Do they really believe that AAPL will only be a few dollars above where it is today in twelve months from now?
They should get some balls and make a real estimate.
These estimates are garbage. That price target is only $5 from today's price. The odds of it hitting $120 in the next 12 months is pretty much 100%. WTF do these guys get paid for?
Hey guys I got an even better target, $116! I'm so right about this one, it's gonna hit sometime in the next 2 years, plz pay me my $500,000 analyst salary now. Oh it hit 116 in 4 days? Ok Ok, $119!
Nice Info. AppleInsider is a nice site for technology news i like it.here is also about apple company that Apple Company Devices facing most dangerous malware in the history
apple is lucky to generate 500m revenue from iwatches, let alone 10b. the design of iwatches is very much generic, they are nothing like the iwatch concept design from some blogs.
I hope he's right, but these estimates (units and ASP) seem a bit optimistic to me, for a few reasons.
When the iPad launched, it could already do a number of pretty useful things quite well, and in some cases better than any other device: surfing the Internet, watching movies, ultra-portable computing, etc. and it was relatively easy for developers to modify their iOS apps to work well on the iPad. I haven't heard of a lot of useful things that the Apple Watch does well, just a few, and it's hard to imagine most existing iOS apps porting over to Apple Watch. The available watch apps will almost definitely increase with time, but it will probably be a slower ramp-up than it was for the iPad. It seems unlikely that the Apple Watch will be able to run hundreds of thousands of unique apps in the next few years, if ever.
So it seems like a lot of units (comparable to iPad's first year, according to the article) to sell at such a high ASP. There may be some "fashion" value to the watch, which is a hard thing to evaluate objectively at this point, but I don't imagine millions of people buying it primarily for its looks. Granted, I have trouble understanding people who go around in public with Bluetooth headsets attached to their heads, so there is a segment of what I presume to be the target demographic that I definitely can't second-guess.
But the market for the watch is different from that of the iPad in other general ways. I know a few very old people who use an iPad instead of a computer. I'm 99% sure none of them will want an Apple Watch. So there would need to be people who don't want an iPad but do want the watch, if we're going to see comparable numbers. The iPad is also great as a stand-alone product, but the watch needs to connect to an iPhone.
I also think the number of people willing to spend a lot for a thing made of gold that will be obsolete in a year (or less if a competitor releases something good, which I doubt) is relatively small. People who are into conspicuous consumption probably want to always have the latest device, so the gold watches will probably depreciate faster than the more utilitarian models.
I hope he's right, but these estimates (units and ASP) seem a bit optimistic to me, for a few reasons.
When the iPad launched, it could already do a number of pretty useful things quite well, and in some cases better than any other device: surfing the Internet, watching movies, ultra-portable computing, etc. and it was relatively easy for developers to modify their iOS apps to work well on the iPad. I haven't heard of a lot of useful things that the Apple Watch does well, just a few, and it's hard to imagine most existing iOS apps porting over to Apple Watch. The available watch apps will almost definitely increase with time, but it will probably be a slower ramp-up than it was for the iPad. It seems unlikely that the Apple Watch will be able to run hundreds of thousands of unique apps in the next few years, if ever.
So it seems like a lot of units (comparable to iPad's first year, according to the article) to sell at such a high ASP. There may be some "fashion" value to the watch, which is a hard thing to evaluate objectively at this point, but I don't imagine millions of people buying it primarily for its looks. Granted, I have trouble understanding people who go around in public with Bluetooth headsets attached to their heads, so there is a segment of what I presume to be the target demographic that I definitely can't second-guess.
But the market for the watch is different from that of the iPad in other general ways. I know a few very old people who use an iPad instead of a computer. I'm 99% sure none of them will want an Apple Watch. So there would need to be people who don't want an iPad but do want the watch, if we're going to see comparable numbers. The iPad is also great as a stand-alone product, but the watch needs to connect to an iPhone.
I also think the number of people willing to spend a lot for a thing made of gold that will be obsolete in a year (or less if a competitor releases something good, which I doubt) is relatively small. People who are into conspicuous consumption probably want to always have the latest device, so the gold watches will probably depreciate faster than the more utilitarian models.
Wait until Apple Pay is all over the place and suddenly, Because Apple Watch allows iPhone 5 and 5S to use Apple Pay, those phone owners will jump into it. Guess how many iPhone 5/5S owners out there?
