I wonder what will happen to the stock when ?Watch is announced. Gruber is doubling down on his pricing estimates saying he's hearing $10K+ for the Edition and $1000+ for the stainless steel with metal band. I'm still trying to picture in my mind how Phil Schiller gets up on stage and announces a $10K watch. Unless there's another piece of the puzzle, another shoe to drop around upgradeability/financing/trade-in/something. But now I'm more convinced than ever Apple will hold another keynote. No way can they drop a $10K watch in a press release.
I wonder what will happen to the stock when ?Watch is announced. ... Unless there's another piece of the puzzle, another shoe to drop around upgradeability/financing/trade-in/something. ...
I'd be extremely surprised if there wasn't an upgrade plan. I'm hoping you will be able to bring your 2-year-old ?Watch to an Apple Store so they can replace the old worn-out battery and outdated S1 electronics. $199 for the base Sport model, $249 for the steel model (because they'll polish the case) and $299 for the Edition (because polishing gold requires more time and because you're rich.)
You'd keep the same old band and enclosure, including the screen.
I read an article to day by some asshole at Business Insider who pointed out that, adjusted for inflation, the Dutch East India Company was worth over $7 Trillion at its peak around the year 1679. Yes, they will stoop that low to denigrate Apple. They simply WILL NOT accept that Apple is a successful company.
Personally I see this as a good thing. If people think a trillion-dollar valuation is insane, it will be that much harder for Apple to reach it, or sustain it when they do.
But if historically speaking that valuation is not extreme (when adjusted for inflation), then hey, plenty of room left to grow, right?
I wonder what will happen to the stock when ?Watch is announced. Gruber is doubling down on his pricing estimates saying he's hearing $10K+ for the Edition and $1000+ for the stainless steel with metal band.
I can understand a stratospheric price for the top model due simply to the cost of gold, but should the stainless steel model really sell for 3x the price of the aluminum one? No way.
I am trying to wrap my head about adjusting for inflation when talking about these market caps. It doesn't make any sense to me when referring to a market cap.
The value of money is not constant. As such, anything you measure with money should, to be fair, adjusted for inflation. I have no dog in this fight; I don't care if Apple becomes the biggest company ever or not. If they do, good on them, if they don't, I'll continue being an Apple professional. But I don't see a strong argument against adjusting for inflation if the metric you are using is affected by inflation.
The value of money is not constant. As such, anything you measure with money should, to be fair, adjusted for inflation. I have no dog in this fight; I don't care if Apple becomes the biggest company ever or not. If they do, good on them, if they don't, I'll continue being an Apple professional. But I don't see a strong argument against adjusting for inflation if the metric you are using is affected by inflation.
And I'd agree if everything else was equal, but that's far from the case which makes looking at market caps across decades, whether adjusted for inflation or not, as pointless as March 14th, 2015 at 9h:26m:53s.
I can understand a stratospheric price for the top model due simply to the cost of gold, but should the stainless steel model really sell for 3x the price of the aluminum one? No way.
At the event last year a watch blogger was really praising the bands, especially the link bracelet and milanese loop saying they were as nice as higher end Swiss watches. I'm sure those bands are driving up the price. Considering how much effort Apple put into these bands I struggle to see how they could design ?Watch to be obsolete in a year or two. There has to be some sort of upgrade path or trade in ability. If not, if Apple is expecting people to fork over another grand in 2 years then I think someone at Apple has jumped the shark and I worry about the success of the product.
LOL at all the bearish "analysts" who were trying to keep AAPL down for the shorters.
They all ran off and hid after the surprise 7-for-1 stock split.
Because of the psychology (read: greed and fear) inherent to the reasons people ultimately choose to buy and sell stocks, I wonder if a share would be at $931 today hadn't down the split.
I can understand a stratospheric price for the top model due simply to the cost of gold, but should the stainless steel model really sell for 3x the price of the aluminum one? No way.
Why not? If we dissolve all variance in profit margins or economies of scale for the 3 main categories of ?Watch, I can see how ?Watch could be 3x more than ?Watch Sport.
Here are the differences in ?Watch v ?Watch Sport:
Casing: Stainless Steal v Aluminium
Display: Sapphire v Gorilla Glass
Bands: Various Stainless Steal and Leather v Plastic
Note that even the leather bands in ?Watch still appear to have stainless steal elements in the locking mechanism at the casing end and in the clasps. The plastic bands likely have some metal in them for the locking into place in the casing, but obviously very minimal compared to the other bands.
Here is a 38mm ?Watch Sport compared to a 42mm ?Watch with the link band, which I assume is the most expensive band. I can see that being over $1,047.
That did make me wonder about the ?Watch Sport band being used on ?Watch. Would they match it by makes the metal on the clasp stainless steal. Based on the images Apple provides it looks like it's aluminium on both types. If one went that route, I wouldn't expect it be anywhere near $1000. In fact, I'd price it under $500.
