Please explain why someone who was paid to bash the stock (as I'm not) would be pushing for pro-shareholder actions that would push the stock up. Give me a logical explanation other than I'm using reverse psychology on all of you. What's funny is you have no suggestions, no opinion on why the stock is down, what should change, why $300 billion has been lost, why value has been destroyed since Cook took over in a huge bull market. Yep, gotta be those paid "trolls." Comical.
Again with the insults. Do you agree that there is a cabal of nefarious hedge fund managers trying to sink Apple (which , by the way, has essentially NO short interest)? Do you believe that someone who believes that is rational? Do you think that someone who believes that this cabal is picking on HIS beloved company (but no other) does not have paranoia issues? You don't have to answer, but if you stopped being a jerk, that would be nice.
Please explain why someone who was paid to bash the stock (as I'm not) would be pushing for pro-shareholder actions that would push the stock up. Give me a logical explanation other than I'm using reverse psychology on all of you. What's funny is you have no suggestions, no opinion on why the stock is down, what should change, why $300 billion has been lost, why value has been destroyed since Cook took over in a huge bull market. Yep, gotta be those paid "trolls." Comical.
More tragic, really. This is the same sort of mentality that leads people to kill other people because of newspaper cartoons.
Can you imagine a company like GE, Disney, or even, God forbid, Microsoft being run this way? Complete dis-engagement or understanding on how to create shareholder value, lack of communicating a clear vision and defensible positions, and, drum-roll, a new-found skill covering the in-ability to execute
I was moved by Tim's comments that "I look around the table, and everyone is at their A-game". Really?
I'm not looking to capture the absolute bottom. I need confirmation of an uptrend and there is definitely no signs of that yet. The only trend on AAPL's chart is down. I'm not a chart statistician, and I don't even play one on the internet, but there are various signs to look for.
There is no such thing as "confirmation of an uptrend", regardless of what the internet chartists tell you. Just when you think you have confirmation, the trend you think is confirmed can be broken, and will do so 50% of the time, in general. News or rumors appear, and the trend is broken. Such things are NOT predicted by the charts. Sure, one can go back and find a way to retroactively extend a really old portion of the chart in a manner that seems to predict a later portion of the chart. But what you need to understand is that the wiggles and fractal-like nature of the trace always allow you to find SOMETHING that seems to be causal when it is not. Extending trends, etc, to the FUTURE and banking on these is a fool's game.
The bottom line is that if charts really were reliably predictive, you would find a lot more people who got wealthy by using them. But the world's top 100 investors are known for other approaches (i.e. actual investment, not chart trading). Meanwhile, I have seen plenty of internet chartists making predictions based on this pattern, that pattern, or this trendline, or that Fibonacci line, etc, etc, etc... but they ultimately prove wrong as often as right, and they pay dearly for it.
You are much better off with a Buffett-like long term horizon. Buy when others are fearful. And do so for a fundamental reason (not just because others are fearful... their reasons may be sound). Sell for a fundamental reason too, not JUST because you have lost some money and are afraid. Buffett himself stays out of investing in consumer electronics companies, because he confesses that he doesn't understand the dynamics there. Smart man. Invest in what you understand. General rule: sell a stock when there is something better you could be doing with the money. Transferring it somewhere else only because you feel stung is a BAD thing. You end up selling low and buying high... the opposite of what should be. Of course if one bought the stock for flighty reasons to begin with, well, they're already in a bad place. I guess they might as well sell if it make themselves feel safer. Their mistake was buying without conviction and a good reason for it.
My current sentiment: based on Apple's fundamental valuation today and their excellent opportunity for growth in emerging markets (iPhone on China Mobile, or cheaper iPhone, etc) and their imminent disruption of more marketplaces, I would say now is an unbelievable opportunity to buy and reap the rewards a few years from now. And don't get shaken is some knee-jerk short-term chartists send it down in the meantime.
Tangent: anybody that believes innovation is dead at Apple just because Steve is gone and because Apple hasn't brought a new groundbreaker out for a few years (e.g. Rocco Pendola) needs to have their head examined for logic. It has always been Apple's way (even under Steve) to take the time to get their new hardware endeavors fully baked, so that they can "wow" the customer. And the size of the "wow" is generally in proportion to the time it takes to bring it out.
