Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2013 18:39:30 GMT -8
The only news that matters, long term, is management's guidance. They, more than any other prognosticator know what is going to happen over the next few years. They may give guidance in 3 months clips, but you know they are developing, planning, buying materials and equipment for launches 3 - 5 years out. Anybody that doesn't believe that should go back to shining shoes. "The only thing that matters, long term, is management's guidance." Really? What about actual earnings? Actual earnings growth? Investor sentiment? Earnings is about the past and can cause a short term pop. Earnings in and of itself has no legs. But guidance is about the future, and the sentiment it generates is much longer lasting.
|
|
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 24, 2013 18:40:26 GMT -8
I don't know what Kass sees or doesn't see, but he's traded several AAPL short-term upwaves and downwaves successfully. Provisionally, it's nice that Kass and Redler are on the same side of a trade as I am.
|
|
|
Post by tuffett on Feb 24, 2013 19:01:05 GMT -8
"The only thing that matters, long term, is management's guidance." Really? What about actual earnings? Actual earnings growth? Investor sentiment? Earnings is about the past and can cause a short term pop. Earnings in and of itself has no legs. But guidance is about the future, and the sentiment it generates is much longer lasting. If that were really true, then guiding ridiculously high would be a no-brainier. Everything has importance.
|
|
JDSoCal
Member
Aspiring oligarch
Posts: 4,181
|
Post by JDSoCal on Feb 24, 2013 19:08:52 GMT -8
He's gone from bearish to bullish back to bearish at least once since September. I'd argue that his agility has been much more profitable than my bullheadedness. I'd argue that a technician who is in and out of a company 2 or 3 times in less than 6 months is agile. But a fundamental analyst who is in and out of a company 2 or 3 times in less than 6 months is lucky.
|
|
|
Post by nathanstevens on Feb 24, 2013 19:43:33 GMT -8
I'd argue that his agility has been much more profitable than my bullheadedness. I'd argue that a technician who is in and out of a company 2 or 3 times in less than 6 months is agile. But a fundamental analyst who is in and out of a company 2 or 3 times in less than 6 months is lucky. Are you saying that one can't use fundamentals to identify the investment and technicals for the timing?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2013 20:11:04 GMT -8
I'm confused about the HP tablet, its not completely terrible, and must be selling near cost. Half the price of the iPad mini, and specs are not that much worse. How are they going to make money??? They don't get any ecosystem profits from it. I don't see it getting any traction. There's no significant advantage to it over the Nexus 7, which isn't seeing wild success either. The Galaxy Note 8.0 will probably be far more successful, because of Samsung's brand image and their leverage of the Galaxy name. Price on that is yet to be released though, so we'll see. This thing is $30 cheaper than the Nexus 7 (which google sells near cost - and has shipped 4 million units of). Google sells a unit for more and makes money through ecosystem sales and advertising. HP sells this thing presumably near cost and makes money....how?
|
|
JDSoCal
Member
Aspiring oligarch
Posts: 4,181
|
Post by JDSoCal on Feb 24, 2013 20:15:40 GMT -8
I'd argue that a technician who is in and out of a company 2 or 3 times in less than 6 months is agile. But a fundamental analyst who is in and out of a company 2 or 3 times in less than 6 months is lucky. Are you saying that one can't use fundamentals to identify the investment and technicals for the timing? Sorry for my lack of clarity. I am saying the fundamental case of a company does not change 2-3 times within a single quarter. And reading Kass's case every time he talks his book via a fawning media, he's making fundie arguments about Apple. A month later, he's switched his position, and he's still making fundie points! I think the guy just talks his book and the scared herd follows.
|
|
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 24, 2013 20:28:45 GMT -8
Spot on.
|
|
|
Post by nathanstevens on Feb 24, 2013 21:41:01 GMT -8
Are you saying that one can't use fundamentals to identify the investment and technicals for the timing? Sorry for my lack of clarity. I am saying the fundamental case of a company does not change 2-3 times within a single quarter. And reading Kass's case every time he talks his book via a fawning media, he's making fundie arguments about Apple. A month later, he's switched his position, and he's still making fundie points! I think the guy just talks his book and the scared herd follows. Thanks for clarifying. I agree that the fundamental case for a company doesn't/shouldn't change over a quarter. Unfortunately, it seems that investor sentiment is easy to sway for those with access to the right pulpit even if it is easy for those of us, with memories longer than a goldfish, to poke holes in their arguments. Hence, the importance of technical analysis for some or the ability to buy, hold and completely avoid the media for years at a time for others.
|
|
|
Post by electrobuzz on Feb 24, 2013 22:56:44 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by electrobuzz on Feb 24, 2013 23:04:29 GMT -8
My take away was that Apple is near finished with share buy back. Solvong for share count from Apple's 10Q/10K doesn't work if Apple is changing the rules with buy backs. The following is from Apple's 10K "In August 2012, the Company entered into an accelerated share repurchase program (“ASR”) with a financial institution to purchase up to $1.95 billion of the Company’s common stock in 2013. In exchange for an up-front payment of $1.95 billion, the financial institution committed to deliver a number of shares during the ASR’s purchase period, which ends later in 2013. The total number of shares ultimately delivered, and therefore the average price paid per share, will be determined at the end of the purchase period based on the volume weighted average price of the Company’s stock during that period. In the first quarter of 2013, 2,582,782 shares were initially delivered to the Company. This does not represent the final number of shares to be delivered under the ASR. These shares were retired and accounted for as a reduction to shareholders’ equity in the Company’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet." I wonder how many shares the financial institution promised to deliver for that upfront $1.95 billion. There should have been some minimum number agreed right?
|
|