This is a pretty timorous price target on the part of RBC, almost pointless. Apple could be trading over $120 by Thanksgiving if current performance is any indication.
Wait until Apple Pay is all over the place and suddenly, Because Apple Watch allows iPhone 5 and 5S to use Apple Pay, those phone owners will jump into it. Guess how many iPhone 5/5S owners out there?
I haven't heard of a lot of useful things that the Apple Watch does well, just a few, and it's hard to imagine most existing iOS apps porting over to Apple Watch.
This is a fair analysis. At this point, we don't *exactly* know what the Apple Watch will do or exactly what role it can play in people's lives. But...Apple has been pretty good about answering that in the past. I specifically remember seeing an ad for iPod, and thinking to myself "I have no need for that." I found a use, and have had a dozen of them.
Consumer expectations change over time when function becomes evident.
I haven't heard of a lot of useful things that the Apple Watch does well, just a few, and it's hard to imagine most existing iOS apps porting over to Apple Watch.
Well you mean the following are not useful: Apple Pay, seeing the time, maps heart rate, respond to messages, calls, stop watch and notifications. The whole point Apple made during the presentation was that most existing apps won't port There will be a whole new class of apps.
Well you mean the following are not useful: Apple Pay, seeing the time, maps heart rate, respond to messages, calls, stop watch and notifications. The whole point Apple made during the presentation was that most existing apps won't port There will be a whole new class of apps.
I found this article interesting and informative. I'm not a dev, so it is hard for me to follow some of the details:
Nah. I sold some but I still hold about 550 shares and $7k in options.
If we see any dip to $110-$112 area I'm going to buy another $18k of calls.
ok, so that was just you being a concern-troll when you were complaining about apple's management and vowing youd sell if it ever reached $110. got it.
I hope he's right, but these estimates (units and ASP) seem a bit optimistic to me, for a few reasons.
When the iPad launched, it could already do a number of pretty useful things quite well, and in some cases better than any other device: surfing the Internet, watching movies, ultra-portable computing, etc. and it was relatively easy for developers to modify their iOS apps to work well on the iPad. I haven't heard of a lot of useful things that the Apple Watch does well, just a few, and it's hard to imagine most existing iOS apps porting over to Apple Watch. The available watch apps will almost definitely increase with time, but it will probably be a slower ramp-up than it was for the iPad. It seems unlikely that the Apple Watch will be able to run hundreds of thousands of unique apps in the next few years, if ever.
So it seems like a lot of units (comparable to iPad's first year, according to the article) to sell at such a high ASP. There may be some "fashion" value to the watch, which is a hard thing to evaluate objectively at this point, but I don't imagine millions of people buying it primarily for its looks. Granted, I have trouble understanding people who go around in public with Bluetooth headsets attached to their heads, so there is a segment of what I presume to be the target demographic that I definitely can't second-guess.
But the market for the watch is different from that of the iPad in other general ways. I know a few very old people who use an iPad instead of a computer. I'm 99% sure none of them will want an Apple Watch. So there would need to be people who don't want an iPad but do want the watch, if we're going to see comparable numbers. The iPad is also great as a stand-alone product, but the watch needs to connect to an iPhone.
I also think the number of people willing to spend a lot for a thing made of gold that will be obsolete in a year (or less if a competitor releases something good, which I doubt) is relatively small. People who are into conspicuous consumption probably want to always have the latest device, so the gold watches will probably depreciate faster than the more utilitarian models.
Wait until Apple Pay is all over the place and suddenly, Because Apple Watch allows iPhone 5 and 5S to use Apple Pay, those phone owners will jump into it. Guess how many iPhone 5/5S owners out there?
I don't think many iPhone 5/5s users will buy the Apple Watch because of Apple Pay; it’s too niche.
British usage treats companies as plurals. Apple design, Foxconn assemble.
The entity "Benjamin Frost" appears to be genuinely British when you see details like this that fit the pattern. Spelling, too. Of course, careful editing could be going on.
Comments
These estimates seem like baloney.
Do they really believe that AAPL will only be a few dollars above where it is today in twelve months from now?
They should get some balls and make a real estimate.
These estimates seem like baloney.
Do they really believe that AAPL will only be a few dollars above where it is today in twelve months from now?
