As I said it earlier --- he "fine-tunes" his estimates and then gives it a wide-range. Also --- any idiot can be correct during the good years. But you know what --- everybody is looking at Warren Buffett right now during the bad times.
I rather have analysts putting out new estimates when Apple actually decides to announce something --- be it a new product or a new pricing.
They have to put out reports when they are due, at regular intervals. Their job isn't to make Apple look good, or bad, it's to inform their clients. They follow a company because they think it's important enough. No one was following Apple for years. Now, many are. He followed then when he was all alone. I give him credit for that.
You're saying they shouldn't report unless Apple has a new product? You're kidding!
If Apple doesn't have new products when they can be expected, thats of interest as well, because that affects the sales and stock price as well.
And don't forget that these reports do take some time to produce. They shouldn't be making new predictions as soon as something changes. It must be evaluated as well.
Ad it's just as difficult to do a report when things are going well as when they aren't. They still must come up with numbers
Seriously? That is seems so archaically backwards for a country whose phones are supposed to be so advanced. Why not use the much faster BT that doesn't require a direct line-of-sight of IR ports in some kinky cellphone mating ritual? Or how about sending your vCard from your contact list via an email or SMS on the cellular network?
Granted, the iPhone does not support sendign vCards, despite its long use of vCards on the Mac, but we're talking about the transfer method used to send the data, not the lack of the iPhone's many SW shortcomings.
In the US, asking a girl for her number by requesting a file transfer between phones wouldn't work... at least not the clubs I go to. Usually you just ask for it and they tell you. Are Japanese phone numbers unusually long or contain more then Roman numerals?
The whole point of IR is that you dont have to type in a phone number of an email address. And the japanese love features. Even they dont use half of them, it's comforting to know they are there. Like the payment feature.
Oh and the iPhone is not selling well in Japan. There has been a report a couple of months ago. It attracted attention at first, but the sales not so good.
You're saying they shouldn't report unless Apple has a new product? You're kidding!
If Apple doesn't have new products when they can be expected, thats of interest as well, because that affects the sales and stock price as well.
I didn't say that --- I said that the other analysts don't speculate on baseless rumors and wild ideas.
There were no creditable rumors at the moment on a iphone nano in the product pipeline. The other analysts expects price drops --- but not to the level that Munster expects in order to get 45 million iphones. What's next for Munster after basing his estimates on zero dollar iphones --- Apple is going to give you a Apple laptop for free along with your zero dollar iphone and Munster expects Apple to sell a billion iphones.
There was an old joke about Apple putting out a iphone shuffle that will just dial random telephone numbers --- should Munster put that into his estimates as well.
The whole point of IR is that you dont have to type in a phone number of an email address. And the japanese love features. Even they dont use half of them, it's comforting to know they are there. Like the payment feature.
Oh and the iPhone is not selling well in Japan. There has been a report a couple of months ago. It attracted attention at first, but the sales not so good.
You're way out of date on the sales issue. Incorrect too.
I didn't say that --- I said that the other analysts don't speculate on baseless rumors and wild ideas.
There were no creditable rumors at the moment on a iphone nano in the product pipeline. The other analysts expects price drops --- but not to the level that Munster expects in order to get 45 million iphones. What's next for Munster after basing his estimates on zero dollar iphones --- Apple is going to give you a Apple laptop for free along with your zero dollar iphone and Munster expects Apple to sell a billion iphones.
There was an old joke about Apple putting out a iphone shuffle that will just dial random telephone numbers --- should Munster put that into his estimates as well.
Apple hasn't actually released any sales data yet.
It's as likely to be like the Japan iphone sales situation --- premature celebration.
Even if he is right --- then all we have is a land grab by Apple and RIM --- sacrifacing profit margins. 10 million iphones at $600 each plus revenue sharing from carriers is like about 50 (complete guess) million iphones at $200 each with zero revenue sharing.
You don't see Motorola celebrating the RAZR sales anymore --- the margins are crap with carriers giving them away.
Even if he is right --- then all we have is a land grab by Apple and RIM --- sacrifacing profit margins. 10 million iphones at $600 each plus revenue sharing from carriers is like about 50 (complete guess) million iphones at $200 each with zero revenue sharing.
You've got over 400 posts here and I know you are well aware that the iPhone only costs $200/300 for eligible customers and that AT&T is paying Apple the reminder of the agreed upon price upfront, instead of paying small, incremental payments over 2 years. On top of that, you know very well that the iPhone was dropped to $400 after 2 months and that the 16GB $300 model is the most popular model.
So, what purpose do you have for spreading so much FUD?
