German investment firm Berenberg predicts doom for Apple, sets price target of $60



  • Reply 61 of 94
    brucemcbrucemc Posts: 1,541member

    Originally Posted by xixo View Post



    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.

  • Reply 62 of 94
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 5,042member
    jd_in_sb wrote: »
    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.
  • Reply 63 of 94
    anomeanome Posts: 1,492member
    ddawson100 wrote: »
    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!"

    Apple Death Watch - now in its 39th year.
  • Reply 64 of 94
    blazarblazar Posts: 270member
    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.
  • Reply 65 of 94
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,526member
    what's the german word for clueless?

    I believe it's schmuckopf.
  • Reply 66 of 94
    fallenjtfallenjt Posts: 4,052member

    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.

  • Reply 67 of 94

    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.

  • Reply 68 of 94
    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.
  • Reply 69 of 94

    This guy just wants to guarantee an invite to go on CNBC.

  • Reply 70 of 94


  • Reply 71 of 94

    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.

  • Reply 72 of 94
    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.
  • Reply 73 of 94
    dcj001dcj001 Posts: 301member

    AAPL will definitely reach $80 per share four to five years from now...


    ... but only after another 7:1 split!

  • Reply 74 of 94
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Originally Posted by MattBookAir View Post


    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.

  • Reply 75 of 94
    bluefire1bluefire1 Posts: 1,261member
    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.
  • Reply 76 of 94

    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!

  • Reply 77 of 94
    radarthekatradarthekat Posts: 3,682moderator
    What ever happened to Ed Zabitsky and his 2012 $250 pre-split prediction? New day, new curmudgeon.
  • Reply 78 of 94
    kibitzerkibitzer Posts: 1,114member

    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

    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 ...

  • Reply 79 of 94
    nagromme wrote: »
    "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.
  • Reply 80 of 94
    iWeed maybe?

    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).
Sign In or Register to comment.