No way, i like my optical drive and need it frequently. for a 15" MBP to go without optical, i wouldn't buy it. you want that, get an air.
for battery life? hah, most places i go have power. i need a portable office, even when i fly, where i can burn discs. cd's for music samples. and then also BD so i can backup my photography and video.
so... i really want BD. Need BD. and don't really think Battery life is all the PR on it is saying. and even if so, I CAN PLUG INTO POWER most of the time.
I'm not trying to argue here, its just that Apple seems to be going the wireless way with everything now. Maybe and just maybe the iPad is the next computer? I wish it was a real computer and not just a big iPod Touch with cool new laptop features but maybe this is just a test trial and there will be a iPad Pro out there in the future.
No way, i like my optical drive and need it frequently. for a 15" MBP to go without optical, i wouldn't buy it. you want that, get an air.
for battery life? hah, most places i go have power. i need a portable office, even when i fly, where i can burn discs. cd's for music samples. and then also BD so i can backup my photography and video.
so... i really want BD. Need BD. and don't really think Battery life is all the PR on it is saying. and even if so, I CAN PLUG INTO POWER most of the time.
Then it sounds like you won't be a Mac customer for too much longer since backing up to a disc is by far the slowest, most power hungry and least economical way to back up files. It's also the worst option for the typical consumer when playing video. Anyone with even rudimentary computer knowledge will copy their DVD video when traveling to keep from using excessive power and having to carry discs with them.
If carrying a spool of discs isn't an issue for you then using an external optical drive shouldn't matter either.
PS: The air isn't a viable solution for most as it's not just a removal of the ODD but the use of a CULV processor and 1.8" drive, neither of which is desired for performance, capacity and cost reasons.
i work for an EMC customer. the strategy is to sell the storage boxes at cost and make it up on hard drives and support. think $800 for a 500GB hard drive and $40,000 a year or so for support
sure now it is (they even sell some below cost), plus consulting services, dedup, DR, etc etc. My point was what led to their decline and their rebirth was moving to provide an total solution rather than just an excellent product, and I think that's the direction Apple is moving to, between their own Macs, Apple TV, iPod, iPad, iPhone, iTunes movies and music....they're basically trying to fulfill every an any entertainment need.
I do wonder what the sales will be the opening weekend and beyond in relation to the iPhone. The iPad does have the advantage of not requiring a data plan, but the iPhone was truly unique and phones are a necessity.
I think within a few years we'll see the tablet market become relevant and within 5 years the iPad could outpace the Mac in terms of revenue and profit, despite continued record growth in Mac sales.
All eyes will be on that first weekend, then the month or so after that, when the research firms will start doing their retail surveys. No doubt we'll see a lot of wildly variable numbers, just like we did for the iPhone in its early days. Then in July we'll get the official rake from Apple in the earnings report, or if the sales are really good, at WWDC in June. Meantime investor's knuckles are bound to get a little white.
Quote:
Then they were outsmarted with the personal computer by not holding applicable patents and by allowing MS to sell their OS to others. One a mistake of torpidity, the other of hubris.
That's a complicated story. The IBM-PC was intended as a rear-guard maneuver to protect their larger market in heavy iron. Nobody at that time really knew if the PC market was real so I don't think IBM can be entirely blamed for not seeing it. Ironically the IBM-PC would not have been the singular success it was if IBM had retained control. Instead probably a lot of competing hardware and software platforms would have emerged during the '80s, and we'd have seen a far more diverse and healthy market than what we got.
A lot of what the iPad is (and is not) can be understood this way. To keep the growth rates running, they need to sell a lot of iPads, probably more than they sold of iPhones off the blocks.
Exactly. To move the needle in any significant way, Apple would need to proportionately increase their growth and reach with every new product -- selling a similar number (assuming similar $ margins) to the already-successful previous product is not sufficient. (I.e., if you're a $100 company and create a product that increases the market cap by $10, you'll need the next product to increase it by $11 to produce the same return for shareholders).
That is tough to do. Growth is, as a result, mean-reverting.
Exactly. To move the needle in any significant way, Apple would need to proportionately increase their growth and reach with every new product -- selling a similar number (assuming similar $ margins) to the already-successful previous product is not sufficient. (I.e., if you're a $100 company and create a product that increases the market cap by $10, you'll need the next product to increase it by $11 to produce the same return for shareholders).
