The only thing that worries me is that I used the same type of logic to predict 2.30 last quarter, way more than actually showed up. My prediction for non-GAAP earnings is 1.49, btw - the 1.38 is GAAP.
It won't sell as much as the 3G because people aren't going to pay full price for the phone now. If you're not eligible for an upgrade price and you just bought the 3G phone you'll wait until you are eligible. Since AT&T sets the rule, and it's something like 18 months before you can buy another phone, there's no reason to keep buying $500 phones. Just wait. On the other hand, this county is as dumb as a bucket of chicken so who knows.
RBC is a major investor in "The BlackBerry Partners Fund". The three companies who invested in this venture capital fund are RIM, ThomsonReuters and RBC.
"While the fund is not explicitly tied to only BlackBerry devices, the development of applications for those smartphones is clearly the main purpose of the fund."
Since RBC has investments heavily related to BlackBerry , I wouldn't trust their analysis. They clearly have a reason to be biased.
The Royal Bank of Canada is maintaining its bearish near-term outlook on shares of Apple, claiming that although consumer interest in a new version of the iPhone remains healthy, sales of the new device are unlikely to provide the company with the same boost seen during the transition from the original iPhone to the iPhone 3G.
In other words, anyone who wanted an iPhone has one. From now on, buyers will have a greater selection and lower prices from competitors.
Mark Abramsky and by proxy, The Royal Bank of Canada (RBC) is correct that an "iPhone 3G Pro won't boost iPhone momentum."
As with all self-fullfilling prophesy, it becomes true. RBC is simply predicting that iPhone sales momentum will not increase if Apple sells the "RBC" predicted iPhone. Things get messy here as Mark shows ignorance in Apple's strategies, product development cycles, and core company DNA.
The golden rule of Apple, "software sells hardware."
Mark seems to have forgotten this small but pivotal point, while blatantly disregarding the educated mainstream present.
I thought the age of greedy, arrogant, and biased financials had come to an end with the current economic crisis'.
Let me enlighten the true analysts, those amongst the populace with intelligence perhaps? Mark Abramsky need not apply.
Software Sells Hardware!
Even Apple was surprised at the gaming capability of the iPhone and its intrinsic value to the gaming community. The very driving force behind the iPhones appeal is an "app for everything." Now circulating through Apple's labs are very advanced iPhone units indeed, not the bland and semi-updated configurations that Mark has apparently excited everyone with.
Apple is killing a few birds with one stone here with their graphic driven "iPhone Pro". By licensing special graphics technologies and integrating them with custom chip designs, Apple quietly steps to the forefront of the mobile graphics arena. From smooth high resolution games, to software driven video, Apple will be able to outperform all competition. The ability for Apple to take the lead in mobile gaming unit sales is a major contender in new revenue dollars at the expense of Sony and Nintendo. Advanced video capabilities through the camera feature (sorry Mark but more than 3.2MP, you need to check your component suppliers next time) will provide a new video aspect to the mobile digital life. An iPhone iMovie app experience with ties into mobileMe and other Apple peripherals will round-out the video side of the Apple ecosystem. Due to the nature of the testing at Apple, the mobileMe tie in may not be available in June.
Software driven video encoding/decoding will also increase battery performance in a very noticeable way, so be prepared for that nice little boost. (more than an extra hour Mark)
A note on Apple exterior hardware design. Due to Apple's acquisition of PA Semi and subsequent custom chip designs being integrated into system on chip variations, I would expect Apple to keep the iPhone around its current size just so that they can shove more of their custom built battery into the darn thing. Hint, hint.
Basically, Apple plans to make the new device irresistible to the modern educated mainstream that enjoy such cutting edge devices, while allowing those unable to upgrade some transition appeal with iPhone OS 3.0.
Make no mistake, Apple is not just upgrading the iPhone as with the 3G model, this is a redesign from the ground up.
Anyone following Apple knows they innovate for more than just a buck, they actually enjoy pushing the envelope. This core company DNA shows through in their products, consumer rankings, and employee pride.
Don't judge Mark to hard, he is after all just a puppet.
I think the stock jumped to far and he has some puts in the market... is this a research note or stock manipulation? $70 per share and underperform? It will not underperform because of Apple fundamentals, but because of media dogging with depression spin.... it's hard to stay long any stock, when you know the whales pump & dump. They need to reinstate the uptick rule on shorts.
