The analyst said the fact that carriers are becoming more strict to 24-month upgrade cycles could serve as a sign that the "balance of power" between wireless providers and smartphone makers is shifting back to carriers.
Sheesh. The carriers are actually being pulled in the opposite direction, e.g., by T-Mobile's "uncarrier" approach which is pulling in millions of new customers (even with their sparse coverage) buying their own phones outright (or purchasing them on installment plans that terminate when paid in full, rather than via never-ending subsidy costs). This alone makes this guy way behind the curve.
I'm saving at least $40/month. THIS is more like the future (if people wise up at least).
Quote (from the article):
"Rather, the shortfall stemmed from lower than expected sales in the U.S.," he said. "Apple attributed part of the domestic shortfall to a change in carrier upgrade policies, which stretched the iPhone upgrade cycle among owners of the iPhone."
More like Apple's stubborn hewing to their "ergonomic aesthetic" of small screens when the market was obviously increasingly embracing larger form factors in most price segments, while Apple's been going "la-la-la" about this issue.
Which is why I bought a Moto X and a T-Mob unlimited/unthrottled plan. Cheap enough to let me see what Apple does about the "size matters" issue this fall.
And their last chance with consumers like me for awhile if they don't bring out something I'm looking for, as otherwise I'll start to get too used to and invested in that other ecosystem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by G-News
Stock is down 42.46$ as of this moment. It seems Apple has finally attracted the attention of "investors" that nobody really wants. It's a sick world we live in, where you can post a profit of over 13 billion and be punished for it by an 8% stock drop.
This is ridiculous.
P.S.: That also means by buying today, you'll make 8% profit within a week's time.
Another reason is that Apple gave "lower guidance" going forward - which the article should have been updated to reflect. THAT always spooks investor's attitudes toward what's been "hyper growth company."
Apple's R&D spending as a percentage of revenue has always been (sometimes far) lower than most of its peers. Many apologists will tell you this is because their efforts are "smarter and more focused." While I think it's more that they've been caught up in their own reality distortion field and have been complacent about the competitive landscape - missing obvious segment opportunities they could have been in if they'd opened their huge wallet (and had less idle cash in it to attract the iCahns of the world).
And that includes bringing out a new disruptive tech as well as a better reading of the phone market.
The issue, I've come to see, is that when those analyst estimates on future earnings are acted on (buy stock) and that drives up the stock price in response, when those estimates are revealed to be inaccurate the response is pulled back (stock is sold), and that reduces the price.
When the weather forecast is for rain I grab an umbrella: once the forecast is shown wrong with clearing skies, I get rid of the umbrella.... I might blame the weatherman but I still drop the umbrella.
Should the analysts or weather forecasters be believed? Or the P/E ratio this low? Different issues.
Another reason is that Apple gave "lower guidance" going forward - which the article should have been updated to reflect. THAT always spooks investor's attitudes toward what's been "hyper growth company."
Apple's R&D spending as a percentage of revenue has always been (sometimes far) lower than most of its peers. Many apologists will tell you this is because their efforts are "smarter and more focused." While I think it's more that they've been caught up in their own reality distortion field and have been complacent about the competitive landscape - missing obvious segment opportunities they could have been in if they'd opened their huge wallet (and had less idle cash in it to attract the iCahns of the world).
And that includes bringing out a new disruptive tech as well as a better reading of the phone market.
Missing obvious segment opportunities ....
Apple, unlike other companies, does not set out to pursue every segment just because the opportunity is there. Apple didn't miss these opportunities. They ignore them.
Reported R&D figures are manipulated by accountants. Only fools use them to compare the R&D being done at different companies.
Not even counting the times when Cook took the reins in Jobs' absence, Cook led Apple to its biggest quarter ever (the one under discussion here), not just in terms of dollars, but in terms of sales. It's also one of Apple's best Mac quarters ever.
