|
Post by lovemyipad on May 17, 2013 14:47:28 GMT -8
I'm tired.... Anyone else?
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on May 17, 2013 14:51:41 GMT -8
Somewhat unamused. But yeah whipsaws are tiring.
On a look-ahead basis (yes, always riskier, arguably quite dangerous), AAPL is behaving much better than it EVER has in some technicals aspects since this downtrend began. But the other shoe just won't drop 'til next week at least. I just hope it's the bullish...er...shoe...y'know that analogy just doesn't work. ;D
|
|
|
Post by lovemyipad on May 17, 2013 15:07:23 GMT -8
OI says we'll close under $435. With GOOG, AMZN and MSFT flying high while AAPL digs a trench, I have serious doubts that the stock market is any place one should put money.So many crooks and gamblers in the market. It's disgusting. Or perhaps not in one stock. Works well when it's going your way, not so well when it's not.
|
|
coma
Member
Posts: 522
|
Post by coma on May 17, 2013 16:31:27 GMT -8
OI says we'll close under $435. With GOOG, AMZN and MSFT flying high while AAPL digs a trench, I have serious doubts that the stock market is any place one should put money.So many crooks and gamblers in the market. It's disgusting. Or perhaps not in one stock. Works well when it's going your way, not so well when it's not. Twelve years ago I owned two houses and had two mortgages, at that time I also bought 1000 shares of AAPL. Today, I have five houses and four mortgages, with 768 shares of AAPL left over. . . . I'm I doing something wrong ?
|
|
|
Post by cbingle on May 17, 2013 17:24:19 GMT -8
Yes, you have mortgages...STMF
|
|
coma
Member
Posts: 522
|
Post by coma on May 17, 2013 17:39:35 GMT -8
I'm working on it . . .
|
|
|
Post by phoebear611 on May 17, 2013 17:52:29 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by cbingle on May 17, 2013 18:51:51 GMT -8
Coma: Good for you. Building is a good thing...STMF
|
|
|
Post by mace on May 17, 2013 18:56:09 GMT -8
Twelve years ago I owned two houses and had two mortgages, at that time I also bought 1000 shares of AAPL. Today, I have five houses and four mortgages, with 768 shares of AAPL left over. . . . I'm I doing something wrong ? You've bought in the wrong place. 768 shares of AAPL can't buy you a wooden shed in SV. Minimum price is $1 mil. Where are your houses?
|
|
coma
Member
Posts: 522
|
Post by coma on May 17, 2013 19:12:52 GMT -8
Local commute to Washington DC . . .
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on May 17, 2013 20:22:30 GMT -8
If you'll do the honors, JD, what's the final pain range scorecard?
(Damn, some bear call spreads would've been a nice play this week...)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2013 20:28:39 GMT -8
OI says we'll close under $435. With GOOG, AMZN and MSFT flying high while AAPL digs a trench, I have serious doubts that the stock market is any place one should put money.So many crooks and gamblers in the market. It's disgusting. Or perhaps not in one stock. Works well when it's going your way, not so well when it's not. Diversification does not validate the stock market as a reliable pricing mechanism. The stock market is broken. This isn't just my opinion but among those who are pulling the levers, where complicity keeps the music playing. Here's a great read by the always reliable Daniel Eran Dilger: appleinsider.com/articles/13/05/17/10m-samsung-flagship-phones-in-28-days-a-record-5m-iphone-5-in-3-days-disappointingThe REAL QUESTION is HOW TO FIX THIS? I have some ideas but there are probably more crooks than strategies to right what's wrong.
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on May 17, 2013 20:34:35 GMT -8
PED also pointed that out. And the funny thing is, Samsung has always been the 900-pound gorilla in this space (sold >100M or something like that when Apple sold 0, IIRC), and its true competition in handsets until recently was Nokia.
Don't get me wrong. Apple will need to take some steps if it wants to continue growing 20%+ in smartphones, because it sure didn't last quarter. But the upstart has been Apple the whole time. Funny how the media is so wrong on facts when it suits them.
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on May 17, 2013 21:11:37 GMT -8
How was your trip, Mercel?
Bullish(+) fervor recharged?