That is tough to do. Growth is, as a result, mean-reverting.
I never thought of growth rates as reverting to a mean, but I suppose that's one way to look at it. The other side of this coin is that Apple has huge leveraging opportunities due to their previous successes with consumers. With all of the moaning/groaning about the iPad's limitations, it's clear that Apple understands the difficulty of this dive and designed the product accordingly. They must appeal to a certain portion of their customer base that already knows and likes the iPhone, and get a buy-in from a new segment of buyers in order to keep the earnings growth rate on fire beyond the next year or two. The nag that remains at the back of my mind is the knowledge that many companies which once looked unbeatable have been beaten.
All eyes will be on that first weekend, then the month or so after that, when the research firms will start doing their retail surveys. No doubt we'll see a lot of wildly variable numbers, just like we did for the iPhone in its early days. Then in July we'll get the official rake from Apple in the earnings report, or if the sales are really good, at WWDC in June. Meantime investor's knuckles are bound to get a little white.
I have to wonder if waiting the 3 weeks for the 3G version to come out would not have been a better move (in some way) since I know several people who had planned on just getting the WiFi model in the interim and then buying the 3G model later, but with the launch dates less than month apart they are just going to wait.
I have to wonder if waiting the 3 weeks for the 3G version to come out would not have been a better move (in some way) since I know several people who had planned on just getting the WiFi model in the interim and then buying the 3G model later, but with the launch dates less than month apart they are just going to wait.
I'm not waiting, plain on preordering the 64 GB Wifi.
Question is for the preorder there is a rumor going around that people who preorder get a free gift, is that true?
I have to wonder if waiting the 3 weeks for the 3G version to come out would not have been a better move (in some way) since I know several people who had planned on just getting the WiFi model in the interim and then buying the 3G model later, but with the launch dates less than month apart they are just going to wait.
Hard to say based on what we know now. Apple seemed extremely anxious to get this product into circulation, enough so that they did the public dog and pony show more than two months before anyone could buy it. I know they did this for the iPhone as well, and it helps build the buzz, but my sense of this for the iPad is that Apple felt their window of opportunity was slipping away. They had to have an answer to why someone should not buy a cheap WIndows netbook for their mobile needs, and they wanted consumers to know what it was sooner rather than later.
I'm not waiting, plain on preordering the 64 GB Wifi.
Question is for the preorder there is a rumor going around that people who preorder get a free gift, is that true?
I haven't heard of that. What kind of gift? They have been giving the first 100 or so at some stores a t-shirt with the new iPhones and the first day(s) got a special bag to go with it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss
Hard to say based on what we know now. Apple seemed extremely anxious to get this product into circulation, enough so that they did the public dog and pony show more than two months before anyone could buy it. I know they did this for the iPhone as well, and it helps build the buzz, but my sense of this for the iPad is that Apple felt their window of opportunity was slipping away. They had to have an answer to why someone should not buy a cheap WIndows netbook for their mobile needs, and they wanted consumers to know what it was sooner rather than later.
The first Phone needed the intro because their customer base is likely under contract. The 6 month window allowed for 25% to effectively be out of contract. The future iPhones also allowed for the ut of contract option a little bit, but mostly it seemed to allow developers to be ready with apps for the next version of iPhone OS.
The iPad seems to fall under the developer umbrella with a secondary reason to get publishers ready for the iPad launch, which was the one area Apple wasn't controlling well, and likely to get more publishers on board. I have to wonder if there is a third reason in regards to video that we have yet to hear about.
The first Phone needed the intro because their customer base is likely under contract. The 6 month window allowed for 25% to effectively be out of contract. The future iPhones also allowed for the ut of contract option a little bit, but mostly it seemed to allow developers to be ready with apps for the next version of iPhone OS.
The iPad seems to fall under the developer umbrella with a secondary reason to get publishers ready for the iPad launch, which was the one area Apple wasn't controlling well, and likely to get more publishers on board. I have to wonder if there is a third reason in regards to video that we have yet to hear about.
The other factor is that Apple used to be more constrained as to when they rolled out products, so they showed the iPhone for the first time at MWSF in January. That was so far in advance of shipping that the only one anyone could see was a dummy in a glass case. I believe Apple certainly could have worked with more developers under NDAs and made a simultaneous announcement and product release for the iPad, but they opted instead for this way. Perhaps your "third reason" is that too many details were beginning to leak out. I know that it's not as exciting a reason as an unannounced feature, but it seems the more likely one.
