I bought AAPL in the $500s and I will fully admit that it was a mistake. The board is hostile to investors. They simply believe that investors and investor sentiment does not matter at all. And with that attitude, the stock will go nowhere. Sure, Apple is immensely profitable. But as an investor, you will not see a dime of that success. It's almost as though being a publicly traded company is a massive inconvenience for them.
I certainly wouldn't recommend the stock to anyone. Even at $420.
I have simply decided to ignore my AAPL position. I'll dump it when it reaches breakeven someday....
I think the weather is going to be horrible tomorrow. I see trolls flying very low recently.
I do wonder if there is something that can be accurately derived by such testing. I do think that when there is a new Apple product release that the more rebolutionary it is the more trollish comments from new posters we get on the forums.
2011 — $108 billion revenue and $26 billion in net income (24% net profit margin)
2012 — $156.53 billion and $41 billion in net income (26.2% net profit margin)
A growth of 69% in revenue and 63% in profits YoY.
Samsung:
2011 — $220.1 billon revenue and $21.2 billion in net income (9.6% net profit margin)
2012 — $183.6 billon revenue and $26.5 billion in operating income (cant find net profit and unwilling to hunt down each quarter and do the currency conversion)
That's looks like a substantial YoY drop in revenue and only a fraction of Apple's net profits and profit margin. Nice try but you won't get away with that shit on this forum.
Where from do you have those Samsung numbers? They are completely wrong.
And you don't need to do currency conversion as Samsung is providing their numbers also in $.
The numbers for Samsung Electronics are (CY = FY)
2010 - $136.28 B revenue and $15.60 B net income
2011 - $144.98 B revenue and $13.15 B net income
2012 - $187.26 B revenue and $23.45 B net income
The numbers for Apple are (Calendar Years!)
2010 - $ 76.28 B revenue and $16.63 B net income
2011 - $127.84 B revenue and $32.98 B net income
2012 - $164.65 B revenue and $41.73 B net income
Samsung had a mediocre 2011 and an excellent 2012.
Apple had a fantastic 2011 and I really don't see why people think Apple had a bad 2012!
It is simple stuff and you continually ignore that Apple's profits have increased YoY, that their profits are projected to increase for fiscal 2013, and they far exceeding Samsung in both profits and profit margins which are now claiming is some gold standard despite ignoring it previously.
And many will buy into those estimates in the hope they are true or at least with the hope that enough lemmings will buy into it so they can make bank. That doesn't make it true and someone who claims to have an MBA should understand a basic concept of how markets can be manipulated without any actually living to their fabricated projections.
Your original comment had nothing to do with the stock price based on projections but instead claimed as fact thing you are merely wanting to come true, but don't take my word for it, let's examine what you wrote…
"While everyone around them is getting better, Apple is getting worse. That is going to be the theme until they change it and unfortunately, a 5S won't change so we'll have most of the year where the mainstream view is that Apple is in decline because they whiffed on product cycles and further can't execute. Frankly, its hard to argue that isn't the case."
You're claiming that Apple is getting worse as a company. Now we might have been able to conclude that you were talking only about the stock price (which still wouldn't be accurate) but your next sentence followed up with a comment about about unreleased hardware and the pronoun "they" in regard to Apple needing to change how they conduct business.
You then restate your initial comment about the company getting worse — not the stock — by claiming they have had unsuccessful attempts on launching products, as well as being able to execute the products they do have, which you conclude as being proof that Apple is pathetic, piece of shit of a company that do nothing but falter in the wake of Steve Job's death despite breaking record after record. That about sum it up?
PS: This is the same ol' shit that has been spewing since before Steve Jobs came to Apple and while Steve Jobs was at all, yet they keep winning and everyone wishing for their death keeps failing. Keep it up, you may live long enough to eventually be right.
>>You have an MBA yet you think shareholders get a piece of the net income? You might want to ask for your money back from whatever college you attended because shares rise and fall based on a large variety of factors and not some direct, 1:1 relationship between increased profits otherwise Apple's share price would be much higher and Amazon's much lower.>>
Theoretically a value of a company is reflective of its discounted future cash flows. Net income is where you start to calculate cash flow (+D&A, stock comp, deferred taxes, working capital, etc.). In the short run, the market is a voting machine, in the long its a weighing machine and will weigh the value of those cash flows. So yes, I agree with you that in the short run many factors come into play, but in the long run cash is king.