I'd be extremely surprised if there wasn't an upgrade plan. I'm hoping you will be able to bring your 2-year-old ?Watch to an Apple Store so they can replace the old worn-out battery and outdated S1 electronics. $199 for the base Sport model, $249 for the steel model (because they'll polish the case) and $299 for the Edition (because polishing gold requires more time and because you're rich.)
You'd keep the same old band and enclosure, including the screen.
Just the battery and Sx chip would be replaced.
And the case polished, of course.
No, Microsoft still holds the inflation adjusted record for now, but Apple is getting close.
Only $100 billion more to go to reach Microsoft's inflation adjusted record. It's pretty unfair considering how low Apple's P/E is. Apple is making more money than Microsoft ever did and I'll bet Apple holds it's record high longer than a week or two. Microsoft caught the perfect market bubble and at the time everyone had dreams of tech companies in their eyes up until the bubble burst. Apple doesn't have the tech company market momentum Microsoft had back in 1999. Apple is pulling it off all by itself. If AppleWatch is a hit, Apple will most certainly break Microsoft's adjusted record and continue climbing. $1T is still a dream figure for me. That's a huge number I don't take lightly. I don't know if Apple will reach it, but that changes nothing for me and I'll still be holding fast onto Apple shares. A great company is still a great company whether Wall Street acknowledges it or not.
And when Apple passes that mark you and your ilk will come up with another reason that Apple just doesn’t measure up. Of that I’m absolutely certain.
You're probably right, but they're going to have to come up with some pretty strong arguments which aren't going to hold any sort of conviction. As time passes, Apple keeps disproving those reasons, so it's going to have to come down to a matter of investor confidence. If investors can believe Amazon will eventually be profitable that's all they have to go on. With Apple it will have to be the same thing unless Apple can keep adding revenue. If Apple could just come out with its own search engine, I think Google investors would head for Apple and it would suck just about everything out of Android. There are some interesting times ahead, for sure.
I wonder what will happen to the stock when ?Watch is announced. Gruber is doubling down on his pricing estimates saying he's hearing $10K+ for the Edition and $1000+ for the stainless steel with metal band.
I can understand a stratospheric price for the top model due simply to the cost of gold, but should the stainless steel model really sell for 3x the price of the aluminum one? No way.
The Stainless Steel model may be done in Liquid Metal. You drop it in the bathrooms and the whole family tries to catch it as it bounces around the house non-stop.
And when Apple passes that mark you and your ilk will come up with another reason that Apple just doesn’t measure up. Of that I’m absolutely certain.
You're probably right, but they're going to have to come up with some pretty strong arguments which aren't going to hold any sort of conviction. As time passes, Apple keeps disproving those reasons, so it's going to have to come down to a matter of investor confidence. If investors can believe Amazon will eventually be profitable that's all they have to go on. With Apple it will have to be the same thing unless Apple can keep adding revenue. If Apple could just come out with its own search engine, I think Google investors would head for Apple and it would suck just about everything out of Android. There are some interesting times ahead, for sure.
The current Mac OS, using Spotlight devalues the use of a search site... That alone could cook Google's goose through and through.
And when Apple passes that mark you and your ilk will come up with another reason that Apple just doesn’t measure up. Of that I’m absolutely certain.
I think you misunderstand @TheWhiteFalcon. He was just answering someone's query. His posts, as far as I can recall, are pretty good and he is an Apple user. You seem to have taken his comment out of context.
Comments
LOL at all the bearish "analysts" who were trying to keep AAPL down for the shorters.
They all ran off and hid after the surprise 7-for-1 stock split.
I wonder what will happen to the stock when ?Watch is announced. ... Unless there's another piece of the puzzle, another shoe to drop around upgradeability/financing/trade-in/something. ...
I'd be extremely surprised if there wasn't an upgrade plan. I'm hoping you will be able to bring your 2-year-old ?Watch to an Apple Store so they can replace the old worn-out battery and outdated S1 electronics. $199 for the base Sport model, $249 for the steel model (because they'll polish the case) and $299 for the Edition (because polishing gold requires more time and because you're rich.)
You'd keep the same old band and enclosure, including the screen.
Just the battery and Sx chip would be replaced.
And the case polished, of course.
I read an article to day by some asshole at Business Insider who pointed out that, adjusted for inflation, the Dutch East India Company was worth over $7 Trillion at its peak around the year 1679. Yes, they will stoop that low to denigrate Apple. They simply WILL NOT accept that Apple is a successful company.
Personally I see this as a good thing. If people think a trillion-dollar valuation is insane, it will be that much harder for Apple to reach it, or sustain it when they do.
But if historically speaking that valuation is not extreme (when adjusted for inflation), then hey, plenty of room left to grow, right?
