Sure, but if you refrained from ever investing because a very rare & random event might cause havoc, you would have lost a lot of purchasing power with that money under your mattress.
This is like being bearish on Gillette because they are too dependent on razors.
Well not a good analogy, since Gillette uses marketing to convince people more blades were better than one when in fact it not really true. Their whole business model when they could not grow share anymore was to sell increasing number of blade per shaver which worked for years, but today they have serious competition there as companies who offer single blade razors again and letting people know more blades are not better.
I never had a straight razor shave done but people who have says it is the best shave you can get.
The law of large numbers has to do with statistical sampling, not with determining company fundamentals. It says that as you increase your sample size you're more likely to get a "true" value. It has nothing to do with stock pricing. Or company earnings, growth, etc. It doesn't mean that as a company grows, that incremental growth becomes more difficult. Frankly, it's irrelevant for predicting what a company's fundamentals will look like at any period in the future.
No-one in the financial sector understands the law of large numbers. (They're not the only ones, but they do seem prouder of this failing than most others.) One tech journalist (who I think was paraphrasing someone else) likened it to insisting that if you measure LeBron James often enough, he'll be 5 foot 9.
This is useless without a timeline. When he's wrong for the next 50 years, and right on the 51st he can then say, "See, I told you I was right."
I'm sure, whenever Apple finally closes its doors - whether it's when an asteroid hits, or we blow ourselves up, or at the heat death of the universe - someone somewhere will be saying "I told you they wouldn't last!"
To be fair, fhe smartphone is already doing a lot of what we care about very well.
I do want better image recognition. I want better siri I want better maps and restaurant reviews etc I want more room to put my entire lossless music collection on phone and cloud. I do want icloud to function more like dropbox I want triple the current battery life I want healthcare compliant text messaging I want scratchproof glass I want apple pay everywhere I want NFC capability to open doors at work I want location services to make home automation more room contextual I want the cloud to keep a record of my voice recognition corrections so that any apple device that I use will have constantly learning voice recognition I want better RPG games on iphone I want a more bug free OS I want more websites to be iphone optimized or have iphone apps I want carplay
Oh wait, maybe there are some upgrade cycles to come... The analysts lack imagination.
Yeah, do the same thing to BMW because they only rely on cars instead of motocycles or bikes. Sometimes, dumb ass got to say something to stir things up.
Attempt at market manipulation. This jackwad will likely be the first buying Apple if the stock drops $20 on his prediction.
Funny thing I've noted about these so called market analysts. If they were worth a hoot they would have started their own highly successful company. Instead they pretend that they are experts. They should be required to post follow-ups on every prediction they make. If they did,
Just your average tunnel thinking MBA with no idea what Apple's business is.
Everybody lauded Microsoft's "vision" to put some variant of Windows into anything and everything. Unfortunately, Microsoft had three obstacles it was unable to overcome in its "vision" quest. The first was that its OS licensing model relied on others to compelling hardware. The second was Windows itself, an OS mired in its 1980s DOS foundation and the spaghetti code that followed. The third was Microsoft itself. It was successful in shoehorning Windows into other form factors, but Microsoft had no "vision" as to the benefits to the user. What jobs were the Windows powered devices suddenly going to be able to do that other OSs didn't already do? Further, none of the Windows variants integrated with any other variant. Still W/S and analysts like Berenberg loved them.
Apple is first and foremost an OS developer that is married to proprietary Apple hardware When developing a new form factor, which in all cases is a variant Apple computer, Apple gives it a host of capabilities, each found in other Apple computers, while deleting some functions and adding new functions.
The point is that the iPhone is a handheld Apple computer that CAN make cellular phone calls, but that's not its primary function. Because iOS devices cam communicate with each other and with MacOSX, new jobs can be created for the PLATFORM.
Apple Watch is a great example of this. Inelegantly labeled a "watch" because it is worn on the wrist, the functionality of the Apple Watch would be impossible without the ability of iOS devices to intercommunicate with each other and with MacOSx.
Apple Watch is going to drive a massive iPhone upgrade/adoption cycle over the next 2 - 3 years. That cycle will be enhanced by Apple Pay, which over the course of the next 3 years will become the dominant mobile pay system - worldwide.
Anybody that sees to much dependence on iPhone by Apple just doesn't understand the mutually beneficial interdependent nature of Apple products.
