Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,766
|
Post by Mav on Mar 29, 2014 22:23:51 GMT -5
Tim actually said: "So we’re going to stick with our knitting with only doing a few things and doing them great. There will be new categories and we’re working on some great stuff. We’re not ready to talk about it. We’re really working on some really great stuff. I think no one reasonable would say they’re not a new category." m.us.wsj.com/articles/BL-DGB-32697That's as unequivocal as it gets with Apple, IMHO. A new product category or two or three won't drive growth like iPhone 6 + China Mobile will though they might help in the AAPL sentiment department. |
|
vitalogy80
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by vitalogy80 on Mar 30, 2014 4:19:12 GMT -5
I'm really not sure that iPhone 6 and China mobile will drive any growth...there hasn't been any substantial growth for almost 2 years.
|
|
|
|
Post by phoebear611 on Mar 30, 2014 5:13:57 GMT -5
Tim actually said: "So we’re going to stick with our knitting with only doing a few things and doing them great. There will be new categories and we’re working on some great stuff. We’re not ready to talk about it. We’re really working on some really great stuff. I think no one reasonable would say they’re not a new category." m.us.wsj.com/articles/BL-DGB-32697That's as unequivocal as it gets with Apple, IMHO. A new product category or two or three won't drive growth like iPhone 6 + China Mobile will though they might help in the AAPL sentiment department. Sentiment is everything Mav. It's better when you have the numbers to back it up like AAPL does but just look at the market and look at the stocks that have positive sentiment - they are sky-rocketing and most DON'T even have any earnings. The markets want to see validation that innovation and vision are not dead at AAPL...and TC hasn't provided that evidence yet IMHO so the jury is still out. And those of us that have remained loyal and long for years would also like some validation - even Marie Antoinette threw out a few crumbs to the peasants! |
|
|
|
Post by Red Shirted Ensign on Mar 30, 2014 10:21:24 GMT -5
|
|
marcellus
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by marcellus on Mar 30, 2014 12:37:40 GMT -5
Tim actually said: "So we’re going to stick with our knitting with only doing a few things and doing them great. There will be new categories and we’re working on some great stuff. We’re not ready to talk about it. We’re really working on some really great stuff. I think no one reasonable would say they’re not a new category." m.us.wsj.com/articles/BL-DGB-32697That's as unequivocal as it gets with Apple, IMHO. A new product category or two or three won't drive growth like iPhone 6 + China Mobile will though they might help in the AAPL sentiment department. Sentiment is everything Mav. It's better when you have the numbers to back it up like AAPL does but just look at the market and look at the stocks that have positive sentiment - they are sky-rocketing and most DON'T even have any earnings. The markets want to see validation that innovation and vision are not dead at AAPL...and TC hasn't provided that evidence yet IMHO so the jury is still out. And those of us that have remained loyal and long for years would also like some validation - even Marie Antoinette threw out a few crumbs to the peasants! We're off from ATH due to lack of institutional interest, which aren't buying the Apple story like they are with Google and Amazon. That's it. I imagine Bezos and Schmidt are in regular conversation extolling the unlimited upside to their respective companies. Apple plays it close to the vest, getting the benefit of the doubt only when it posts boffo gross margin numbers or unit sales. Now that the latter two items are moribund, institutions are buying all the hot air in Google and Amazon, helped by the group think (a money manager can't be wrong if all the other money managers are buying the same thing). Finally, the media LOVES a negative story about a celebrity company like Apple, the Kim Kardashian of tech stocks. I think Apple's management is livid with its valuation and highly motivated to kill the negativity and skepticism. It can do it with a new product category, a larger iPhone, better margins and CM delivering on the promise of 700M subscribers. However, when an institution dismisses Apple as a "fashion company," all of the best reasons for investing in Apple aren't worth diddly. Apple may just be a company we like to purchase products from rather than a company that's in our investment portfolio. |
|
marcellus
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by marcellus on Mar 30, 2014 12:44:39 GMT -5
The Phuket News? Are you catching up on the news from a go-go bar? That's focus! Pics? |
|
chinacat
Moderator
AAPL Long since 2006
Posts: 2,332
|
Post by chinacat on Mar 30, 2014 13:31:59 GMT -5
