Since84
Moderator
To infinity and beyond!
Posts: 3,933
|
Post by Since84 on May 16, 2017 2:19:52 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by phoebear611 on May 16, 2017 3:32:57 GMT -8
I am hearing that Canaccord raised their PT from $165 to $180 in Apple this morning - trying to officially confirm it. (Although I can't get it from Canaccord directly - Reuters and a million blogs are stating it)
|
|
JDSoCal
Member
Aspiring oligarch
Posts: 4,186
|
Post by JDSoCal on May 16, 2017 10:32:16 GMT -8
This author has some interesting takes on Apple Watch, although Yahoo's Seana Smith is as dumb as a box of rocks (her take on cash-hoarding elderly increasing income inequality is staggeringly stupid SJW nonsense.). This could be the gamechanger the Apple Watch has been waiting forAny takes on why AAPL is off the last two sessions? I haven't seen any bad news.
|
|
|
Post by dmiller on May 16, 2017 11:23:30 GMT -8
More sources today with additional rumors about glucose sensing coming to Apple Watch, this time via a custom band (so that the watch price itself is unaffected by this).
That actually makes a lot of sense; not only do you only pay for glucose sensing if you need it (or want it, but anyone without diabetes really doesn't "need" it); but also, the watch itself doesn't potentially get held up or hindered by need for FDA approval.
There also seems to be the idea that this would be announced as part of the fall update for Watch series 3, but I have a hard time believing that. If it was true, it would be incredible and a potential boost to the stock.
|
|
|
Post by tuffett on May 16, 2017 11:29:35 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by joel90069 on May 16, 2017 11:37:12 GMT -8
This author has some interesting takes on Apple Watch, although Yahoo's Seana Smith is as dumb as a box of rocks (her take on cash-hoarding elderly increasing income inequality is staggeringly stupid SJW nonsense.). This could be the gamechanger the Apple Watch has been waiting forAny takes on why AAPL is off the last two sessions? I haven't seen any bad news. Could be the big call wall at 155, though it seems a bit early in the week.
|
|
|
Post by tuffett on May 16, 2017 11:53:24 GMT -8
More sources today with additional rumors about glucose sensing coming to Apple Watch, this time via a custom band (so that the watch price itself is unaffected by this). That actually makes a lot of sense; not only do you only pay for glucose sensing if you need it (or want it, but anyone without diabetes really doesn't "need" it); but also, the watch itself doesn't potentially get held up or hindered by need for FDA approval. There also seems to be the idea that this would be announced as part of the fall update for Watch series 3, but I have a hard time believing that. If it was true, it would be incredible and a potential boost to the stock. I'm not familiar with the costs of glucose monitoring equipment but they are a perpetual recurring expense. I bet Apple can put a hefty markup on a glucose monitoring band and have much of the costs subsidized so the consumer doesn't end up paying much. Apple makes money, insurer saves money and the patient has consistent, nonintrusive monitoring.
|
|
JDSoCal
Member
Aspiring oligarch
Posts: 4,186
|
Post by JDSoCal on May 16, 2017 11:55:58 GMT -8
More sources today with additional rumors about glucose sensing coming to Apple Watch, this time via a custom band (so that the watch price itself is unaffected by this). That actually makes a lot of sense; not only do you only pay for glucose sensing if you need it (or want it, but anyone without diabetes really doesn't "need" it); but also, the watch itself doesn't potentially get held up or hindered by need for FDA approval. There also seems to be the idea that this would be announced as part of the fall update for Watch series 3, but I have a hard time believing that. If it was true, it would be incredible and a potential boost to the stock. The author in the Yahoo vid suggested subsides by employers for the Apple Watch, but didn't mention the obvious health insurance subsidies. Anything that keeps a diabetic out of a hospital is preferable for insurance companies to pay for. About 30 million Americans have diabetes. Millions more have metabolic syndrome and would like to avoid becoming diabetic. I'd just love to see mass adoption of the Apple Watch, while the bozos continue to claim it's a failure. It's already disrupting the sector. Just ask Fossil. *** As for call walls, that usually doesn't start to affect AAPL until mid-week, and last week was a quarterly OpEx, yet we had a strong close.
|
|
|
Post by joel90069 on May 16, 2017 12:05:46 GMT -8
Last week were only weeklies. OI is much higher this week.