Apple isn't a Nokia, that flooded the world with low cost, DIGITAL, handsets during the '90s. It is an integrated platform of mutually supported products, using an OS and proprietary hardware unavailable to its competitors. The public has bought into Apple's "vision" even if the likes of Berenberg cannot (and are willing to pay a delicious premium for it).
This is one (of several) analyst I give no credence to.
If Berenberg really belives this they should reveal their short position. My prediction is that Berenberg will be out of business in 6 months if its really a business at all.
They quote the 'law of large numbers' but they forget the largest number of all at the moment. Apple has 160 billion of ready cash, this means that given a good idea they have the means to bring it to fruition unlike any other company on earth. It's almost certain that the iPhone will not remain 85% of Apple's cash cow, but when it eventually slides, there will be something else. With the cash, talent, and design and idea expertise that Apple has, anything is possible for the future, but most unlikely is for its value to drop by half.
This values them at less than about double the *cash* they have (I think ... doing the math in my head here). Heck Apple could take themselves private in 5 years, if shares hit $60, even if revenue only stays constant
They have enough money to buy back all the existing shares right now but they would not be allowed to do that. But, even if they were allowed to, that is not the same as going private. In order to go private, someone would have to buy them. There are only a handful of people who are wealthy enough to do that and I think Apple is better off being run by Tim Cook than some Saudi sheik. Apple cannot own itself. It is possible that it could be an employee owned company but they still need to come up with $759B. Plus whatever the material assets are.
If iPad sales continue to decline, and if the Apple Watch doesn't become a huge seller, the company still has two exceptional iPhones, upcoming state-of-the-art MacBooks (hopefully Skylake in the Pro) and a major update for the Apple TV. In other words, the stock may decline, but it won't be anywhere near what Berenberg Bank is predicting.
Otay! So I guess there is always a nut case somewhere. He is bearish on selling and upcoming product, but he is bullish on rumored product (Apple Car)? Can someone please deliver a canister of oxygen to that man, so he can breath and have oxygen and a good blood reaches his brains. April 1st is many days away!
Fire his boss, too, for letting this guy embarrass his firm for at least the last three years. Of course, if your boss is your father and a Middle East sheik who owns the whole damn enterprise thanks to his oil money, well then ...
"German investment firm Berenberg predicts continued success for Apple; and therefore pretends to predict doom to manipulate the price in the short term"
But it is so crazy I don't think anyone in the market would them seriously.
Given Apple's share is trading with a much lower P/E vs. other Tech Titans, isn't it fair to take the current Apple's share price as reasonable (and has accounted the concentration risk)? Undeniably, the heavy reliance of a single product is a concern; but it is more relevant for business model that relies on market share to survive. Apple has a wonderful track record on high margin low market share position. I doubt things will turn around in the foreseeable future given its highly guarded walled garden offerings (e.g. Ecosystem and proprietary hardware software).
Comments
This, happening in a more populated region:
Sure, but if you refrained from ever investing because a very rare & random event might cause havoc, you would have lost a lot of purchasing power with that money under your mattress.
Well not a good analogy, since Gillette uses marketing to convince people more blades were better than one when in fact it not really true. Their whole business model when they could not grow share anymore was to sell increasing number of blade per shaver which worked for years, but today they have serious competition there as companies who offer single blade razors again and letting people know more blades are not better.
I never had a straight razor shave done but people who have says it is the best shave you can get.
I'm sure, whenever Apple finally closes its doors - whether it's when an asteroid hits, or we blow ourselves up, or at the heat death of the universe - someone somewhere will be saying "I told you they wouldn't last!"
Apple Death Watch - now in its 39th year.
I do want better image recognition.
I want better siri
I want better maps and restaurant reviews etc
I want more room to put my entire lossless music collection on phone and cloud.
I do want icloud to function more like dropbox
I want triple the current battery life
I want healthcare compliant text messaging
I want scratchproof glass
I want apple pay everywhere
I want NFC capability to open doors at work
I want location services to make home automation more room contextual
I want the cloud to keep a record of my voice recognition corrections so that any apple device that I use will have constantly learning voice recognition
I want better RPG games on iphone
I want a more bug free OS
I want more websites to be iphone optimized or have iphone apps
I want carplay
Oh wait, maybe there are some upgrade cycles to come... The analysts lack imagination.
I believe it's schmuckopf.