What exactly does stock price only have to do with anything? Just referencing stock prices without share count, cash, leverage tells us nothing about the value of a company.
Let me clear things up, it is getting worse as an investment and I am generally throwing out perceptions that are hurting the stock. That really isn't saying much as the gains of yesteryear won't happen again.
There is no denying Tim has made some mistakes recently. CEOs don't send out apology letters when they do good things. Heck all CEOs make strategic mistakes from time to time, its order of magnitude that is the big deal. Apparently folks here believe no mistake are ever made in Cupertino, that Tim Cook is infallible, despite the fact he himself put out a letter saying they make mistakes. Do you think the stock would be at this price without the maps mistake? I don't.
Lets talk facts. The value of this company is less than it was when Tim Cook took over. That isn't rumor, conjecture or anything else, its a fact. Stock price is higher, but the value of the enterprise is lower by about $30 billion despite selling all those products the last year and a half. Of course it was much higher at one point. Your response was sharp witted enough that I shouldn't have to explain how the value of the company is lower with the stock higher.
Current sellside estimates show a profit decrease this year (based on 45 analysts). Marginal decrease, but decrease nonetheless. Goog is expected to increase its profits by 40+% and Samsung by nearly 100%. Google and Samsung are currently preferred investments because they are growing profits and Apple isn't. Listen, the law of large numbers is tough to deal with, but this is a large market and competitors are growing.
This is the angst people have with the company AND stock. The total amount of profits being generated in mobile is increasing this year and next and foreseeable future, but they have flatlined profit-wise, so is it just a pause or can they re-accelerate profit growth. That is the issue people care about from an investment perspective, not whether Apple has better products (they do), not whether they can innovate (they will). Of course these are tied together.
I just meant very few sellside equity pieces discuss terminal value, constant growth model. That's classic b-school stuff but you don't see it much in equity analysis, but rather just a 3-4 yr forecast and multiple approach. I'm primarily a credit guy, but also do equities, cap structure arb, vol trading, etc. I focus on cash flow much more than the income statement approach equity analysts take. I would note cash flow margin (FFO/revenue) hasn't taken the hit gross margin has recently due to scale on the top line - meaning r&d and sg&a as % sales has decreased), but that offset will stall out without revenue growth.
Cash flow based is even better. I await your answers. (I am surprised you now say you need time, since you bragged earlier that you had a 'model'. Why don't you just share it with us?).
Until then, stop pontificating on Apple stock. Or stick to credit analysis, not equity analysis.
Cash flow based is even better. I await your answers. (I am surprised you now say you need time, since you bragged earlier that you had a 'model'. Why don't you just share it with us?).
Until then, stop pontificating on Apple stock. Or stick to credit analysis, not equity analysis.
You are a real joy. I didn't 'brag' I said I had one. Like virtually every person on wall street, I didn't build a model like you want.
You obviously have one, I assume that will be shared as a quid pro quo.
I've been wrong on the stock. If I though they were doomed I'd sell.
As if there is a difference between credit and equity analysis at the end of the day. Fact that you think so is quite funny.
you forgot Jon Ive...He will design Apple's future
I didn't forget Jon Ive. I had hopes for him but he hasn't appeared as spokesman -- and I was expecting him to when he was promoted to upper management. And the few times I've watched him speak, he is the quiet, thoughtful guy, perhaps charming, but decidedly not a salesman.
Now, at upper management, they still have to bring in a retail guy. Can they bring somebody in to run retail and ooze enthusiasm, joy, excitement, knows retail, sees the market as it can be?
Those aren't lies. The lack of innovation is routinely discussed, so I was discussing perception. Of course I think they are innovating. Whether that innovation leads to a commercial product that can move the needle for a $40+ billion bottom line company remains to be seen.
I guess it depends what the 5S has. Lets hope the fingerprint and NFC rumors are true. Roll out same phone with a new camera and it will get ugly.
I don't think i said they will miss, but maybe I did. They have missed 3 of the last 4 quarters so not exactly a stretch to assume it happens again.
Tim knows the buyback is a mirage and not particularly beneficial to shareholders as it simply offsets dilution, so why say we are returning $45 billion? Shareholders will get the divvies in that number, they get none of the buyback, its smoke and mirrors.
