cost (relative to the perceived incremental benefit) apple could reengineer the iPhone 4(S) to make it thinner, lighter, power saving, and perhaps, most importantly, less costly to not only manufacture but also to package and ship. Doing so would not necessarily tarnish Apples image, just as producing a smaller BMW (and selling it a lower price) does not tarnish their image. Furthermore, the lower costs would allow Apple to offer it a lower price which would increase the market for them without cutting into their margins.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iMax1
People were skeptical (and made similar disparaging comments) regarding the mythical 'iPad Mini'.
Yes they were, but I was not one of them.
OK, let me rephrase my point of view:
A larger or same size (as is currently doing the rumour rounds) specifically designed cheap iPhone aint gonna happen.
A smaller and cheaper iPhone is more likely. But I seriously doubt it will be throwaway cheap because Apple simply don't care for that end of the market.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
I've seen several articles that say Apple should report the highest profits in corporate history this month..
Where are you reading this? The only articles I read are chock full manipulation trying to beat AAPL down! The internet is swamped by them. I have never seen such a desperate attempt in all my years of watching AAPL. Some of it is really quite comical.
Check out these idiots...
http://www.valuewalk.com/2013/01/nokia-corporation-adr-nysenok-beating-apple-inc-aapl-big-time/
http://www.valuewalk.com/2013/01/apple-inc-aapl-50-price-target-analysis/
Damn, there was an amazing one I read this morning but I can't seem to find it right this second.
Quote:
Originally Posted by monstrosity
Where are you reading this? The only articles I read are chock full manipulation trying to beat AAPL down! The internet is swamped by them. I have never seen such a desperate attempt in all my years of watching AAPL. Some of it is really quite comical.
Check out these idiots...
Damn, there was an amazing one I read this morning but I can't seem to find it right this second.
Factual reporting will report that Apple is expected to report record profits. If you read partisan stock advice you'll get whatever the writer wants to say. The writer of those posts you linked (by the way, why would you link them? You realize the poster is just trying to ring up views) would not argue that Apple is expected to report record results this quarter. You shouldn't be surprised that people try to trumpet information that supports their world view. It happens here every day, just on the positive, instead of the negative like in the posts you linked.
But because of the general negativity surrounding Apple there is a lot of room for upside for the stock after earnings if they dispel some of the negativity. For me it will require information showing that production of the new iPhone and iMac have not in fact been as difficult as it seems, and that the reason for the extended stock-outs has been demand, not lack of supply. I have a hard time believing that is true with regard to the iMac. The iPhone, however, I think will surprise solidly to the upside.
Contrary to what the blind homers around here will tell you, Apple doesn't have to astound the market on all fronts to go up. It's all about expectations. While they have been high in the past (that's how you get to $700, duh), they are not high right now. It will be much easier than in the past to drive the stock to higher levels this month.
Originally Posted by cameronj
…Apple doesn't have to astound the market on all fronts to go up. It's all about expectations. It will be much easier than in the past to drive the stock to higher levels this month.
You mind if we hold you to that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
You mind if we hold you to that?
You know if you look at their past behavior, they've shown steady growth, yet the stock has always faltered after shooting way up, sometimes significantly. You saw the same thing when it was around $450. I wouldn't worry about its daily behavior if you aren't being forced to eat losses.
Originally Posted by hmm
You know if you look at their past behavior, they've shown steady growth, yet the stock has always faltered after shooting way up, sometimes significantly. You saw the same thing when it was around $450. I wouldn't worry about its daily behavior if you aren't being forced to eat losses.
Oh, sure; you're absolutely right about that. But he did mention a month's timeframe, which for Apple is virtually "day trading".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
You mind if we hold you to that?
You have no way to hold anyone to anything, despite your lofty position here. Tell you what, if I'm wrong, I will forgive the amount you owe me for all the free advice I've given you. If I'm right, you disappear for a month. Deal?
20,000 posts in 3 years. Seriously, need a life?
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm
You know if you look at their past behavior, they've shown steady growth, yet the stock has always faltered after shooting way up, sometimes significantly. You saw the same thing when it was around $450. I wouldn't worry about its daily behavior if you aren't being forced to eat losses.
Your definition of always is a little shaky.
