My opinion isn't on the negative side it's just realistic and in my opinion accurate. I use Apple products because they suit my needs and I enjoy using them. I invest in AAPL because I have done very well with it, I decided to pull back for a while because there were several key factors I didn't like one of them is Cook's management.
Well, I am certainly glad that in your opinion, your opinion is accurate...
As I made clear before, my comments are not in reference to when to invest or take money out. IMO, the equities market itself is very risky right now, and all investment decisions need "extra" scrutiny. AAPL as an investment should indeed be made without emotion (positive or negative). Despite having a very good Q3, and showing great growth trends (revenue and earnings) for last 4 quarters, AAPL is definitely going down, and this happens with AAPL as you can see in the chart history over time. If you have been able to time that, then great for you. However, outside of a few cranks like yourself, you don't read any analysis which attribute that to Cook's management.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AtlApple
Several rollouts under him have not been the best, iMac delays, poor Apple Watch rollout and he isn't very good at damage control. Having marketed the Apple Watch in such a high profile manner and not release numbers makes no sense unless the product isn't doing well. That was Cook's first big release, we had an announcement followed six months later by an event. Then when it came time to release, there was a 4-6 week wait, followed by an even longer wait of it to get into retail stores. Hard for even the most diehard fan to say it was smooth.
I've heard over and over that Cook said they weren't going to release then yet we all know if the numbers were ground breaking they would have been release.
Outside of the Apple Watch, all other product "delays" in recent years are well within the Apple norm, and IMO much better than most other companies. I don't also believe it has affected the financials at all (e.g. an iMac delay didn't mean that potential buyer went out and purchased a Dell all-in-one).
The Apple Watch launch did not go smoothly from the outside view, I agree. I attribute that to a mix of low supply (due to yields - potentially due to defective parts like the tactic engine rumour) and Apple being cautious on product mix being a brand new product. The online only was one way to manage that and still launch. Was it the right decision (vs. say waiting until June)? Can't really tell. Hopefully they have learned from it & correct going forward.
On the supply issue, I know people like you trivialize the design & manufacturing (including all new materials, tools and processes) of something completely new (and small!!!), but in the real world it is actually difficult. If you could take off your "I hate Tim Cook" glasses you might note that the fit/finish/materials/build-quality of the Apple Watch is **far** superior to the competition. So yes, there was likely a supply issue that affected the launch. Believe it or not, brand new product lines sometimes have glitches for initial builds.
On the announcing hard numbers for AW, I don't believe even if it were a completely out-of-the expectation number, they would have announced it. That is competitive information that should be kept under wraps. Keep the competition guessing as to how well it is doing, how big the market its, etc. I think Apple made a mistake with the iPad in releasing the numbers early. The competition likely would not have jumped in as quickly if they didn't know how well that "big iPod" was doing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AtlApple
In no way do I feel Apple is failing financially then again at one time Microsoft had a 550 Billion market cap and I don't think many see them today as being successful or I should say well run even though the company is still worth 372 Billion. At some point a company hits their peak, you would be hard pressed to find a company that keeps growing and stays at the top forever, or at the very least stumble.
...
Another factor were issues in China, Apple is also facing increasing competition from companies like Xiaomi Corp.
If you don't know the PE difference between Microsoft then and Apple now, I am afraid no one can help you, and question whether you know as much as you claim about investing and trading. Sure, no company is likely to grow forever, but that doesn't mean you have any idea when that peak is. For Apple right now, I think they have a very good 5-10 year run to grow in all areas (rev/earnings/ecosystem/subscribers).
On China, the only issue Apple has here right now is the macro-economic picture. Apple sells into the higher 1/4 (of 1/5) of the market, where Xiaomi doesn't play. Apple has the premier brand, and China is very brand conscious. Apple is growing its base in China significantly, while Xiaomi grows as well. Again, if you don't understand Apple's target markets, and how they have historically managed to hold that high end market across all their product segments for years, then you don't know Apple at all (other than you hate Tim Cook).
In 2011 when Apple was growing revenue 100% they still had a weak PE of 20. The whole industry knew they were going to grow more and more yet Wall Street still punished them with a pathetic PE.
The bottom line is Wall Street can make way more money selling options and manipulating apple's stock price up and down than just letting the stock reach supply/demand balance. They use the media to manipulate price and make Billions in the options market. And because of the stocks massive trade volume they can make Billions just buying/selling each 1 cent move.