Are you naive enough to believe Tim when he insinuated they aren't going to come out with a large screen phone. C'mon! Of course they will
They have never missed a quarter. They have missed the analyst's estimates, not their own guidances.
I personally am not a fan of Tim Cook and think he is delusional if he thinks he can run the company the same way Steve did.
You realize that Apple's phenomenal margins and supply chain management for the past 15 years is all a result of Cook's hard work at Apple? You should be praising him for any gains on your stock. You're delusional if you think Jobs rebuilt Apple all by himself.
Jefferies can go **** itself. Does it have any evidence of all these claims? Of course not. All they need to do is pull random shit out of their asses with "supply chain checks" in order to denigrate Apple.
You realize that Apple's phenomenal margins and supply chain management for the past 15 years is all a result of Cook's hard work at Apple? You should be praising him for any gains on your stock. You're delusional if you think Jobs rebuilt Apple all by himself.
I clarified that statement to mean he can't deal with Wall Street the way SJ did. A fair retort otherwise.
Jefferies can go **** itself. Does it have any evidence of all these claims? Of course not. All they need to do is pull random shit out of their asses with "supply chain checks" in order to denigrate
What really makes me almost vomit is that by next week Jefferies and Co. will have made hundreds of thousends of $ just by spreading completely unsupported BS.
What really makes me almost vomit is that by next week Jefferies and Co. will have made hundreds of thousends of $ just by spreading completely unsupported BS.
Beyond the channel checks, Misek says their survey of 16-25 year olds show Samsung is the most popular phone for that category at the moment. Believes Apple is losing the high end purely due to screen size and that they won't have one until middle of next year. Sees massive earnings miss vs street consensus in fiscal 3Q (June qtr) and fiscal 4Q (sept qtr).
If any of this is true, I hope they hold off on buyback as stock gonna go a heck of a lot lower.
You obviously have one, I assume that will be shared as a quid pro quo.
Listen, you're the one that bragged in your prior post, the one that I responded to first ('bragging' is what I call this) ?: "Listen, I have an Apple model, it is very tough to see any earnings growth this year,...... blah blah."
All I am doing is calling you out on it. I have to assume that you're obviously b-s'ing unless you could tell us what the 'model' is.
------
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdnc123
As if there is a difference between credit and equity analysis at the end of the day. Fact that you think so is quite funny.
------
The fact that you don't know the difference between the two tells me all I need to know!
PS: I see that you've picked up MacRulez as an admirer! In these parts, that's not a compliment......
Listen, you're the one that bragged in your prior post, the one that I responded to first ('bragging' is what I call this) ?: "Listen, I have an Apple model, it is very tough to see any earnings growth this year,...... blah blah."
All I am doing is calling you out on it. I have to assume that you're obviously b-s'ing unless you could tell us what the 'model' is.
------
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdnc123
As if there is a difference between credit and equity analysis at the end of the day. Fact that you think so is quite funny.
------
The fact that you don't know the difference between the two tells me all I need to know!
PS: I see that you've picked up MacRulez as an admirer! In these parts, that's not a compliment......
Send me your email, i'll send you what I have, its not very complex or prettied up at moment is all, I was going to spend some time building it out. I asked for a day to do so, but you would rather not wait. That is fine.
Right, so guys like me that have work with converts or put on bond vs equity trades, vol vs credit, options vs credit and thus have exposure to credit and equity..... you think there are two analysts one that focuses on equity and the other credit? The fact that you are implying that would have to be the case tells me all I need to know about you. Tell me how you buy a convert, short the stock against it (or vice versa) on a neutral hedge and don't care if the stock goes up or down and can still make a ton of money. How does that work? Tell me what you know about merton or kmv models that show credit is nothing more than a derivative of equity volatility (what I meant by vol, which I'm sure you didn't know). Tell me the correlation between the VIX and high yield credit spreads. Tell me the correlation between a single company option vol and its credit default swaps or credit spreads. All these model and correlations exist based on the theory and historical relationships that show equity value is nothing more than a long-term option on the underlying value of a company's assets with a strike price of the company's debt.
But sure, big difference between being a credit and equity analyst. Other than knowing how to read and indenture and credit agreement, no difference between analyzing company fundamentals. None.
Go ahead an google what I'm explaining and respond so you can pretend you have any idea what I just said.
