It worries me because employes know whats going on to some extend inside the company. Employes moving away is never good.
If you have employees leaving due to a companies stock price that is in fact a good thing. It is the wrong motivation to have in an employee. Beyond that we have seen nothing to back up the claim that their is a mass exodus at Apple. If anything they have been attracting some rather strong talent this year. Facts seem to oppose the hack job reporting you are using to justify your position.
Well I still owns leaps prior to product cycles, so I am hoping Apple will be able to stop the bleeding at some point. But my hopes are pretty low. If Apple really does what the fanboys here expects, which is just an iPhone 5s, no TV, no game console, I think Apple EPS will continu to go down.
iPhone 5S will be a hit, that is almost a given. As for a game console, since when have game consoles contributed to any companies bottom line. Apple already sells a multifunction device in iPad that is far better than many of the game consoles out there. Likewise for a TV which isn't exactly a lucrative market in its current form. A TV highlights Apples different approach to changing industries, Apple won't sell a TV until there is an infrastructure in place to support it.
Seriously, I don't see how people are going to upgrade to a same form factor iPhone 5s. I think the sales are going to be horrible on that device and its apple core business. You can't charge a premium and badly lag the market on innovation.
You can't see that screen size has nothing to do with innovation? If you look at my posts over time you will see that I'm a proponent of Apple selling different sizes iPhones. That isn't innovation though, in fact it is no more innovation than a company selling different sized socks.
If they dont come up with a complete set of integrated hardware/solfware that integrate with the TV this year, I see no reasons for Apple to gain new customers.
Apple could survive for centuries without a "TV" product if they wanted too.
The only way to increase current product sales is EU,China and India and its not going to happen without a lower cost NEW phone.
Seriously you call yourself an investor but yet you can't write a rational paragraph. What does a lower cost iPhone have to do with an Apple TV!
There is a lot of things Apple could do, problem is Apple is not doing any of them... well so far.
Frankly you are out of touch, Apple is laying the ground work for future products, you can see this in the various WWDC videos. Your problem is that you expect a market shaking product every year. That has never happened with Apple, nor any other company for that matter so why the unreasonable expectations?
Frankly all this negativity is beyond all reason. Apple has breezed through one of the most significant downturns in the computer industry while knocking the crap out of the cell phone market. That sonny is a sign of a well managed company with a great product lineup.
Garbage publication. But I have to wonder: where is the buy-back money? This could get political fast and even TC's position could be in danger if he allows the market to continue abusing the stocks.
The market is what it is. TC can no more prevent market abuse than the janitor at Apple can. If the majority of your stock is owned by manipulators and or speculators you are basically out of control. The idea that a company has some sort of control over stock prices, especially when so much stock is controlled by so few is ridiculous right from the start.
Beyond that the idea that Apples stock is trading low is totally bogus. Last year people saw Apples stock ballon due to significant market manipulation and for whatever reason thought that such inflated prices represented the real value of the company. It is really sad to see just how delusional people can be.
Um, an agreement not to compete would not be looked at favorably from an antitrust point of view.
Not true at all. Non-disclosure/Non-compete are very common contract clauses between companies with potential conflicts of interest who might want to do business together.
Apple never forged one with Samsung because they both already manufactured components/products in a competitive space and footing. Risky business, but the profits outweighed the risks.
Every day since 2 weeks now I read every time good news about Apple on this website.
And every day, with almost no exception, I see the price of AAPL stock go down...today 12 points !
I'm seriously in doubt about the future of Apple, looking at their WWDC conference I'm no longer confident that they have the "touch" that Steve had in his time.
I wonder if you guys feel the same way,,,,
No, I do not. When the stock falls on Apple's "good" news, it usually means Apple is doing something right. I don't pay much attention to the market manipulations and movements. Especially when it's clear they are taking the bull by the horns and moving the entire market forward.
So no, I have absolutely no doubt about Apple's future, and continued leadership position, in both products and ongoing innovations...
Apple wont be ditching Samsung completely yet. At least the future A7 are still being produced by them being used in iPod touch or Apple TV. So there should be at least 2 years to go.
The A7 will very likely be faster clock speed 28nm die shrink of A6X along with 2GB of LPDDR3 ( very likely to be same one being used in the new MBA ). And Apple could very well be using A7 as their testing chip for TSMC, meaning A7 will be manufactured by both Samsung and TSMC.
Because Intel would then have early access to Apple tech and could then use it in their chips that get sold to competitors.
iOS on x86 is a horrible idea.
Apple are designers who will use technology they see fit. Intel have historically given Apple early access to their technology.
If this does not happen with ARM then obviously Apple may jump ship there too. They usually do manage to control costs and stay ahead of the game this way.
Around the world away from the USA it also appears as if Apple could head the way of Blackberry, so licensing IOS is surely going to happen too. Apple could license out IOS for ARM whilst use Intel for premium IOS themselves.
Intel have historically given Apple early access to their technology.
This has never really been proven. If you're talking about engineering samples, all oems receive those. You're likely identifying benefits of being a contract buyer rather than ones that are specific to Apple's contracts with intel.