"Put another way: Why is it that everyone wants to copy Apple’s products but nobody wants to copy being Apple?"
None of this is happening. I can think of two reasons why:
Apple is not to be imitated because it’s not worth copying. I.e. Apple is not a successful company.
Apple is successful but Apple cannot be copied because its success is a magical process involving sorcery.
"There is a great deal of evidence for the first hypothesis. The idea of Apple being successful is not something reflected in its stock price.Being valued at a lower P/E ratio than its competitors, and indeed lower than the average company in the S&P 500, indicates that to whatever degree Apple was successful in the past, it’s not seen by the vast majority of observers as successful in the future (no matter when you choose to make this observation).
Why should one bother copying Apple if it results in being punished with a low valuation? You work really hard at innovation and then that innovation becomes commoditized very quickly. Why should one bother?
And yet if we look outside the investor community, especially if we ask operational managers and entrepreneurs, there are some who would say that Apple is actually a success story. However, when asking innovation practitioners what makes Apple successful the answers regarding the causalityof this success border on the mythical. Answers which reference “skills”, “culture” and “teams” abound. The culmination of this hypothesis is the “chief-sorcerer” theory of success which places one magician in charge of casting all the right spells. These resource-defined explanations are unsatisfactory because they are vague. Without specificity they don’t help us understand why they can’t be copied.
Here's what Tim Cook says;
"But what about Apple’s own opinion of what makes it tick?
Bill C. Shope: How do we think about Apple’s culture of innovation today?
Timothy D. Cook: Innovation is deeply embedded in Apple’s culture. The boldness, the ambition, the belief that there are no limits, the desire among our people to not just make good products [but to] make the very best products in the world. It’s in the values. It’s in the DNA of the company.
Now if you look at some essentials for innovation, there is no formula.
If there was a formula, there would be a lot of companies that have a lot of money that would gone out and bought their ability to innovate.
Some of the essentials for us are skills and leadership. Apple is in a very unique, and, in my view, unrivaled position because Apple has skills in software, in hardware, and in services.
[…] arguably, where you can innovate in hardware, [where] you can innovate in software, [where] you can innovate in services; the real magic happens at the intersection of these.
And you know, the iPad is very magical. And it’s exactly because our company was doing all of those things. And so for many years this idea … [which] some people call vertical integration, … it was out of favor. People thought it was kind of crazy. And we never did.
And so through all of those years, we continued to build. And these skills, this isn’t something you can just go write a check for. This is something that you work decades for. Building this experience. And so I think we bring that. I think we’re unique in that. I think we’re unrivaled in that. I think there are people trying desperately to catch up in that. And I think they’re finding that it’s not so easy to do."
Comments
My opinion isn't on the negative side it's just realistic and in my opinion accurate. I use Apple products because they suit my needs and I enjoy using them. I invest in AAPL because I have done very well with it, I decided to pull back for a while because there were several key factors I didn't like one of them is Cook's management.
Well, I am certainly glad that in your opinion, your opinion is accurate...
As I made clear before, my comments are not in reference to when to invest or take money out. IMO, the equities market itself is very risky right now, and all investment decisions need "extra" scrutiny. AAPL as an investment should indeed be made without emotion (positive or negative). Despite having a very good Q3, and showing great growth trends (revenue and earnings) for last 4 quarters, AAPL is definitely going down, and this happens with AAPL as you can see in the chart history over time. If you have been able to time that, then great for you. However, outside of a few cranks like yourself, you don't read any analysis which attribute that to Cook's management.
Several rollouts under him have not been the best, iMac delays, poor Apple Watch rollout and he isn't very good at damage control. Having marketed the Apple Watch in such a high profile manner and not release numbers makes no sense unless the product isn't doing well. That was Cook's first big release, we had an announcement followed six months later by an event. Then when it came time to release, there was a 4-6 week wait, followed by an even longer wait of it to get into retail stores. Hard for even the most diehard fan to say it was smooth.
I've heard over and over that Cook said they weren't going to release then yet we all know if the numbers were ground breaking they would have been release.
Outside of the Apple Watch, all other product "delays" in recent years are well within the Apple norm, and IMO much better than most other companies. I don't also believe it has affected the financials at all (e.g. an iMac delay didn't mean that potential buyer went out and purchased a Dell all-in-one).