Yeah, do the same thing to BMW because they only rely on cars instead of motocycles or bikes. Sometimes, dumb ass got to say something to stir things up.
Attempt at market manipulation. This jackwad will likely be the first buying Apple if the stock drops $20 on his prediction.
Funny thing I've noted about these so called market analysts. If they were worth a hoot they would have started their own highly successful company. Instead they pretend that they are experts. They should be required to post follow-ups on every prediction they make. If they did,
no one would listen to any of their BS.
Everybody lauded Microsoft's "vision" to put some variant of Windows into anything and everything. Unfortunately, Microsoft had three obstacles it was unable to overcome in its "vision" quest. The first was that its OS licensing model relied on others to compelling hardware. The second was Windows itself, an OS mired in its 1980s DOS foundation and the spaghetti code that followed. The third was Microsoft itself. It was successful in shoehorning Windows into other form factors, but Microsoft had no "vision" as to the benefits to the user. What jobs were the Windows powered devices suddenly going to be able to do that other OSs didn't already do? Further, none of the Windows variants integrated with any other variant. Still W/S and analysts like Berenberg loved them.
Apple is first and foremost an OS developer that is married to proprietary Apple hardware When developing a new form factor, which in all cases is a variant Apple computer, Apple gives it a host of capabilities, each found in other Apple computers, while deleting some functions and adding new functions.
The point is that the iPhone is a handheld Apple computer that CAN make cellular phone calls, but that's not its primary function. Because iOS devices cam communicate with each other and with MacOSX, new jobs can be created for the PLATFORM.
Apple Watch is a great example of this. Inelegantly labeled a "watch" because it is worn on the wrist, the functionality of the Apple Watch would be impossible without the ability of iOS devices to intercommunicate with each other and with MacOSx.
Apple Watch is going to drive a massive iPhone upgrade/adoption cycle over the next 2 - 3 years. That cycle will be enhanced by Apple Pay, which over the course of the next 3 years will become the dominant mobile pay system - worldwide.
Anybody that sees to much dependence on iPhone by Apple just doesn't understand the mutually beneficial interdependent nature of Apple products.
Apple isn't a Nokia, that flooded the world with low cost, DIGITAL, handsets during the '90s. It is an integrated platform of mutually supported products, using an OS and proprietary hardware unavailable to its competitors. The public has bought into Apple's "vision" even if the likes of Berenberg cannot (and are willing to pay a delicious premium for it).
This is one (of several) analyst I give no credence to.
This guy just wants to guarantee an invite to go on CNBC.
If Berenberg really belives this they should reveal their short position. My prediction is that Berenberg will be out of business in 6 months if its really a business at all.
AAPL will definitely reach $80 per share four to five years from now...
... but only after another 7:1 split!
This values them at less than about double the *cash* they have (I think ... doing the math in my head here). Heck Apple could take themselves private in 5 years, if shares hit $60, even if revenue only stays constant
They have enough money to buy back all the existing shares right now but they would not be allowed to do that. But, even if they were allowed to, that is not the same as going private. In order to go private, someone would have to buy them. There are only a handful of people who are wealthy enough to do that and I think Apple is better off being run by Tim Cook than some Saudi sheik. Apple cannot own itself. It is possible that it could be an employee owned company but they still need to come up with $759B. Plus whatever the material assets are.
Otay! So I guess there is always a nut case somewhere. He is bearish on selling and upcoming product, but he is bullish on rumored product (Apple Car)? Can someone please deliver a canister of oxygen to that man, so he can breath and have oxygen and a good blood reaches his brains. April 1st is many days away!
That guy's boss should immediately fire him.
Fire his boss, too, for letting this guy embarrass his firm for at least the last three years. Of course, if your boss is your father and a Middle East sheik who owns the whole damn enterprise thanks to his oil money, well then ...
But it is so crazy I don't think anyone in the market would them seriously.
Given Apple's share is trading with a much lower P/E vs. other Tech Titans, isn't it fair to take the current Apple's share price as reasonable (and has accounted the concentration risk)? Undeniably, the heavy reliance of a single product is a concern; but it is more relevant for business model that relies on market share to survive. Apple has a wonderful track record on high margin low market share position. I doubt things will turn around in the foreseeable future given its highly guarded walled garden offerings (e.g. Ecosystem and proprietary hardware software).