As long as we're talking analysts, there was another report from a few days ago which makes slightly more sense to me. It claims that Sprint may be in danger of forced bankruptcy if the next iPhone includes 4G LTE as rumored. Sprint doesn't have the infrastructure to compete with either Verizon or ATT, and also lacks available spectrum to shift over even if it wanted to.
My favorite quote from the article: "Want to know how bad the housing bubble is going to get? Look around you right now, today December 30th 2005 is as bad as it?s going to get."
The almost complete denial of any weakness to the stock is classic bubble mentality. At this point new Apple investors are only lining the pockets of existing shareholders.
You're getting demoted to Private.
Had you used almost any argument other than that tired old saw about "your friends moving to Android" then you probably would have gotten some more thoughtful replies.
Is AAPL going to go down from its current price? I would say that it is. Is AAPL going to be worth more than the current price at this time next year? I would say that it is.
So, either way you cut it... buying after AAPL has had a 20-30% haircut or buying now and riding it out... AAPL will give you gains in the future.
Will AAPL still give you the gains over the next 5 years that you could have had buying it in 2007? Most likely not. Will AAPL give you better gains than most, if not all, of the other tech companies in the next 5 years. Most likely.
My first cellphone was a Motorola, costing me 750, five years before iPhone, and a palm to handle calendaring, and notes, and a few other functions. Compared to the iPhone today, these are a ripoff, but I and many others coughed up that kind of money.
I certainly would like to see the end of subsidies for all phones, removal of long term contracts, common cell technologies, and concomitant drop in providers' monthly and usage charges to make up the difference. Being realistic, when you buy a subsidized phone, you're really taking out a loan, and paying exorbitant interest. Get the carriers out of the business, or let there be competition in this loan making business, or let those who can, buy the phone outright.
We would all be better off, and I'd doubt there would be much change in purchasing trends. There are no subsidies for the ipad, or other Mac products, so there should be little for the iPhone.
I certainly would like to see the end of subsidies for all phones, removal of long term contracts, common cell technologies, and concomitant drop in providers' monthly and usage charges to make up the difference. Being realistic, when you buy a subsidized phone, you're really taking out a loan, and paying exorbitant interest. Get the carriers out of the business, or let there be competition in this loan making business, or let those who can, buy the phone outright.
There seem to be increasing numbers of prepaid services that offer much of what you ask for.
Do you foresee any of the mainstream carriers offering what you want? via a separate subsidiary maybe?
Have you seen any analysis of the effective interest rate subscribers are paying to the carriers due to their subsidized purchases? IOW, are the savings going to be seen as worth it to the consumer, if they are offered lower connection rates in exchange for BYO phones?
And how doe the seeming shortage of data bandwidth affect the decisions of the carriers?
My favorite quote from the article: "Want to know how bad the housing bubble is going to get? Look around you right now, today December 30th 2005 is as bad as it?s going to get."
The almost complete denial of any weakness to the stock is classic bubble mentality. At this point new Apple investors are only lining the pockets of existing shareholders.
The bubble I'm seeing these days is the one building up below Facebook... Not Apple.
US carriers should do what Carriers elsewhere in the world do: have the monthly price of the contract without the phone, and add the explicit phone payment (which is currently a built-in subsidy in the US) as a separate item on the bill. This allows the consumer to see the impact of different phone costs on their monthly bill.
With regard to the specific issue: if the carriers started jacking up against the most popular phone they would be in a bag of hurt. And even if they tried to gang up, which would be illegal BTW, Apple can afford to subsidise the iphone directly via the apple store and negotiate with the carriers to offer phone free contracts.
I wasn't aware the carriers were supposed to make money from selling the phones. The carriers sell services... which is what they charge a monthly fee for.
I'm an American... so I only know subsidies. My 16GB iPhone only cost me $200 because Verizon subsidized it. Basically... Verizon then wrote a check to Apple for the remaining $450.
But Verizon does that because they will make it up by me paying a monthly fee over the life of my contract... or at least that's what's supposed to happen.
If that's not working anymore... the carriers need to fix it.
I could certainly afford paying the full $650 for an iPhone.... but not if I'll be paying the same monthly fee as a subsidized customer.
Subsidized:
$200 phone + $90 a month
Unsubsidized:
$650 phone + $90 a month (?)