And we're not talking sales based on a tired old business model (an OS and a lousy office suite) that ignores the pace of change (there's such a thing as making money from all the wrong things), but one that reflects in the most exacting way possible, everything that is important about current market dynamics.
The problem here isn't Apple's performance, which is not only astounding in purely tech company terms, but also in terms of *any* company *ever*.
This is the fourth-highest quarterly earnings by any company (any country). Of the six highest earnings ever, Apple now owns positions 4, 5, and 6. The top three are all oil companies.
The problem is Wall Street expectations (not Apple's performance), most of which do not (and need not) have any actual basis in reality.
And Apple's astounding achievement is based on what, exactly? A closed, proprietary platform that fits into a vertical business model, with only a very limited number of products at its core. Streamlined product portfolio, no OEMs.
Think about it.
You are wasting your breath. Those who want to condemn Cook will find reasons to do so. Here is the thing - there is nothing magical about earnings announcements. So the stock tanks a bit. Eventually it will come back up, only to tank again at some point. A day like yesterday simply provides a focal point. The company is no better and no worse off today than yesterday. If you're rich like Icahn, you take advantage of yesterday to buy more. If you are not, you shouldn't play the stock market.
Oh dear, oh dear! Some poor little rich boys think it is time to sell Apple shares and buy what ... Microsoft shares or Samsung shares? Let's hope Apple just ignore these parasites and keeps concentrating on what real CUSTOMERS think, and keep driving INNOVATION for the entire industry for decades to come.
Oh dear, oh dear! Some poor little rich boys think it is time to sell Apple shares and buy what ... Microsoft shares or Samsung shares? Let's hope Apple just ignore these parasites and keeps concentrating on what real CUSTOMERS think, and keep driving INNOVATION for the entire industry for decades to come.
You left out Sony ... didn't Moody's just downgrade them to "junk" status? Ouch.
You are probably right Jean Luc. :-) But when a bunch of "analysts" all publish their similar positions in an effort to drive the price down, that is organized collusion. And I'd bet many of them sold their interest in Apple just prior to publishing their speculations (and will be buying it back when they feel they've driven it down far enough). I also love how they try to pawn it off on "investors" being concerned. I'm an investor and I looked at the Apple numbers. Their overall performance is still excellent and a solid investment if it weren't for "analysts" manipulating the stock value.
The release of a larger iPhone will definitely help with sales but that is only a short term fix. After 4 years with essentially the same design for the iPhone I also expect the iPhone 6 to look radically different so that should help boost sales and bring back some excitement. Perhaps they will also figure out a better way forward for the successor to the 5c to address the growing midrange phone sector where most real growth is happening.
But ultimately Apple is far too dependent on the iPhone for growth. I am hoping for some completely new product categories to take the pressure off of iPhone sales. Home automation devices, a real iOS in the car product that goes well beyond what we have seen thus far, an AppleTV with DVR capabilities, HDMI in and out, and game support complete with a real controller, maybe a wearable type device. Who knows, but I hope all the talk about new products down the pipeline over the last 3 years is based on some actual new products and not just more refreshes of the current products.
I accept that Apple definitely needs to diversify, but that will be an incredible challenge because of the "Market Share" problem. It amazes me that people seem to think that iOS in the car is going to take off outside of the US. The problem is that as long as Apple follows the closed-shop proprietory strategy they will be a niche player in the world markets and I find it challenging to believe that non-us auto makers are going to swallow this and make themselves dependent on Apple .. where the market share of Apple in the target markets of the Auto industry is around 20%. That won't fly. US Auto makers are insignificant outside of the US. It would also be silly to assume that Apple understands the market dynamics and market strategy of the Auto industry. It is more sensible to assume that the Auto Makers who have joined the google initiative have good reasons for making that decision.
Similarly the home automation market ... as long as Apple is a niche player they will not be able to compete .. not just with Google and their Home Automation, but with other competitors also focussing on interoperability, brand neutrality and other open market strategies. Apple is not strong on embedded systems. I think these are all areas where "Market share" will be a defining factor and will take on a significance that many on AI don't see because of their obsessions.