The only thing that worries me is that I used the same type of logic to predict 2.30 last quarter, way more than actually showed up. My prediction for non-GAAP earnings is 1.49, btw - the 1.38 is GAAP.
Do you mean that non-GAAP earnings will be 2.87 (which seems plausible, but a little bit high), or that AAPL will earn 0.11 on subscription sales this quarter (which seems too low)?
Several of the comments above rightly question the analyst Abramsky's bearish predictions. But he is not alone in his fictions for the future.
Among several other analysts was the firm of Merrill Lynch, Doug Reid of Thomas Weisel Partners (CNN 20 March), JP Morgan, and many others are stating that "the global economy continues to deteriorate," and "that's bad news for Apple" because it has only two product lines, and so on. They seem to be quoting one another. If you watch Apple's stock price, a big-name analyst can drive it down by a point, but then it goes up two points.
Earlier in the month Appleinsider reported (March 11) that
"Shares of Apple, which came under immense pressure Friday and Monday when a pair of analysts trimmed their outlook on the company citing concerns of slowing sales amid an ailing economy, have risen more than 10 percent in the last 48 hours -- after rising some 6.6 percent on Tuesday to close at $88.63, shares are up another 5.16 percent in Wednesday morning Nasdaq trading to $93.20."
By Noon March 11, 2008 (after the Analysts had spoken) the stock went up by almost 5% to $92.62.
By March 24 Apple had gone up to $106 at the end of a "down" day on both D0W and NASDAQ market, and on a day when Bloomberg reported a 49% plunge in Japanese exports because of the world recession. According the analysts Apple is supposed to shrink to $70 or $80 or less because of the "hostile environment" of recession.
As of today, 30 March, Apple, despite the prophecies of Abramsky and other analysts, closed at a far higher price: $104.49 losing only 2.4% in a market that plunged 254 points!
Analysts know how to talk as though they are amazingly informed, but they are mainly hucksters with an impressive market lingo. They love to talk about Apple because it is a world-wide attraction and because many Microsoft-Americans hate it. They could never attract attention with an analysis of American Hosiery. From Steve Ballmer down to the the lowliest financial expert, nobody can take their eyes off the Marilyn Monroe of American corporations. But they do not approve of her.
I guess that's why the press and the Internet pay so much attention to the finger-wagging analysts. The analysts are like writers for the scandal magazines at the supermarket checkout.
In other words, anyone who wanted an iPhone has one. From now on, buyers will have a greater selection and lower prices from competitors.
I've got 10 family members yet to convert from other wireless providers. They are waiting on the next generation of iPhone. In short, they are waiting for me to actually buy one and then move over to using an iPhone.
I've been waiting and hanging on to an old Verizon phone [long passed my contract] and when I move I'll set up for development, as well. My colleagues have them and it's helped my long hold on my old Apple stock options shares.
They love to talk about Apple because it is a world-wide attraction and because many Microsoft-Americans hate it. They could never attract attention with an analysis of American Hosiery. From Steve Ballmer down to the the lowliest financial expert, nobody can take their eyes off the Marilyn Monroe of American corporations. But they do not approve of her.
Couldn't you have chosen someone who didn't die young for your metaphor?\
I've got 10 family members yet to convert from other wireless providers. They are waiting on the next generation of iPhone. In short, they are waiting for me to actually buy one and then move over to using an iPhone.
I've been waiting and hanging on to an old Verizon phone [long passed my contract] and when I move I'll set up for development, as well. My colleagues have them and it's helped my long hold on my old Apple stock options shares.
It's a wise decision to wait for the upcoming iPhone with a faster CPU and improved graphics for games, not to mention the new features of iPhone 3.0 system software.
Abramsky doesn't say that there won't be any buyers going forward, just that the growth rate for new subscribers will slow down (for any number of reasons including the high price of iPhone cell phone contracts).
Given a choice, many buyers may prefer newer and less expensive phones by competitors (Palm Pre, BlackBerry Storm, etc.).
I have no time for Abramsky or RBC. They seem to always be producing negative reports about Apple, which are never backed up by any evidence and turn out to be totally wrong. They should probably declare that they have a futures bet on Apple and a stock price drop would benefit them.
Lets face it they ain't Shaw Wu/ATR who actually gets of his ass and does some proper research.