Comments
Originally Posted by poksi
Nope. They spent miserable percentage on R&D.
Your implication being that "percentage" means anything whatsoever.
Apple was always greedy, this is Jobs legacy.
Your implication being that this is the truth.
There is nothing up the sleeve. …they will take it 2014… … and there is no next big thing.
Your implication being that you know anything about the internals of the company.
They have no iTV, especially not with bad Siri interface…
Your implication being that Siri is bad.
…iWatch is a funny little thing that means nothing…
Your implication being that you know anything at all about whatever product this is or is not.
I certainly wouldn't recommend the stock to anyone. Even at $420.
I have simply decided to ignore my AAPL position. I'll dump it when it reaches breakeven someday....
I do wonder if there is something that can be accurately derived by such testing. I do think that when there is a new Apple product release that the more rebolutionary it is the more trollish comments from new posters we get on the forums.
deleted
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Apple:
2011 — $108 billion revenue and $26 billion in net income (24% net profit margin)
2012 — $156.53 billion and $41 billion in net income (26.2% net profit margin)
A growth of 69% in revenue and 63% in profits YoY.
Samsung:
2011 — $220.1 billon revenue and $21.2 billion in net income (9.6% net profit margin)
2012 — $183.6 billon revenue and $26.5 billion in operating income (cant find net profit and unwilling to hunt down each quarter and do the currency conversion)
That's looks like a substantial YoY drop in revenue and only a fraction of Apple's net profits and profit margin. Nice try but you won't get away with that shit on this forum.
Where from do you have those Samsung numbers? They are completely wrong.
And you don't need to do currency conversion as Samsung is providing their numbers also in $.
The numbers for Samsung Electronics are (CY = FY)
2010 - $136.28 B revenue and $15.60 B net income
2011 - $144.98 B revenue and $13.15 B net income
2012 - $187.26 B revenue and $23.45 B net income
The numbers for Apple are (Calendar Years!)
2010 - $ 76.28 B revenue and $16.63 B net income
2011 - $127.84 B revenue and $32.98 B net income
2012 - $164.65 B revenue and $41.73 B net income
Samsung had a mediocre 2011 and an excellent 2012.
Apple had a fantastic 2011 and I really don't see why people think Apple had a bad 2012!
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
It is simple stuff and you continually ignore that Apple's profits have increased YoY, that their profits are projected to increase for fiscal 2013, and they far exceeding Samsung in both profits and profit margins which are now claiming is some gold standard despite ignoring it previously.
And many will buy into those estimates in the hope they are true or at least with the hope that enough lemmings will buy into it so they can make bank. That doesn't make it true and someone who claims to have an MBA should understand a basic concept of how markets can be manipulated without any actually living to their fabricated projections.
Your original comment had nothing to do with the stock price based on projections but instead claimed as fact thing you are merely wanting to come true, but don't take my word for it, let's examine what you wrote…
"While everyone around them is getting better, Apple is getting worse. That is going to be the theme until they change it and unfortunately, a 5S won't change so we'll have most of the year where the mainstream view is that Apple is in decline because they whiffed on product cycles and further can't execute. Frankly, its hard to argue that isn't the case."
You're claiming that Apple is getting worse as a company. Now we might have been able to conclude that you were talking only about the stock price (which still wouldn't be accurate) but your next sentence followed up with a comment about about unreleased hardware and the pronoun "they" in regard to Apple needing to change how they conduct business.
You then restate your initial comment about the company getting worse — not the stock — by claiming they have had unsuccessful attempts on launching products, as well as being able to execute the products they do have, which you conclude as being proof that Apple is pathetic, piece of shit of a company that do nothing but falter in the wake of Steve Job's death despite breaking record after record. That about sum it up?
PS: This is the same ol' shit that has been spewing since before Steve Jobs came to Apple and while Steve Jobs was at all, yet they keep winning and everyone wishing for their death keeps failing. Keep it up, you may live long enough to eventually be right.
>>You have an MBA yet you think shareholders get a piece of the net income? You might want to ask for your money back from whatever college you attended because shares rise and fall based on a large variety of factors and not some direct, 1:1 relationship between increased profits otherwise Apple's share price would be much higher and Amazon's much lower.>>
Theoretically a value of a company is reflective of its discounted future cash flows. Net income is where you start to calculate cash flow (+D&A, stock comp, deferred taxes, working capital, etc.). In the short run, the market is a voting machine, in the long its a weighing machine and will weigh the value of those cash flows. So yes, I agree with you that in the short run many factors come into play, but in the long run cash is king.