You've got over 400 posts here and I know you are well aware that the iPhone only costs $200/300 for eligible customers and that AT&T is paying Apple the reminder of the agreed upon price upfront, instead of paying small, incremental payments over 2 years. On top of that, you know very well that the iPhone was dropped to $400 after 2 months and that the 16GB $300 model is the most popular model.
So, what purpose do you have for spreading so much FUD?
It's not FUD at all.
The 10 million number came from Steve Jobs' keynote when the iphone was priced at $600 (with a 2 year contract) and revenue sharing. If Apple is keeping the same amount of money as before --- then Munster would be raising his Apple stock price targets (instead of maintaining $250 a share target with 45 million iphones sold upto next year's end).
The "power" of the 10 million units goal --- loses all kinds of meaning when the current pricing is introduced. Just like the 50 million RAZR sold --- it loses all kinds of meanings when every carrier in the world is giving them out for free.
Apple hasn't actually released any sales data yet.
It's as likely to be like the Japan iphone sales situation --- premature celebration.
Even if he is right --- then all we have is a land grab by Apple and RIM --- sacrifacing profit margins. 10 million iphones at $600 each plus revenue sharing from carriers is like about 50 (complete guess) million iphones at $200 each with zero revenue sharing.
You don't see Motorola celebrating the RAZR sales anymore --- the margins are crap with carriers giving them away.
What are you saying?
Apple will take real fine profits on these phones. The amount they will be getting is pretty much the same as with revenue sharing. They just will get written down differently. And even if they do get somewhat less, so what?
That's still a big deal.
You seem to not know where you're going with this.
The 10 million number came from Steve Jobs' keynote when the iphone was priced at $600 (with a 2 year contract) and revenue sharing. If Apple is keeping the same amount of money as before --- then Munster would be raising his Apple stock price targets (instead of maintaining $250 a share target with 45 million iphones sold upto next year's end).
The "power" of the 10 million units goal --- loses all kinds of meaning when the current pricing is introduced. Just like the 50 million RAZR sold --- it loses all kinds of meanings when every carrier in the world is giving them out for free.
You have absolutely no idea what Apple was planning. don't pretend to.
No doubt, Apple lowered prices earlier than expected. That didn't cost them much.
You also seem to be living in your own world.
The markets have dropped quite a bit recently, as has Apple. To even keep the price target where it is, expresses confidence. For Apple to have sold so many phones in this time period, with consumer confidence so low is itself quite good. This economic situation is not just here in the States, though Europe has been in an economic pit for more than a few years now.
You have absolutely no idea what Apple was planning. don't pretend to.
No doubt, Apple lowered prices earlier than expected. That didn't cost them much.
You also seem to be living in your own world.
The markets have dropped quite a bit recently, as has Apple. To even keep the price target where it is, expresses confidence. For Apple to have sold so many phones in this time period, with consumer confidence so low is itself quite good. This economic situation is not just here in the States, though Europe has been in an economic pit for more than a few years now.
And neither is Munster --- which is my point.
What price target are you talking about? Munster's $250 a share price target or Apple's $200 iphone. If it's Munster's, it doesn't express confidence when nobody else is having similar price target for APPL shares. If it is apple's $200 iphone --- then it's just a land grab by Apple and RIM --- it doesn't express confidence.
What price target are you talking about? Munster's $250 a share price target or Apple's $200 iphone. If it's Munster's, it doesn't express confidence when nobody else is having similar price target for APPL shares. If it is apple's $200 iphone --- then it's just a land grab by Apple and RIM --- it doesn't express confidence.
Munster doesn't claim to know what Apple is planning. He just can go by what he sees.
You were talking about the stock price, so I responded to that.
You apparently haven't noticed that a number of others have lowered their targets recently.
Munster doesn't claim to know what Apple is planning. He just can go by what he sees.
You were talking about the stock price, so I responded to that.
You apparently haven't noticed that a number of others have lowered their targets recently.
What does Munster see --- there have been no creditable evidence that Apple is going to introduce a iphone nano.
That's my point --- if all the other analysts have lowered the price targets for apple shares, then Munster's lone $250 price target doesn't provide confidence at all.
What does Munster see --- there have been no creditable evidence that Apple is going to introduce a iphone nano.
That's my point --- if all the other analysts have lowered the price targets for apple shares, then Munster's lone $250 price target doesn't provide confidence at all.
Wow! You go all over the book, don't you?
If one argument doesn't work, you twist it in your next post.
Comments
As I said it earlier --- he "fine-tunes" his estimates and then gives it a wide-range. Also --- any idiot can be correct during the good years. But you know what --- everybody is looking at Warren Buffett right now during the bad times.
