|
Post by pauls on Feb 27, 2013 13:54:37 GMT -8
One way or other there should be a real time news stream from a shareholders meeting, in this day and age. It's a Shareholder meeting, not a town hall debate. What would be the problem with shareholders being privy to shareholder meeting info in real time? I really don't care if some misinterpreted soundbite effects trading in the short term. As if aapl watchers weren't hanging on to every scrap and rumor that made it out of the room....why not allow the info to be free? This is the Internet age, with no small thanks to Apple and their products and services. Embrace it. No better counter to the Kass debacle from yesterday, IMO.
|
|
icam
Member
Posts: 447
|
Post by icam on Feb 27, 2013 14:03:12 GMT -8
1% is generous. I'd say 1/10 of 1% is more realistic, and that most likely too generous. I'd say even less has lost ~$250B in an upmarket. Ibuyer - We're talking about Steve Jobs, not Tim Cook.
|
|
|
Post by fas550 on Feb 27, 2013 14:30:37 GMT -8
I know there are a lot of counter plus arguments, but he has some valid points. www.cnbc.com/id/100502204. It's all about expectations. Full disclosure: Admittedly I have always had a problem with C staff that are not leveraged and could walk out the door at any time with zero effect on their lifestyle (I do believe that a loss of reputation can be quickly forgotten if one is sitting in the south of France at Cap Roux). In my experience (not a guess but a fact) people simply try harder, are more innovative if they are leveraged. Anyway many of this guy's points are fact. Like it or not this is what it is. This is sentiment today. TC could do nothing and watch this sentiment stay the course, deteriorate and walk out the door and it would not matter to him but perhaps a slight regret. Johnny Ive could decide he's had enough and walk out tomorrow with zero effect on his lifestyle but less stress. This is exactly why you don't take things on history and faith but push management for answers and accountability. We and they are feeling the effects that the street puts on accountability. They are not taking this on faith or history. This is exactly why you don't put all you faith in management based on nothing more than reputation, history and faith. I know apple is not going to release any hint of products and certainly would not expect them to. However, one question I wished someone had asked that could have spoke volumes: Not are going to increase the dividend, not are you going to increase the buyback but what are your plans for 137B dollars? No company in history needs 137B in cash. Once it got over 80B it became a liability. If they don't have a plan except save more then they need to get a plan or find someone who can utilize it in the best interest of the company.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 27, 2013 14:32:06 GMT -8
wires: AAPL's entire board at meeting. no sure if it means anything. Is it too much a leap of imagination that this means the board may be meeting TODAY? How often do they have the opportunity to all meet - why wait 2 - 3 more weeks to get together when they can do it today?
|
|
|
Post by lovemyipad on Feb 27, 2013 14:32:12 GMT -8
Whatever JD. I don't see you calling out the blind bulls. You would think after a 270 point drop that the board would change its tone toward people who are bearish. I'm still far and away net-long on AAPL and bullish long term. But go ahead and ignore that so it can suit your idiotic comment better. TA bullshit belongs in the TA bullshit thread. Especially FUD TA. Like the discussion about how yesterday was the big market correction, LOL. Real oracles, those TA people. And BTW, the Blind Bulls (who make price predictions) have long been on my ignore list. HEY NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by lovemyipad on Feb 27, 2013 14:39:19 GMT -8
These bashing comments remind me of when AFB on the Mac Observer came to an end. This board is getting ridiculous. Minus the website redesign.