What exactly does stock price only have to do with anything? Just referencing stock prices without share count, cash, leverage tells us nothing about the value of a company.
Let me clear things up, it is getting worse as an investment and I am generally throwing out perceptions that are hurting the stock. That really isn't saying much as the gains of yesteryear won't happen again.
There is no denying Tim has made some mistakes recently. CEOs don't send out apology letters when they do good things. Heck all CEOs make strategic mistakes from time to time, its order of magnitude that is the big deal. Apparently folks here believe no mistake are ever made in Cupertino, that Tim Cook is infallible, despite the fact he himself put out a letter saying they make mistakes. Do you think the stock would be at this price without the maps mistake? I don't.
Lets talk facts. The value of this company is less than it was when Tim Cook took over. That isn't rumor, conjecture or anything else, its a fact. Stock price is higher, but the value of the enterprise is lower by about $30 billion despite selling all those products the last year and a half. Of course it was much higher at one point. Your response was sharp witted enough that I shouldn't have to explain how the value of the company is lower with the stock higher.
Current sellside estimates show a profit decrease this year (based on 45 analysts). Marginal decrease, but decrease nonetheless. Goog is expected to increase its profits by 40+% and Samsung by nearly 100%. Google and Samsung are currently preferred investments because they are growing profits and Apple isn't. Listen, the law of large numbers is tough to deal with, but this is a large market and competitors are growing.
This is the angst people have with the company AND stock. The total amount of profits being generated in mobile is increasing this year and next and foreseeable future, but they have flatlined profit-wise, so is it just a pause or can they re-accelerate profit growth. That is the issue people care about from an investment perspective, not whether Apple has better products (they do), not whether they can innovate (they will). Of course these are tied together.
Cash flow based is even better. I await your answers. (I am surprised you now say you need time, since you bragged earlier that you had a 'model'. Why don't you just share it with us?).
Until then, stop pontificating on Apple stock. Or stick to credit analysis, not equity analysis.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetz
But as an investor, you will not see a dime of that success.
Instead of a dime you see $10.60 per share p.a.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
Cash flow based is even better. I await your answers. (I am surprised you now say you need time, since you bragged earlier that you had a 'model'. Why don't you just share it with us?).
Until then, stop pontificating on Apple stock. Or stick to credit analysis, not equity analysis.
You are a real joy. I didn't 'brag' I said I had one. Like virtually every person on wall street, I didn't build a model like you want.
You obviously have one, I assume that will be shared as a quid pro quo.
I've been wrong on the stock. If I though they were doomed I'd sell.
As if there is a difference between credit and equity analysis at the end of the day. Fact that you think so is quite funny.
Quote:
Originally Posted by geekdad
you forgot Jon Ive...He will design Apple's future
I didn't forget Jon Ive. I had hopes for him but he hasn't appeared as spokesman -- and I was expecting him to when he was promoted to upper management. And the few times I've watched him speak, he is the quiet, thoughtful guy, perhaps charming, but decidedly not a salesman.
Now, at upper management, they still have to bring in a retail guy. Can they bring somebody in to run retail and ooze enthusiasm, joy, excitement, knows retail, sees the market as it can be?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdnc123
Those aren't lies. The lack of innovation is routinely discussed, so I was discussing perception. Of course I think they are innovating. Whether that innovation leads to a commercial product that can move the needle for a $40+ billion bottom line company remains to be seen.
I guess it depends what the 5S has. Lets hope the fingerprint and NFC rumors are true. Roll out same phone with a new camera and it will get ugly.
I don't think i said they will miss, but maybe I did. They have missed 3 of the last 4 quarters so not exactly a stretch to assume it happens again.
Tim knows the buyback is a mirage and not particularly beneficial to shareholders as it simply offsets dilution, so why say we are returning $45 billion? Shareholders will get the divvies in that number, they get none of the buyback, its smoke and mirrors.
Are you naive enough to believe Tim when he insinuated they aren't going to come out with a large screen phone. C'mon! Of course they will
They have never missed a quarter. They have missed the analyst's estimates, not their own guidances.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdnc123
I personally am not a fan of Tim Cook and think he is delusional if he thinks he can run the company the same way Steve did.