RBC is a major investor in "The BlackBerry Partners Fund". The three companies who invested in this venture capital fund are RIM, ThomsonReuters and RBC.
"While the fund is not explicitly tied to only BlackBerry devices, the development of applications for those smartphones is clearly the main purpose of the fund."
Since RBC has investments heavily related to BlackBerry , I wouldn't trust their analysis. They clearly have a reason to be biased.
It is quite amazing, especially with the current view on banking practices, that such a blatant attempt to sabotage a rival's share price is even legal. The term analyst is ridiculous in this case and the word hostile needs to be in there somewhere to alert investors of the total lack of credibility.
I have no time for Abramsky or RBC. They seem to always be producing negative reports about Apple, which are never backed up by any evidence and turn out to be totally wrong. They should probably declare that they have a futures bet on Apple and a stock price drop would benefit them.
Lets face it they ain't Shaw Wu/ATR who actually gets of his ass and does some proper research.
It probably goes beyond simple share price manipulation for stock gains on their part, they actually are attempting to harm Apple anyway they can in order to try to keep RIM afloat. There should be an official investigation into this. Abramsky needs to be taken away in handcuffs.
I have an original iPhone - would like to upgrade to 3G - but also willing to wait to see what a new hardware rev might bring. Also - have a few months left yet on a 3G broadband card contract in my notebook - ideally if I could get a 3G iPhone that could be used as a modem at 3G speeds for my notebooks - then I would pay a few extra $ for the 3G iPhone and dump the 3G card.
I'm really amazed by these analysts, predicting case sizing down to 1/10th of an inch (or mm). How do they do that. Yet manage to get so much other basic stuff wrong!
N e 1 update to 3.0. As developers all around me, was told it kills voice mail. Need it so am waiting 4 a fix.
Do you mean that non-GAAP earnings will be 2.87 (which seems plausible, but a little bit high), or that AAPL will earn 0.11 on subscription sales this quarter (which seems too low)?
GAAP earnings:
0.85 legacy product sales down by 15% or so from a year ago +
0.45 carried in +
0.08 iPhone sales rec. in quarter
-----
1.38
non-GAAP earnings
0.85 +
0.00 carried in (non-GAAP does not carry in or carry out earnings)
0.64 iPhone sales rec. in quarter (we are recognizing the whole thing, not 1/8th of it)
Funny he still has a job. He speculates, is wrong and then criticizes because Apple didn't deliver, then he does it all over again. Every quarter, I can set my clock by it!
One could say the same thing about the banking and real estate analysts/observers/pundits. The ones who are right don't get quoted and the ones who get quoted are never right. How else could we explain the continuing presence of NAR economists in all those real estate stories? But I digress...
With the new phone, they can upgrade the speed of the phone all the want, but so long as AT&T's network is as bad as it is (where I am, anyway) the prospect of an upgrade is not very attractive.
Comments
From http://venturebeat.com/2008/10/28/bl...e-investments/
"While the fund is not explicitly tied to only BlackBerry devices, the development of applications for those smartphones is clearly the main purpose of the fund."
Since RBC has investments heavily related to BlackBerry , I wouldn't trust their analysis. They clearly have a reason to be biased.
The Royal Bank of Canada is maintaining its bearish near-term outlook on shares of Apple, claiming that although consumer interest in a new version of the iPhone remains healthy, sales of the new device are unlikely to provide the company with the same boost seen during the transition from the original iPhone to the iPhone 3G.
In other words, anyone who wanted an iPhone has one. From now on, buyers will have a greater selection and lower prices from competitors.
As with all self-fullfilling prophesy, it becomes true. RBC is simply predicting that iPhone sales momentum will not increase if Apple sells the "RBC" predicted iPhone. Things get messy here as Mark shows ignorance in Apple's strategies, product development cycles, and core company DNA.
The golden rule of Apple, "software sells hardware."
Mark seems to have forgotten this small but pivotal point, while blatantly disregarding the educated mainstream present.
I thought the age of greedy, arrogant, and biased financials had come to an end with the current economic crisis'.
Let me enlighten the true analysts, those amongst the populace with intelligence perhaps? Mark Abramsky need not apply.
Software Sells Hardware!
Even Apple was surprised at the gaming capability of the iPhone and its intrinsic value to the gaming community. The very driving force behind the iPhones appeal is an "app for everything." Now circulating through Apple's labs are very advanced iPhone units indeed, not the bland and semi-updated configurations that Mark has apparently excited everyone with.