MS focus on SW, IBM on HW and both of them had substantial growth by playing to the low end of the market. Apple may make their money from HW but they create an environment not easily copied or replicated and are still mostly focusing on higher-end, even within the cheaper segments of the CE market. For instance, the iPod Nano compared to other PMPs in its class.
Those are the obvious tech comparisons. But one of the important differentiators in my mind is that they both totally dominated their market on their way to the top of their market cap.
MS was selling their OS on much more than 90% of the computers sold back in the day. To grow sales, they depended on the growth of the entire market (which was explosive through the 90s). Apple, on the other hand, is at their market cap peak (so far) and they be lucky to hit 20% of computers or phones in the forseable future. The only market they dominate is the MP3 market.
It just seems crazy that Apple can have so much apparent potential for growth from where they are. Of course, it may not be possible to get to even 20% without giving up their profit margins... Still, it seems to make comparisons difficult.
Quote:
I think this gives them a long term benefit over MS and IBM and allows them to grow more steadily into wider markets of the lower-end slowly as the upper-tiers slowly get saturated. Perhaps a better comparative example would be Cisco, who also make the HW and SW and are considered the cream of the crop for the router market, but that in itself has some comparative issues. For starters, the lack of a consumer element and of course the stock stagnation since the dot.com crash a decade ago.
I hope Cisco is not a better comparison! Sell now!!
Of course, it may not be possible to get to even 20% without giving up their profit margins... Still, it seems to make comparisons difficult.
I think it's impossible to do. Loop at HP and Dell with their worldwide PC marketshare. There is absolutely no way Apple can do it unless they compete on the same level they are, which I don't think Apple is willing to do and if they do it once they've saturated a price region it'll take decades at the current growth rate before that would be possible.
Dabs.com price it at £1128. You are paying full retail at Sony.
Also... Ive never bought a virus killer ever. So stop with the unnecessary hype. You can buy Virus killers for Macs too you know (but are also not needed).
I'll give you multi touch trackpad though and iLife. . Unibody... Most people dont give a damn about it as a critical comparison point. (well I dont)
Isn't Laskys selling the MacBook Pro at £1100?
How do you create a Virus killer for something that that is immune to viruses?
So the Multi-touch trackpad and iLife is worth zero?
And because you don't give a damn, it has no value? Well, Windows and a finger print reader means nothing to most people here?
I think it's impossible to do. Loop at HP and Dell with their worldwide PC marketshare. There is absolutely no way Apple can do it unless they compete on the same level they are, which I don't think Apple is willing to do and if they do it once they've saturated a price region it'll take decades at the current growth rate before that would be possible.
The take-away point being, the current growth rate is an excellent source of growing earnings, which is the only thing which actually matters in the end. Way too much attention is focused on market share. A company could be increasing market share in a shrinking market, or one which is not profitable. That's not how to make the stockholders happy. The way to make stockholders happy is to earn more this quarter than you did last quarter or last year.
A lowered P/E means investors believe collectively that the company's earnings growth rates have declined or will decline. That does not make a stock safer investment -- far from it. It just means that your future returns will be lower, and that's never a good thing. Trailing P/E (the one most often quoted) is strictly a measure of anticipation. You're right, AAPL's P/E isn't likely to go as high as 40 again, unless investors really start to believe in the major growth story again. Only part of this is within Apple's control. If the iPad looks like it will be a hit, P/E will shoot up again.
I agree with your first point, i.e. that lower P/E means investors collectively believe earnings (or at least growth) will decline, but with due respect you've lost me when you say a lower P/E means my future returns will be lower. My thinking goes like this: I know that I'm right some of the time and wrong some of the time. I believe the same is true of the market, i.e. your "collective investors". I happen to think that when the market gives APPL a lower P/E, the market is more likely to have underestimated Apple and my holdings are more likely to do good things in the future, i.e. I expect Apple to exceed expectations. On the contrary, when the market gives APPL a higher P/E, it's less likely that the market has underestimated Apple, and in fact it's possible that they've overestimated Apple and Jobs, and it's more likely my holdings will do bad things in the future. I know the herd is right some of the time but they're also wrong some of the time. I myself am pretty much constantly bullish on APPL (though all I do is sell now; I finished buying ten years ago) and I expect them to do better than the baked-in expectations at a P/E of 20, but I don't expect them to beat the baked-in expectations when it's up at 40.