|
|
|
Post by lovemyipad on Feb 27, 2013 14:42:07 GMT -8
Why don't we all just take a break and stop with attacking the individual and instead if you don't agree with the assertion counter it with facts (if there are any) or propose an alternative and justify why it will work. This is getting too caustic IMHO. I don't think we joined this board to simply trash others on their past assertions. I don't believe anyone has been right all the time: and that's okay. It's about sharing information and ideas. If you can't resist just don't post and do something else for a while. I really like this board and don't want to see it reduced to Yahoo MSG boards. We could start by banning the word "You" in any post. +1
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 27, 2013 14:45:00 GMT -8
I know there are a lot of counter plus arguments, but he has some valid points. www.cnbc.com/id/100502204. It's all about expectations. Full disclosure: Admittedly I have always had a problem with C staff that are not leveraged and could walk out the door at any time with zero effect on their lifestyle (I do believe that a loss of reputation can be quickly forgotten if one is sitting in the south of France at Cap Roux). In my experience (not a guess but a fact) people simply try harder, are more innovative if they are leveraged. Anyway many of this guy's points are fact. Like it or not this is what it is. This is sentiment today. TC could do nothing and watch this sentiment stay the course, deteriorate and walk out the door and it would not matter to him but perhaps a slight regret. Johnny Ive could decide he's had enough and walk out tomorrow with zero effect on his lifestyle but less stress. This is exactly why you don't take things on history and faith but push management for answers and accountability. We and they are feeling the effects that the street puts on accountability. They are not taking this on faith or history. This is exactly why you don't put all you faith in management based on nothing more than reputation, history and faith. I know apple is not going to release any hint of products and certainly would not expect them to. However, one question I wished someone had asked that could have spoke volumes: Not are going to increase the dividend, not are you going to increase the buyback but what are your plans for 137B dollars? No company in history needs 137B in cash. Once it got over 80B it became a liability. If they don't have a plan except save more then they need to get a plan or find someone who can utilize it in the best interest of the company. What if the answer to the cash question is simply that they are waiting for a favourable tax repatriation environment? What kind of reaction would that get from the market? From the press? From the government?
|
|
|
Post by ibuyer on Feb 27, 2013 15:02:57 GMT -8
I know there are a lot of counter plus arguments, but he has some valid points. www.cnbc.com/id/100502204. It's all about expectations. Full disclosure: Admittedly I have always had a problem with C staff that are not leveraged and could walk out the door at any time with zero effect on their lifestyle (I do believe that a loss of reputation can be quickly forgotten if one is sitting in the south of France at Cap Roux). In my experience (not a guess but a fact) people simply try harder, are more innovative if they are leveraged. Anyway many of this guy's points are fact. Like it or not this is what it is. This is sentiment today. TC could do nothing and watch this sentiment stay the course, deteriorate and walk out the door and it would not matter to him but perhaps a slight regret. Johnny Ive could decide he's had enough and walk out tomorrow with zero effect on his lifestyle but less stress. This is exactly why you don't take things on history and faith but push management for answers and accountability. We and they are feeling the effects that the street puts on accountability. They are not taking this on faith or history. This is exactly why you don't put all you faith in management based on nothing more than reputation, history and faith. I know apple is not going to release any hint of products and certainly would not expect them to. However, one question I wished someone had asked that could have spoke volumes: Not are going to increase the dividend, not are you going to increase the buyback but what are your plans for 137B dollars? No company in history needs 137B in cash. Once it got over 80B it became a liability. If they don't have a plan except save more then they need to get a plan or find someone who can utilize it in the best interest of the company. What if the answer to the cash question is simply that they are waiting for a favourable tax repatriation environment? What kind of reaction would that get from the market? From the press? From the government? They have over 40B of domestic cash. Have been generating ~15B of domestic cash/yr. So not need to think about foreign cash for $40B plus 15B a year. After spending a large portion of the domestic cash, then they can delay paying repatriation tax by issuing debt secured by foreign cash. Bring it back on shore if and when the time is right. A few large multi-nationals do this.
|
|
|
Post by fas550 on Feb 27, 2013 15:09:39 GMT -8
I know there are a lot of counter plus arguments, but he has some valid points. www.cnbc.com/id/100502204. It's all about expectations. Full disclosure: Admittedly I have always had a problem with C staff that are not leveraged and could walk out the door at any time with zero effect on their lifestyle (I do believe that a loss of reputation can be quickly forgotten if one is sitting in the south of France at Cap Roux). In my experience (not a guess but a fact) people simply try harder, are more innovative if they are leveraged. Anyway many of this guy's points are fact. Like it or not this is what it is. This is sentiment today. TC could do nothing and watch this sentiment stay the course, deteriorate and walk out the door and it would not matter to him but perhaps a slight regret. Johnny Ive could decide he's had enough and walk out tomorrow with zero effect on his lifestyle but less stress. This is exactly why you don't take things on history and faith but push management for answers and accountability. We and they are feeling the effects that the street puts on accountability. They are not taking this on faith or history. This is exactly why you don't put all you faith in management based on nothing more than reputation, history and faith. I know apple is not going to release any hint of products and certainly would not expect them to. However, one question I wished someone had asked that could have spoke volumes: Not are going to increase the dividend, not are you going to increase the buyback but what are your plans for 137B dollars? No company in history needs 137B in cash. Once it got over 80B it became a liability. If they don't have a plan except save more then they need to get a plan or find someone who can utilize it in the best interest of the company. What if the answer to the cash question is simply that they are waiting for a favourable tax repatriation environment? What kind of reaction would that get from the market? From the press? From the government? They already accounted for the potential tax of repatriation in their past earnings.