Apple is killing a few birds with one stone here with their graphic driven "iPhone Pro". By licensing special graphics technologies and integrating them with custom chip designs, Apple quietly steps to the forefront of the mobile graphics arena. From smooth high resolution games, to software driven video, Apple will be able to outperform all competition. The ability for Apple to take the lead in mobile gaming unit sales is a major contender in new revenue dollars at the expense of Sony and Nintendo. Advanced video capabilities through the camera feature (sorry Mark but more than 3.2MP, you need to check your component suppliers next time) will provide a new video aspect to the mobile digital life. An iPhone iMovie app experience with ties into mobileMe and other Apple peripherals will round-out the video side of the Apple ecosystem. Due to the nature of the testing at Apple, the mobileMe tie in may not be available in June.
Software driven video encoding/decoding will also increase battery performance in a very noticeable way, so be prepared for that nice little boost. (more than an extra hour Mark)
A note on Apple exterior hardware design. Due to Apple's acquisition of PA Semi and subsequent custom chip designs being integrated into system on chip variations, I would expect Apple to keep the iPhone around its current size just so that they can shove more of their custom built battery into the darn thing. Hint, hint.
Basically, Apple plans to make the new device irresistible to the modern educated mainstream that enjoy such cutting edge devices, while allowing those unable to upgrade some transition appeal with iPhone OS 3.0.
Make no mistake, Apple is not just upgrading the iPhone as with the 3G model, this is a redesign from the ground up.
Anyone following Apple knows they innovate for more than just a buck, they actually enjoy pushing the envelope. This core company DNA shows through in their products, consumer rankings, and employee pride.
Don't judge Mark to hard, he is after all just a puppet.
I think the stock jumped to far and he has some puts in the market... is this a research note or stock manipulation? $70 per share and underperform? It will not underperform because of Apple fundamentals, but because of media dogging with depression spin.... it's hard to stay long any stock, when you know the whales pump & dump. They need to reinstate the uptick rule on shorts.
The only thing that worries me is that I used the same type of logic to predict 2.30 last quarter, way more than actually showed up. My prediction for non-GAAP earnings is 1.49, btw - the 1.38 is GAAP.
Do you mean that non-GAAP earnings will be 2.87 (which seems plausible, but a little bit high), or that AAPL will earn 0.11 on subscription sales this quarter (which seems too low)?
Among several other analysts was the firm of Merrill Lynch, Doug Reid of Thomas Weisel Partners (CNN 20 March), JP Morgan, and many others are stating that "the global economy continues to deteriorate," and "that's bad news for Apple" because it has only two product lines, and so on. They seem to be quoting one another. If you watch Apple's stock price, a big-name analyst can drive it down by a point, but then it goes up two points.
Earlier in the month Appleinsider reported (March 11) that
"Shares of Apple, which came under immense pressure Friday and Monday when a pair of analysts trimmed their outlook on the company citing concerns of slowing sales amid an ailing economy, have risen more than 10 percent in the last 48 hours -- after rising some 6.6 percent on Tuesday to close at $88.63, shares are up another 5.16 percent in Wednesday morning Nasdaq trading to $93.20."
By Noon March 11, 2008 (after the Analysts had spoken) the stock went up by almost 5% to $92.62.
By March 24 Apple had gone up to $106 at the end of a "down" day on both D0W and NASDAQ market, and on a day when Bloomberg reported a 49% plunge in Japanese exports because of the world recession. According the analysts Apple is supposed to shrink to $70 or $80 or less because of the "hostile environment" of recession.
As of today, 30 March, Apple, despite the prophecies of Abramsky and other analysts, closed at a far higher price: $104.49 losing only 2.4% in a market that plunged 254 points!
Analysts know how to talk as though they are amazingly informed, but they are mainly hucksters with an impressive market lingo. They love to talk about Apple because it is a world-wide attraction and because many Microsoft-Americans hate it. They could never attract attention with an analysis of American Hosiery. From Steve Ballmer down to the the lowliest financial expert, nobody can take their eyes off the Marilyn Monroe of American corporations. But they do not approve of her.
I guess that's why the press and the Internet pay so much attention to the finger-wagging analysts. The analysts are like writers for the scandal magazines at the supermarket checkout.