I just wish the respective governments of these component/finished product companies split them up somehow so they aren't in conflict of interest. Making components for customers and then making finished goods that compete with their component customers is a VERY unethical business model.
Do you have any reference of how that steps on antitrust laws in any given country? You can spin this in any way you want depending on viewpoint, but I don't see how it's highly unethical. Those customers are aware that Samsung and LG make finished products, yet they buy from them. What country has laws saying a company can't compete with customers of its subsidiaries? I'm just skeptical here, as I can't think of a single good reference for that argument.
This has never really been proven. If you're talking about engineering samples, all oems receive those. You're likely identifying benefits of being a contract buyer rather than ones that are specific to Apple's contracts with intel.
Never proven? The first Intel Macs were part of that deal. Apple have been a lucrative customer for Intel and the Macbook Air was similarly so,
What is noticeable this time is that Intel Haswell is arriving elsewhere quicker than prior.
Never proven? The first Intel Macs were part of that deal. Apple have been a lucrative customer for Intel and the Macbook Air was similarly so,
What is noticeable this time is that Intel Haswell is arriving elsewhere quicker than prior.
You're using rumors there. Intel has other lucrative customers. That is what I mentioned. All contract purchasers would enjoy some amount of early access to technology that comes with NDAs. As to when things show up, look at the past couple cycles. Others shipped Sandy and Ivy around the same time. That's the thing. If you have a purchasing contract to buy millions of cpus, it does come with some amount of preferential treatment whether you're Apple or HP. I thought you might use the case of thunderbolt where Apple offered the use of mini displayport. Sony worked on their own version of that too based on usb, but that obviously didn't go anywhere.
Seem far better to use ones personal memory than to rely on Wikipedia. Much of the stuff there on "Apple's transition to Intel processors" is waffle.
I'm forgetting which chips Apple got a 12 month 'window' on but they were the obvious choice for Intel to market their top end CPUs.
The massive failure of the Ultrabook marketing shows that.
Talking of Wikipedia, compared to what looks like a very infantile writing descent on technology stuff at Wikipedia , that 'transition' wiki is high grade waffle.
It is now increasingly common to find good Wikipedia articles almost vandalised into low grade childishness, backed up by very 3rd rate citations.
I do wondering if Wikipedia has had a sad decline, or whether it was always so bad.
Seem far better to use ones personal memory than to rely on Wikipedia. Much of the stuff there on "Apple's transition to Intel processors" is waffle.
I'm forgetting which chips Apple got a 12 month 'window' on but they were the obvious choice for Intel to market their top end CPUs.
The massive failure of the Ultrabook marketing shows that.
Talking of Wikipedia, compared to what looks like a very infantile writing descent on technology stuff at Wikipedia , that 'transition' wiki is high grade waffle.
It is now increasingly common to find good Wikipedia articles almost vandalised into low grade childishness, backed up by very 3rd rate citations.
I do wondering if Wikipedia has had a sad decline, or whether it was always so bad.
Wiki varies quite a bit. They're quite accurate if you'
Comments
If you have employees leaving due to a companies stock price that is in fact a good thing. It is the wrong motivation to have in an employee. Beyond that we have seen nothing to back up the claim that their is a mass exodus at Apple. If anything they have been attracting some rather strong talent this year. Facts seem to oppose the hack job reporting you are using to justify your position. iPhone 5S will be a hit, that is almost a given. As for a game console, since when have game consoles contributed to any companies bottom line. Apple already sells a multifunction device in iPad that is far better than many of the game consoles out there. Likewise for a TV which isn't exactly a lucrative market in its current form. A TV highlights Apples different approach to changing industries, Apple won't sell a TV until there is an infrastructure in place to support it. You can't see that screen size has nothing to do with innovation? If you look at my posts over time you will see that I'm a proponent of Apple selling different sizes iPhones. That isn't innovation though, in fact it is no more innovation than a company selling different sized socks. Apple could survive for centuries without a "TV" product if they wanted too. Seriously you call yourself an investor but yet you can't write a rational paragraph. What does a lower cost iPhone have to do with an Apple TV! Frankly you are out of touch, Apple is laying the ground work for future products, you can see this in the various WWDC videos. Your problem is that you expect a market shaking product every year. That has never happened with Apple, nor any other company for that matter so why the unreasonable expectations?
Frankly all this negativity is beyond all reason. Apple has breezed through one of the most significant downturns in the computer industry while knocking the crap out of the cell phone market. That sonny is a sign of a well managed company with a great product lineup.
The market is what it is. TC can no more prevent market abuse than the janitor at Apple can. If the majority of your stock is owned by manipulators and or speculators you are basically out of control. The idea that a company has some sort of control over stock prices, especially when so much stock is controlled by so few is ridiculous right from the start.
Beyond that the idea that Apples stock is trading low is totally bogus. Last year people saw Apples stock ballon due to significant market manipulation and for whatever reason thought that such inflated prices represented the real value of the company. It is really sad to see just how delusional people can be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MyDogHasFleas
Um, an agreement not to compete would not be looked at favorably from an antitrust point of view.