I agree with your first point, i.e. that lower P/E means investors collectively believe earnings (or at least growth) will decline, but with due respect you've lost me when you say a lower P/E means my future returns will be lower. My thinking goes like this: I know that I'm right some of the time and wrong some of the time. I believe the same is true of the market, i.e. your "collective investors". I happen to think that when the market gives APPL a lower P/E, the market is more likely to have underestimated Apple and my holdings are more likely to do good things in the future, i.e. I expect Apple to exceed expectations. On the contrary, when the market gives APPL a higher P/E, it's less likely that the market has underestimated Apple, and in fact it's possible that they've overestimated Apple and Jobs, and it's more likely my holdings will do bad things in the future. I know the herd is right some of the time but they're also wrong some of the time. I myself am pretty much constantly bullish on APPL (though all I do is sell now; I finished buying ten years ago) and I expect them to do better than the baked-in expectations at a P/E of 20, but I don't expect them to beat the baked-in expectations when it's up at 40.
I take your point, but unfortunately we never know which scenario is going to play out. A lower P/E can mean the stock is undervalued, but only if earnings continue to outstrip those lowered expectations in which case investors will bid the P/E upwards, eventually, if it looks sustainable. If earnings growth rates do decline then the market will keep those P/E ratios lower to reflect that reality. Bottom line, declining P/E can be harbinger of either impending value or declining earnings, we just don't know which until after the fact. You have to place your bets on which one you think it will be.
Take the last AAPL earnings report for instance. They blew out consensus earnings estimates but the market collectively yawned and allowed the P/E drop. This doesn't mean next time the markets will behave any differently if the markets still don't believe that 3-6-9 months from now that they'll repeat the performance.
Comments
No way, i like my optical drive and need it frequently. for a 15" MBP to go without optical, i wouldn't buy it. you want that, get an air.
for battery life? hah, most places i go have power. i need a portable office, even when i fly, where i can burn discs. cd's for music samples. and then also BD so i can backup my photography and video.
so... i really want BD. Need BD. and don't really think Battery life is all the PR on it is saying. and even if so, I CAN PLUG INTO POWER most of the time.
I'm not trying to argue here, its just that Apple seems to be going the wireless way with everything now. Maybe and just maybe the iPad is the next computer? I wish it was a real computer and not just a big iPod Touch with cool new laptop features but maybe this is just a test trial and there will be a iPad Pro out there in the future.
No way, i like my optical drive and need it frequently. for a 15" MBP to go without optical, i wouldn't buy it. you want that, get an air.
for battery life? hah, most places i go have power. i need a portable office, even when i fly, where i can burn discs. cd's for music samples. and then also BD so i can backup my photography and video.
so... i really want BD. Need BD. and don't really think Battery life is all the PR on it is saying. and even if so, I CAN PLUG INTO POWER most of the time.
Then it sounds like you won't be a Mac customer for too much longer since backing up to a disc is by far the slowest, most power hungry and least economical way to back up files. It's also the worst option for the typical consumer when playing video. Anyone with even rudimentary computer knowledge will copy their DVD video when traveling to keep from using excessive power and having to carry discs with them.
If carrying a spool of discs isn't an issue for you then using an external optical drive shouldn't matter either.
PS: The air isn't a viable solution for most as it's not just a removal of the ODD but the use of a CULV processor and 1.8" drive, neither of which is desired for performance, capacity and cost reasons.
i work for an EMC customer. the strategy is to sell the storage boxes at cost and make it up on hard drives and support. think $800 for a 500GB hard drive and $40,000 a year or so for support
sure now it is (they even sell some below cost), plus consulting services, dedup, DR, etc etc. My point was what led to their decline and their rebirth was moving to provide an total solution rather than just an excellent product, and I think that's the direction Apple is moving to, between their own Macs, Apple TV, iPod, iPad, iPhone, iTunes movies and music....they're basically trying to fulfill every an any entertainment need.
I do wonder what the sales will be the opening weekend and beyond in relation to the iPhone. The iPad does have the advantage of not requiring a data plan, but the iPhone was truly unique and phones are a necessity.
