With most major companies already using iOS, Piper Jaffray doesn't see IBM deal surging Apple sales



  • Reply 41 of 97

    Originally Posted by Eideard View Post

    Way too conservative, Gino. Think IBM's doings only approach the Fortune 500?




    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post


    Get this clown out of here.


    Just because 90% of Fortune500 companies use iOS products does not mean its an intergal part of their information system.  I bet half of those companies are just company iPhones.


    Muenster just has to STFU already.




    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post


    Muenster is wrong on two accounts


    #1 - A Fortune 500 company would purchase WAY MORE than 3,000 iOS devices in a full roll out (number he used)


    #2 - There are way more business than just the Fortune 500


    This Muenster clown is a Bear in Bull clothing.  The guy is always around to rain on Apple's parade during good news yet he still has a buy rating on the stock.  This guy has been saying Apple would bring out the iTV since 2011.  This is the same clown who said the 9 million iPhones sold in the first week end last year was no big deal since 4 million was to stuff the channel.  Thus his prediction of 5 Million was correct.  FUK this guy. 


    Its so obvious that Jaffray has shorted this stock and is trying to keep the stock from going up.  They use an anaylsis like Muenster to scare Bulls. 

    #1, they probably already have purchased (or their employees have) a majority of their devices.   This isn't changing the demand curve other then reducing the cost of supporting the iDevices expected to be purchased.


    #2, and IBM isn't cost effective as a consulting/SW solution outside of the F500.   I agree... the impact of this deal doesn't affect sales so much as it impacts loss of sales of other products  I won't have to have a corporate Blackberry or WinPhone and a personal iPhone... the first two just went 'poof'.


    In addition, the long term impact is immeasureable now.  iBeacon Technology in F500 companies, especially retail, was going to happen.  But with IBM now at the spear, and having it tied into their analytics, a company can push out iBeacon technology and monitor/steer clients in sales situations ("Hey, This is your Home Depot shopping assistant.  I see by the project you've been working on, you're looking for spackle.  For the boards you bought yesterday, and the paint you bought today, I recommend the DAP 8in1 Goop, 10 feet over and on the 3 shelf... I'll even give you a 2 for 1 discount on that product [silently: because we're discontinuing it next week]")


    This 'stickiness' may drive sales, but that analysis is soft and likely already built into soft projections.


    bottom line: 


    Muenster is a counter.   He count's what he sees.  His claim to fame was that he could go to the Mall of  America, WoodField Mall, and a couple others one plane flight from Minneapolis, and pretty much gauge the sales 'pressure' of Apple products to consumers at Apple Stores, Best Buy, and Target (both Mpls/Stp based retailers, where he's based), he had some gravitas to investors, as he saw the popularity of the iPhone before Wall Street did)  Now that Apple is international in sales, has sales channels developed into corporate and educational channels, he's consistently underreporting, and not seeing Apple as a company that couldn't give a sh*t about 10Q results, but looks over that magical 18month horizon (almost every public company I know sees 15 months as it's event horizon. They may be spending for the long term, but beyond 15 months is science fiction for them, as they are managing today's numbers, this years numbers, and planning next years numbers only in the 4th quarter.  Apple appears to me planning 24 months ahead, thus releasing a revenue product is less about 'hitting numbers,' and more about 'getting it right')

  • Reply 42 of 97
    jay-tjay-t Posts: 39member

    You see, Munster's analysis is based on believe! :rolleyes:


    "We do not expect the IBM partnership to have a meaningful impact on Apple's financials overall primarily based on our belief that large corporations are already utilizing iPhones"


    "We believe that IBM will add incremental functionality for corporate customers, but is unlikely to be the make or break factor for a large corporation in utilizing iOS."

  • Reply 43 of 97
    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post



    Fine lets go 5 year performance.


    Apple is up 357%. 

    Google is up 176%


    Now STFU. 


    Show me a swing in GOOG that equaled the swing in AAPL in the last 5 and I will.


    AAPL has been a lot more volatile over the years. It makes people antsy.


    $200 back down to $80 [on edit: "although this was a time when most stocks took a large hit")... $700 back down to $360.


    AAPL is still a stock that makes people hold their breath when they buy it.

  • Reply 44 of 97
    I work for one of the Fortune 500 companies and the iOS deployment at my company was only for company phones. I am sure this is the case at most of the other Fortune 500 companies. We are not currently integrating the iOS devices into our workflow. Fact is we are still using IBM software on Windows machines and currently that is not even an option on iOS devices. When these new applications are available, it will improve our productivity 100 folds because of the usability that the iPhone and iPad brings to the table. This deal means billions upon billions of dollars and the analysts cannot see it. Working in the enterprise is my reality and seriously Windows devices are POS. Fact is the HP workstation I work on cause me more frustrations than it's worth. If Apple can bring the same ease of use to the enterprise market, it will be a game changer.