As for next quarter's lowered guidance, why would analysts expect Apple to sell more the quarter after the winter holidays? ?? They are a consumer product tech firm. .
This time they beat the EPS and Gross Revenue numbers. So the analysts comeup with the number of phones sold as their complaint? Every qtr it is something else that they miss
Also there is deferred revenue. And the 14 to 26% increases in sales of software, apps, iTunes.
Nope. Analysts will never get Apple. Too busy crunching numbers from something somewhere. Sharp pencil points but dull players.
Another reason is that Apple gave "lower guidance" going forward - which the article should have been updated to reflect. THAT always spooks investor's attitudes toward what's been "hyper growth company."
Wrong. Prior to earnings release, AAPL traded around 550 which is 13.9 P/E. How is that anywhere near investor attitude toward "hyper growth"?
Would have been a different story if AAPL were at P/E of 17+....then the "lower guidance" would spook enough to shave off 8%.
All of you who are trying to explain the drop in share price due to financial data (via past earnings release) are just showing your true colors (which is probably yella or green). :-)
Wall Street believes that Apple is the Titanic; forever doomed to hit an iceberg and sink.
Apple believes it is the iceberg; a powerful entity mostly hidden from view.
Icebergs are the disruptors, not Titanics.
You are on to something ("hidden from view")...but it also seems that Apple's DNA is so different from the other market darlings (i.e. Amazon, Google, etc. with higher P/E and share prices). It hurts Apple's brand to either brag about the future or to throw crap against the wall and work with whatever sticks.
There WILL BE opportunity in the near future for Apple to monetize on other value-added products or services such as aTV, NFC-type payments, iWatch, etc. But it comes when it comes, and it'll surprise Wall Street off their asses cause EPS will increase and P/E will finally be restored to the 17+ range. Apple's ecosystem IS HUGE...especially when you consider not just the numbers of people, but the quality of people (i.e. those who can be influenced to spend money).
Apple, unlike other companies, does not set out to pursue every segment just because the opportunity is there. Apple didn't miss these opportunities. They ignore them.
Reported R&D figures are manipulated by accountants. Only fools use them to compare the R&D being done at different companies.
No two dollars spent on R&D produce the same results. While there is some benefit to having massive budgets, if it were a simple matter of throwing money at it, Apple could have have already developed a century's worth of innovative products, cured cancer and established world peace. ...And we would all be bitching that the windows on our personal space stations were too small.
AP is reporting Apple's earnings as "lackluster," even though they were the fourth best results in the history of quarterly corporate earnings results (and the best ever of a non-oil/gas company).
I understand that expectations were higher and the growth in terms of percentage is lower than it was a few years ago, but it's hard to not be impressed with a company that makes $13.1 billion in a single quarter, unless you've totally lost perspective. As of last April, for example, Amazon's total lifetime earnings were $1.9 Billion, and I know they've posted some losses since then.
And I don't think you can really say Apple's growth is over, if iPhones, iPads and Mac sales are all growing. Oh, and did I mention that iPhone Average Selling Price was also up?
In the quarter when Apple shares were at their peak (just over $700), Apple made a profit of $8.67 per diluted share, and this quarter it was only...$14.50 per diluted share. I know that's because "the market" was expecting growth to continue at its previous rate, but the overreaction is kind of nutty.
Not period. The rate of change in their profit has been declining. They also gave a flat guidance for the next quarter.
I think that flat guidance has worried a few analysts. I'm sure they expected guidance to be at least a tad higher considering that China Mobile just signed on.
I think that flat guidance has worried a few analysts. I'm sure they expected guidance to be at least a tad higher considering that China Mobile just signed on.
Comments
Sheesh. The carriers are actually being pulled in the opposite direction, e.g., by T-Mobile's "uncarrier" approach which is pulling in millions of new customers (even with their sparse coverage) buying their own phones outright (or purchasing them on installment plans that terminate when paid in full, rather than via never-ending subsidy costs). This alone makes this guy way behind the curve.
I'm saving at least $40/month. THIS is more like the future (if people wise up at least).
More like Apple's stubborn hewing to their "ergonomic aesthetic" of small screens when the market was obviously increasingly embracing larger form factors in most price segments, while Apple's been going "la-la-la" about this issue.
Which is why I bought a Moto X and a T-Mob unlimited/unthrottled plan. Cheap enough to let me see what Apple does about the "size matters" issue this fall.
And their last chance with consumers like me for awhile if they don't bring out something I'm looking for, as otherwise I'll start to get too used to and invested in that other ecosystem.
Quote:
Stock is down 42.46$ as of this moment. It seems Apple has finally attracted the attention of "investors" that nobody really wants. It's a sick world we live in, where you can post a profit of over 13 billion and be punished for it by an 8% stock drop.
This is ridiculous.
P.S.: That also means by buying today, you'll make 8% profit within a week's time.
Another reason is that Apple gave "lower guidance" going forward - which the article should have been updated to reflect. THAT always spooks investor's attitudes toward what's been "hyper growth company."
Apple's R&D spending as a percentage of revenue has always been (sometimes far) lower than most of its peers. Many apologists will tell you this is because their efforts are "smarter and more focused." While I think it's more that they've been caught up in their own reality distortion field and have been complacent about the competitive landscape - missing obvious segment opportunities they could have been in if they'd opened their huge wallet (and had less idle cash in it to attract the iCahns of the world).
And that includes bringing out a new disruptive tech as well as a better reading of the phone market.
Hence the saying 'buy on rumor sell on news'
Really a perception problem.
Wall Street believes that Apple is the Titanic; forever doomed to hit an iceberg and sink.
Apple believes it is the iceberg; a powerful entity mostly hidden from view.
Icebergs are the disruptors, not Titanics.
Icebergs are melting as global warming continues. ;-)
Another reason is that Apple gave "lower guidance" going forward - which the article should have been updated to reflect. THAT always spooks investor's attitudes toward what's been "hyper growth company."
Apple's R&D spending as a percentage of revenue has always been (sometimes far) lower than most of its peers. Many apologists will tell you this is because their efforts are "smarter and more focused." While I think it's more that they've been caught up in their own reality distortion field and have been complacent about the competitive landscape - missing obvious segment opportunities they could have been in if they'd opened their huge wallet (and had less idle cash in it to attract the iCahns of the world).
And that includes bringing out a new disruptive tech as well as a better reading of the phone market.
Missing obvious segment opportunities ....
Apple, unlike other companies, does not set out to pursue every segment just because the opportunity is there. Apple didn't miss these opportunities. They ignore them.
Reported R&D figures are manipulated by accountants. Only fools use them to compare the R&D being done at different companies.
Cook doesn't know how to lead?
Not even counting the times when Cook took the reins in Jobs' absence, Cook led Apple to its biggest quarter ever (the one under discussion here), not just in terms of dollars, but in terms of sales. It's also one of Apple's best Mac quarters ever.
And we're not talking sales based on a tired old business model (an OS and a lousy office suite) that ignores the pace of change (there's such a thing as making money from all the wrong things), but one that reflects in the most exacting way possible, everything that is important about current market dynamics.
The problem here isn't Apple's performance, which is not only astounding in purely tech company terms, but also in terms of *any* company *ever*.
This is the fourth-highest quarterly earnings by any company (any country). Of the six highest earnings ever, Apple now owns positions 4, 5, and 6. The top three are all oil companies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_corporate_profits_and_losses#Largest_Corporate_Quarterly_Earnings_of_All_Time
Largest Corporate Quarterly Earnings of All Time:
The problem is Wall Street expectations (not Apple's performance), most of which do not (and need not) have any actual basis in reality.
