Since84
Moderator
To infinity and beyond!
Posts: 3,933
|
Post by Since84 on Jan 24, 2017 3:22:40 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by rickag on Jan 24, 2017 4:34:12 GMT -8
Will be interesting if Qualcomm counter sues Apple. Over what exactly? Being forced by South Korea to reveal their abusive licensing requirements that prevent companies from complaining to legal authorities. It will have to have some real whacky language.
|
|
|
Post by macster on Jan 24, 2017 5:46:00 GMT -8
The fear of tough talk against china island building and further land grabs is on the investor mind set. Myself also as yesterday's war talk resumed. Told the long part of my grey matter to get out yesterday to no avail. Hopefully it's just the art of the deal. Weak hands may start a mass exit scenario.
|
|
Since84
Moderator
To infinity and beyond!
Posts: 3,933
|
Post by Since84 on Jan 24, 2017 5:59:16 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by carbonate24 on Jan 24, 2017 6:04:26 GMT -8
Good morning everyone. The Nikkei is the only RED index in a sea of GREEN. AAPL is RED trading at $119.14 -0.94 (-0.78%). No driving factors I can ascertain beyond the vagaries of pre-market. It is coming up. Let's see where it trades upon open. Looks like some clown from Barclay's downgraded AAPL to equal-weight from overweight and lowered their price target from 119 to 117. Same old story.....they noted weakness in smartphone market overall (emphasis mine) and concerns about China and India as growth drivers.
|
|
|
Post by CdnPhoto on Jan 24, 2017 6:05:53 GMT -8
Barclays downgrades AAPL to equal weight. Lowers price target from $119 to $117. Does not see meaningful upside potential for C2017
|
|
|
Post by mrentropy on Jan 24, 2017 6:42:17 GMT -8
Well, that's how much Mr market thinks of Barclays's "Analysis". About as much as the rest of us. I think I can summarize it as "we have lower price target than the current stock price, let me justify that position with supposition."
|
|
|
Post by artman1033 on Jan 24, 2017 7:03:56 GMT -8
next week. not today! FY 17 First Quarter Results Apple’s conference call to discuss first fiscal quarter results is scheduled for Tuesday, January 31, 2017 at 2:00 p.m. PT / 5:00 p.m. ET. investor.apple.com
|
|
|
Post by carbonate24 on Jan 24, 2017 10:11:41 GMT -8
Does anyone have any thoughts as to why we seemed to be glued to 120? I understood it last week with options expiration, but I thought we'd be able to pull away this week. I am glad we're not down after the Barclay's note, but it would be nice to be moving higher with the market.
|
|
chinacat
Moderator
AAPL Long since 2006
Posts: 4,428
|
Post by chinacat on Jan 24, 2017 11:02:31 GMT -8
Does anyone have any thoughts as to why we seemed to be glued to 120? I understood it last week with options expiration, but I thought we'd be able to pull away this week. My guess is no one is confident that they know what is going to get announced next Tuesday.
|
|
|
Post by mrentropy on Jan 24, 2017 11:28:51 GMT -8
120 is a magnet both ways though. The force is strong with this one.
|
|
|
Post by dreamRaj on Jan 24, 2017 12:11:14 GMT -8
Does anyone have any thoughts as to why we seemed to be glued to 120? I understood it last week with options expiration, but I thought we'd be able to pull away this week. My guess is no one is confident that they know what is going to get announced next Tuesday. Agreed, but I'm starting to feel that this solid, stubborn pin seems like a continued effort by someone to put a lid on AAPL at 120. If there really IS someone trying to do that, it's hard to understand why, with the main monthly options already expired. I don't get it because this pin is unusually strong and on the point for too long now!
|
|
JDSoCal
Member
Aspiring oligarch
Posts: 4,182
|
Post by JDSoCal on Jan 24, 2017 13:54:41 GMT -8
Stuck at 120, as profitless AMZN goes up a few dollars every day.
|
|
|
Post by Luckychoices on Jan 24, 2017 14:13:41 GMT -8
Barclays downgrades AAPL to equal weight. Lowers price target from $119 to $117. Does not see meaningful upside potential for C2017 For Barclays to adjust a price target only $2 indicates they would like investors to believe that their forecasting methods are so accurate, such small price target adjustments can be warranted by their detailed analysis and projections. I give their downgrade as much credit as I do when tech writers insert the following disclosure at the end of their article: Disclosure: I/we have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours.
Question #1: Why wouldn't a tech writer write about stocks where they had done "due diligence" and could recommend an investment (buy, sell, options, etc) which they themselves were following by investing their own money? Question #2: Why is it so difficult to track companies like Barclays, comparing their price targets calls to price target actuals, so there could be a fair estimate made about how accurate they've been for a particular stock? It seems that all these price target adjustments by various companies are made with no real way to judge how accurate they've been over the past few years; but if such a thing already exists, please educate me.
|
|
|
Post by macster on Jan 24, 2017 18:00:27 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by mace on Jan 24, 2017 19:14:55 GMT -8
Peanuts to his AAPL holdings. Too lazy to look at the details, could be just to pay tax for vested RSUs or to buy a house or something. Heard he is still renting. Article says he has option?
|
|
|
Post by macster on Jan 24, 2017 22:10:29 GMT -8
Peanuts to his AAPL holdings. Too lazy to look at the details, could be just to pay tax for vested RSUs or to buy a house or something. Heard he is still renting. Article says he has option? What would Forest Gump do? I was successful following Lt. Dan and Forest's momma always said, Life was like a box of chocolates. You never know what you're gonna get. Thats lately. heheh
|
|
|
Post by hledgard on Jan 24, 2017 23:00:47 GMT -8
Barclays downgrades AAPL to equal weight. Lowers price target from $119 to $117. Does not see meaningful upside potential for C2017 For Barclays to adjust a price target only $2 indicates they would like investors to believe that their forecasting methods are so accurate, such small price target adjustments can be warranted by their detailed analysis and projections. I give their downgrade as much credit as I do when tech writers insert the following disclosure at the end of their article: Disclosure: I/we have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours.
Question #1: Why wouldn't a tech writer write about stocks where they had done "due diligence" and could recommend an investment (buy, sell, options, etc) which they themselves were following by investing their own money? Question #2: Why is it so difficult to track companies like Barclays, comparing their price targets calls to price target actuals, so there could be a fair estimate made about how accurate they've been for a particular stock? It seems that all these price target adjustments by various companies are made with no real way to judge how accurate they've been over the past few years; but if such a thing already exists, please educate me. LuckyChoice, your point is beautifully taken. A very thoughtful comment !
|
|
|
Post by Luckychoices on Jan 24, 2017 23:09:42 GMT -8
Peanuts to his AAPL holdings. Too lazy to look at the details, could be just to pay tax for vested RSUs or to buy a house or something. Heard he is still renting. Article says he has option? Yeah, you're right, mace. He's still holding a few shares. Last August marked Cook's fifth year on the job helming Apple, a period that saw the company grow to become one of the most valuable in the world. That same month, Cook saw 1.26 million restricted stock units —980,000 time-based RSUs and 280,000 performance-based RSUs —vest as per a compensation package dating back to 2011.
|
|