|
Post by wheeles on Jan 14, 2013 17:54:27 GMT -8
What if AAPL is below 500 on the Thursday, say 480? I lose money, of course. But if you don't have it in your account, which is sort of what you're hinting at, then you'll have a bit of a problem on your hands.
|
|
|
Post by osx10 on Jan 14, 2013 18:47:58 GMT -8
Can't wait to see how this is spun into bad news by the Mother F'ers at CNBC. iPad 4/Mini Cellular launch in China on Friday. LINK
|
|
|
Post by archibaldtuttle on Jan 14, 2013 18:58:06 GMT -8
They must have so much extra supply if they can sell them in china!
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on Jan 14, 2013 19:00:59 GMT -8
Demand for iPad 4/mini in China is weak, because you won't be seeing any lines.
Apple is doomed. I have two reliable unnamed sources that told me so.
The FUD headlines write themselves. Next Wednesday can't get here soon enough.
|
|
|
Post by qualitywte on Jan 14, 2013 19:15:59 GMT -8
Demand for iPad 4/mini in China is weak, because you won't be seeing any lines. Apple is doomed. I have two reliable unnamed sources that told me so. The FUD headlines write themselves. Next Wednesday can't get here soon enough. Damn Mav, you're just a bit too good at that, it hurts!
|
|
|
Post by prazan on Jan 14, 2013 20:26:45 GMT -8
Someone mentioned today (I forget who) that he feared Apple was losing its cool factor with kids. To this I respectfully but forcibly disagree. Nielsen released a study this past December about kids' wish list for Christmas that showed Apple had 4 of the top 5 products, including the iPad as number one with a bullet. Nielsen has long been a respected media and information measurement company, most famous in the US for their television ratings system. Their research methodology in general is solid. The disinformation that Apple is no longer cool was released by Buzz Marketing Group, a "boutique" market consulting company specializing in the teen market. They aren't known for definitive market research. They are definitely for hire. They say so right on their website, which is dominated by the vapid marketing-speak of the day. The research they cited is entirely anecdotal, and without statistical foundation. It seems clear to me that either they wanted a bunch of press (the game is easy to figure out: hit pieces on Apple generate publicity) or they were hired by a client to spread disinformation. Here's the Nielsen study: www.cultofmac.com/202171/kids-want-an-ipad-for-christmas-more-than-they-want-a-wii-u-xbox-or-anything-else/
|
|
|
Post by archibaldtuttle on Jan 14, 2013 21:04:05 GMT -8
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2013 21:38:11 GMT -8
Dell rumors of going private if apple doesnt do something in terms of there cash pile, maybe rumors will be floating soon about Apple going private.. I thought this as well recently. Makes sense - if I had a few hundred billion spare I would do it There's a few Middle East investment funds that could easily do it. Even if you had to pay a 20% premium over today's price, you would still be getting a bargain. Even using Apple's cash to help leverage going private, the BOD would be remiss not to value the Company for less than $2.5 Trillion (annual cash flow capitalized at 5% plus $120,000,000,000 cash). I'm sure the institutions would have something to say about it as well. But then, if you could get the institutions to agree to seller financing, which then leaves only 30% to cash out. But then that brings us right back to where we're at today. Because of Apple's valuation I don't see it happening.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2013 21:43:03 GMT -8
That's would be bullish. Btw, OI is only released tomorrow's morning. So if the put/call ratio increases tomorrow, it's not so much from the supply of puts increasing, as it is the decrease in the supply (OI) of calls from the "big boys" buying them back at lower prices. You gotta follow the math all the way through to understand what is going on.
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on Jan 14, 2013 21:43:17 GMT -8
Buh. Make it a FUD Lite. Here We Go (again). The FUD is still there, just toned down. If nothing else, at least Apple has some more specific intel to go after the SCM leaks if they're for real. The march to next Wednesday - and hopefully analysts who'll ask the right questions, which are really totally obvious - continues.
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on Jan 14, 2013 21:48:29 GMT -8
Someone mentioned today (I forget who) that he feared Apple was losing its cool factor with kids. To this I respectfully but forcibly disagree. When Apple enjoys appeal across all demographics, I frankly don't give a damn about the individual ones, y'know? And for those who think Apple is faddish, walk into a typical higher ed lecture room, see the Macs and iOS devices pointing at you, and...continue on with your silly notions of faddishness and waning popularity, despite all the evidence otherwise.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2013 21:49:33 GMT -8
In a way I'm a little buoyed by how we held $500 today - that seems to be the line in the sand for sellers. AAPL has held at $498/$505 4 X since Sept 21,2012.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2013 22:03:44 GMT -8
This is positive to me. I was rather shocked that WSJ published what they did yesterday (thinking it was complete FUD). But having the NYT publish a corroborating report seems to de-FUDify the WSJ to me. 11-14 million iPhone screens for January is the reported new figure (down from 19 million). At that monthly run rate we are looking at 33-42 million build for Q2 for the iPhone 5 ONLY - probably looking at 40 - 50 million including iPhone 4/4S as well (if you assume iPhone 5 is 80% of sales) - which to me is a good range. Thoughts?