BAsed on Jobs' remarks before his death, Cook's remarks after, and Jony Ive's answer in an interview last year that he was currently working on the most important thing he's ever done, I'd say that it is only a matter of time before Apple drops a huge bomb on some market. (Most likely TV/entertainment.) Certainly people don't think that Jony is going to call an upgrade to an existing product the "most impoprtant thing he's ever done.
Get ready for the bomb. Buy in before it happens. Hold unless something other than nervous-nellies takes down the stock.
Remember, if they are going into a completely new field, Apple does not necessarily have to hold announcement until it is ready and the rumors have already surfaced.
Can you imagine a company like GE, Disney, or even, God forbid, Microsoft being run this way? Complete dis-engagement or understanding on how to create shareholder value, lack of communicating a clear vision and defensible positions, and, drum-roll, a new-found skill covering the in-ability to execute
I was moved by Tim's comments that "I look around the table, and everyone is at their A-game". Really?
What do the names you have mentioned have in common? They all have strong CEOs (Immelt at GE, Iger at DIS, Ballmer at MSFT), and always have. You might disagree with them and dislike them, but you cannot claim that they are not providing leadership. Same is true of Google, Oracle, Facebook. It seems to be less true of Apple, which I think is the source of the problem.
Can you imagine a company like GE, Disney, or even, God forbid, Microsoft being run this way? Complete dis-engagement or understanding on how to create shareholder value, lack of communicating a clear vision and defensible positions, and, drum-roll, a new-found skill covering the in-ability to execute
I was moved by Tim's comments that "I look around the table, and everyone is at their A-game". Really?
Apple is making shitloads of money every qtr. 70% of the mobile profits.
Making money is a bad thing? Apparently WS thinks so.
If you have been holding Apple stock for the last two years, you have not done so well. The fact that the company has earnings on the balance sheet is irrelevant, since you cannot get your hands on that money.
My current sentiment: based on Apple's fundamental valuation today and their excellent opportunity for growth in emerging markets (iPhone on China Mobile, or cheaper iPhone, etc) and their imminent disruption of more marketplaces, I would say now is an unbelievable opportunity to buy and reap the rewards a few years from now. And don't get shaken is some knee-jerk short-term chartists send it down in the meantime.
I don't disagree with your sentiment. I also think that Apple is very strong and in a good position to catapult higher in the future.
Predicted Tim comments for the earnings call next week,
"We are in very very very active discussions on the use of cash. As opposed to just very very. We are VERY serious about this (emphasis mine). It is an honor to have so much cash sitting in a bank earning 1.0% return for a year while competitors catch-up. In this new world, it takes us 9 months to make any large scale, meaningful decisions. My A-Team including my CFO-Head-In-The-Sand-Peter is all over what to do next"
AND
"The product pipeline is chock-full. So chock-full, it's backed up and we can't get anything out of it. It's like we are constipated. I'll get back to you in September"
AND
"TV is a very very very interesting area for us. We continue to pull the string to see where it takes us. No, we are now TUGGING that string. TUGGING now!. It's all very interesting to us. It's just an outstanding hobby. The current offering is like going back to 1875"
AND
"I look around the table and I'm more convinced then ever that everyone is at their A-Game. Never mind the fact we incinerated $250 billion in shareholder value over the last four months. Never mind that. A-Game. All the way"
Quant finance is obviously not your thing. Yes, my statement is a probabilistic statement, but volatility is a very good predictor of volatility, much more so than a predictor of direction.
I must be underemployed as a paid troll to say 30 day implied vol is 29+, while 30 day implied vol is 43+. If you think things are good at Apple and the market is wrong, go put a short volatility, market neutral trade on. Sell some calls and buy some stock on the delta or sell puts and short stock against the puts. Might be wild trading the gamma around over short term, but if any good news, short term vol could really come in; likewise you will lose if vol spikes with bad news, but the trade is market neutral and really doesn't care what the stock does if you can manage the gamma.
230+ comments on this news? Don't have time to read everything so I might be repeating what someone else said....