In other words, anyone who wanted an iPhone has one. From now on, buyers will have a greater selection and lower prices from competitors.
I've got 10 family members yet to convert from other wireless providers. They are waiting on the next generation of iPhone. In short, they are waiting for me to actually buy one and then move over to using an iPhone.
I've been waiting and hanging on to an old Verizon phone [long passed my contract] and when I move I'll set up for development, as well. My colleagues have them and it's helped my long hold on my old Apple stock options shares.
They love to talk about Apple because it is a world-wide attraction and because many Microsoft-Americans hate it. They could never attract attention with an analysis of American Hosiery. From Steve Ballmer down to the the lowliest financial expert, nobody can take their eyes off the Marilyn Monroe of American corporations. But they do not approve of her.
Couldn't you have chosen someone who didn't die young for your metaphor?
I've got 10 family members yet to convert from other wireless providers. They are waiting on the next generation of iPhone. In short, they are waiting for me to actually buy one and then move over to using an iPhone.
I've been waiting and hanging on to an old Verizon phone [long passed my contract] and when I move I'll set up for development, as well. My colleagues have them and it's helped my long hold on my old Apple stock options shares.
It's a wise decision to wait for the upcoming iPhone with a faster CPU and improved graphics for games, not to mention the new features of iPhone 3.0 system software.
Abramsky doesn't say that there won't be any buyers going forward, just that the growth rate for new subscribers will slow down (for any number of reasons including the high price of iPhone cell phone contracts).
Given a choice, many buyers may prefer newer and less expensive phones by competitors (Palm Pre, BlackBerry Storm, etc.).
Lets face it they ain't Shaw Wu/ATR who actually gets of his ass and does some proper research.
RBC is a major investor in "The BlackBerry Partners Fund". The three companies who invested in this venture capital fund are RIM, ThomsonReuters and RBC.
From http://venturebeat.com/2008/10/28/bl...e-investments/
"While the fund is not explicitly tied to only BlackBerry devices, the development of applications for those smartphones is clearly the main purpose of the fund."
Since RBC has investments heavily related to BlackBerry , I wouldn't trust their analysis. They clearly have a reason to be biased.
It is quite amazing, especially with the current view on banking practices, that such a blatant attempt to sabotage a rival's share price is even legal. The term analyst is ridiculous in this case and the word hostile needs to be in there somewhere to alert investors of the total lack of credibility.
I have no time for Abramsky or RBC. They seem to always be producing negative reports about Apple, which are never backed up by any evidence and turn out to be totally wrong. They should probably declare that they have a futures bet on Apple and a stock price drop would benefit them.
Lets face it they ain't Shaw Wu/ATR who actually gets of his ass and does some proper research.
It probably goes beyond simple share price manipulation for stock gains on their part, they actually are attempting to harm Apple anyway they can in order to try to keep RIM afloat. There should be an official investigation into this. Abramsky needs to be taken away in handcuffs.
Couldn't you have chosen someone who didn't die young for your metaphor?
How bout Snoop?
I'm really amazed by these analysts, predicting case sizing down to 1/10th of an inch (or mm). How do they do that.
N e 1 update to 3.0. As developers all around me, was told it kills voice mail. Need it so am waiting 4 a fix.
Do you mean that non-GAAP earnings will be 2.87 (which seems plausible, but a little bit high), or that AAPL will earn 0.11 on subscription sales this quarter (which seems too low)?
GAAP earnings:
0.85 legacy product sales down by 15% or so from a year ago +
0.45 carried in +
0.08 iPhone sales rec. in quarter
-----
1.38
non-GAAP earnings
0.85 +
0.00 carried in (non-GAAP does not carry in or carry out earnings)
0.64 iPhone sales rec. in quarter (we are recognizing the whole thing, not 1/8th of it)
-----
1.49
Funny he still has a job. He speculates, is wrong and then criticizes because Apple didn't deliver, then he does it all over again. Every quarter, I can set my clock by it!
One could say the same thing about the banking and real estate analysts/observers/pundits. The ones who are right don't get quoted and the ones who get quoted are never right. How else could we explain the continuing presence of NAR economists in all those real estate stories? But I digress...
With the new phone, they can upgrade the speed of the phone all the want, but so long as AT&T's network is as bad as it is (where I am, anyway) the prospect of an upgrade is not very attractive.