I think within a few years we'll see the tablet market become relevant and within 5 years the iPad could outpace the Mac in terms of revenue and profit, despite continued record growth in Mac sales.
All eyes will be on that first weekend, then the month or so after that, when the research firms will start doing their retail surveys. No doubt we'll see a lot of wildly variable numbers, just like we did for the iPhone in its early days. Then in July we'll get the official rake from Apple in the earnings report, or if the sales are really good, at WWDC in June. Meantime investor's knuckles are bound to get a little white.
Then they were outsmarted with the personal computer by not holding applicable patents and by allowing MS to sell their OS to others. One a mistake of torpidity, the other of hubris.
That's a complicated story. The IBM-PC was intended as a rear-guard maneuver to protect their larger market in heavy iron. Nobody at that time really knew if the PC market was real so I don't think IBM can be entirely blamed for not seeing it. Ironically the IBM-PC would not have been the singular success it was if IBM had retained control. Instead probably a lot of competing hardware and software platforms would have emerged during the '80s, and we'd have seen a far more diverse and healthy market than what we got.
A lot of what the iPad is (and is not) can be understood this way. To keep the growth rates running, they need to sell a lot of iPads, probably more than they sold of iPhones off the blocks.
Exactly. To move the needle in any significant way, Apple would need to proportionately increase their growth and reach with every new product -- selling a similar number (assuming similar $ margins) to the already-successful previous product is not sufficient. (I.e., if you're a $100 company and create a product that increases the market cap by $10, you'll need the next product to increase it by $11 to produce the same return for shareholders).
That is tough to do. Growth is, as a result, mean-reverting.
Exactly. To move the needle in any significant way, Apple would need to proportionately increase their growth and reach with every new product -- selling a similar number (assuming similar $ margins) to the already-successful previous product is not sufficient. (I.e., if you're a $100 company and create a product that increases the market cap by $10, you'll need the next product to increase it by $11 to produce the same return for shareholders).
That is tough to do. Growth is, as a result, mean-reverting.
I never thought of growth rates as reverting to a mean, but I suppose that's one way to look at it. The other side of this coin is that Apple has huge leveraging opportunities due to their previous successes with consumers. With all of the moaning/groaning about the iPad's limitations, it's clear that Apple understands the difficulty of this dive and designed the product accordingly. They must appeal to a certain portion of their customer base that already knows and likes the iPhone, and get a buy-in from a new segment of buyers in order to keep the earnings growth rate on fire beyond the next year or two. The nag that remains at the back of my mind is the knowledge that many companies which once looked unbeatable have been beaten.
All eyes will be on that first weekend, then the month or so after that, when the research firms will start doing their retail surveys. No doubt we'll see a lot of wildly variable numbers, just like we did for the iPhone in its early days. Then in July we'll get the official rake from Apple in the earnings report, or if the sales are really good, at WWDC in June. Meantime investor's knuckles are bound to get a little white.
I have to wonder if waiting the 3 weeks for the 3G version to come out would not have been a better move (in some way) since I know several people who had planned on just getting the WiFi model in the interim and then buying the 3G model later, but with the launch dates less than month apart they are just going to wait.
I have to wonder if waiting the 3 weeks for the 3G version to come out would not have been a better move (in some way) since I know several people who had planned on just getting the WiFi model in the interim and then buying the 3G model later, but with the launch dates less than month apart they are just going to wait.
I'm not waiting, plain on preordering the 64 GB Wifi.
Question is for the preorder there is a rumor going around that people who preorder get a free gift, is that true?
I have to wonder if waiting the 3 weeks for the 3G version to come out would not have been a better move (in some way) since I know several people who had planned on just getting the WiFi model in the interim and then buying the 3G model later, but with the launch dates less than month apart they are just going to wait.
Hard to say based on what we know now. Apple seemed extremely anxious to get this product into circulation, enough so that they did the public dog and pony show more than two months before anyone could buy it. I know they did this for the iPhone as well, and it helps build the buzz, but my sense of this for the iPad is that Apple felt their window of opportunity was slipping away. They had to have an answer to why someone should not buy a cheap WIndows netbook for their mobile needs, and they wanted consumers to know what it was sooner rather than later.
I'm not waiting, plain on preordering the 64 GB Wifi.
Question is for the preorder there is a rumor going around that people who preorder get a free gift, is that true?