|
|
|
Post by dmiller on May 16, 2017 12:07:01 GMT -8
More sources today with additional rumors about glucose sensing coming to Apple Watch, this time via a custom band (so that the watch price itself is unaffected by this). That actually makes a lot of sense; not only do you only pay for glucose sensing if you need it (or want it, but anyone without diabetes really doesn't "need" it); but also, the watch itself doesn't potentially get held up or hindered by need for FDA approval. There also seems to be the idea that this would be announced as part of the fall update for Watch series 3, but I have a hard time believing that. If it was true, it would be incredible and a potential boost to the stock. I'm not familiar with the costs of glucose monitoring equipment but they are a perpetual recurring expense. I bet Apple can put a hefty markup on a glucose monitoring band and have much of the costs subsidized so the consumer doesn't end up paying much. Apple makes money, insurer saves money and the consumer has better monitoring. Test strips and lancets are probably on the order of several hundred dollars per year, depending on how frequently you test (for the strips) and how frequently you change lancets in the fingerpick pen. (You can actually keep reusing lancets until they get too dull, even though the medical industry wants you to think you use each lancet once, then throw it away). Non-invasive, "continuous" (what would the frequency be?) glucose monitoring would be orders of magnitude better than fingerpick tests, price considerations aside. The invasiveness of testing (and feeling like it needs to be done in a subtle or hidden way, depending on social circumstances) discourages diabetics from testing as often as they "should". With continuous monitoring, blood glucose could be closely tracked and then warnings given, when it's dropping (danger of going too low, which can in fact be quite immediately dangerous) or when getting too high (which can also be quite dangerous, with a bit less urgency). If you're a diabetic and you're driving, you're not testing yourself in the car, although you should test before you start driving. (and many probably do not). There's no way of knowing if your glucose is dropping until you'd start feeling symptoms and you may not recognize this in time to prevent serious problems. Having continuous glucose monitoring in a CAR is reason alone for every diabetic (or at least, Type I diabetic) in the world to wear an Apple Watch, and for the insurance industry to subsidize this. It's not even close to a no-brainer. The winners in this would be all humans with diabetes (significant increase in quality of life; significant reduction in the potential for complications). And there are a lot of them. And insurers, since widespread, universal glucose monitoring through Apple Watch would result in lowered costs from the same tangible benefits. The only "losers" would be manufacturers of invasive glucose monitoring equipment (strips/meters/etc).
|
|
|
Post by rickag on May 16, 2017 12:13:04 GMT -8
The Apple Park is an architecual marvel and will be an unbelievable place to work. Though the one question I have had since seeing the design is as Apple grows how can Apple Park be expanded?
|
|
|
Post by incorrigible on May 16, 2017 12:35:43 GMT -8
This author has some interesting takes on Apple Watch, although Yahoo's Seana Smith is as dumb as a box of rocks (her take on cash-hoarding elderly increasing income inequality is staggeringly stupid SJW nonsense.). This could be the gamechanger the Apple Watch has been waiting forAny takes on why AAPL is off the last two sessions? I haven't seen any bad news. Could be the big call wall at 155, though it seems a bit early in the week. Easier to keep it at $155 than to drop it to $155.
|
|
|
Post by BillH on May 16, 2017 13:44:27 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by hledgard on May 16, 2017 14:01:21 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by rickag on May 16, 2017 14:43:26 GMT -8
Thank you for the response, much appreciated.
|
|
|
Post by tuffett on May 16, 2017 15:50:52 GMT -8
I'm not familiar with the costs of glucose monitoring equipment but they are a perpetual recurring expense. I bet Apple can put a hefty markup on a glucose monitoring band and have much of the costs subsidized so the consumer doesn't end up paying much. Apple makes money, insurer saves money and the consumer has better monitoring. Test strips and lancets are probably on the order of several hundred dollars per year, depending on how frequently you test (for the strips) and how frequently you change lancets in the fingerpick pen. (You can actually keep reusing lancets until they get too dull, even though the medical industry wants you to think you use each lancet once, then throw it away). Non-invasive, "continuous" (what would the frequency be?) glucose monitoring would be orders of magnitude better than fingerpick tests, price considerations aside. The invasiveness of testing (and feeling like it needs to be done in a subtle or hidden way, depending on social circumstances) discourages diabetics from testing as often as they "should". With continuous monitoring, blood glucose could be closely tracked and then warnings given, when it's dropping (danger of going too low, which can in fact be quite immediately dangerous) or when getting too high (which can also be quite dangerous, with a bit less urgency). If you're a diabetic and you're driving, you're not testing yourself in the car, although you should test before you start driving. (and many probably do not). There's no way of knowing if your glucose is dropping until you'd start feeling symptoms and you may not recognize this in time to prevent serious problems. Having continuous glucose monitoring in a CAR is reason alone for every diabetic (or at least, Type I diabetic) in the world to wear an Apple Watch, and for the insurance industry to subsidize this. It's not even close to a no-brainer. The winners in this would be all humans with diabetes (significant increase in quality of life; significant reduction in the potential for complications). And there are a lot of them. And insurers, since widespread, universal glucose monitoring through Apple Watch would result in lowered costs from the same tangible benefits. The only "losers" would be manufacturers of invasive glucose monitoring equipment (strips/meters/etc). Thanks for the detailed response. The cynic in me has to ask: Assuming Apple is first to market with a successful solution, how long before the tech is ripped off and put into a much cheaper standalone band? I have zero confidence in IP's ability to prevent this as we have seen time and time again, and insurers are bound to opt for the cheaper device.
|
|
coma
Member
Posts: 522
|
Post by coma on May 16, 2017 16:43:27 GMT -8
Would't a cheaper (Chinese) device be subject to the same FDA scrutiny as the Apple device? I assume this would be several years of testing at which time Apple would be ahead of the game in sales and development.
|
|