They should get some balls and make a real estimate.
These estimates are garbage. That price target is only $5 from today's price. The odds of it hitting $120 in the next 12 months is pretty much 100%. WTF do these guys get paid for?
Hey guys I got an even better target, $116! I'm so right about this one, it's gonna hit sometime in the next 2 years, plz pay me my $500,000 analyst salary now. Oh it hit 116 in 4 days? Ok Ok, $119!
Read More
http://whatsnewsology.com/2014/11/apple-company-devices-facing-most-dangerous-malware-in-the-history/
I bet you that Apple sell fewer than 10 million in the first year.
If Apple don't declare any numbers, we can presume that my prediction is correct.
What about a bet that Apple will sell 10mil - 20mil in the first year? My number will be north of 10 mil.
Hey i forgot the /s after the chamfered edge crack ...
When the iPad launched, it could already do a number of pretty useful things quite well, and in some cases better than any other device: surfing the Internet, watching movies, ultra-portable computing, etc. and it was relatively easy for developers to modify their iOS apps to work well on the iPad. I haven't heard of a lot of useful things that the Apple Watch does well, just a few, and it's hard to imagine most existing iOS apps porting over to Apple Watch. The available watch apps will almost definitely increase with time, but it will probably be a slower ramp-up than it was for the iPad. It seems unlikely that the Apple Watch will be able to run hundreds of thousands of unique apps in the next few years, if ever.
So it seems like a lot of units (comparable to iPad's first year, according to the article) to sell at such a high ASP. There may be some "fashion" value to the watch, which is a hard thing to evaluate objectively at this point, but I don't imagine millions of people buying it primarily for its looks. Granted, I have trouble understanding people who go around in public with Bluetooth headsets attached to their heads, so there is a segment of what I presume to be the target demographic that I definitely can't second-guess.
But the market for the watch is different from that of the iPad in other general ways. I know a few very old people who use an iPad instead of a computer. I'm 99% sure none of them will want an Apple Watch. So there would need to be people who don't want an iPad but do want the watch, if we're going to see comparable numbers. The iPad is also great as a stand-alone product, but the watch needs to connect to an iPhone.
I also think the number of people willing to spend a lot for a thing made of gold that will be obsolete in a year (or less if a competitor releases something good, which I doubt) is relatively small. People who are into conspicuous consumption probably want to always have the latest device, so the gold watches will probably depreciate faster than the more utilitarian models.
I hope he's right, but these estimates (units and ASP) seem a bit optimistic to me, for a few reasons.
When the iPad launched, it could already do a number of pretty useful things quite well, and in some cases better than any other device: surfing the Internet, watching movies, ultra-portable computing, etc. and it was relatively easy for developers to modify their iOS apps to work well on the iPad. I haven't heard of a lot of useful things that the Apple Watch does well, just a few, and it's hard to imagine most existing iOS apps porting over to Apple Watch. The available watch apps will almost definitely increase with time, but it will probably be a slower ramp-up than it was for the iPad. It seems unlikely that the Apple Watch will be able to run hundreds of thousands of unique apps in the next few years, if ever.
So it seems like a lot of units (comparable to iPad's first year, according to the article) to sell at such a high ASP. There may be some "fashion" value to the watch, which is a hard thing to evaluate objectively at this point, but I don't imagine millions of people buying it primarily for its looks. Granted, I have trouble understanding people who go around in public with Bluetooth headsets attached to their heads, so there is a segment of what I presume to be the target demographic that I definitely can't second-guess.
But the market for the watch is different from that of the iPad in other general ways. I know a few very old people who use an iPad instead of a computer. I'm 99% sure none of them will want an Apple Watch. So there would need to be people who don't want an iPad but do want the watch, if we're going to see comparable numbers. The iPad is also great as a stand-alone product, but the watch needs to connect to an iPhone.
I also think the number of people willing to spend a lot for a thing made of gold that will be obsolete in a year (or less if a competitor releases something good, which I doubt) is relatively small. People who are into conspicuous consumption probably want to always have the latest device, so the gold watches will probably depreciate faster than the more utilitarian models.
Wait until Apple Pay is all over the place and suddenly, Because Apple Watch allows iPhone 5 and 5S to use Apple Pay, those phone owners will jump into it. Guess how many iPhone 5/5S owners out there?
Yup. A lot.