Since when do supplier component orders directly follow a manufacturers device shipments? Companies often order more in 1 quarter to be used in devices made in the following quarter, so reduced revenue from a supplier means nothing. Cirrus boost in a previous quarter can simply be attributed to Apple placing a larger order last quarter.
The things these stupid analysts will do to try and come up with reasons for Apple to "fail".
Can you imagine a company like GE, Disney, or even, God forbid, Microsoft being run this way? Complete dis-engagement or understanding on how to create shareholder value, lack of communicating a clear vision and defensible positions, and, drum-roll, a new-found skill covering the in-ability to execute
I was moved by Tim's comments that "I look around the table, and everyone is at their A-game". Really?
Maybe Tim Cook should do a Ballmer like monkey dance, would that make you happy?
Developers, developers, developers, flocking to the biggest App store the world has ever seen.
Maybe he could wear a sumo suit.
How about roll around on the biggest pile of cash the world has ever seen.
Pull Apple's Billions out of the markets they are invested in and create a run on the banks holding it, that might be fun.
Maybe Tim Cook should do a Ballmer like monkey dance, would that make you happy?
Developers, developers, developers, flocking to the biggest App store the world has ever seen.
Maybe he could wear a sumo suit.
How about roll around on the biggest pile of cash the world has ever seen.
Pull Apple's Billions out of the markets they are invested in and create a run on the banks holding it, that might be fun.
Your right - should not have put Microsoft in as one of the examples. Ballmer is an absolute joke. But the point I'm trying to make still stands - stable, sustainable, large cap companies
On your comment 'Pull Apple Billions", that is not what I am saying. The company should keep and invest in EVERYTHING they need to WIN. But it should not aimlessly be sitting on piles of cash with no plan or vision
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Well, care enough to keep being paid, at least.
Please explain why someone who was paid to bash the stock (as I'm not) would be pushing for pro-shareholder actions that would push the stock up. Give me a logical explanation other than I'm using reverse psychology on all of you. What's funny is you have no suggestions, no opinion on why the stock is down, what should change, why $300 billion has been lost, why value has been destroyed since Cook took over in a huge bull market. Yep, gotta be those paid "trolls." Comical.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
It takes a paranoiac to know one, I am guessing.
Again with the insults. Do you agree that there is a cabal of nefarious hedge fund managers trying to sink Apple (which , by the way, has essentially NO short interest)? Do you believe that someone who believes that is rational? Do you think that someone who believes that this cabal is picking on HIS beloved company (but no other) does not have paranoia issues? You don't have to answer, but if you stopped being a jerk, that would be nice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur
Here's another gem. Does anyone believe this guy that he has his fortune tied to Apple's stock value? That he just loves his Apple products?
He is drooling over his vision of Apple's destruction. Fake fake fake.
Block, block, block.
Then you won't have to put up with this constant dribble of sh*t.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdnc123
Please explain why someone who was paid to bash the stock (as I'm not) would be pushing for pro-shareholder actions that would push the stock up. Give me a logical explanation other than I'm using reverse psychology on all of you. What's funny is you have no suggestions, no opinion on why the stock is down, what should change, why $300 billion has been lost, why value has been destroyed since Cook took over in a huge bull market. Yep, gotta be those paid "trolls." Comical.
More tragic, really. This is the same sort of mentality that leads people to kill other people because of newspaper cartoons.
Can you imagine a company like GE, Disney, or even, God forbid, Microsoft being run this way? Complete dis-engagement or understanding on how to create shareholder value, lack of communicating a clear vision and defensible positions, and, drum-roll, a new-found skill covering the in-ability to execute
I was moved by Tim's comments that "I look around the table, and everyone is at their A-game". Really?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][
I'm not looking to capture the absolute bottom. I need confirmation of an uptrend and there is definitely no signs of that yet. The only trend on AAPL's chart is down. I'm not a chart statistician, and I don't even play one on the internet, but there are various signs to look for.