Not true at all. Non-disclosure/Non-compete are very common contract clauses between companies with potential conflicts of interest who might want to do business together.
Apple never forged one with Samsung because they both already manufactured components/products in a competitive space and footing. Risky business, but the profits outweighed the risks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElFig2012
Every day since 2 weeks now I read every time good news about Apple on this website.
And every day, with almost no exception, I see the price of AAPL stock go down...today 12 points !
I'm seriously in doubt about the future of Apple, looking at their WWDC conference I'm no longer confident that they have the "touch" that Steve had in his time.
I wonder if you guys feel the same way,,,,
No, I do not. When the stock falls on Apple's "good" news, it usually means Apple is doing something right. I don't pay much attention to the market manipulations and movements. Especially when it's clear they are taking the bull by the horns and moving the entire market forward.
So no, I have absolutely no doubt about Apple's future, and continued leadership position, in both products and ongoing innovations...
The A7 will very likely be faster clock speed 28nm die shrink of A6X along with 2GB of LPDDR3 ( very likely to be same one being used in the new MBA ).
And Apple could very well be using A7 as their testing chip for TSMC, meaning A7 will be manufactured by both Samsung and TSMC.
Quote:
Because Intel would then have early access to Apple tech and could then use it in their chips that get sold to competitors.
iOS on x86 is a horrible idea.
Apple are designers who will use technology they see fit. Intel have historically given Apple early access to their technology.
If this does not happen with ARM then obviously Apple may jump ship there too. They usually do manage to control costs and stay ahead of the game this way.
Around the world away from the USA it also appears as if Apple could head the way of Blackberry, so licensing IOS is surely going to happen too. Apple could license out IOS for ARM whilst use Intel for premium IOS themselves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aBeliefSystem
Intel have historically given Apple early access to their technology.
This has never really been proven. If you're talking about engineering samples, all oems receive those. You're likely identifying benefits of being a contract buyer rather than ones that are specific to Apple's contracts with intel.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank
I just wish the respective governments of these component/finished product companies split them up somehow so they aren't in conflict of interest. Making components for customers and then making finished goods that compete with their component customers is a VERY unethical business model.
Do you have any reference of how that steps on antitrust laws in any given country? You can spin this in any way you want depending on viewpoint, but I don't see how it's highly unethical. Those customers are aware that Samsung and LG make finished products, yet they buy from them. What country has laws saying a company can't compete with customers of its subsidiaries? I'm just skeptical here, as I can't think of a single good reference for that argument.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm
This has never really been proven. If you're talking about engineering samples, all oems receive those. You're likely identifying benefits of being a contract buyer rather than ones that are specific to Apple's contracts with intel.
Never proven? The first Intel Macs were part of that deal. Apple have been a lucrative customer for Intel and the Macbook Air was similarly so,
What is noticeable this time is that Intel Haswell is arriving elsewhere quicker than prior.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aBeliefSystem
Never proven? The first Intel Macs were part of that deal. Apple have been a lucrative customer for Intel and the Macbook Air was similarly so,
What is noticeable this time is that Intel Haswell is arriving elsewhere quicker than prior.
You're using rumors there. Intel has other lucrative customers. That is what I mentioned. All contract purchasers would enjoy some amount of early access to technology that comes with NDAs. As to when things show up, look at the past couple cycles. Others shipped Sandy and Ivy around the same time. That's the thing. If you have a purchasing contract to buy millions of cpus, it does come with some amount of preferential treatment whether you're Apple or HP. I thought you might use the case of thunderbolt where Apple offered the use of mini displayport. Sony worked on their own version of that too based on usb, but that obviously didn't go anywhere.
Seem far better to use ones personal memory than to rely on Wikipedia. Much of the stuff there on "Apple's transition to Intel processors" is waffle.
I'm forgetting which chips Apple got a 12 month 'window' on but they were the obvious choice for Intel to market their top end CPUs.
The massive failure of the Ultrabook marketing shows that.
Talking of Wikipedia, compared to what looks like a very infantile writing descent on technology stuff at Wikipedia , that 'transition' wiki is high grade waffle.
It is now increasingly common to find good Wikipedia articles almost vandalised into low grade childishness, backed up by very 3rd rate citations.
I do wondering if Wikipedia has had a sad decline, or whether it was always so bad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aBeliefSystem
Seem far better to use ones personal memory than to rely on Wikipedia. Much of the stuff there on "Apple's transition to Intel processors" is waffle.
I'm forgetting which chips Apple got a 12 month 'window' on but they were the obvious choice for Intel to market their top end CPUs.
The massive failure of the Ultrabook marketing shows that.
Talking of Wikipedia, compared to what looks like a very infantile writing descent on technology stuff at Wikipedia , that 'transition' wiki is high grade waffle.
It is now increasingly common to find good Wikipedia articles almost vandalised into low grade childishness, backed up by very 3rd rate citations.
I do wondering if Wikipedia has had a sad decline, or whether it was always so bad.
Wiki varies quite a bit. They're quite accurate if you'