You realize that Apple's phenomenal margins and supply chain management for the past 15 years is all a result of Cook's hard work at Apple? You should be praising him for any gains on your stock. You're delusional if you think Jobs rebuilt Apple all by himself.
Jefferies can go **** itself. Does it have any evidence of all these claims? Of course not. All they need to do is pull random shit out of their asses with "supply chain checks" in order to denigrate Apple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fastasleep
You realize that Apple's phenomenal margins and supply chain management for the past 15 years is all a result of Cook's hard work at Apple? You should be praising him for any gains on your stock. You're delusional if you think Jobs rebuilt Apple all by himself.
I clarified that statement to mean he can't deal with Wall Street the way SJ did. A fair retort otherwise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy
Jefferies can go **** itself. Does it have any evidence of all these claims? Of course not. All they need to do is pull random shit out of their asses with "supply chain checks" in order to denigrate
What really makes me almost vomit is that by next week Jefferies and Co. will have made hundreds of thousends of $ just by spreading completely unsupported BS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by waldobushman
They have never missed a quarter. They have missed the analyst's estimates, not their own guidances.
Good point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabbit_Coach
What really makes me almost vomit is that by next week Jefferies and Co. will have made hundreds of thousends of $ just by spreading completely unsupported BS.
Beyond the channel checks, Misek says their survey of 16-25 year olds show Samsung is the most popular phone for that category at the moment. Believes Apple is losing the high end purely due to screen size and that they won't have one until middle of next year. Sees massive earnings miss vs street consensus in fiscal 3Q (June qtr) and fiscal 4Q (sept qtr).
If any of this is true, I hope they hold off on buyback as stock gonna go a heck of a lot lower.
Don't shoot the messenger.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdnc123
You obviously have one, I assume that will be shared as a quid pro quo.
Listen, you're the one that bragged in your prior post, the one that I responded to first ('bragging' is what I call this) ?: "Listen, I have an Apple model, it is very tough to see any earnings growth this year,...... blah blah."
All I am doing is calling you out on it. I have to assume that you're obviously b-s'ing unless you could tell us what the 'model' is.
------
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdnc123
As if there is a difference between credit and equity analysis at the end of the day. Fact that you think so is quite funny.
------
The fact that you don't know the difference between the two tells me all I need to know!
PS: I see that you've picked up MacRulez as an admirer! In these parts, that's not a compliment......
Need waders for this thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
Listen, you're the one that bragged in your prior post, the one that I responded to first ('bragging' is what I call this) ?: "Listen, I have an Apple model, it is very tough to see any earnings growth this year,...... blah blah."
All I am doing is calling you out on it. I have to assume that you're obviously b-s'ing unless you could tell us what the 'model' is.
------
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdnc123
As if there is a difference between credit and equity analysis at the end of the day. Fact that you think so is quite funny.
------
The fact that you don't know the difference between the two tells me all I need to know!
PS: I see that you've picked up MacRulez as an admirer! In these parts, that's not a compliment......
Send me your email, i'll send you what I have, its not very complex or prettied up at moment is all, I was going to spend some time building it out. I asked for a day to do so, but you would rather not wait. That is fine.
Right, so guys like me that have work with converts or put on bond vs equity trades, vol vs credit, options vs credit and thus have exposure to credit and equity..... you think there are two analysts one that focuses on equity and the other credit? The fact that you are implying that would have to be the case tells me all I need to know about you. Tell me how you buy a convert, short the stock against it (or vice versa) on a neutral hedge and don't care if the stock goes up or down and can still make a ton of money. How does that work? Tell me what you know about merton or kmv models that show credit is nothing more than a derivative of equity volatility (what I meant by vol, which I'm sure you didn't know). Tell me the correlation between the VIX and high yield credit spreads. Tell me the correlation between a single company option vol and its credit default swaps or credit spreads. All these model and correlations exist based on the theory and historical relationships that show equity value is nothing more than a long-term option on the underlying value of a company's assets with a strike price of the company's debt.
But sure, big difference between being a credit and equity analyst. Other than knowing how to read and indenture and credit agreement, no difference between analyzing company fundamentals. None.
Go ahead an google what I'm explaining and respond so you can pretend you have any idea what I just said.