|
|
mark
fire starter
Posts: 1,575
|
Post by mark on Feb 27, 2013 15:10:30 GMT -8
Um...there's a way to attract a wider audience besides a race to the bottom. See the iPod line and the iPad Mini. I just want them to do the same with the iPhone, since it is their most important product. Competitors are certainly racing to the top to compete, and Apple is so far standing still. What exactly do you want them to remove from the existing iPhone that: a) Makes it enough less expensive to produce that it could be sold at a reasonably low price. and b) Makes it not too attractive such as to cannibalize the existing iPhone product line. and c) Makes it competitive in the lower-priced smartphone segment of the market. I've thought about this often and can't think of a solution. Of course, that doesn't mean that smarter people couldn't think of one (especially the smart folks at Apple!)
|
|
|
Post by Lstream on Feb 27, 2013 15:17:02 GMT -8
Um...there's a way to attract a wider audience besides a race to the bottom. See the iPod line and the iPad Mini. I just want them to do the same with the iPhone, since it is their most important product. Competitors are certainly racing to the top to compete, and Apple is so far standing still. What exactly do you want them to remove from the existing iPhone that: a) Makes it enough less expensive to produce that it could be sold at a reasonably low price. and b) Makes it not too attractive such as to cannibalize the existing iPhone product line. and c) Makes it competitive in the lower-priced smartphone segment of the market. I've thought about this often and can't think of a solution. Of course, that doesn't mean that smarter people couldn't think of one (especially the smart folks at Apple!) I would like to hear the answer to these questions too. The only way that I can figure out how to enter this market is to accept lower margins. Tuffet - is that what you are advocating?
|
|
|
Post by tuffett on Feb 27, 2013 15:21:28 GMT -8
Mark, I don't have all the answers, but I'm thinking something as simple as a repackaged iPhone 4 with less expensive materials and a cheaper production cost. To keep the differentiation strong enough, memory can be limited to 8/16GB and move to 16/32GB in a couple of years. I'm sure Apple can come up with something feasible that will sell.
Heck, I'm even all for a higher margin iPhone. Something with crazy high resolution, 5" screen, quad core, whatever. Just something new that will get the buzz back. I wouldn't buy but I bet a lot of people would and at the very least it would be a sign that Apple is responsive to a wider consumer base. A lot of people want a bigger screen, especially in the East. In many cultures, people don't carry phones in their pockets, they keep them in their backpacks that they carry around everywhere.
|
|
mark
fire starter
Posts: 1,575
|
Post by mark on Feb 27, 2013 15:25:50 GMT -8
At 3dfx's last shareholder meeting all 7 of us were let into a tiny room to see an unreleased product. It seemed to do great, though seemed odd to show off at a shareholder's meeting as I believe it was unannounced. But the company went under in the coming months. I was one of the bagholders in that one
|
|
|
Post by tuffett on Feb 27, 2013 15:25:54 GMT -8
What exactly do you want them to remove from the existing iPhone that: a) Makes it enough less expensive to produce that it could be sold at a reasonably low price. and b) Makes it not too attractive such as to cannibalize the existing iPhone product line. and c) Makes it competitive in the lower-priced smartphone segment of the market. I've thought about this often and can't think of a solution. Of course, that doesn't mean that smarter people couldn't think of one (especially the smart folks at Apple!) I would like to hear the answer to these questions too. The only way that I can figure out how to enter this market is to accept lower margins. Tuffet - is that what you are advocating? Lower margins may be necessary, but they should still be well above the industry averages. The iPad Mini seems to be lower margin, and Apple was willing to do that. Why not with the iPhone, where it is clear that they are struggling (relatively speaking) in certain areas of the world?