I haven't heard of a lot of useful things that the Apple Watch does well, just a few, and it's hard to imagine most existing iOS apps porting over to Apple Watch.
This is a fair analysis. At this point, we don't *exactly* know what the Apple Watch will do or exactly what role it can play in people's lives. But...Apple has been pretty good about answering that in the past. I specifically remember seeing an ad for iPod, and thinking to myself "I have no need for that." I found a use, and have had a dozen of them.
Consumer expectations change over time when function becomes evident.
I bet you that Apple sell fewer than 10 million in the first year.
If Apple don't declare any numbers, we can presume that my prediction is correct.
Is the bad grammer deliberate?
I haven't heard of a lot of useful things that the Apple Watch does well, just a few, and it's hard to imagine most existing iOS apps porting over to Apple Watch.
Well you mean the following are not useful: Apple Pay, seeing the time, maps heart rate, respond to messages, calls, stop watch and notifications. The whole point Apple made during the presentation was that most existing apps won't port There will be a whole new class of apps.
Well you mean the following are not useful: Apple Pay, seeing the time, maps heart rate, respond to messages, calls, stop watch and notifications. The whole point Apple made during the presentation was that most existing apps won't port There will be a whole new class of apps.
I found this article interesting and informative. I'm not a dev, so it is hard for me to follow some of the details:
http://david-smith.org/blog/2014/11/06/expectations-for-watchkit/
ok, so that was just you being a concern-troll when you were complaining about apple's management and vowing youd sell if it ever reached $110. got it.
I bet you that Apple sell fewer than 10 million in the first year.
If Apple don't declare any numbers, we can presume that my prediction is correct.
What about a bet that Apple will sell 10mil - 20mil in the first year? My number will be north of 10 mil.
I’ll take that bet.
10 million to 15 million would be ok, a bit disappointing. 15 million to 20 million would be successful. North of 20 million would be a triumph.
I hope he's right, but these estimates (units and ASP) seem a bit optimistic to me, for a few reasons.
When the iPad launched, it could already do a number of pretty useful things quite well, and in some cases better than any other device: surfing the Internet, watching movies, ultra-portable computing, etc. and it was relatively easy for developers to modify their iOS apps to work well on the iPad. I haven't heard of a lot of useful things that the Apple Watch does well, just a few, and it's hard to imagine most existing iOS apps porting over to Apple Watch. The available watch apps will almost definitely increase with time, but it will probably be a slower ramp-up than it was for the iPad. It seems unlikely that the Apple Watch will be able to run hundreds of thousands of unique apps in the next few years, if ever.
So it seems like a lot of units (comparable to iPad's first year, according to the article) to sell at such a high ASP. There may be some "fashion" value to the watch, which is a hard thing to evaluate objectively at this point, but I don't imagine millions of people buying it primarily for its looks. Granted, I have trouble understanding people who go around in public with Bluetooth headsets attached to their heads, so there is a segment of what I presume to be the target demographic that I definitely can't second-guess.
But the market for the watch is different from that of the iPad in other general ways. I know a few very old people who use an iPad instead of a computer. I'm 99% sure none of them will want an Apple Watch. So there would need to be people who don't want an iPad but do want the watch, if we're going to see comparable numbers. The iPad is also great as a stand-alone product, but the watch needs to connect to an iPhone.
I also think the number of people willing to spend a lot for a thing made of gold that will be obsolete in a year (or less if a competitor releases something good, which I doubt) is relatively small. People who are into conspicuous consumption probably want to always have the latest device, so the gold watches will probably depreciate faster than the more utilitarian models.
Wait until Apple Pay is all over the place and suddenly, Because Apple Watch allows iPhone 5 and 5S to use Apple Pay, those phone owners will jump into it. Guess how many iPhone 5/5S owners out there?
I don't think many iPhone 5/5s users will buy the Apple Watch because of Apple Pay; it’s too niche.
British usage treats companies as plurals. Apple design, Foxconn assemble.
The entity "Benjamin Frost" appears to be genuinely British when you see details like this that fit the pattern. Spelling, too. Of course, careful editing could be going on.
And then when I am listening to music with my BT headphones, I am sad cause I don't have my %uF8FFWatch with my iTunes.
That's about all for me. And I have been wanting this for THE LAST 5 YEARS!!!
It's going to sell. I think so...