That doesn't make any sense at all...
If the carriers aren't gonna "finance" new phone sales anymore... then it's back to the drawing board...
I think what the analyst is saying is that instead of writing a cheque for $450 to Apple the carriers would like to write a cheque for $250 to Nokia or Samsung or whoever so the carriers make a lot more money. The tariffs remain the same but the amount the carriers have to pay out in handset subsidies would fall dramatically thereby slashing their cost base and raising their profits. I think there is some resentment amongst the carriers that Apple is making so much profit, much of it from the carrier subsidies.
Something like 50% of Apple's revenues come from the iPhone so this would a big deal if it happened in a big way. How many people would be willing to pay for a much higher priced (less subsidised) iPhone over a much cheaper alternative? Who knows.
I think what the analyst is saying is that instead of writing a cheque for $450 to Apple the carriers would like to write a cheque for $250 to Nokia or Samsung or whoever so the carriers make a lot more money. The tariffs remain the same but the amount the carriers have to pay out in handset subsidies would fall dramatically thereby slashing their cost base and raising their profits. I think there is some resentment amongst the carriers that Apple is making so much profit, much of it from the carrier subsidies.
That's what happens when you only look at the debit side of the ledger.
What is Apple bringing to AT&T? Billions and billions of dollars in revenue. For example, if I switch to a different regional provider who is using the AT&T network, I'll save about $1400 over the 2 year contract period compared to getting a subsidized phone from AT&T. And the regional offers a significantly better plan, as well. Even if I buy a new iPhone every year and sell the old one on eBay, I'll still have hundreds of dollars in my pocket. So AT&T is making a TON of money off iPhone customers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun, UK
Something like 50% of Apple's revenues come from the iPhone so this would a big deal if it happened in a big way. How many people would be willing to pay for a much higher priced (less subsidised) iPhone over a much cheaper alternative? Who knows.
I don't know how many, but I'll bet there are lots. As I said - I'll save about $1400 over 2 years by using my own phone - or hundreds of dollars if I buy an unsubsidized phone rather than getting a subsidy from AT&T.
But it's not going to happen. The carriers all offer subsidies because they make lots more money that way.
I think what the analyst is saying is that instead of writing a cheque for $450 to Apple the carriers would like to write a cheque for $250 to Nokia or Samsung or whoever so the carriers make a lot more money. The tariffs remain the same but the amount the carriers have to pay out in handset subsidies would fall dramatically thereby slashing their cost base and raising their profits. I think there is some resentment amongst the carriers that Apple is making so much profit, much of it from the carrier subsidies.
Something like 50% of Apple's revenues come from the iPhone so this would a big deal if it happened in a big way. How many people would be willing to pay for a much higher priced (less subsidised) iPhone over a much cheaper alternative? Who knows.
Ah... that makes sense.
Well... the carriers are in trouble then... they already sell 15 other phones that aren't the iPhone. But people aren't choosing those...
And I don't think the carriers should resent Apple for making so much profit... they are in different industries.
Apple sells a $650 phone... and the carriers will collect $90 a month from each customer for the rest of our lives.
Besides... it's the carriers' fault... they started subsidizing phones. I once got a Blackberry for $29 on upgrade. Clearly Verizon footed the rest of the cost of that phone to get me to sign a 2 year contract. It must have been a good risk.
When someone posts a legitimate, well-supported complaint about Apple, it is readily accepted. It is the endless FUD that people spread with no evidence and no basis in facts that gets flamed.
NO, it is never accepted. That is why I made the comment. I've been reading this forum for a while now and a constructive critique is always met with a negative comment, always and in great numbers.
When someone posts a legitimate, well-supported complaint about Apple, it is readily accepted. It is the endless FUD that people spread with no evidence and no basis in facts that gets flamed.
Yes, you are right. As a matter of fact that is evident in this thread. In every thread I've ever read there are always a few very objective comments from pro Apple people; people who do not contribute to the endless fud seen from the anti-Apple faction.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic
NO, it is never accepted. That is why I made the comment. I've been reading this forum for a while now and a constructive critique is always met with a negative comment, always and in great numbers.
Comments
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericsavi...of-bankruptcy/
Quite the bubble mentality here! Apple certainly isn't going to collapse, but the days of making easy money with that stock are gone.