I rather have analysts putting out new estimates when Apple actually decides to announce something --- be it a new product or a new pricing.
They have to put out reports when they are due, at regular intervals. Their job isn't to make Apple look good, or bad, it's to inform their clients. They follow a company because they think it's important enough. No one was following Apple for years. Now, many are. He followed then when he was all alone. I give him credit for that.
You're saying they shouldn't report unless Apple has a new product? You're kidding!
If Apple doesn't have new products when they can be expected, thats of interest as well, because that affects the sales and stock price as well.
And don't forget that these reports do take some time to produce. They shouldn't be making new predictions as soon as something changes. It must be evaluated as well.
Ad it's just as difficult to do a report when things are going well as when they aren't. They still must come up with numbers
Seriously? That is seems so archaically backwards for a country whose phones are supposed to be so advanced. Why not use the much faster BT that doesn't require a direct line-of-sight of IR ports in some kinky cellphone mating ritual? Or how about sending your vCard from your contact list via an email or SMS on the cellular network?
Granted, the iPhone does not support sendign vCards, despite its long use of vCards on the Mac, but we're talking about the transfer method used to send the data, not the lack of the iPhone's many SW shortcomings.
In the US, asking a girl for her number by requesting a file transfer between phones wouldn't work... at least not the clubs I go to. Usually you just ask for it and they tell you. Are Japanese phone numbers unusually long or contain more then Roman numerals?
The whole point of IR is that you dont have to type in a phone number of an email address. And the japanese love features. Even they dont use half of them, it's comforting to know they are there. Like the payment feature.
Oh and the iPhone is not selling well in Japan. There has been a report a couple of months ago. It attracted attention at first, but the sales not so good.
You're saying they shouldn't report unless Apple has a new product? You're kidding!
If Apple doesn't have new products when they can be expected, thats of interest as well, because that affects the sales and stock price as well.
I didn't say that --- I said that the other analysts don't speculate on baseless rumors and wild ideas.
There were no creditable rumors at the moment on a iphone nano in the product pipeline. The other analysts expects price drops --- but not to the level that Munster expects in order to get 45 million iphones. What's next for Munster after basing his estimates on zero dollar iphones --- Apple is going to give you a Apple laptop for free along with your zero dollar iphone and Munster expects Apple to sell a billion iphones.
There was an old joke about Apple putting out a iphone shuffle that will just dial random telephone numbers --- should Munster put that into his estimates as well.
The whole point of IR is that you dont have to type in a phone number of an email address. And the japanese love features. Even they dont use half of them, it's comforting to know they are there. Like the payment feature.
Oh and the iPhone is not selling well in Japan. There has been a report a couple of months ago. It attracted attention at first, but the sales not so good.
You're way out of date on the sales issue. Incorrect too.
I didn't say that --- I said that the other analysts don't speculate on baseless rumors and wild ideas.
There were no creditable rumors at the moment on a iphone nano in the product pipeline. The other analysts expects price drops --- but not to the level that Munster expects in order to get 45 million iphones. What's next for Munster after basing his estimates on zero dollar iphones --- Apple is going to give you a Apple laptop for free along with your zero dollar iphone and Munster expects Apple to sell a billion iphones.
There was an old joke about Apple putting out a iphone shuffle that will just dial random telephone numbers --- should Munster put that into his estimates as well.
It read as though that was what you were saying.
But, he may be the one laughing after all.
http://bullcross.blogspot.com/2008/1...urpass-q4.html
It read as though that was what you were saying.
But, he may be the one laughing after all.
http://bullcross.blogspot.com/2008/1...urpass-q4.html
Apple hasn't actually released any sales data yet.
It's as likely to be like the Japan iphone sales situation --- premature celebration.
Even if he is right --- then all we have is a land grab by Apple and RIM --- sacrifacing profit margins. 10 million iphones at $600 each plus revenue sharing from carriers is like about 50 (complete guess) million iphones at $200 each with zero revenue sharing.
You don't see Motorola celebrating the RAZR sales anymore --- the margins are crap with carriers giving them away.
Even if he is right --- then all we have is a land grab by Apple and RIM --- sacrifacing profit margins. 10 million iphones at $600 each plus revenue sharing from carriers is like about 50 (complete guess) million iphones at $200 each with zero revenue sharing.
You've got over 400 posts here and I know you are well aware that the iPhone only costs $200/300 for eligible customers and that AT&T is paying Apple the reminder of the agreed upon price upfront, instead of paying small, incremental payments over 2 years. On top of that, you know very well that the iPhone was dropped to $400 after 2 months and that the 16GB $300 model is the most popular model.