Finally, the media LOVES a negative story about a celebrity company like Apple, the Kim Kardashian of tech stocks. Kim Kardashian???!!!?? Really!?!?! I have read that she was some kind of reality TV show star, but honestly, what has she ever accomplished that comes close to what Apple has done in the past year, never mind the past decade? I know that few here, and almost no one in the press, agree with me, but I still say that if any other company had produced a phone with an A7-like 64-bit architecture, the M7 sensor, and an absolutely secure fingerprint-based security system in 2013, they would have been hailed as the greatest innovator in the industry. Just call me a fan-boy (or fan-codger), I guess. |
|
|
|
Post by artman1033 on Mar 30, 2014 13:33:43 GMT -5
Sentiment is everything Mav. It's better when you have the numbers to back it up like AAPL does but just look at the market and look at the stocks that have positive sentiment - they are sky-rocketing and most DON'T even have any earnings. The markets want to see validation that innovation and vision are not dead at AAPL...and TC hasn't provided that evidence yet IMHO so the jury is still out. And those of us that have remained loyal and long for years would also like some validation - even Marie Antoinette threw out a few crumbs to the peasants! We're off from ATH due to lack of institutional interest, which aren't buying the Apple story like they are with Google and Amazon. That's it. I imagine Bezos and Schmidt are in regular conversation extolling the unlimited upside to their respective companies. Apple plays it close to the vest, getting the benefit of the doubt only when it posts boffo gross margin numbers or unit sales. Now that the latter two items are moribund, institutions are buying all the hot air in Google and Amazon, helped by the group think (a money manager can't be wrong if all the other money managers are buying the same thing). Finally, the media LOVES a negative story about a celebrity company like Apple, the Kim Kardashian of tech stocks. I think Apple's management is livid with its valuation and highly motivated to kill the negativity and skepticism. can do it with a new product category, a larger iPhone, better margins and CM delivering on the promise of 700M subscribers. However, when an institution dismisses Apple as a "fashion company," all of the best reasons for investing in Apple aren't worth diddly. Apple may just be a company we like to purchase products from rather than a company that's in our investment portfolio. I humbly disagree.... I believe the opposite is true. Apple management has never cared about the short term valuation of AAPL |
|
marcellus
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by marcellus on Mar 30, 2014 13:49:54 GMT -5
Finally, the media LOVES a negative story about a celebrity company like Apple, the Kim Kardashian of tech stocks. Kim Kardashian???!!!?? Really!?!?! I have read that she was some kind of reality TV show star, but honestly, what has she ever accomplished that comes close to what Apple has done in the past year, never mind the past decade? I know that few here, and almost no one in the press, agree with me, but I still say that if any other company had produced a phone with an A7-like 64-bit architecture, the M7 sensor, and an absolutely secure fingerprint-based security system in 2013, they would have been hailed as the greatest innovator in the industry. Just call me a fan-boy (or fan-codger), I guess. Kim Kardashian in the sense that she consumes all the media attention, spilling untold digital ink with vacuous and superficial reporting. |
|
|
|
Post by phoebear611 on Mar 30, 2014 14:07:12 GMT -5
Oh dear Lord! Kim Kardashian...she was made famous for the sex tape she did and her mother (the brains in the operation) sold to the media. Such a lovely family. Please do not even compare our PURE fruit company with that white trash. Someday I'll tell you how I really feel about that whole family.  |
|
marcellus
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by marcellus on Mar 30, 2014 15:05:49 GMT -5
Oh dear Lord! Kim Kardashian...she was made famous for the sex tape she did and her mother (the brains in the operation) sold to the media. Such a lovely family. Please do not even compare our PURE fruit company with that white trash. Someday I'll tell you how I really feel about that whole family. lol. The media treats Apple like a celebrity, period, with all the superficiality of the Kardashians. Like you, I deplore the fact they even have a show on TV that gets ratings (I've never met anyone who watches their show but some must, right?). The indictment was targeting the media, a whorehouse of rumor, innuendo and opinion without accountability. |
|
|
|
Post by artman1033 on Mar 30, 2014 16:20:33 GMT -5
|
|
icam
Member
Posts: 447 
|
Post by icam on Mar 30, 2014 17:58:23 GMT -5