I haven't heard of that. What kind of gift? They have been giving the first 100 or so at some stores a t-shirt with the new iPhones and the first day(s) got a special bag to go with it.
Hard to say based on what we know now. Apple seemed extremely anxious to get this product into circulation, enough so that they did the public dog and pony show more than two months before anyone could buy it. I know they did this for the iPhone as well, and it helps build the buzz, but my sense of this for the iPad is that Apple felt their window of opportunity was slipping away. They had to have an answer to why someone should not buy a cheap WIndows netbook for their mobile needs, and they wanted consumers to know what it was sooner rather than later.
The first Phone needed the intro because their customer base is likely under contract. The 6 month window allowed for 25% to effectively be out of contract. The future iPhones also allowed for the ut of contract option a little bit, but mostly it seemed to allow developers to be ready with apps for the next version of iPhone OS.
The iPad seems to fall under the developer umbrella with a secondary reason to get publishers ready for the iPad launch, which was the one area Apple wasn't controlling well, and likely to get more publishers on board. I have to wonder if there is a third reason in regards to video that we have yet to hear about.
The first Phone needed the intro because their customer base is likely under contract. The 6 month window allowed for 25% to effectively be out of contract. The future iPhones also allowed for the ut of contract option a little bit, but mostly it seemed to allow developers to be ready with apps for the next version of iPhone OS.
The iPad seems to fall under the developer umbrella with a secondary reason to get publishers ready for the iPad launch, which was the one area Apple wasn't controlling well, and likely to get more publishers on board. I have to wonder if there is a third reason in regards to video that we have yet to hear about.
The other factor is that Apple used to be more constrained as to when they rolled out products, so they showed the iPhone for the first time at MWSF in January. That was so far in advance of shipping that the only one anyone could see was a dummy in a glass case. I believe Apple certainly could have worked with more developers under NDAs and made a simultaneous announcement and product release for the iPad, but they opted instead for this way. Perhaps your "third reason" is that too many details were beginning to leak out. I know that it's not as exciting a reason as an unannounced feature, but it seems the more likely one.
MS focus on SW, IBM on HW and both of them had substantial growth by playing to the low end of the market. Apple may make their money from HW but they create an environment not easily copied or replicated and are still mostly focusing on higher-end, even within the cheaper segments of the CE market. For instance, the iPod Nano compared to other PMPs in its class.
Those are the obvious tech comparisons. But one of the important differentiators in my mind is that they both totally dominated their market on their way to the top of their market cap.
MS was selling their OS on much more than 90% of the computers sold back in the day. To grow sales, they depended on the growth of the entire market (which was explosive through the 90s). Apple, on the other hand, is at their market cap peak (so far) and they be lucky to hit 20% of computers or phones in the forseable future. The only market they dominate is the MP3 market.
It just seems crazy that Apple can have so much apparent potential for growth from where they are. Of course, it may not be possible to get to even 20% without giving up their profit margins... Still, it seems to make comparisons difficult.
I think this gives them a long term benefit over MS and IBM and allows them to grow more steadily into wider markets of the lower-end slowly as the upper-tiers slowly get saturated. Perhaps a better comparative example would be Cisco, who also make the HW and SW and are considered the cream of the crop for the router market, but that in itself has some comparative issues. For starters, the lack of a consumer element and of course the stock stagnation since the dot.com crash a decade ago.
I hope Cisco is not a better comparison! Sell now!!
Of course, it may not be possible to get to even 20% without giving up their profit margins... Still, it seems to make comparisons difficult.
I think it's impossible to do. Loop at HP and Dell with their worldwide PC marketshare. There is absolutely no way Apple can do it unless they compete on the same level they are, which I don't think Apple is willing to do and if they do it once they've saturated a price region it'll take decades at the current growth rate before that would be possible.
Dabs.com price it at £1128. You are paying full retail at Sony.
Also... Ive never bought a virus killer ever. So stop with the unnecessary hype. You can buy Virus killers for Macs too you know (but are also not needed).
I'll give you multi touch trackpad though and iLife. . Unibody... Most people dont give a damn about it as a critical comparison point. (well I dont)
Isn't Laskys selling the MacBook Pro at £1100?
How do you create a Virus killer for something that that is immune to viruses?
So the Multi-touch trackpad and iLife is worth zero?
And because you don't give a damn, it has no value? Well, Windows and a finger print reader means nothing to most people here?