If you'd like an example of "bubble mentality" consider this article: http://www.investorelite.com/article...ousing-bubble/
My favorite quote from the article: "Want to know how bad the housing bubble is going to get? Look around you right now, today December 30th 2005 is as bad as it?s going to get."
The almost complete denial of any weakness to the stock is classic bubble mentality. At this point new Apple investors are only lining the pockets of existing shareholders.
You're getting demoted to Private.
Had you used almost any argument other than that tired old saw about "your friends moving to Android" then you probably would have gotten some more thoughtful replies.
Is AAPL going to go down from its current price? I would say that it is. Is AAPL going to be worth more than the current price at this time next year? I would say that it is.
So, either way you cut it... buying after AAPL has had a 20-30% haircut or buying now and riding it out... AAPL will give you gains in the future.
Will AAPL still give you the gains over the next 5 years that you could have had buying it in 2007? Most likely not. Will AAPL give you better gains than most, if not all, of the other tech companies in the next 5 years. Most likely.
jmho
I certainly would like to see the end of subsidies for all phones, removal of long term contracts, common cell technologies, and concomitant drop in providers' monthly and usage charges to make up the difference. Being realistic, when you buy a subsidized phone, you're really taking out a loan, and paying exorbitant interest. Get the carriers out of the business, or let there be competition in this loan making business, or let those who can, buy the phone outright.
We would all be better off, and I'd doubt there would be much change in purchasing trends. There are no subsidies for the ipad, or other Mac products, so there should be little for the iPhone.
I'd like to see them back it up by shorting the stock.
Agree. I'd like to see them suffer injury as well as insult. (Or is it injury as well as ignominy?)
I certainly would like to see the end of subsidies for all phones, removal of long term contracts, common cell technologies, and concomitant drop in providers' monthly and usage charges to make up the difference. Being realistic, when you buy a subsidized phone, you're really taking out a loan, and paying exorbitant interest. Get the carriers out of the business, or let there be competition in this loan making business, or let those who can, buy the phone outright.
There seem to be increasing numbers of prepaid services that offer much of what you ask for.
Do you foresee any of the mainstream carriers offering what you want? via a separate subsidiary maybe?
Have you seen any analysis of the effective interest rate subscribers are paying to the carriers due to their subsidized purchases? IOW, are the savings going to be seen as worth it to the consumer, if they are offered lower connection rates in exchange for BYO phones?
And how doe the seeming shortage of data bandwidth affect the decisions of the carriers?
BTW - don't forget, the stock will drop Thursday and Friday for options expiration.
That depends on where max pain is at.
(Little out of date...but still relevant)
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/06/...ne-year-later/
Quite the bubble mentality here! Apple certainly isn't going to collapse, but the days of making easy money with that stock are gone.
If you'd like an example of "bubble mentality" consider this article: http://www.investorelite.com/article...ousing-bubble/
My favorite quote from the article: "Want to know how bad the housing bubble is going to get? Look around you right now, today December 30th 2005 is as bad as it?s going to get."
The almost complete denial of any weakness to the stock is classic bubble mentality. At this point new Apple investors are only lining the pockets of existing shareholders.
The bubble I'm seeing these days is the one building up below Facebook... Not Apple.
The bubble I'm seeing these days is the one building up below Facebook... Not Apple.
If AAPL had Amazon's trailing and forward p/e... then I'd be thinking bubble.
With regard to the specific issue: if the carriers started jacking up against the most popular phone they would be in a bag of hurt. And even if they tried to gang up, which would be illegal BTW, Apple can afford to subsidise the iphone directly via the apple store and negotiate with the carriers to offer phone free contracts.
I wasn't aware the carriers were supposed to make money from selling the phones. The carriers sell services... which is what they charge a monthly fee for.
I'm an American... so I only know subsidies. My 16GB iPhone only cost me $200 because Verizon subsidized it. Basically... Verizon then wrote a check to Apple for the remaining $450.
But Verizon does that because they will make it up by me paying a monthly fee over the life of my contract... or at least that's what's supposed to happen.
If that's not working anymore... the carriers need to fix it.
I could certainly afford paying the full $650 for an iPhone.... but not if I'll be paying the same monthly fee as a subsidized customer.