For your perusal, take it for what you will. PED's CNN Money article re Robert Paul Letao's thoughts on Apples revenue and Net Income growth: tech.fortune.cnn.com/2014/03/30/apple-revenue-earnings-leitao/He presents revenue and EPS data by quarter in chart format in the article, but here is the article absent said charts: FORTUNE -- Robert Paul Leitao manages a Los Angeles Catholic Church by day, but his real devotion is to Apple (AAPL). When I first met him, Leitao was running The Mac Observer's Apple Finance Board, which he moved to LinkedIn a few years ago and renamed AAPL Independent Analysts. He also founded the Braeburn Group, and every quarter he pulls together his members' estimates for Fortune's Apple Earnings Smackdown. With all this, he somehow finds time to write his irregular Posts at Eventide, from which the attached charts were taken. Ever the Apple bull, Leitao begins his latest post -- Walking Up the Down Staircase -- on a positive note. Over the past eight fiscal years, he reminds us, Apple's revenue has risen 1,127% and its earnings per share 2,457%. But the charts he posted Saturday tell a very different story. Following two years of extraordinary revenue growth -- 66% in fiscal 2011, and 54% in fiscal 2012 -- Apple's grew only 9.2% in the fiscal year that ended in September 2013 and its guidance for the quarter that ended Saturday suggests no growth at all. Leitao's analysis: Apple's seemingly unreal rates of revenue growth from FY2010 through FY2012 were due in part to the release of the iPad product line in April 2010, the addition of Verizon Wireless as an authorized carrier in February 2011 and the mass consumer migration from feature phones to smartphones that occurred over the three-year period. Apple's decline in earnings per share in FY2013 was influenced by the company's very strong prior-year performance. Although Apple reported 9.2% revenue growth in the period, the drop in gross margin year-over-year produced negative net income growth and a decline in earnings per share... While much speculation continues about Apple's plans for new products, with the start of the June quarter, Apple's cycle of negative net income growth has come to end with or without new product lines. Nonetheless, as the graphs in this article illustrate, on a forward-looking basis fast rates of revenue and net income growth are dependent on the successful release of new and currently unannounced new products. Apple is an episodic enterprise. Revenue growth rates and organic net income growth will be challenged in fiscal years absent the delivery of new products. |
|
|
|
Post by phoebear611 on Mar 30, 2014 19:27:37 GMT -5
Futures are green  |
|
vitalogy80
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by vitalogy80 on Mar 30, 2014 20:13:46 GMT -5
Sentiment is everything Mav. It's better when you have the numbers to back it up like AAPL does but just look at the market and look at the stocks that have positive sentiment - they are sky-rocketing and most DON'T even have any earnings. The markets want to see validation that innovation and vision are not dead at AAPL...and TC hasn't provided that evidence yet IMHO so the jury is still out. And those of us that have remained loyal and long for years would also like some validation - even Marie Antoinette threw out a few crumbs to the peasants! We're off from ATH due to lack of institutional interest, which aren't buying the Apple story like they are with Google and Amazon. That's it. I imagine Bezos and Schmidt are in regular conversation extolling the unlimited upside to their respective companies. Apple plays it close to the vest, getting the benefit of the doubt only when it posts boffo gross margin numbers or unit sales. Now that the latter two items are moribund, institutions are buying all the hot air in Google and Amazon, helped by the group think (a money manager can't be wrong if all the other money managers are buying the same thing). Finally, the media LOVES a negative story about a celebrity company like Apple, the Kim Kardashian of tech stocks. I think Apple's management is livid with its valuation and highly motivated to kill the negativity and skepticism. It can do it with a new product category, a larger iPhone, better margins and CM delivering on the promise of 700M subscribers. However, when an institution dismisses Apple as a "fashion company," all of the best reasons for investing in Apple aren't worth diddly. Apple may just be a company we like to purchase products from rather than a company that's in our investment portfolio. Don't you think Apple is off it's ATH primarily because when it was at it's ATH, it was growing EPS at almost 100% YOY...now Net Income is essentially flat. And I agree, they should be livid with the valuation because it's bad for company morale, since I'm guessing a significant portion of people there have stock options and/or stock. But I believe the only way to get back to an ATH is to release a new product...I don't think there's much growth left for the iPhone. Increasing margins will mean lower sales, higher sales will mean lower margins, new larger screens mean greater production costs which mean lower margin. |
|
marcellus
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by marcellus on Mar 30, 2014 21:15:20 GMT -5
Watch 60 Minutes tonight. The market is rigged, of course.