The Apple Watch launch did not go smoothly from the outside view, I agree. I attribute that to a mix of low supply (due to yields - potentially due to defective parts like the tactic engine rumour) and Apple being cautious on product mix being a brand new product. The online only was one way to manage that and still launch. Was it the right decision (vs. say waiting until June)? Can't really tell. Hopefully they have learned from it & correct going forward.
On the supply issue, I know people like you trivialize the design & manufacturing (including all new materials, tools and processes) of something completely new (and small!!!), but in the real world it is actually difficult. If you could take off your "I hate Tim Cook" glasses you might note that the fit/finish/materials/build-quality of the Apple Watch is **far** superior to the competition. So yes, there was likely a supply issue that affected the launch. Believe it or not, brand new product lines sometimes have glitches for initial builds.
On the announcing hard numbers for AW, I don't believe even if it were a completely out-of-the expectation number, they would have announced it. That is competitive information that should be kept under wraps. Keep the competition guessing as to how well it is doing, how big the market its, etc. I think Apple made a mistake with the iPad in releasing the numbers early. The competition likely would not have jumped in as quickly if they didn't know how well that "big iPod" was doing.
In no way do I feel Apple is failing financially then again at one time Microsoft had a 550 Billion market cap and I don't think many see them today as being successful or I should say well run even though the company is still worth 372 Billion. At some point a company hits their peak, you would be hard pressed to find a company that keeps growing and stays at the top forever, or at the very least stumble.
...
Another factor were issues in China, Apple is also facing increasing competition from companies like Xiaomi Corp.
If you don't know the PE difference between Microsoft then and Apple now, I am afraid no one can help you, and question whether you know as much as you claim about investing and trading. Sure, no company is likely to grow forever, but that doesn't mean you have any idea when that peak is. For Apple right now, I think they have a very good 5-10 year run to grow in all areas (rev/earnings/ecosystem/subscribers).
On China, the only issue Apple has here right now is the macro-economic picture. Apple sells into the higher 1/4 (of 1/5) of the market, where Xiaomi doesn't play. Apple has the premier brand, and China is very brand conscious. Apple is growing its base in China significantly, while Xiaomi grows as well. Again, if you don't understand Apple's target markets, and how they have historically managed to hold that high end market across all their product segments for years, then you don't know Apple at all (other than you hate Tim Cook).
Stop with the bullshit.
In 2011 when Apple was growing revenue 100% they still had a weak PE of 20. The whole industry knew they were going to grow more and more yet Wall Street still punished them with a pathetic PE.
The bottom line is Wall Street can make way more money selling options and manipulating apple's stock price up and down than just letting the stock reach supply/demand balance. They use the media to manipulate price and make Billions in the options market. And because of the stocks massive trade volume they can make Billions just buying/selling each 1 cent move.
Thought you might like this;
http://www.asymco.com/2013/02/19/why-doesnt-anybody-copy-apple/
From Horace Dediu back in 2013.
"Put another way: Why is it that everyone wants to copy Apple’s products but nobody wants to copy being Apple?"
None of this is happening. I can think of two reasons why:
"There is a great deal of evidence for the first hypothesis. The idea of Apple being successful is not something reflected in its stock price. Being valued at a lower P/E ratio than its competitors, and indeed lower than the average company in the S&P 500, indicates that to whatever degree Apple was successful in the past, it’s not seen by the vast majority of observers as successful in the future (no matter when you choose to make this observation).
Why should one bother copying Apple if it results in being punished with a low valuation? You work really hard at innovation and then that innovation becomes commoditized very quickly. Why should one bother?
And yet if we look outside the investor community, especially if we ask operational managers and entrepreneurs, there are some who would say that Apple is actually a success story. However, when asking innovation practitioners what makes Apple successful the answers regarding the causalityof this success border on the mythical. Answers which reference “skills”, “culture” and “teams” abound. The culmination of this hypothesis is the “chief-sorcerer” theory of success which places one magician in charge of casting all the right spells. These resource-defined explanations are unsatisfactory because they are vague. Without specificity they don’t help us understand why they can’t be copied.
Here's what Tim Cook says;
"But what about Apple’s own opinion of what makes it tick?
A current twitter posted on his site: