rogifan wrote: »
You think Wall Street is homophobic? I find that hard to believe. Apple stock reached record highs after Tim came out so I don't think Wall Street gives a shit about Tim Cook's private life.
Market watchers have been seeing Apple stock as a buying opportunity for years now. They continually raise their targets and that has absolutely no connection to the market's response. Sometimes the market seems random and sometimes it punishes Apple. I rarely ever see Apple rewarded for doing what a good company should do. Perhaps they should just all lower their targets and see what happens. It couldn't be any worse.
SpamSandwich wrote: »
Yep. Traders care about money and making more money for themselves. That's it.
Dumb headline, AI.
But who cares. Many of us are already up relative to the purchase price after-hours yesterday.....
This is how full of shit these analysis are.
When Apple released earnings in April here was the estimates for the June Quarter:
Q3 revenue forecast: $46-$48 billion versus $47 billion expectedRead more: http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-q2-earnings-2015-4#ixzz3gd4LRXDA
So analysists were expecting June quarter revenue to be $47 billion in April.
But as we got to May, Jun, and Jul they kept on raising their revenue expectation until it was impossible for Apple to reach it (over $50 billion)
That right there tells you this is manipulation. Why the HELL did the analysist raise their revenue expectation from $47 billion to $50 billion since April? The only reason is to either save face if Apple had another blowout or to make it impossible for Apple to exceed 'expectation'
You are correct about the numbers, i.e., the $47B expectation v. $46-$48B Apple guided in Q2.
However, it's silly to suggest that there was 'manipulation.' These revised assessments were not only totally public (here's, for example, an excellent link: http://fortune.com/2015/07/22/here-are-the-best-and-worst-apple-analysts-for-q3-2015/), but these upward revisions were made by many different analysts. (Also, it's a stretch to attribute it all to that Kuo-whatever guy).
I really think we need to stop with these overwrought conspiracy theories. It's nothing more than analyst herding, given their not wanting to be wrong when everyone else is right. The cost of being wrong when everyone else is wrong is substantially less than the cost of being wrong when everyone else is right. That's what leads to herding. Not much more than that.
Apple is one of the most highly speculated stocks and what's the old adage. 'Buy on expectations. Sell on results'. I think Apple had another spectacular earnings quarter. Especially for a Q3 which is historically one of their softest quarters. The only blotch, in my opinion, is the decline in iPad sales. I think Apple needs to turn this around as well as have a blow-out next iPhone launch. Apple Watch will be a big (FY)Q1 seller as many will buy these for holiday gifts. In the big scheme of things Apple builds products for consumers and not the whims of Wall Street Analysts. I am still kicking myself for all the Apple stock I owned back in the day. (full disclosure: I worked at Apple from 1987 - 1992)
I bought 300 shares last night at $122 and sold this morning for a quick $400 profit.
I'm still holding 1000 shares.
I have no doubt this will see $150 sometime this year.
All these analysist are a-holes.
Apple guided for revenue to be $46-48 billion for Q3. They blew that away with $49.4 billion. Apple blew away there own expectations. Wall Streets expectations were unrealistic, yet they penalize Apple for not meeting some pipe dream $51 billion mark.
So you blew $400 in gain for $9000 when it reaches your predicted $150? Smart!
That sounds like a reasonable idea, but historically, analysts have done the same thing with Apple, manipulating the stock price whether Apple beat or "missed" the analyst's own forecast, yet you do not see the same behavior with other tech companies. I get that it's an easy way to make money, given Apple is so prominent and slight shifts in valuation and stock price can be significant swings in real dollars for the analysts and their customers. But that does not make it right. The thing that those of us who see this practice as being "unfair" have to remember, is that stocks are traded and prices are driven by things other than logic - and the Apple hate that many have, in part due to the way Apple has treated Wall Street, is something that will keep happening, whether we think it's fair or not.
Nothing is a sure bet, but I was also thinking why settle for a measely $400 profit if one is so sure.
rogifan wrote: »
The only thing Tim Cook getting involved in gay rights stuff does is get Apple on the front page of the drudge report.
Daniel Dilger is on Twitter. @DanielEran
sog35 wrote: »
What strike and expiration did you buy?
muadibe wrote: »
As many here have stated, you have analysts arbitrarily increasing expectations of Apple with the apparent intention of knocking the stock price. I agree there should be some detailed grilling of these analysts and their numbers. They should have to explain why they adjusted expectations with no obvious reason.
I just wonder how much of this is Wall Street penalizing Apple simply because of Tim Cook's lifestyle. I know this might seem out there, but in the absence of anything that makes sense, you have to wonder.
Incidentally, I'm not the only person who has written about this possibility. Again, lacking any seemingly rational reason, you have to wonder what's going on.
jmgregory1 wrote: »
That sounds like a reasonable idea, but historically, analysts have done the same thing with Apple, manipulating the stock price whether Apple beat or "missed" the analyst's own forecast, yet you do not see the same behavior with other tech companies.
You must have doubt if you sold.
What I do know is that people with money care about more than just money. Many use that money to further their own beliefs and suppress others with whom they disagree. Just take a look at what some billionaires do with some of their money. So while I'm not saying this is definitely happening, I don't see it out of the realm of possibility. Apple is, and will continue to make boatloads of money for many years to come.
I agree that was perhaps not the best way of putting it. I should simply have said because of him being gay or a homosexual.
As a gay man myself, no, I do not follow a heterosexual lifestyle. Does that help?
sog35 wrote: »
Even at 1000 shares I am very over weight Apple.