Apple shares are dropping because of China: the Chinese stock market is down and the stocjk price is pricing in future saturation of the Chinese stock market. What are the regional sales numbers like, isn't most of the growth coming from extending the global footprint, rather than from established markets? If that is the case, then it is easy to model saturation across the world, plus a lower refresh rate (more akin to the iPad refresh rate).
Plus, flat-rate services such as Netflix, DropBox, Apple Music, Spotify, etc make switching easier and cost-less.
This all results in a re-statement of the Apple share price to sustainable levels.
The firm needs to sell ever more products every year, and they will only be able to do that if they actually sell NEW products every year.
One thing makes me laugh though, the Stock market in China went up a absolutely massive amount in the last few years despite slowing down, and there is very little link between the stock market and the real chinese economy. Even if the stock market went down 100% (its just 40%), they'd still be sitting on huge gains.
I'm really tired about the myopia of so called specialists.
I don't think a new iPhone 7 will make a lick of difference. I believe there's a fundamental sea change in the smart phone market. The days of premium $700 phones are numbered and not a 'smart' buy. People are happy to get by with decent $300 phones that do 90% of what an iPhone does. Only your hard core Apple enthusiast will ooh and ahh and make the latest design, a must have upgrade.
The sky is not falling, but when the iPhone makes up 70% of Apple's revenues, you have to wonder how hard and fast Apple stock can crash.
I disagree 100% with your assessment. If you are leasing an iPhone from Apple you are literally paying pennies a day for something you use every day for many hours a day. People are willing to pay a few pennies more a day for the best. The smartphone has been the most important item in most people's lives after their house and maybe their car. You really think people are not willing to pay $20 a month for that?
If you buy a cheap $300 phone it will be worthless in 18 months. That means you are paying $17 a month to use a cheap phone. Do you really think people are unwilling to pay $5 more to get an iPhone? That's literally 15 cents more per day.
Your assessment is also wrong because for the last 4 quarters the averaging selling price of iPhones YoY have gone up. People are willing to pay for quality.
Apple offering even the iPhone business on a subscription model base is a brilliant move, but also shows concerns.
Apple always gets a nice bump up when they change the shell of the phone. iPhone4, 5, and 6 all had nice unit growth. The S-models have been hit and miss. 4s was huge, 5s barely had growth, and the 6s will probably have a slight decline. That means even if only iPhone6 users upgrade to the 7 we will see a YoY unit growth over the 6s. But of course there will be switchers from Android and some 5/4 series holdouts who skipped the 6. So I expect a nice 8-10% unit growth for the iPhone7. That should should help the stock reach about $125. In the 7s shows growth then we see $140 in a couple of years.
With that in mind I'd wait for $80 share price. If taxes isn't a factor I'd even sell shares now at close to $100 and wait for that $80 price in the Spring. Then you can easily get a 50% return by mid 2017.
The 4s gave us Siri and came at a time that iPhone was really becoming popular (it had just come to Verizon in Feburary of 2011). The 5 and 6 were screen size changes. Whaf is the 7 going to bring that people didn't get with the 6S? I'm skeptical that a new look or something like wireless charging or losing the headphone jack will cause a massive upgrade. If we're going down the path of D&G then I think we have to go all the way. None of this iPhone 7 will be the savior nonsense.
Has anyone seen an analysis of iPhone growth comparing replacement revenue, same store growth (ie same carriers, same countries) versus footprint growth (new carriers, new countries). This will show us where saturation levels are. I suspect the share price today factors in reduced replacement (as people hang on their iPhones a year or two longer), zero or very low same store growth (few conversions, low demographic drivers), and footprint expansion is finite (not saying saturation is reached, only saying that it is baked into the share price). In the absence of new products, that is an appropriate analysis
The economy has been propped up, first under Bush, then under Obama, and there is no rational basis for any of the current levels. Fed policy has created the bubble we're in again and Congress has encouraged recklessness to prevent the crash the US should have gone through and emerged from on a stronger footing back in 2008.
There is no evidence for this.
The US economy is doing well in and of itself, and even better relative to other major economies. The fundamentals look pretty good: low unemployment, low inflation, still historically low interest rates, strong dollar, declining deficits, a pretty reasonably valued stock market (despite the recent drops), historically low stock price volatility (with the average VIX in the teens in the past couple of years), historically high corporate profits, and a real estate sector that has bounced back. Corporate investment is lower than it should be at home; it would be higher if the stupid tax laws would be fixed.
Of course, the only people who don't believe any of this are the conspiracy theorists (and their ilk), mostly from the Right. When presented with such facts, they tell you, predictably, that the numbers must be wrong. No cognitive dissonance there.
Nice theory, except the same bad policies that were pushed by the Bush administration were continued under Obama.
Apple stock drops every time they announce a record quarter. The stock market bears little relation to the real world most of the time. I recognise that a China slowdown would affect the perception of Apple, but most of the time the stock movement is a result of the market thinking it knows Apple's business better than they do. It doesn't.
Comments
I'm really tired about the myopia of so called specialists.
Has anyone seen an analysis of iPhone growth comparing replacement revenue, same store growth (ie same carriers, same countries) versus footprint growth (new carriers, new countries). This will show us where saturation levels are. I suspect the share price today factors in reduced replacement (as people hang on their iPhones a year or two longer), zero or very low same store growth (few conversions, low demographic drivers), and footprint expansion is finite (not saying saturation is reached, only saying that it is baked into the share price). In the absence of new products, that is an appropriate analysis