And Apple's astounding achievement is based on what, exactly? A closed, proprietary platform that fits into a vertical business model, with only a very limited number of products at its core. Streamlined product portfolio, no OEMs.
Think about it.
You are wasting your breath. Those who want to condemn Cook will find reasons to do so. Here is the thing - there is nothing magical about earnings announcements. So the stock tanks a bit. Eventually it will come back up, only to tank again at some point. A day like yesterday simply provides a focal point. The company is no better and no worse off today than yesterday. If you're rich like Icahn, you take advantage of yesterday to buy more. If you are not, you shouldn't play the stock market.
Apple SURPASED analysis EXPECTATIONS for EPS and Revenue. PERIOD.
Not period. The rate of change in their profit has been declining. They also gave a flat guidance for the next quarter.
Oh dear, oh dear! Some poor little rich boys think it is time to sell Apple shares and buy what ... Microsoft shares or Samsung shares? Let's hope Apple just ignore these parasites and keeps concentrating on what real CUSTOMERS think, and keep driving INNOVATION for the entire industry for decades to come.
You left out Sony ... didn't Moody's just downgrade them to "junk" status? Ouch.
These WS clowns should all be brought up on charges by the SEC for stock manipulation and price fixing. Unfortunately, the SEC has no balls.
Price fixing? I'm not sure that's what this is.
Price fixing? I'm not sure that's what this is.
You are probably right Jean Luc. :-) But when a bunch of "analysts" all publish their similar positions in an effort to drive the price down, that is organized collusion. And I'd bet many of them sold their interest in Apple just prior to publishing their speculations (and will be buying it back when they feel they've driven it down far enough). I also love how they try to pawn it off on "investors" being concerned. I'm an investor and I looked at the Apple numbers. Their overall performance is still excellent and a solid investment if it weren't for "analysts" manipulating the stock value.
The release of a larger iPhone will definitely help with sales but that is only a short term fix. After 4 years with essentially the same design for the iPhone I also expect the iPhone 6 to look radically different so that should help boost sales and bring back some excitement. Perhaps they will also figure out a better way forward for the successor to the 5c to address the growing midrange phone sector where most real growth is happening.
But ultimately Apple is far too dependent on the iPhone for growth. I am hoping for some completely new product categories to take the pressure off of iPhone sales. Home automation devices, a real iOS in the car product that goes well beyond what we have seen thus far, an AppleTV with DVR capabilities, HDMI in and out, and game support complete with a real controller, maybe a wearable type device. Who knows, but I hope all the talk about new products down the pipeline over the last 3 years is based on some actual new products and not just more refreshes of the current products.
I accept that Apple definitely needs to diversify, but that will be an incredible challenge because of the "Market Share" problem. It amazes me that people seem to think that iOS in the car is going to take off outside of the US. The problem is that as long as Apple follows the closed-shop proprietory strategy they will be a niche player in the world markets and I find it challenging to believe that non-us auto makers are going to swallow this and make themselves dependent on Apple .. where the market share of Apple in the target markets of the Auto industry is around 20%. That won't fly. US Auto makers are insignificant outside of the US. It would also be silly to assume that Apple understands the market dynamics and market strategy of the Auto industry. It is more sensible to assume that the Auto Makers who have joined the google initiative have good reasons for making that decision.
Similarly the home automation market ... as long as Apple is a niche player they will not be able to compete .. not just with Google and their Home Automation, but with other competitors also focussing on interoperability, brand neutrality and other open market strategies. Apple is not strong on embedded systems. I think these are all areas where "Market share" will be a defining factor and will take on a significance that many on AI don't see because of their obsessions.
This time they beat the EPS and Gross Revenue numbers. So the analysts comeup with the number of phones sold as their complaint? Every qtr it is something else that they miss
Also there is deferred revenue.
