SpamSandwich wrote: »
Maynard Um...that toolbag still has a job?
"Goes out of fashion"? The mid-term refresh doesn't change the physical design but improve the cons in the previous one. iPhone reminds you of anything? BTW, people pay $1k for iPhone too and do they concern if it's refreshed next year? If you think people buy Apple Watch for fashion, then Apple may just sell a lot less units than they did.
People get the phone subsidised, not the watch. I suspect watch buying patterns to be more like the iPad, and since the "compute power" is less of an issue with the watch, doubt Apple will feel the need to update as often as iPad. I don't really care, one way or the other, I just think people assuming an annual update cycle might be disappointed. Just can't wait for my stainless steel with leather loop to arrive!
What I do envision is Apple steadily introducing new straps, to keep revenue coming in from watch owners.
brucemc wrote: »
So it will not be until the second, or maybe even 3rd, generation of Apple Watch before it starts to grow in meaningful volumes? You mean, like every product that Apple has ever produced? I wonder if they themselves cringe a bit at the bilge they write in these notes.
SpamSandwich wrote: »
I'm also probably going to go for the 2nd gen. Any issues should be ironed out by then.
Amazon announces yet another loss and the stock jumps 15%. Apple announces yet another blockbuster quarter beating ALL estimates by a wide margin, completely blowing by analyst’s predictions and...AAPL drops 1.5% today. Just another day in the alternate universe that is Wall Street. What can one say, really?
Here are the best performing Apple analysts:
Why in the world AI continues to highlight morons like Maynard Um, Gene Munster and Katy Huberty instead of these analysts with real analytical skills is baffling to me.
No more Gene Munster stories, ever!
It was both Apple's, and the industry's, best selling 1st gen product of all time. However, it still wasn't until gen 2 that it ramped up to those "meaningful" (as analysts define them) volumes.
Yet the stock is down. WTF!!!!
Hooray! Now who wants to eat?!
Since Amazon makes (almost no) profits, but still shows strong cash flow growth, they are measured by Wall Street in a different manner. Amazon is valued on what their "potential" is. Clearly based on its stock price, there are many that believe Amazon, once it has established a strong enough moat in the industry (whenever that is), can start to turn up the "profit tap". Whether they can or not of course is an educated guess, as they are have never shown that profit on the bottom line. Personally, I am not invested in them.
Apple on the other hand, is both very profitable with very large & growing revenues, but also relatively transparent with their business. Thus the ability to price Apple's future earnings into the stock is much easier than with a company like Amazon, and why Apple's stock would not move as much upon having a "very solid quarter" - much of the price should be reflected in the stock price already. When Apple has these quarters, it sets the stage for another move up, but doesn't necessarily cause an immediate rise, unless the beat was very big (like calendar Q4 2014).
I do agree that Apple continues to be undervalued even still, though it is not as bad as it used to be (had to turn the corner on the little bit of YoY profit decline that happened in 2013 - which itself was mostly caused by fact that 2011 & 2012 were so massive). The market as a whole doesn't seem to price in Apple producing new product (categories) or entering new markets - they assume each year/quarter is Apple's last for much strong growth, and that the average moving forward is about 10%/year.
sog35 wrote: »
buy more AAPL shares.
Dumb Ass Maynard Um had a target price of $100 for Apple 3 months ago.
Guy was off by 30%
Now this piece of shit is saying his target is $135 but still the stock isn't a buy.
Dumb ASS Maynard. Looks like he got fired by UBS and joined Wells Fargo
Is he South Korean by any chance, and possible on the payroll of some other company? I can't think of a single fucking rational reason of why else he would spout the shit that he does. Clearly he has an extreme level of bias against Apple, that is the only thing that explains his lunacy, and how epically wrong he consistently enjoys being. The fantastic thing about an analyst is that you somehow keep your job, and even get others to hire you, no matter how wrong you are. More that be said for any other job on the planet. He's financially raped anyone who's listened to him, when it comes to Apple. Anyone with an ounce of shame, humility, or self awareness should have stopped giving their opinions after being proven wrong time and time again.
Maynerd is "unimpressed" at the biggest March quarter in the history of tech (and pretty much everything else)? He must have one fucking hell of a resume.
Buy. Hold. Repeat.
That's what we Canadian's call: skating to where the puck was. Not good, Maynard.
I wonder why Apple doesn't spend their 200 B, ( and more cash as they are earning it ) for their own stock, eventually they will be able to own more then 50% of their own self. As Wallstreet never values their cash anyway.
palomine wrote: »
Isn't there a thing called 'options Friday' at the end of the month?
It's odd how low the stock price is. I Have a hard time believing results like this quarter's are already baked into the price..