|
|
|
Post by lovemyipad on Feb 27, 2013 15:26:23 GMT -8
Market tops tend to have whipsaws like yesterday and today -- the first drop is usually: 1) bought by dip-buyers who have been conditioned and rewarded for dip-buying for the entire duration of the last upwave; 2) shorted by those who missed the drop yesterday and do not want to miss the next one + uncommitted sellers, both of which then stop out and fuel a low-volume melt-up. Tomorrow will hopefully give us a clue as to whether today was retrace or reversal. We'll see if strength is being bought or sold. As for AAPL... Until that downtrend line breaks (see chart), I'm assuming any upside is an oversold, counter-trend bounce or bull trap. Do I think we'll go sub-400? No idea. But I'm hedged for the possibility, because until proven otherwise (with a decisive break above that line), the prevailing trend is DOWN. I've been waiting for my hedges to blow up in flames for months now. One day, it will happen, and I will be thrilled. Until then, my cheap throwaway disaster insurance continues to outperform my core AAPL holdings. AAPL DAILY CHART: trendlines Usually when a trendline is broken, there's a retest. See that light blue uptrend line we just lost? Bulls need to get above that minimally, and ideally, above the green downtrend line.
|
|
|
Post by Lstream on Feb 27, 2013 15:33:07 GMT -8
I would like to hear the answer to these questions too. The only way that I can figure out how to enter this market is to accept lower margins. Tuffet - is that what you are advocating? Lower margins may be necessary, but they should still be well above the industry averages. The iPad Mini seems to be lower margin, and Apple was willing to do that. Why not with the iPhone, where it is clear that they are struggling (relatively speaking) in certain areas of the world? Be careful what you wish for. Industry averages totally suck. I can see the carnage in the stock now, if margins start to take a real hit. The altar of market share, and what it actually means re financial performance would become evident real quick. Not to mention whatever damage this low priced, lower end device would do to Apple's brand image. I think that the lower end device could end up hurting the stock, more than helping it. That possibility should at least be acknowledged.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 27, 2013 15:40:28 GMT -8
Um...there's a way to attract a wider audience besides a race to the bottom. See the iPod line and the iPad Mini. I just want them to do the same with the iPhone, since it is their most important product. Competitors are certainly racing to the top to compete, and Apple is so far standing still. What exactly do you want them to remove from the existing iPhone that: a) Makes it enough less expensive to produce that it could be sold at a reasonably low price. and b) Makes it not too attractive such as to cannibalize the existing iPhone product line. and c) Makes it competitive in the lower-priced smartphone segment of the market. I've thought about this often and can't think of a solution. Of course, that doesn't mean that smarter people couldn't think of one (especially the smart folks at Apple!) Plan A: Simply repackage the iPhone 4/4S internals into a new device. No LTE, smaller screen, less storage is the main differentiator. Apple sold the 3GS for $375 before it was end of lined - selling a device with similar internals to the iPhone 4 at $299 in emerging markets shouldn't be too difficult to do while maintaining 30%+ gross margins. Apple doesn't have to sell this device in the USA, and few would consider grey market imports in the US of the device now that LTE is widespread. And few in the USA would pay $299 for an unsubsidised device when they can get an iPhone 5/5S for $99/$199 subsidised with a data plan they would need anyway. Plan B: The rumoured forthcoming iWatch is also a phone. Retails for between $199-$299. Apple sells this as both a independent iOS communication device, and also as a companion accessory device to existing iPhone owners. Perfect for both emerging markets (as an entry level iOS/iPhone device, either prepay or subsidised) and as a high margin unsubsidised accessory for developed markets. (I like plan B.)
|
|
|
Post by tuffett on Feb 27, 2013 15:43:00 GMT -8
Lower margins may be necessary, but they should still be well above the industry averages. The iPad Mini seems to be lower margin, and Apple was willing to do that. Why not with the iPhone, where it is clear that they are struggling (relatively speaking) in certain areas of the world? Be careful what you wish for. Industry averages totally suck. I can see the carnage in the stock now, if margins start to take a real hit. The altar of market share, and what it actually means re financial performance would become evident real quick. Not to mention whatever damage this low priced, lower end device would do to Apple's brand image. I think that the lower end device could end up hurting the stock, more than helping it. That possibility should at least be acknowledged. Fair enough, but what do you think of the iPad Mini? I'd say it's a huge hit and has only done good to Apple's brand image, despite the lesser specs and lower-res screen. It absolutely has to be done right, and it can easily be done wrong. But I still think it is the next necessary step. How much room do you see left at the top of the market? I see North America approaching saturation soon, and I see much of the rest of the world unable to afford a top end phone. I see a lot of people unserved in the mid-range market. Even though margins may be reduced, these are people who will buy a new phone every few years and probably spend a few dollars on apps. Staying only at the top end will quickly lead to zero growth, in my opinion. A little more nibbling by Samsung, a small resurgence by Blackberry, increased Windows 8 adoption and it could come rather quickly.