I think it's impossible to do. Loop at HP and Dell with their worldwide PC marketshare. There is absolutely no way Apple can do it unless they compete on the same level they are, which I don't think Apple is willing to do and if they do it once they've saturated a price region it'll take decades at the current growth rate before that would be possible.
The take-away point being, the current growth rate is an excellent source of growing earnings, which is the only thing which actually matters in the end. Way too much attention is focused on market share. A company could be increasing market share in a shrinking market, or one which is not profitable. That's not how to make the stockholders happy. The way to make stockholders happy is to earn more this quarter than you did last quarter or last year.
A lowered P/E means investors believe collectively that the company's earnings growth rates have declined or will decline. That does not make a stock safer investment -- far from it. It just means that your future returns will be lower, and that's never a good thing. Trailing P/E (the one most often quoted) is strictly a measure of anticipation. You're right, AAPL's P/E isn't likely to go as high as 40 again, unless investors really start to believe in the major growth story again. Only part of this is within Apple's control. If the iPad looks like it will be a hit, P/E will shoot up again.
I agree with your first point, i.e. that lower P/E means investors collectively believe earnings (or at least growth) will decline, but with due respect you've lost me when you say a lower P/E means my future returns will be lower. My thinking goes like this: I know that I'm right some of the time and wrong some of the time. I believe the same is true of the market, i.e. your "collective investors". I happen to think that when the market gives APPL a lower P/E, the market is more likely to have underestimated Apple and my holdings are more likely to do good things in the future, i.e. I expect Apple to exceed expectations. On the contrary, when the market gives APPL a higher P/E, it's less likely that the market has underestimated Apple, and in fact it's possible that they've overestimated Apple and Jobs, and it's more likely my holdings will do bad things in the future. I know the herd is right some of the time but they're also wrong some of the time. I myself am pretty much constantly bullish on APPL (though all I do is sell now; I finished buying ten years ago) and I expect them to do better than the baked-in expectations at a P/E of 20, but I don't expect them to beat the baked-in expectations when it's up at 40.
I agree with your first point, i.e. that lower P/E means investors collectively believe earnings (or at least growth) will decline, but with due respect you've lost me when you say a lower P/E means my future returns will be lower. My thinking goes like this: I know that I'm right some of the time and wrong some of the time. I believe the same is true of the market, i.e. your "collective investors". I happen to think that when the market gives APPL a lower P/E, the market is more likely to have underestimated Apple and my holdings are more likely to do good things in the future, i.e. I expect Apple to exceed expectations. On the contrary, when the market gives APPL a higher P/E, it's less likely that the market has underestimated Apple, and in fact it's possible that they've overestimated Apple and Jobs, and it's more likely my holdings will do bad things in the future. I know the herd is right some of the time but they're also wrong some of the time. I myself am pretty much constantly bullish on APPL (though all I do is sell now; I finished buying ten years ago) and I expect them to do better than the baked-in expectations at a P/E of 20, but I don't expect them to beat the baked-in expectations when it's up at 40.
I take your point, but unfortunately we never know which scenario is going to play out. A lower P/E can mean the stock is undervalued, but only if earnings continue to outstrip those lowered expectations in which case investors will bid the P/E upwards, eventually, if it looks sustainable. If earnings growth rates do decline then the market will keep those P/E ratios lower to reflect that reality. Bottom line, declining P/E can be harbinger of either impending value or declining earnings, we just don't know which until after the fact. You have to place your bets on which one you think it will be.
Take the last AAPL earnings report for instance. They blew out consensus earnings estimates but the market collectively yawned and allowed the P/E drop. This doesn't mean next time the markets will behave any differently if the markets still don't believe that 3-6-9 months from now that they'll repeat the performance.
Its too bad that good sales are not good enough by themselves - they have to make it "look better". I don't get the analysts.
jaff is a weird dude
Even more amazing considering most of Apple's current mac products use old out of date technology and are in dire need of updates....
Im looking at you Macbooks/Macbook Pros/Airs/Minis/Mac Pro's !
ilst the user experience may well be 1st class, there is nothing worse that flogging off year old tech at launch prices.
my MBP153.02 GHz will beat any other lap top on the planet in every way . the snow is the first step to a brand new world
No surprises here . . .
When it comes to Apple, 'down' is good. So is 'up.'
Go figure.
reminds me of the dead cat bounce stock quotes