Wells Fargo maintains neutral outlook on Apple, says market expectations too high

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 33
    b9botb9bot Posts: 238member
    How can you have record profits, Mac and phone sales off the charts and consider Apple as a company that won't perform well? The fact that Apple has gone up even with there rating proves that most people think Apple still will perform better. Remember the Apple Watch is just around the corner too.
  • Reply 22 of 33
    pazuzupazuzu Posts: 1,728member
    sog35 wrote: »
    Wise?  This same tool downgraded Apple when it was $80.  He just lost his clients 30% return.

    Total BS that Apple is too leveraged with iPhone.  People buy iPhone's not just because of the hardware.  They buy it for the ecosystem, OS, apps, experience, ect.

    You say they are too leveraged but what about Google?  95% of their profits comes from adverstising.  BMW makes 100% of their profits from cars. Exxon makes 100% from oil.  Stop with the BS trash.

    People love iPhones for all you've mentioned (though I doubt all use many apps or can figure out how the ecosystem even works) and I'm not saying they don't. But when you have an Apple TV that is 4 years stale and ITunes which is losing Music sales etc etc . the iPhone alone shouldn't paint the whole Apple picture for investor decisions. Just sayin.
  • Reply 23 of 33
    freerangefreerange Posts: 1,589member
    Morons abound in the world of anal-ists. The difference in COG between 16gb and 32gb memory is not material. It's a rounding error in the big picture. More importantly, trying to look at Apple's value from the standpoint of a single relatively inexpensive component is like valuing a luxury car by the type of oil in the engine.
  • Reply 24 of 33
    solipsismy wrote: »
    Someone is showing their age. :D

    Maybe, I'm 24 and I laughed at that.
  • Reply 25 of 33
    wdowell wrote: »
    It's funny how many ? insider followers are dismissive of opinions of apple analysts and share prices - unless of course it is high at which point they like to laugh at other companies with lower stuff.

    At the end of the day sentiment is what runs the show - not necessary accurate rational thinking
    Sentiment in shortrun.... rational
    Thinking in long run !
  • Reply 26 of 33
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    Maybe, I'm 24 and I laughed at that.

    So you know the show The Many Loves of Dobie Gillis? I certainly wasn't close to being born then, but I've seen the show on Nick at Night or something when I was young, as well as hearing that is where Bob Denver got some fame before Gilligan's Island, and with such unusual and goofy names it's not something I was likely to forget.
  • Reply 27 of 33
    Dont u find it suspect and curios that these reports come out just one day before the earnigs report?

    Manipulation written all over these kind of reports !
  • Reply 28 of 33
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by rob53 View Post

     

    "Um also expressed concern over Apple's next product cycle, particularly with regard to the low-end 16-gigabyte capacity for the iPhone and iPad. The analyst said that 16 gigabytes does not appear to be sufficient for modern devices, and raising the minimum storage to 32 gigabytes could affect average selling prices and margins."

     


    I just bought a 16GB iPad for work.  I only need the iPad to run one piece of software (the rest is bonus) and there is plenty of memory to spare.  I'm glad the cheaper 16GB option was available in this case, but for my own use I'd opt for the 64GB.

  • Reply 29 of 33
    rob53 wrote: »
    "Um also expressed concern over Apple's next product cycle, particularly with regard to the low-end 16-gigabyte capacity for the iPhone and iPad. The analyst said that 16 gigabytes does not appear to be sufficient for modern devices, and raising the minimum storage to 32 gigabytes could affect average selling prices and margins."

    He's not only an analyst but a technical expert. What technical background does he have to make statements like this? 16GB is fine for a lot of people, just not for those who want to carry half of the iTunes library or every photo they've ever taken on their phones. I'd like to see valid numbers collected (maybe Apple actually already does this) that show how much data space is actually used on iPhones. Until this happens, this Um guy needs to come up with something else. Doubling the data size from 16 to 32GB wouldn't affect Apple's bottom line very much anyway. The charge $100 more to go from 16GB to 64GB on an iPhone 6, which probably doesn't cost them more than $5 so how would this affect Apple's margins? It affects the average selling price (up) but so what?

    As for P/E level, AAPL has been low for a long time without any valid reason. If AAPL's P/E ratio was the same as Google or Amazon (two companies that don't sell a product they've built, they just sell marketing), their share price would be through the roof. AAPL's P/E ratio is contradictory to what normal investors think about a stock. With AAPL's low P/E investors should be downgrading this stock but they aren't, except for a few who are working their own angles. 

    I don't know…I have a 32 GB iPhone and I am constantly running up against the storage wall. The only photos I have on the phone are the ones taken with it. I constantly have to delete apps to make more room. I think he is right, 16 GB is pitiful today.

    Apple did this on purpose, to get people to spend another hundred dollars, which is another 20% BTW, to get a decent amount of storage. It is good people are calling Apple out on this.
  • Reply 30 of 33
    justbobf wrote: »
    I don't know…I have a 32 GB iPhone and I am constantly running up against the storage wall. The only photos I have on the phone are the ones taken with it. I constantly have to delete apps to make more room. I think he is right, 16 GB is pitiful today.

    Not enough for you doesn't mean it's not enough for others. You haven't even detailed what's using all your space which is suspect in and of itself.
    Apple did this on purpose, to get people to spend another hundred dollars, which is another 20% BTW, to get a decent amount of storage. It is good people are calling Apple out on this.

    1) Of course they did. Who would think they make these decisions by accident.

    2) Apple could have simply offered 32GB as the 2nd tier, 64GB as the 3rd their and 128GB for the 4th tier, each for $100 more, but they didn't. They offered 48GB of additional space for $100 more instead of 16GB for $100 more.
  • Reply 31 of 33

    What's wrong with Wall St, companies that predict the future, better known as analysts. Headline this morning; Apple Had Better Beat Wall Street Expectations." STOP pressuring companies to meet YOUR expectations. Buyers produce the earnings report, not Soothsayers.

  • Reply 32 of 33
    solipsismy wrote: »
    Someone is showing their age. :D

    Maybe, I'm 24 and I laughed at that.

    Young whippersnapper.
Sign In or Register to comment.