I wonder what will happen to the stock when ?Watch is announced. Gruber is doubling down on his pricing estimates saying he's hearing $10K+ for the Edition and $1000+ for the stainless steel with metal band.
I can understand a stratospheric price for the top model due simply to the cost of gold, but should the stainless steel model really sell for 3x the price of the aluminum one? No way.
No, Microsoft still holds the inflation adjusted record for now, but Apple is getting close.
And when Apple passes that mark you and your ilk will come up with another reason that Apple just doesn’t measure up. Of that I’m absolutely certain.
I am trying to wrap my head about adjusting for inflation when talking about these market caps. It doesn't make any sense to me when referring to a market cap.
The value of money is not constant. As such, anything you measure with money should, to be fair, adjusted for inflation. I have no dog in this fight; I don't care if Apple becomes the biggest company ever or not. If they do, good on them, if they don't, I'll continue being an Apple professional. But I don't see a strong argument against adjusting for inflation if the metric you are using is affected by inflation.
And I'd agree if everything else was equal, but that's far from the case which makes looking at market caps across decades, whether adjusted for inflation or not, as pointless as March 14th, 2015 at 9h:26m:53s.
I can understand a stratospheric price for the top model due simply to the cost of gold, but should the stainless steel model really sell for 3x the price of the aluminum one? No way.
At the event last year a watch blogger was really praising the bands, especially the link bracelet and milanese loop saying they were as nice as higher end Swiss watches. I'm sure those bands are driving up the price. Considering how much effort Apple put into these bands I struggle to see how they could design ?Watch to be obsolete in a year or two. There has to be some sort of upgrade path or trade in ability. If not, if Apple is expecting people to fork over another grand in 2 years then I think someone at Apple has jumped the shark and I worry about the success of the product.Because of the psychology (read: greed and fear) inherent to the reasons people ultimately choose to buy and sell stocks, I wonder if a share would be at $931 today hadn't down the split.
Why not? If we dissolve all variance in profit margins or economies of scale for the 3 main categories of ?Watch, I can see how ?Watch could be 3x more than ?Watch Sport.
Here are the differences in ?Watch v ?Watch Sport:
Note that even the leather bands in ?Watch still appear to have stainless steal elements in the locking mechanism at the casing end and in the clasps. The plastic bands likely have some metal in them for the locking into place in the casing, but obviously very minimal compared to the other bands.
Here is a 38mm ?Watch Sport compared to a 42mm ?Watch with the link band, which I assume is the most expensive band. I can see that being over $1,047.
That did make me wonder about the ?Watch Sport band being used on ?Watch. Would they match it by makes the metal on the clasp stainless steal. Based on the images Apple provides it looks like it's aluminium on both types. If one went that route, I wouldn't expect it be anywhere near $1000. In fact, I'd price it under $500.
Prepare to be surprised.
No, Microsoft still holds the inflation adjusted record for now, but Apple is getting close.
Only $100 billion more to go to reach Microsoft's inflation adjusted record. It's pretty unfair considering how low Apple's P/E is. Apple is making more money than Microsoft ever did and I'll bet Apple holds it's record high longer than a week or two. Microsoft caught the perfect market bubble and at the time everyone had dreams of tech companies in their eyes up until the bubble burst. Apple doesn't have the tech company market momentum Microsoft had back in 1999. Apple is pulling it off all by itself. If AppleWatch is a hit, Apple will most certainly break Microsoft's adjusted record and continue climbing. $1T is still a dream figure for me. That's a huge number I don't take lightly. I don't know if Apple will reach it, but that changes nothing for me and I'll still be holding fast onto Apple shares. A great company is still a great company whether Wall Street acknowledges it or not.
And when Apple passes that mark you and your ilk will come up with another reason that Apple just doesn’t measure up. Of that I’m absolutely certain.
You're probably right, but they're going to have to come up with some pretty strong arguments which aren't going to hold any sort of conviction. As time passes, Apple keeps disproving those reasons, so it's going to have to come down to a matter of investor confidence. If investors can believe Amazon will eventually be profitable that's all they have to go on. With Apple it will have to be the same thing unless Apple can keep adding revenue. If Apple could just come out with its own search engine, I think Google investors would head for Apple and it would suck just about everything out of Android. There are some interesting times ahead, for sure.
Prepare to be surprised.
There has to be something to justify these prices.
The Stainless Steel model may be done in Liquid Metal. You drop it in the bathrooms and the whole family tries to catch it as it bounces around the house non-stop.
Prepare to be surprised.
I'm ready. For $349 plus tax.
The current Mac OS, using Spotlight devalues the use of a search site... That alone could cook Google's goose through and through.
And when Apple passes that mark you and your ilk will come up with another reason that Apple just doesn’t measure up. Of that I’m absolutely certain.
I think you misunderstand @TheWhiteFalcon. He was just answering someone's query. His posts, as far as I can recall, are pretty good and he is an Apple user. You seem to have taken his comment out of context.