There is no such thing as "confirmation of an uptrend", regardless of what the internet chartists tell you. Just when you think you have confirmation, the trend you think is confirmed can be broken, and will do so 50% of the time, in general. News or rumors appear, and the trend is broken. Such things are NOT predicted by the charts. Sure, one can go back and find a way to retroactively extend a really old portion of the chart in a manner that seems to predict a later portion of the chart. But what you need to understand is that the wiggles and fractal-like nature of the trace always allow you to find SOMETHING that seems to be causal when it is not. Extending trends, etc, to the FUTURE and banking on these is a fool's game.
The bottom line is that if charts really were reliably predictive, you would find a lot more people who got wealthy by using them. But the world's top 100 investors are known for other approaches (i.e. actual investment, not chart trading). Meanwhile, I have seen plenty of internet chartists making predictions based on this pattern, that pattern, or this trendline, or that Fibonacci line, etc, etc, etc... but they ultimately prove wrong as often as right, and they pay dearly for it.
You are much better off with a Buffett-like long term horizon. Buy when others are fearful. And do so for a fundamental reason (not just because others are fearful... their reasons may be sound). Sell for a fundamental reason too, not JUST because you have lost some money and are afraid. Buffett himself stays out of investing in consumer electronics companies, because he confesses that he doesn't understand the dynamics there. Smart man. Invest in what you understand. General rule: sell a stock when there is something better you could be doing with the money. Transferring it somewhere else only because you feel stung is a BAD thing. You end up selling low and buying high... the opposite of what should be. Of course if one bought the stock for flighty reasons to begin with, well, they're already in a bad place. I guess they might as well sell if it make themselves feel safer. Their mistake was buying without conviction and a good reason for it.
My current sentiment: based on Apple's fundamental valuation today and their excellent opportunity for growth in emerging markets (iPhone on China Mobile, or cheaper iPhone, etc) and their imminent disruption of more marketplaces, I would say now is an unbelievable opportunity to buy and reap the rewards a few years from now. And don't get shaken is some knee-jerk short-term chartists send it down in the meantime.
Tangent: anybody that believes innovation is dead at Apple just because Steve is gone and because Apple hasn't brought a new groundbreaker out for a few years (e.g. Rocco Pendola) needs to have their head examined for logic. It has always been Apple's way (even under Steve) to take the time to get their new hardware endeavors fully baked, so that they can "wow" the customer. And the size of the "wow" is generally in proportion to the time it takes to bring it out.
BAsed on Jobs' remarks before his death, Cook's remarks after, and Jony Ive's answer in an interview last year that he was currently working on the most important thing he's ever done, I'd say that it is only a matter of time before Apple drops a huge bomb on some market. (Most likely TV/entertainment.) Certainly people don't think that Jony is going to call an upgrade to an existing product the "most impoprtant thing he's ever done.
Get ready for the bomb. Buy in before it happens. Hold unless something other than nervous-nellies takes down the stock.
Remember, if they are going into a completely new field, Apple does not necessarily have to hold announcement until it is ready and the rumors have already surfaced.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Oak
Can you imagine a company like GE, Disney, or even, God forbid, Microsoft being run this way? Complete dis-engagement or understanding on how to create shareholder value, lack of communicating a clear vision and defensible positions, and, drum-roll, a new-found skill covering the in-ability to execute
I was moved by Tim's comments that "I look around the table, and everyone is at their A-game". Really?
What do the names you have mentioned have in common? They all have strong CEOs (Immelt at GE, Iger at DIS, Ballmer at MSFT), and always have. You might disagree with them and dislike them, but you cannot claim that they are not providing leadership. Same is true of Google, Oracle, Facebook. It seems to be less true of Apple, which I think is the source of the problem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Well, care enough to keep being paid, at least.
Taiwan calling?
Apple is making shitloads of money every qtr. 70% of the mobile profits.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark
Apple is making shitloads of money every qtr. 70% of the mobile profits.
And this is helping you as an Apple shareholder how?
Making money is a bad thing? Apparently WS thinks so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark
Making money is a bad thing? Apparently WS thinks so.