Vitalogy, since WHEN does a company have to grow EPS 100% to earn a P/E of 15? Try this exercise: Chart AAPL at a sustainable growth rate of 20% annually from 2007. If THAT is a sustainable growth rate, then Apple would have been smarter to have sold fewer iPhones and iPads than they did in 2010-2012. Managing an EPS growth rate of 20% would have produced far less EPS this March quarter using the 2007 baseline. Why in the hell can't WS figure that out? DON'T JUSTIFY AAPL's SHARE PRICE BY ASSUMING WALL STREET IS STRAIGHT AND KNOWS SOMETHING ABOUT VALUATION (or uses context in measuring a company's performance).
|
|
|
|
Post by mark on Mar 30, 2014 21:51:41 GMT -5
Tim actually said: "So we’re going to stick with our knitting with only doing a few things and doing them great. There will be new categories and we’re working on some great stuff. We’re not ready to talk about it. We’re really working on some really great stuff. I think no one reasonable would say they’re not a new category." m.us.wsj.com/articles/BL-DGB-32697That's as unequivocal as it gets with Apple, IMHO. A new product category or two or three won't drive growth like iPhone 6 + China Mobile will though they might help in the AAPL sentiment department. Then what good are they? In general, you create new categories FOR GROWTH! |
|
Luckychoices
Member
Long AAPL Stock: No Trading, No Options, No Selling (except for annual RMD)
Posts: 1,076
|
Post by Luckychoices on Mar 30, 2014 21:56:32 GMT -5
|
|
vitalogy80
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by vitalogy80 on Mar 30, 2014 22:08:07 GMT -5
Watch 60 Minutes tonight. The market is rigged, of course. Vitalogy, since WHEN does a company have to grow EPS 100% to earn a P/E of 15? Try this exercise: Chart AAPL at a sustainable growth rate of 20% annually from 2007. If THAT is a sustainable growth rate, then Apple would have been smarter to have sold fewer iPhones and iPads than they did in 2010-2012. Managing an EPS growth rate of 20% would have produced far less EPS this March quarter using the 2007 baseline. Why in the hell can't WS figure that out? DON'T JUSTIFY AAPL's SHARE PRICE BY ASSUMING WALL STREET IS STRAIGHT AND KNOWS SOMETHING ABOUT VALUATION (or uses context in measuring a company's performance). If you think the market is rigged, why are you in it? What PE is "fair" in your mind that is shrinking Net Income YOY? Wall Street had no idea how to value Apple from 2007 to 2011 because that type of growth for that large a company had never been seen before. |
|
JDSoCal
Member
"Irrationally discounted"
Posts: 3,219
|
Post by JDSoCal on Mar 30, 2014 23:48:14 GMT -5
And, remember Steve often said Apple wasn't "going to do X" or "Y was stupid." Then, a year later Apple would release X and Y. Isaacson's bio told us that Steve could call an idea the dumbest ever on Monday, but the best idea ever on Tuesday morning, and by Tuesday PM, he was its biggest evangelist and its inventor. ** I'm not a fan of the Kardashian analogy. Facebook and Twitter are Kardashians, really popular and famous and huge stock prices, but WTF have they ever done? Maybe Apple is like that awesome character actor that never gets a lead because Hollywood wants the flashy attractive guy, like George Clooney (a guy who just plays himself, charming handsome guy, whose movies always tank, at least until that space movie, yet he keeps getting roles) or some pretty cipher like Ryan Gosling. Apple is like Phillip Seymour Hoffman, a character actor that finally breaks the paradigm, huge talent instead of just superficial looks, one who finally gets the lead roles, but can't sustain the pressure and dies a premature tragic flameout death. OK, I don't like where this is going. Analogies are hard. Aw, phuket Tim, just release some new products already! |
|
