applesincider wrote: »
This is not journalism; this is tabloid trash.
This sort of article, whose sole purpose seems to be character assassination, reveals gossipy, agenda-driven, pro-company propagandists, and separates the author(s) from blogs of real journalistic integrity.
Can pure editorials please be better labeled and separated from news articles? I quite honestly must be missing something.
joelchu wrote: »
If anyone care, I wrote right here in this forum a few months ago about 3 things (all prove to be correct)
1. iPhone 5c won't be cheap (or cheap as in Apple standard)
2. China don't want cheap iPhone.
3. iPhone 4 is the answer to cheap iPhone in China.
Shame the rest of the world gone insane. Drove the stock down, but mind you I never think the $700+ price was justify that time anyway. It was just another Wall Street trick to get bunch of suckers in the game ...
digitalclips wrote: »
I was wondering and I am sure experts here will enlighten me.
How far can manipulators like this directly benefit from that manipulation and stay legal? Also what are the a gray areas that can be used by the Musters and Cramers of this world to so benefit from stock manipulation using their powerful soap boxes and what clear is a line they cannot cross?
Lastly, is there any legislation afoot to curb this or is it just the modern day snake oil salesman and 'let the buyer beware' rule applies?
I would have thought at the very least every article they print should carry a list of disclaimers! Just listen to the last 15 seconds of every pharmaceutical ad on television! Your testicles dropping of and going blind might be worse than losing your shirt but not by far for some.
While there ARE most likely orchestrated schemes to defame good companies such as Apple, there most likely AREN'T any such SCHEMES to make so many people buy Apple products and to flood its retail stores on a daily basis (my Apple store is ALWAYS busy!). Samsung wonders how Apple does it. But it's obvious to most Apple customers: Apple simply makes good products which factually do make its customers' lives better. So they're worth it and are naturally in demand.
It's NOT a matter of Apple's "greed." Its profits are simply a SIDE EFFECT of its very effective strategy of putting its products and its customers first and delivering in volume what they need and want.
Why bother consulting analysts' opinions? Observe and decide for yourselves.
patrickwalker wrote: »
I agree that saying the 5C is less profitable than the 5S may not be true as the 5C is a much improved iPhone5 but then again, this assumes that input costs remain low and given how JPM and Goldman Sachs have been overtly manipulating commodity markets of late... and given that one of the commodities in question was being manipulated by driving the material from one part of Detroit to another over and over would change the costs of one of the iPhone models. .
patrickwalker wrote: »
The 5S, to me, is more iPhone 6 given the CPU alone. To me, the problem with Apple is what are they going to add to the iPhone 6 next year now that iOS7 has been revamped and these new features added?
Only thing I can think of is wireless charging.
terps530 wrote: »
I'm surprised you didn't also mention his mega blunder after the recent iphone 5C/5S keynote, where he said on national TV that the China Mobile deal 99% was happening the next day in China. A lot of people listened and bought on those comments, and they were dead wrong as usual per the Munster standard.
It's about time someone called these buffoons out on their ridiculously misinformed predictions and commentary. Anyone who's followed Apple through the years knows Joe Wilcox will bend his thought-pretzels into any shape needed to spell 'Apple sucks'. On the surface, Munster appears to be somewhat better, but he's not. His commentary and predictions often lead to the same results the Joe Wilcoxes of the world by making goofy, incorrect predictions and such, which when they don't come to pass, make Apple look bad.
Whoever it was earlier in the thread who coined the term 'Market Trolls', nailed it. So, Market Trolls they are!
Screen size alone will be an "innovation" that will get people talking! " src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
Honestly I think the next wave of big innovations for Apple will be software. I think the big feature of iOS 8 will be an all new PassBook that doubles as a wallet (the often rumored iWallet that Apple already has a dozen patents for). APIs for iBeacons will be center stage along with retail partnerships already in place.
The only phones that will be able to take advantage of this will be 4S and up, but the 5S and 6 will have faster transaction speeds because of the fingerprint sensor verification. Older phones will rely on a PIN or signature for purchases with the new iBeacon system.
But that said for hardware the 6 will at least be on par with the upgrade Apple gave us with the 4S>>>5.
I said it before the analysis are wrong on purpose. The Wall Street type can not wait to make money so they force the market to do thing that does not make sense. When Apple was rapidly growing they made money, but when it began to slow they still want to make money. How, by short it and driving the stock down. Stock prices usually fall far faster than they ever raise. If you need to make money fast short a stock and tell a bad gloom and doom story about the company and watch what happens.
back in the 90's I love apple stock it was buy of fact since the market usually drove it value down when the fact were out and then sell on rumor since the market drove the stock up on the great rumors. Today you have the opposite, sell on rumors since they are all bad gloom and doom and then buy on the facts since the stock will then go up.
These analysis need to drive the stock up and down otherwise they can not make money for their company. It does not matter if they understand what apple is doing, actually is better they do no know since you can not fact check them and they can get the markets to react.
Not for Apple.
Huh?!? We got exactly what leaked at the event... WTF are those jaw-dropping surprises?
That's a really good point and he should be called out on it. If all these analysts talk up "shipment" numbers for every other company why wouldn't his 5-6 million figure count shipments and not just sales? Sounds like a double standard - Apple is only allowed to count actually sales, while every other OEM can count shipments.
Not sure how you keep your job after failures like these. Don't comment on what you don't know.
These analysts are doing what they always do: making educated guesses. Anyone who treats their advice as fact should not be allowed to make their own investment decisions.
I would really like to know who is issuing better or more accurate information? No one? Anyone? Bueller?
Can DED do better?
The point is that this is not about anyone's ability to accurately predict future sales. It is about their behavior once the numbers come in and show how wrong they were. The proper response by Munster and others who saw Apple's actual sales blow away expectations is to praise Apple and discuss the factors that contributed to such a huge launch, such as having two "new" models available (the 5C is "newish" with the colored plastic backs and some minor upgrades over the 5) rather than one and the impact of China and Japan's largest carriers coming on board. Instead what these idiots did is try to minimize the huge gains by saying Apple is fudging the numbers and that most of the increase is "channel sell-in" rather than actual sales. They are insinuating that Apple changed the way they measure sales from how they've done in the past. In other words, "I wasn't wrong, Apple just manipulated the numbers."
It's bullshit and they deserve to be called on it. And you need to quit acting like you don't get that.
I take your point. But I have to disagree.