Tell me how a stock gets from 80 to 700 in 5 years despite going down most of the time? Weird, huh? I thought only global administrators were this confused about the market
Edit: I think i misunderstood your first sentence. If you were actually saying that Apple, like all stocks, will grow steadily along with earnings and tend to correct downward after sharp rises, then I agree with you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Oh, sure; you're absolutely right about that. But he did mention a month's timeframe, which for Apple is virtually "day trading".
That is a fairly short term purchase. He was referring to the conference call, and the stock typically doesn't remain static around that time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cameronj
Edit: I think i misunderstood your first sentence. If you were actually saying that Apple, like all stocks, will grow steadily along with earnings and tend to correct downward after sharp rises, then I agree with you.
That would be correct, although you worded it better. My anecdote was referring to when the stock first hit around $450 then dropped back into the $3xx range. They've still grown over the longer term. If you look at the company over the past decade, it's worth much more today, even adjusted for inflation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm
That would be correct, although you worded it better. My anecdote was referring to when the stock first hit around $450 then dropped back into the $3xx range. They've still grown over the longer term. If you look at the company over the past decade, it's worth much more today, even adjusted for inflation.
Yep. People around here would have you believe that Apple does nothing but go down. Amazing how a company can be the most valuable in the world without ever going up in chunks!
Anyone else have an infraction on their account that's valid for 10,000 days? Apparently when I insulted a certain global moderator who also posts an awful lot, I got one of those. Isn't it funny
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
You mind if we hold you to that?
Ah, removed my other post. I wasn't sufficiently respectful of someone in a position of power, huh?
Let's make this deal formal. Let's come up with a measuring stick, and a real bet.
You seem to think that if Apple doesn't do astoundingly well, the stock will go down. I believe that even without an amazing blowout of expectations, but with a beat of them (and we can work out the details of where those lines are drawn) the stock will be much higher a few weeks later than it is now.
Punishment is banishment from ALLLLLLL AI boards for a month.
The kicker is, I think posting on this site is bad for me, a huge waste of time, and a drain on me life. I think you need it desperately for your self-worth. So basically it's a win-win for me. Now, of course you'd be allowed to continue your "job" moderating the board, but you would be forbidden from posting.
So, what do you say? Put your money where your mouth is, friendo?
Quote:
Originally Posted by cameronj
Yep. People around here would have you believe that Apple does nothing but go down. Amazing how a company can be the most valuable in the world without ever going up in chunks!
I've never posted anything like that, although I've stated if the stock is lower than they purchased it, they don't necessarily have to lock in a loss, given the past long term performance of the stock.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cameronj
Factual reporting will report that Apple is expected to report record profits. If you read partisan stock advice you'll get whatever the writer wants to say. The writer of those posts you linked (by the way, why would you link them?
I was linking them for fun. Read my post.
Actually, for trading, I find it is very useful reading the bullshit articles. I day trade, and if you learn to read between to lines, you can use the bullshit to your advantage. I don't really need to read the 'factual' reporting, because I know damn well where this stock is headed, and do not need anyone else's explanation to confirm what I already know.
Hold him to what? In the quoted text he made no fixed statement that the stock will go up this month, only that it will be easier which is not the same as it is guaranteed as his comment leaves plenty of room for other circumstances to work against it.
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Hold him to what? In the quoted text he made no fixed statement that the stock will go up this month, only that it will be easier which is not the same as it is guaranteed as his comment leaves plenty of room for other circumstances to work against it.
He's assuming that it will go up based on the "reduced expectations" this time around. I figure they'll do marginally better than everyone is assuming and still go down, but that's making the assumption that they'll actually do better than expected.
Based on the comment you quoted "will be easier" is not the same as "will go up." His comment allows for other circumstances to be at work for any drop in the market. For instance, if you are a marathon runner it will be easier to clim Mount Everest than if yo are an invalid* but it is no guarantee that you will succeed, it just means that you have a single advantage in one area that will make it easier. If he had written more I didn't see it, only the part you quoted.
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Based on the comment you quoted "will be easier" is not the same as "will go up."
You're right; I was operating under the assumption that Apple will outperform expectations. I apologize for not making that clearer. I built in an artificial condition that was not fully explained because I thought it would be assumed.