So, what purpose do you have for spreading so much FUD?
You've got over 400 posts here and I know you are well aware that the iPhone only costs $200/300 for eligible customers and that AT&T is paying Apple the reminder of the agreed upon price upfront, instead of paying small, incremental payments over 2 years. On top of that, you know very well that the iPhone was dropped to $400 after 2 months and that the 16GB $300 model is the most popular model.
So, what purpose do you have for spreading so much FUD?
It's not FUD at all.
The 10 million number came from Steve Jobs' keynote when the iphone was priced at $600 (with a 2 year contract) and revenue sharing. If Apple is keeping the same amount of money as before --- then Munster would be raising his Apple stock price targets (instead of maintaining $250 a share target with 45 million iphones sold upto next year's end).
The "power" of the 10 million units goal --- loses all kinds of meaning when the current pricing is introduced. Just like the 50 million RAZR sold --- it loses all kinds of meanings when every carrier in the world is giving them out for free.
Apple hasn't actually released any sales data yet.
It's as likely to be like the Japan iphone sales situation --- premature celebration.
Even if he is right --- then all we have is a land grab by Apple and RIM --- sacrifacing profit margins. 10 million iphones at $600 each plus revenue sharing from carriers is like about 50 (complete guess) million iphones at $200 each with zero revenue sharing.
You don't see Motorola celebrating the RAZR sales anymore --- the margins are crap with carriers giving them away.
What are you saying?
Apple will take real fine profits on these phones. The amount they will be getting is pretty much the same as with revenue sharing. They just will get written down differently. And even if they do get somewhat less, so what?
That's still a big deal.
You seem to not know where you're going with this.
It's not FUD at all.
The 10 million number came from Steve Jobs' keynote when the iphone was priced at $600 (with a 2 year contract) and revenue sharing. If Apple is keeping the same amount of money as before --- then Munster would be raising his Apple stock price targets (instead of maintaining $250 a share target with 45 million iphones sold upto next year's end).
The "power" of the 10 million units goal --- loses all kinds of meaning when the current pricing is introduced. Just like the 50 million RAZR sold --- it loses all kinds of meanings when every carrier in the world is giving them out for free.
You have absolutely no idea what Apple was planning. don't pretend to.
No doubt, Apple lowered prices earlier than expected. That didn't cost them much.
You also seem to be living in your own world.
The markets have dropped quite a bit recently, as has Apple. To even keep the price target where it is, expresses confidence. For Apple to have sold so many phones in this time period, with consumer confidence so low is itself quite good. This economic situation is not just here in the States, though Europe has been in an economic pit for more than a few years now.
You have absolutely no idea what Apple was planning. don't pretend to.
No doubt, Apple lowered prices earlier than expected. That didn't cost them much.
You also seem to be living in your own world.
The markets have dropped quite a bit recently, as has Apple. To even keep the price target where it is, expresses confidence. For Apple to have sold so many phones in this time period, with consumer confidence so low is itself quite good. This economic situation is not just here in the States, though Europe has been in an economic pit for more than a few years now.
And neither is Munster --- which is my point.
What price target are you talking about? Munster's $250 a share price target or Apple's $200 iphone. If it's Munster's, it doesn't express confidence when nobody else is having similar price target for APPL shares. If it is apple's $200 iphone --- then it's just a land grab by Apple and RIM --- it doesn't express confidence.
And neither is Munster --- which is my point.
What price target are you talking about? Munster's $250 a share price target or Apple's $200 iphone. If it's Munster's, it doesn't express confidence when nobody else is having similar price target for APPL shares. If it is apple's $200 iphone --- then it's just a land grab by Apple and RIM --- it doesn't express confidence.
Munster doesn't claim to know what Apple is planning. He just can go by what he sees.
You were talking about the stock price, so I responded to that.
You apparently haven't noticed that a number of others have lowered their targets recently.
Munster doesn't claim to know what Apple is planning. He just can go by what he sees.
You were talking about the stock price, so I responded to that.
You apparently haven't noticed that a number of others have lowered their targets recently.
What does Munster see --- there have been no creditable evidence that Apple is going to introduce a iphone nano.
That's my point --- if all the other analysts have lowered the price targets for apple shares, then Munster's lone $250 price target doesn't provide confidence at all.
What does Munster see --- there have been no creditable evidence that Apple is going to introduce a iphone nano.
That's my point --- if all the other analysts have lowered the price targets for apple shares, then Munster's lone $250 price target doesn't provide confidence at all.
Wow! You go all over the book, don't you?
If one argument doesn't work, you twist it in your next post.