    These analysts have no vision. Who cares if the stock doesn't move up now. When the new income starts flowing in, it will be reflected in the stock price.
  • Reply 45 of 97

    Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post



    No, it really wouldn't. Mobile payments is a feature, not a product. 


    The needle moves on the stock price when more iPhones, iPads, Macs, or some new product (iWatch maybe) are sold. This IBM deal makes those products more appealing to business users, but many of those business users were going to buy Apple products anyway. 


    Say adding these new features increases iPhone sales by 1 million a year --- that's less than a 1% increase. Nice to have, but the stock isn't going up more than 1% as a result. 



    I think the IBM announcement is 2nd derivative.... 0 derivative is the product, 1st derivative is the channel/country, 2nd derivative is integration into the lives of the users... e.g. how dependent on my iDevice  will the personal, cultural, economic, business parts of me become.  


    The IBM announcement is all about making it easier for corporations to 'give up' their need for BlackBerries (IT needed a tool that manages iPhones as easy as BES, or Tivoli), and easier to integrate SW into these devices to stop shipping laptops to salesmen/execs who need to real-time access to inventory/financials...


    ....and easier for large retails/customer facing organizations to use IDevices to improve cost of doing business (if it I can shift one person off the cash registers or the the aisle per shift by using ipayments/iBeacon technology, that saves my organization $60-90,000 per location, and I got 4000 locations, and IBM can absorb the risk of implementation and testing... I'll spend the 3Million to roll it out [and for the customer, 'hey If I own an iPhone with TouchID, I can get served faster at McBurgerFilet... I'm gonna buy one, because nothing stands between me and my athleroschlerosis)


    I see this is more like someone figuring out a way to make a better phone switch for a company... Ma Bell doesn't sell more phones directly, but it makes more money on long distance because the business has integrated telephony into its business DNA, competitors buy phones to keep up, and individuals buy phones to talk to their suppliers, and spouses at the company.

  • Reply 46 of 97
    chadbagchadbag Posts: 1,993member

    While a huge percentage of F500 already uses iOS in some capacity, including custom app development (which is a lot more than most people probably assume they are being used for), this will open up a ton of new uses for iOS devices in enterprise since a lot of current systems they are using will be able to be upgraded or replaced which will greatly expand the use in Enterprise.   Instead of only for a couple custom apps, and big-wig email and stuff, they will have core business process systems running on iOS and IBM big iron on the back end.   Stuff that they don't have to custom develop, but maybe pay IBM to customize and fine tune for them.  Etc etc etc.


    These analysts are pretty dumb most of the time.  They don't see the forest for the trees.

  • Reply 47 of 97
    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post



    Not REAL INVESTORS.  If you are buying stock and planning to sell in less than a year then you are not an investor.  You are a speculator.  Any stock can be manipulated up or down in the short term.  Most REAL INVESTORS knew that when Apple was $385-$400 it was the buy of the century. 


    Google was $310 in Dec 2009. 

    Google was $298 in July 2012.

    Over 2.5 years the stock did absolutely NOTHING. 


    Learn to INVEST.

    Stop being influenced by short term moves.

    Make money.


    View fluctiations as buying opportunities. 




    You were the one giving us YTD and 12 month performance. Not me.


    You should take some of your own advice.


    BTW - $700 for AAPL was also an anomaly. Shouldn't have gone much beyond $560.

  • Reply 48 of 97
    yojimbo007yojimbo007 Posts: 1,165member
    He is clueless... This will be huge!
    Did he even bother to listen to the whole interview?
    Tim answered what he is addressing in this article!
  • Reply 49 of 97
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member

    I really don't understand what is the big deal with iPads in corporate environments. iPhones sure, they are the best phone hands down and everyone needs a good phone, however, you can't really do much work on a phone, but what do corporate employees do with an iPad?


    People always bring their iPad to meetings, but in the meetings I attend we sometimes use an iPad for FaceTime with a manager from a different office, but that is about it. Usually someone has a Windows laptop with a PowerPoint presentation, and printouts of the slides. Even though people have their iPad, they tend to make notes on the slide printouts. In larger global meetings we have a projector and an AV guy to hook up the presenters laptops, some Macs but mostly Windows.


    I know traveling sales people can use an iPad for presentations, doctors making rounds and executives use them in the airport, but to be secure you would need to be on cellular and that isn't always very fast, plus it is not the best ergonomic setting to do intensive work. Why would someone with a nice desktop and a comfortable ergonomic workstation want to trade that for a tiny iPad that has to be held or propped up using awkward touch input? It is a mystery to me.