|
|
|
Post by fas550 on Feb 27, 2013 15:49:29 GMT -8
What if the answer to the cash question is simply that they are waiting for a favourable tax repatriation environment? What kind of reaction would that get from the market? From the press? From the government? Also respectfully if the answer from a CEO, CFO was based on dependency on a favorable tax situation when there is no indication from the Gov't that its coming I'd say what's plan B and what are the data points you are prepared to execute it it. For instance if we are sitting on 200B in the bank still waiting for a tax break that's just miss management of cash on an unprecedented level. Everyone's in the same boat.
|
|
mark
fire starter
Posts: 1,575
|
Post by mark on Feb 27, 2013 15:50:01 GMT -8
Valid points. Yes, I have been spoiled by Apple. If I saw them as an 8-10% growth company I would certainly not have invested so heavily. If this is the kind of growth we see going forward, then AAPL is an exceptional value stock but no longer a growth stock. Reasons for the mediocre Q2 are fair enough. But a lot of that reasoning would mean Q1 should have been stronger than it was in terms of iPhone sales. Either that or Cook failed epically in providing adequate supply. Either explanation is not good considering Cook is a supposed supply chain guru. Where we differ is that I refuse to give Apple the benefit of the doubt anymore. Quite frankly, the way they have dealt with earnings calls and shareholders, they don't deserve it. The results are all that matter, and I am paring back expectations while remaining heavily long. For the life of me I can't understand your continued denigrating of Apple's growth. ANY OTHER MEMBER OF THE S & P 500 WOULD BE THRILLED WITH APPLE'S CURRENT GROWTH, and yet you continue to find fault with it. The only fault I see is your inability to compare/contrast current quarter's results with prior quarter's, factoring in the REASONS behind prior quarter's results. Yeah, but which company wants to be saddled with $137B in cash, just sitting there like an albatross around their neck? <sarcasm> At least that's what all the talking heads make it seem like!
|
|
|
Post by Lstream on Feb 27, 2013 15:51:40 GMT -8
Fair enough, but what do you think of the iPad Mini? I'd say it's a huge hit and has only done good to Apple's brand image, despite the lesser specs and lower-res screen. The Mini brought something more to the table, besides being just lower cost. Smaller, lighter, and more convenient, so customers are more prepared to accept lesser specs for the trade. I am struggling with the cheap phone being anything more than just cheap. Which is why it worries me. I can't figure out how it would be better at anything. Unlike the Mini.
|
|
JDSoCal
Member
Aspiring oligarch
Posts: 4,189
|
Post by JDSoCal on Feb 27, 2013 15:52:49 GMT -8
TA bullshit belongs in the TA bullshit thread. Especially FUD TA. Like the discussion about how yesterday was the big market correction, LOL. Real oracles, those TA people. And BTW, the Blind Bulls (who make price predictions) have long been on my ignore list. So why does your max pain bullshit get to be posted in the intraday thread? Which I might add, is rarely correct. Especially this early in the week. Are you now the great overseer of what can and cannot go in this thread? I don't need to put up with this shit anymore. I'm glad my contributions won't be missed. Well that's just false. Max pain range is right on almost every week. And it is actually based on something, existing contracts, unlike the squiggly lines history lesson. And I have never made long-term price predictions on pain (other than to watch your ass come LEAPS expiry). Hell, I don't even make weekly predictions on pain. I provide pain range as an FYI, draw you own conclusions service. Tell us, almighty Carnac, what sound math is your sub-400 prediction based on, other than some Spongian wild-assed guess/feeling? And seriously, if one negative post makes you run away, perhaps you are too insecure to be making price predictions on a public forum.