If you have been holding Apple stock for the last two years, you have not done so well. The fact that the company has earnings on the balance sheet is irrelevant, since you cannot get your hands on that money.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thompr
My current sentiment: based on Apple's fundamental valuation today and their excellent opportunity for growth in emerging markets (iPhone on China Mobile, or cheaper iPhone, etc) and their imminent disruption of more marketplaces, I would say now is an unbelievable opportunity to buy and reap the rewards a few years from now. And don't get shaken is some knee-jerk short-term chartists send it down in the meantime.
I don't disagree with your sentiment. I also think that Apple is very strong and in a good position to catapult higher in the future.
Breaking news! Tim Cook has been fired and replaced by Ron Popeil. AAPL rises by 50% in after hours trading. /s
Predicted Tim comments for the earnings call next week,
"We are in very very very active discussions on the use of cash. As opposed to just very very. We are VERY serious about this (emphasis mine). It is an honor to have so much cash sitting in a bank earning 1.0% return for a year while competitors catch-up. In this new world, it takes us 9 months to make any large scale, meaningful decisions. My A-Team including my CFO-Head-In-The-Sand-Peter is all over what to do next"
AND
"The product pipeline is chock-full. So chock-full, it's backed up and we can't get anything out of it. It's like we are constipated. I'll get back to you in September"
AND
"TV is a very very very interesting area for us. We continue to pull the string to see where it takes us. No, we are now TUGGING that string. TUGGING now!. It's all very interesting to us. It's just an outstanding hobby. The current offering is like going back to 1875"
AND
"I look around the table and I'm more convinced then ever that everyone is at their A-Game. Never mind the fact we incinerated $250 billion in shareholder value over the last four months. Never mind that. A-Game. All the way"
Quote:
Originally Posted by igriv
Quant finance is obviously not your thing. Yes, my statement is a probabilistic statement, but volatility is a very good predictor of volatility, much more so than a predictor of direction.
I must be underemployed as a paid troll to say 30 day implied vol is 29+, while 30 day implied vol is 43+. If you think things are good at Apple and the market is wrong, go put a short volatility, market neutral trade on. Sell some calls and buy some stock on the delta or sell puts and short stock against the puts. Might be wild trading the gamma around over short term, but if any good news, short term vol could really come in; likewise you will lose if vol spikes with bad news, but the trade is market neutral and really doesn't care what the stock does if you can manage the gamma.
230+ comments on this news? Don't have time to read everything so I might be repeating what someone else said....
Since when do supplier component orders directly follow a manufacturers device shipments? Companies often order more in 1 quarter to be used in devices made in the following quarter, so reduced revenue from a supplier means nothing. Cirrus boost in a previous quarter can simply be attributed to Apple placing a larger order last quarter.
The things these stupid analysts will do to try and come up with reasons for Apple to "fail".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Oak
Can you imagine a company like GE, Disney, or even, God forbid, Microsoft being run this way? Complete dis-engagement or understanding on how to create shareholder value, lack of communicating a clear vision and defensible positions, and, drum-roll, a new-found skill covering the in-ability to execute
I was moved by Tim's comments that "I look around the table, and everyone is at their A-game". Really?
Maybe Tim Cook should do a Ballmer like monkey dance, would that make you happy?
Developers, developers, developers, flocking to the biggest App store the world has ever seen.
Maybe he could wear a sumo suit.
How about roll around on the biggest pile of cash the world has ever seen.
Pull Apple's Billions out of the markets they are invested in and create a run on the banks holding it, that might be fun.
Quote:
Originally Posted by majjo
Just curious: do you guys think it will rebound tomorrow or continue to slide?
Maybe a bounce but I don't really think AAPL is going to stay above $400.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
Maybe Tim Cook should do a Ballmer like monkey dance, would that make you happy?
Developers, developers, developers, flocking to the biggest App store the world has ever seen.
Maybe he could wear a sumo suit.
How about roll around on the biggest pile of cash the world has ever seen.
Pull Apple's Billions out of the markets they are invested in and create a run on the banks holding it, that might be fun.
Your right - should not have put Microsoft in as one of the examples. Ballmer is an absolute joke. But the point I'm trying to make still stands - stable, sustainable, large cap companies
On your comment 'Pull Apple Billions", that is not what I am saying. The company should keep and invest in EVERYTHING they need to WIN. But it should not aimlessly be sitting on piles of cash with no plan or vision