    I have two iPads which are seldom used except for reading iBooks. I use the iPad when I travel just to browse the web at a cafe, mostly just the news. If I have to do actual work I always prefer a desktop or at least a MBP with a mouse.

  • Reply 50 of 97
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

    But go ahead and be myopic and think the entire world is based on your personal use of the ipad.

    Quit being a jerk. You obviously don't have the answer to my question.

  • Reply 51 of 97
    Munster is wrong, like always. How he keeps a straight face and keeps on churning out poorly conceived predictions is beyond me.
  • Reply 52 of 97
    pdq2pdq2 Posts: 270member

    Originally Posted by island hermit View Post


    If anything, it might help legitimize Apple in the enterprise world.


    Bingo. Totally agree.


    There are still waaay too many flunkies in IT that can't get over Microsoft and think that anything that Apple makes is a "toy". They're unlikely to change their minds, but CEOs might see Apple as a hot new (and now validated) enterprise possibility. At the least, it gives these CEOs free license to jump into iPad- and iPhone-delivered business solutions which they will see as cutting-edge (and top-drawer) moves in the board room. And the CEOs make the ultimate IT decisions, so those MS dead-enders can finally go pound sand.


    I think that Munster is being a little too contrarian here.

  • Reply 53 of 97
    mcdavemcdave Posts: 1,927member
    IOS sales to enterprise has been largely driven by curiosity. Now bulk sales can be driven by credibility.

  • Reply 54 of 97
    blastdoorblastdoor Posts: 3,209member

    Originally Posted by TheOtherGeoff View Post




    I think the IBM announcement is 2nd derivative.... 0 derivative is the product, 1st derivative is the channel/country, 2nd derivative is integration into the lives of the users... e.g. how dependent on my iDevice  will the personal, cultural, economic, business parts of me become.  


    Good way to express it. 

  • Reply 55 of 97
    blastdoorblastdoor Posts: 3,209member

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post



    And that's why they fail (analysis)


    If you think Apple is only about physical products you truly are lost.


    These are the same analysis that had a price target of $520 last year. 

    12 months later and we will see $700 soon.  The reason?  They lack VISION.  They seriously though Samsung was going to dethrown Apple last year.  They have no concept of the importance of ecosystem, software, and integration.  The only time they 'see' is when the actual earnings reports come out.  By then its too late and much of the money has already been made in the stock.


    So what will you be?  Will you wait till the analysis finally realize this is a big deal?  Or will you buy the stock BEFORE and use VISION?


    If you think that the vast majority of Apple's profits come from something other than the sale of physical products, you truly cannot read a 10-K. 

  • Reply 56 of 97

    Originally Posted by HAMETA View Post

    Calm Down, FOLKS !


    ROFL, hameta.


    I love it when people shout things like "be quiet!"  ;)

  • Reply 57 of 97
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

    Originally Posted by mstone View Post


    Quit being a jerk. You obviously don't have the answer to my question.


    I obviously do.


    IBM/Apple are writing 100 apps.


    I mean seriously.  Just read the articles.

    Clearly you don't understand the question. Here's my point with a simplified example so perhaps you can comprehend it. Why would someone rather work on a Numbers spreadsheet with an iPad when a perfectly good desktop machine was available? 


    The other question is:


    What are some typical corporate uses for an iPad that are not mobile related?  And part two: What percent of corporate users are primarily mobile?

  • Reply 58 of 97
    blastdoorblastdoor Posts: 3,209member

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post



    And that's why you lack VISION.


    If Apple only made great physical products they would not be worth close to $600B

    So... do you think that using all caps on the word vision constitutes an argument? 

  • Reply 59 of 97
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

    It would use a docking station with a keyboard.


    This is done at a million places with laptops right now.

    Ok then an iPad is a better desktop than a real desktop because a tiny smudged up screen is better than a 17" monitor and a mouse with real desktop class applications. And try to find a corporate printer that is compatible with Airprint or log on to the network or share files with Windows users. Face it, this is nothing but a Trojan Horse by IBM to get people onto their cloud service which ultimately will work much better from a conventional desktop computer. Apple is just going along for the ride.

  • Reply 60 of 97
    jameskatt2jameskatt2 Posts: 720member
    iOS may be in 98 percent of enterprise companies but it is only a small percentage of the actual number of office computing devices use.

    Suppose this deal brings Apple up to 50% of enterprise computing devices used (including PCs). That would be a big-time move. This would mean Apple gets $8 BILLION IN PROFIT a year - since that is part of Microsoft's profit from big business. This means an extra $16 BILLION a year in revenue.

    Then once iOS is entrenched as the weapon of choice for the corporate world, Mac OS X is not far behind. Macs can then surge in use in all corporations. This would bring Apple even more income.

    IBM stands to profit by having more service contracts and software sales.
Sign In or Register to comment.