|
|
JDSoCal
Member
Aspiring oligarch
Posts: 4,189
|
Post by JDSoCal on Feb 27, 2013 16:01:03 GMT -8
The problem is that the counter arguments are often made in a dismissive tone with little or no data to back up their arguments, and then many others pile on . Why does an "I feel we are going sub 400" claim deserve any data-based counter arguments? Where is the data in the original bearish "argument"? As I've said, I think similar "new ATH by XXX" price predictions are ridiculous too. I just don't think in this FUD-driven environment it helps AAPL longs to propagate more of it here. After this drop, how anyone could think that FUD has not affected AAPL (as if it's a real fundie problem) escapes me.
|
|
|
Post by tuffett on Feb 27, 2013 16:03:38 GMT -8
There are many ways to skin a cat. TA certainly has its merits. For you to dismiss it as garbage is unreasonable. You can't possibly say with a straight face that the 200MA means nothing to the way a stock trades, can you?
Like anything else, it needs to be applied correctly and it will not always work. But I have certainly seen the power of TA many times.
People who have traded AAPL using TA with zero emotion or attachment have probably made out like bandits - not just in the past few months but long term as well. Colourful squiggly lines can be wonderfully profitable.
|
|
|
Post by lovemyipad on Feb 27, 2013 16:08:50 GMT -8
Tell us, almighty Carnac, what sound math is your sub-400 prediction based on, other than some Spongian wild-assed guess/feeling? I can answer that question, if you really want an answer.
|
|
mark
fire starter
Posts: 1,575
|
Post by mark on Feb 27, 2013 16:09:27 GMT -8
I know there are a lot of counter plus arguments, but he has some valid points. www.cnbc.com/id/100502204. It's all about expectations. Full disclosure: Admittedly I have always had a problem with C staff that are not leveraged and could walk out the door at any time with zero effect on their lifestyle (I do believe that a loss of reputation can be quickly forgotten if one is sitting in the south of France at Cap Roux). In my experience (not a guess but a fact) people simply try harder, are more innovative if they are leveraged. Anyway many of this guy's points are fact. Like it or not this is what it is. This is sentiment today. TC could do nothing and watch this sentiment stay the course, deteriorate and walk out the door and it would not matter to him but perhaps a slight regret. Johnny Ive could decide he's had enough and walk out tomorrow with zero effect on his lifestyle but less stress. This is exactly why you don't take things on history and faith but push management for answers and accountability. We and they are feeling the effects that the street puts on accountability. They are not taking this on faith or history. This is exactly why you don't put all you faith in management based on nothing more than reputation, history and faith. I know apple is not going to release any hint of products and certainly would not expect them to. However, one question I wished someone had asked that could have spoke volumes: Not are going to increase the dividend, not are you going to increase the buyback but what are your plans for 137B dollars? No company in history needs 137B in cash. Once it got over 80B it became a liability. If they don't have a plan except save more then they need to get a plan or find someone who can utilize it in the best interest of the company. For many of them, a huge part of their lifestyle is being C XO of ABC company!
|
|
|
Post by Lstream on Feb 27, 2013 16:10:29 GMT -8
There are many ways to skin a cat. TA certainly has its merits. For you to dismiss it as garbage is unreasonable. You can't possibly say with a straight face that the 200MA means nothing to the way a stock trades, can you? Like anything else, it needs to be applied correctly and it will not always work. But I have certainly seen the power of TA many times. What do you think your edge is with TA? Even if it works, which is very debatable. If there is anything to it, you are up against professional traders with way more expertise and tools than you have. Meaningless comes in many forms. Including not being able to make any money with stuff like 200MA, because everyone else can see the same thing.
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on Feb 27, 2013 16:11:57 GMT -8
Oh what fun.
Anyway, without the benefit of a transcript from the shareholders' meeting, it seems to me there's a 50% or better chance of a cash conference within the next month, and aside from that, there's just April earnings.
We'll see how AAPL navigates these price levels the rest of the week. At some point this...should...stop. Just don't know when.
|
|
|
Post by zzmac on Feb 27, 2013 16:17:13 GMT -8
Any guess as to what it would cost apple to make a barebones 4S towards the end of the year? Fair enough, but what do you think of the iPad Mini? I'd say it's a huge hit and has only done good to Apple's brand image, despite the lesser specs and lower-res screen. The Mini brought something more to the table, besides being just lower cost. Smaller, lighter, and more convenient, so customers are more prepared to accept lesser specs for the trade. I am struggling with the cheap phone being anything more than just cheap. Which is why it worries me. I can't figure out how it would be better at anything. Unlike the Mini.
|
|