Subsidized:
$200 phone + $90 a month
Unsubsidized:
$650 phone + $90 a month (?)
That doesn't make any sense at all...
If the carriers aren't gonna "finance" new phone sales anymore... then it's back to the drawing board...
I think what the analyst is saying is that instead of writing a cheque for $450 to Apple the carriers would like to write a cheque for $250 to Nokia or Samsung or whoever so the carriers make a lot more money. The tariffs remain the same but the amount the carriers have to pay out in handset subsidies would fall dramatically thereby slashing their cost base and raising their profits. I think there is some resentment amongst the carriers that Apple is making so much profit, much of it from the carrier subsidies.
Something like 50% of Apple's revenues come from the iPhone so this would a big deal if it happened in a big way. How many people would be willing to pay for a much higher priced (less subsidised) iPhone over a much cheaper alternative? Who knows.
I think what the analyst is saying is that instead of writing a cheque for $450 to Apple the carriers would like to write a cheque for $250 to Nokia or Samsung or whoever so the carriers make a lot more money. The tariffs remain the same but the amount the carriers have to pay out in handset subsidies would fall dramatically thereby slashing their cost base and raising their profits. I think there is some resentment amongst the carriers that Apple is making so much profit, much of it from the carrier subsidies.
That's what happens when you only look at the debit side of the ledger.
What is Apple bringing to AT&T? Billions and billions of dollars in revenue. For example, if I switch to a different regional provider who is using the AT&T network, I'll save about $1400 over the 2 year contract period compared to getting a subsidized phone from AT&T. And the regional offers a significantly better plan, as well. Even if I buy a new iPhone every year and sell the old one on eBay, I'll still have hundreds of dollars in my pocket. So AT&T is making a TON of money off iPhone customers.
Something like 50% of Apple's revenues come from the iPhone so this would a big deal if it happened in a big way. How many people would be willing to pay for a much higher priced (less subsidised) iPhone over a much cheaper alternative? Who knows.
I don't know how many, but I'll bet there are lots. As I said - I'll save about $1400 over 2 years by using my own phone - or hundreds of dollars if I buy an unsubsidized phone rather than getting a subsidy from AT&T.
But it's not going to happen. The carriers all offer subsidies because they make lots more money that way.
I think what the analyst is saying is that instead of writing a cheque for $450 to Apple the carriers would like to write a cheque for $250 to Nokia or Samsung or whoever so the carriers make a lot more money. The tariffs remain the same but the amount the carriers have to pay out in handset subsidies would fall dramatically thereby slashing their cost base and raising their profits. I think there is some resentment amongst the carriers that Apple is making so much profit, much of it from the carrier subsidies.
Something like 50% of Apple's revenues come from the iPhone so this would a big deal if it happened in a big way. How many people would be willing to pay for a much higher priced (less subsidised) iPhone over a much cheaper alternative? Who knows.
Ah... that makes sense.
Well... the carriers are in trouble then... they already sell 15 other phones that aren't the iPhone. But people aren't choosing those...
And I don't think the carriers should resent Apple for making so much profit... they are in different industries.
Apple sells a $650 phone... and the carriers will collect $90 a month from each customer for the rest of our lives.
Besides... it's the carriers' fault... they started subsidizing phones. I once got a Blackberry for $29 on upgrade. Clearly Verizon footed the rest of the cost of that phone to get me to sign a 2 year contract. It must have been a good risk.
That is, of course, total nonsense.
When someone posts a legitimate, well-supported complaint about Apple, it is readily accepted. It is the endless FUD that people spread with no evidence and no basis in facts that gets flamed.
NO, it is never accepted. That is why I made the comment. I've been reading this forum for a while now and a constructive critique is always met with a negative comment, always and in great numbers.
That is, of course, total nonsense.
When someone posts a legitimate, well-supported complaint about Apple, it is readily accepted. It is the endless FUD that people spread with no evidence and no basis in facts that gets flamed.
Yes, you are right. As a matter of fact that is evident in this thread. In every thread I've ever read there are always a few very objective comments from pro Apple people; people who do not contribute to the endless fud seen from the anti-Apple faction.
NO, it is never accepted. That is why I made the comment. I've been reading this forum for a while now and a constructive critique is always met with a negative comment, always and in great numbers.
Does anyone else see the irony in this comment...