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on Jan 14, 2013 22:16:11 GMT -8
It's STILL FUD, just more...believable?
The reason I say that (it's still FUD) would be because of this:
Bonus faux-clever points for "The reduction in orders for screens could be related to excess inventory, or because consumer demand for the iPhone 5 just was not as strong as Apple had predicted, Mr. Semenza said." Congratulations for saying the same thing two different ways in a sentence.
Then there's the matter of Apple PR formally not commenting, but the "quiet period" is just one of those WS traditions that companies generally stick to, so I'm reserving "thanks for nothing" judgment for the CC.
|
|
|
Post by firestorm on Jan 14, 2013 22:17:25 GMT -8
Someone mentioned today (I forget who) that he feared Apple was losing its cool factor with kids. To this I respectfully but forcibly disagree. Nielsen released a study this past December about kids' wish list for Christmas that showed Apple had 4 of the top 5 products, including the iPad as number one with a bullet. Nielsen has long been a respected media and information measurement company, most famous in the US for their television ratings system. Their research methodology in general is solid. The disinformation that Apple is no longer cool was released by Buzz Marketing Group, a "boutique" market consulting company specializing in the teen market. They aren't known for definitive market research. They are definitely for hire. They say so right on their website, which is dominated by the vapid marketing-speak of the day. The research they cited is entirely anecdotal, and without statistical foundation. It seems clear to me that either they wanted a bunch of press (the game is easy to figure out: hit pieces on Apple generate publicity) or they were hired by a client to spread disinformation. Here's the Nielsen study: www.cultofmac.com/202171/kids-want-an-ipad-for-christmas-more-than-they-want-a-wii-u-xbox-or-anything-else/ Statistics lag coolness; by the time the statisticians have nabbed a trend, the trendsetters are onto something else. Anecdotal evidence is probably a better window into the future than is a statistical snapshot of the present. The members of this board are generally an older demographic who have ridden on Apple's coattails for a decade or three, and we love the company, but I daresay we have no concept of what is trending among the college-age demographic, a small proportion of whom set the trends for the future.
|
|
JDSoCal
Member
Aspiring oligarch
Posts: 4,182
|
Post by JDSoCal on Jan 14, 2013 22:27:05 GMT -8
This is exactly what I had been thinking about Apple's Q1 guidance: WS expectations were ludicrous at $15.44 EPS. Something had to be done to tamp down these runaway numbers, and better to lower guidance last earnings call than to miss on this one.
|
|
JDSoCal
Member
Aspiring oligarch
Posts: 4,182
|
Post by JDSoCal on Jan 14, 2013 23:15:56 GMT -8
No, I do not think the 38,000 $500 puts closed up today. Not that this necessarily means anything, but volume on that strike today: 42,900. Only 246 500 puts closed up. But the calls had a net gain of 2326. Note good put support @ 495 & 490. It's early in the week, so lots can happen. You'd think a day like today would have the put buyers out in force, but, The 520 & 525 puts stayed about the same, and the calls gained about 4K each, which sucks. Goddamn lemmings would buy OTM calls if Apple declared BK.
|
|
|
Post by yellowhandman on Jan 14, 2013 23:22:49 GMT -8
It's STILL FUD, just more...believable? The reason I say that (it's still FUD) would be because of this: Bonus faux-clever points for "The reduction in orders for screens could be related to excess inventory, or because consumer demand for the iPhone 5 just was not as strong as Apple had predicted, Mr. Semenza said." Congratulations for saying the same thing two different ways in a sentence. Then there's the matter of Apple PR formally not commenting, but the "quiet period" is just one of those WS traditions that companies generally stick to, so I'm reserving "thanks for nothing" judgment for the CC. Excess inventory could be because of unexpectedly high production yields in the launch quarter, which allowed Apple to fill their inventory needs faster than anticipated. Apple probably projected X production in 4Q 2012, and so ordered Y production in 1Q 2013. But in the end they managed to get X+ production in 4Q 2012, so could reduce their orders for 1Q 2013. How ironic - Tim Cook is routinely praised for being great at just-in-time manufacturing logistics, yet when Apple takes steps to adjust their supply to meet their needs, it gets spun as a failure. Sigh.
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on Jan 14, 2013 23:33:54 GMT -8
While you make a great point about the alternate explanation, most others won't arrive at it. I didn't, and I'd guess over 90 out of 100 would interpret "excess inventory" as somehow related to demand.
|
|