And the 14 to 26% increases in sales of software, apps, iTunes.
Nope. Analysts will never get Apple. Too busy crunching numbers from something somewhere. Sharp pencil points but dull players.
That does it. I'm changing my sig.
Apple SURPASED analysis EXPECTATIONS for EPS and Revenue. PERIOD.
I just heard on the news that, quote, “revenue did not meet Apple’s expectations.”
Apple needs to sue whoever said that.
Another reason is that Apple gave "lower guidance" going forward - which the article should have been updated to reflect. THAT always spooks investor's attitudes toward what's been "hyper growth company."
Wrong. Prior to earnings release, AAPL traded around 550 which is 13.9 P/E. How is that anywhere near investor attitude toward "hyper growth"?
Would have been a different story if AAPL were at P/E of 17+....then the "lower guidance" would spook enough to shave off 8%.
All of you who are trying to explain the drop in share price due to financial data (via past earnings release) are just showing your true colors (which is probably yella or green). :-)
Really a perception problem.
Wall Street believes that Apple is the Titanic; forever doomed to hit an iceberg and sink.
Apple believes it is the iceberg; a powerful entity mostly hidden from view.
Icebergs are the disruptors, not Titanics.
You are on to something ("hidden from view")...but it also seems that Apple's DNA is so different from the other market darlings (i.e. Amazon, Google, etc. with higher P/E and share prices). It hurts Apple's brand to either brag about the future or to throw crap against the wall and work with whatever sticks.
There WILL BE opportunity in the near future for Apple to monetize on other value-added products or services such as aTV, NFC-type payments, iWatch, etc. But it comes when it comes, and it'll surprise Wall Street off their asses cause EPS will increase and P/E will finally be restored to the 17+ range. Apple's ecosystem IS HUGE...especially when you consider not just the numbers of people, but the quality of people (i.e. those who can be influenced to spend money).
Missing obvious segment opportunities ....
Apple, unlike other companies, does not set out to pursue every segment just because the opportunity is there. Apple didn't miss these opportunities. They ignore them.
Reported R&D figures are manipulated by accountants. Only fools use them to compare the R&D being done at different companies.
No two dollars spent on R&D produce the same results. While there is some benefit to having massive budgets, if it were a simple matter of throwing money at it, Apple could have have already developed a century's worth of innovative products, cured cancer and established world peace. ...And we would all be bitching that the windows on our personal space stations were too small.
AP is reporting Apple's earnings as "lackluster," even though they were the fourth best results in the history of quarterly corporate earnings results (and the best ever of a non-oil/gas company).
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/apple-shares-tumble-lackluster-earnings-22264506
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_corporate_profits_and_losses (scroll down to quarterly earnings)
I understand that expectations were higher and the growth in terms of percentage is lower than it was a few years ago, but it's hard to not be impressed with a company that makes $13.1 billion in a single quarter, unless you've totally lost perspective. As of last April, for example, Amazon's total lifetime earnings were $1.9 Billion, and I know they've posted some losses since then.
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/04/18/1-mind-blowing-comparison-of-apple-and-amazon.aspx
http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2013/10/25/amazon_earnings_jeff_bezos_is_like_king_midas_in_reverse_chart.html
And I don't think you can really say Apple's growth is over, if iPhones, iPads and Mac sales are all growing. Oh, and did I mention that iPhone Average Selling Price was also up?
In the quarter when Apple shares were at their peak (just over $700), Apple made a profit of $8.67 per diluted share, and this quarter it was only...$14.50 per diluted share. I know that's because "the market" was expecting growth to continue at its previous rate, but the overreaction is kind of nutty.
Revenue never meets expectations, we all expect to make more money than we actually do.
Not period. The rate of change in their profit has been declining. They also gave a flat guidance for the next quarter.
I think that flat guidance has worried a few analysts. I'm sure they expected guidance to be at least a tad higher considering that China Mobile just signed on.
Or it could be a ruse.