ksec

avon b7 said:

lkrupp said:

ksec said:

Right now I really wish Apple improves their Antenna design in iPhone. Because it is severely lacking behind its competitors, namely Samsung.

Says who? You? Because some website said so? Just because? Samsung says so? Blathering idiocy presented as fact is what your claim is.

Well, obviously it's better to have a good modem/antenna setup working in harmony and the faster the better in a future proofing sense. Of course, it's also true that if your network can't actually handle the highest possible speeds today, you won't see much benefit in the short term.

AFAIK, Huawei has the only shipping Cat 18 download, dual simultaneous VoLTE modem.

These are the official download speeds presented during the US presentation of the Mate 10 Pro:

Testing carried out on phones in San Francisco

Apple iPhone X: 151 Mbps

Samsung Note 8: 347 Mbps

Huawei Mate 10 Pro: 536 Mbps

Huawei shipped an update last week improving download efficiencies even further.

Says who? You? Because some website said so? Just because? Huawei says so? Blathering idiocy presented as fact is what your claim is.

/s

As much as I dislike Huawei, but credit where credit's due, their Networking stuff are pretty damn impressive. Given their TeleCo Equipment market share is now larger then Nokia and Ericsson combined, I am not surprised. 

tylersdad said:

Why are other smartphone manufacturers, such as Samsung, Google, and LG, able to keep their premium OLED phones under $850 and Apple is not?

We've seen from past reports that the difference in the cost of OLED and LCD isn't hundreds of dollars.

Not all OLED are equal. That is the same as LCD as well.

Not all of those OLED are Edge to Edge like Apple is. By Edge I mean it curve around the Notch and corners.

OLED is only part of the cost equation. And we all know Apple charges a premium with their product.

rogifan_new said:

Stock is down almost 5% today. Everyone long on Apple why do you think Wall Street sentiment on the company is going to change? Services revenues are up, other revenues from accessories are up. iPhone ASP is the highest it’s ever been and yet the stock is down nearly 5%. What is going to ever make them bullish on Apple?

Possibly Never.

I am not sure how I could possibly better explain this and get the point across. People has been pointing fingers and calling me bull shit.

You must separate yourself from an Apple Fan boy ( like AI is ) to actual investing and sentiment, or there is a combined word for it, the "market".

Before anything else, Apple is doing great, flipping great. There is no other way to put it. But, when people say Apple is doomed, some actually mean Apple "is" doomed, like hard core Android fans, some actually means Apple is not doing as well as they expected. Or According to AI those has reading comprehension problems.

Let's define what super cycle is, and also referred a few times in Bloomberg and other financial media. They were expecting a iPhone 6 Plus cycle, where everyone was rushing to buy it, and it was by and large the majority of iPhone sold during its initial launch, mostly helped by China.  The iPhone 6 Plus cycle, sold 135M Unit combined  in Q1 and Q2, staggering number.

Wall Street / Market kind of expect / want this to happen, people will rush to buy iPhone X, more new user to iPhone ecosystem, more users upgrade, and it will be the sold in vast majority of it, bringing up ASP and Unit Sales.

Remember this is iPhone X here, not iPhone 8 or else.

This is high expectation, or ridiculous in numbers. So from that point of view, iPhone X failed. So when Nikkei posted news about 40M unit in Q1 and 20M in Q2, it wasn't that bad at all. Yes AI and other dont like the word production cut in half, which is likely true in seasonal sales. Market was secretly expecting Apple to even beat the 80M unit number, and wanting like 50M+ iPhone X.   

So while iPhone X did not create a super cycle, it was Ok when the results came along. iPhone X is leading iPhone sold every week, ASP is nearly $800. And one reason why Ming from KGI is already hyping the super cycle is still to come next year when Apple has even more new iPhone next year.

Problem is all these expectation is already priced in*, one reason why Apple is trading at P/E 17x now instead of its usual 15 in the past three to four years.

(*Actually that is not entirely true, Berkshire Hathaway buying was the main causes of (slight ) spike, lots of traders, even on twitter was seeing / guessing someone buying lots of AAPL stocks, and it later became clear it was Berkshire Hathaway )

So why is AAPL so undervalued, even at a P/E 17 is very low, compared to the current S&P average of 26, or Tech stocks from Google and the like of close or above 30.

Investor generally view Facebook, Microsoft, Amazon and Google as monopoly. And that is very much true.

Social Network? If you view the world Top 6 social and instant messenger network, five of them are from Facebook, one is WeChat.

Microsoft? The world is still running on Excel. Business is still on Windows, growing lock in ( Actually it is not but that is how they view it ) in Azure , Services and Office.  

Google? Android and Search ( Ads ) Literally Zero direct competition. 

Amazon? You want to place your bet against Jeff Bezos?

Apple? Apple doesn't have a monopoly. Or it does, it is called customer loyalty. But it is hard to quantify loyalty, or not quantify it, but price or value it. It is much easier for investor to understand Microsoft and Facebook lock in, especially when both dont have its competitor in its field. iOS has Android, macOS has Windows. Apple Music has spotify etc. Each and every major Apple product or services has a major market share competitor.

There is also, always the fear that the current pricing of iPhone and Unit sold, with its margin is not sustainable. I have seen this asked a few times already, and there is yet an answer. No other company in the history of man kind has created a product that is as widely popular as the iPhone, at such a price range, being used now and still growing slightly, and has such a NET margin. None. Zero. ( The closest thing is oil from Saudi where cost is zero and they keep bumping. )

So it may be forgiveable one does not know how to value such company that man kind never seen before.

You asked: What? AAPL is down not because of its report, but Wall Street as a whole is looking for safety from raising interest rate.

Well yes, and that Safety was established long ago, AAPL at around P/E 15.
   

rogifan_new said:

Btw guidance of 60-62B would mean YOY revenue increase of 14-17% Wall Street’s 65B would be a 24% increase. I believe the last time Apple reported a YOY increase that high was the March 2015 quarter with 27%. What is Wall Street basing its 65B on?

That there was such thing as a Super Cycle. Which was already priced into the Stock price. Like I said analyst were expecting iPhone X to be sold much more then iPhone 8, hence some unrealistic ASP of $800+. I would actually say the current ASP is pretty damn good even to my expectation, but whether Wall Street likes it is another story.

Dont ask me why, some even attacks me for it. But it is their game. AAPL has been a ridiculously low P/E for a very long time.  

P.S- Numbers are meaningless without explanation. I think Six Colour has the transcript which explains in a lot more details.

https://sixcolors.com/post/2018/02/this-is-tim-transcript-of-apples-q1-2018-earnings-call/

tl;dr. Bloody Great.

One could argue it is the Intel x86 that is the co processor, not Apple's T Series. Since Apple is basically have the whole boot process themselves, and likely more basic, under the hood OS function will move to have the T2 doing it.

One of the great thing about T2 is how it has integrated SSD Controller, so Apple could standardize parts across all Mac. And it is likely WiFi and Bluetooth will be integrated as well. That is $40 - $50 BOM cost saved.... likely being spent in other parts of the Mac.

I dont think it make sense for Apple to build its own x86 chip across the range of TDP in Macs, scaling from 10W to 150W. It makes much more sense for Apple to have their GPU used on the Desktop as well. Since scaling GPU across TDP is much much easier. But then it is hard to imagine Apple writing their Windows drivers for GPU. One possible way is that the GPU is only usable on macOS. On Windows you are stuck with Intel's iGPU.