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on May 17, 2013 21:26:22 GMT -8
What could have been at Intel - er, really? macdailynews.com/2013/05/17/whoops-intels-otellini-passed-on-apples-iphone/See, I always thought that for Apple it was ARM or nothin' on iPhone. Now if Otellini is saying they might have become a chip foundry for Apple, yes to ARM, no to Atom, that's a story. If he's saying Atom on smartphones would've worked...that's a statement made out of Itanium if you'll pardon the pun. ;D Hey, Intel has my respect for the NOT-crappy tech it has (cough IGPs cough). I wonder if it permanently missed the train on (truly) mobile. The ONLY way it'll get back on is through one company. Does it have the courage to change (y'know, actually use that ARM license it has and/or get whatever else it needs to start up an ARM-based foundry), the talent to catch up (talent yes, price/performance/ultramobile power efficiency ), the "humility" to bargain with a company that's now bigger than the WinTel "alliance" combined (who'd have thought)?!?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2013 22:13:51 GMT -8
How was your trip, Mercel? Bullish(+) fervor recharged? AAPL in the 400s is just insane while the overall market scales new heights. Is AAPL the ATM for rotation into other stocks? My, one can buy more than 10 shares of Mr. Softie for one share of AAPL. Is retail really that dumb? Probably dumber. The product pipeline may be full but there's scant evidence of it. This is probably the longest stretch without an Apple event on the books. And it's not helping AAPL, the stock. The only thing new over the past 6 months is a 128GB iPad 4: This is a clean break from the past, a disappointing one. In the vacuum, the media has filled it with Apple FUD and pro-Samsung articles. Hawaii trips are always good -- perhaps I'll even share a pic for chopped-liver-Red over the weekend
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on May 17, 2013 23:11:33 GMT -8
EDIT: TL;DR warning.Well, we're aligned on the Dangerfield-esque treatment of Apple (for all its faults, many real and some imagined, which AAPL makes us painfully aware of in amplified form). On a sidenote, I still like technicals to help me at least get some grasp of WTH's going on, even though trading technicals is of little use when you're in, well, "WTH's going on" mode as I've been for, well, much of the past few months . And you have to admit, the extra-hated rally and AAPL's dead stop act are at least _mild_ head-scratchers. I'm pretty sure this IS the longest stretch without an Apple something in many years. But until Apple changes its culture and finishes dealing with the Sins of the Forstall, if that's even possible, (no small thing, that iOS-related issue!), this year remains Apple's "true" year of transition (or "worse", the new Apple for the time being). Lucky for Apple, it has more than enough resources to get through this, leaving aside us retail investor/trader AAPL types who may be AAPL bulls. The fixes are "simple" IMHO, but implementation? - Leveraging "good enough" A-series SoCs as a baseline if they can't realistically accelerate the generational cadence beyond 12-15 months. A6 and beyond should pretty easily solve this problem. A6 _rules_, it'll be a killer platform for a good 2 years yet IMHO (and a super engine for iPad mini/iPod touch/whatever). Well, at least _this_ one seems simple enough. - Getting iOS "back on schedule" (read: June or so). This could be very, very tough. Remember Apple's "promise" to accelerate OS X development? Once a year? Under the command of Hair Force One, so theoretically free of Forstall influences (let's just pretend OS X isn't wagged by iOS for the moment here, to mix metaphors) daringfireball.net/2012/02/mountain_lionChances of 12-month interval before 10.9 launch this year - I'll say more like 15 months, at minimum. Maybe even more since Jony Ive has a role in ALL software now. That transition thing again. I'll be happy enough if we get iOS 7 and iOS 8 by Septemberish 2013/2014 for now. - Product cadence. Apple could be a "second-half company" but I'd find it very hard to believe it WANTS things that way. It could certainly go back to iPads for the spring since they're not dependent on iOS New(tm) like iPhone is at present...you'd think, anyway. It makes me wonder if the SoCs were tripping Apple up some, since iPad retina had an A5X instead of an A6 underhood. OTOH, Apple has a window to show progress on the cadence front if it can match the interval between iPad 3 and 4. That interval would place one or more new iPads right around late June/early July. Hmm... Of course, there's the question of iPhone. Can Apple turn back the clock? Will it even if it could? Or will there be a "spring iPhone" in the cards at some point (iPhone Cheap/iPhone Big) to address some of the market while the "fall iPhone" remains the flagship for the year? - Mysterious New Products to fill the void. If iRadio negotiations are anywhere near as tough as the rumors say, I don't even wanna know about television. Help us all if the Apple TV launches as a...second-half product at some point. ;D
|
|
|
Post by rob_london on May 18, 2013 1:57:14 GMT -8
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on May 18, 2013 2:15:29 GMT -8
A nice, concise primer there.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2013 5:18:30 GMT -8
Thanks for sharing. Facebook will unlikely remain as one of the four horsemen (AMZN, GOOG and AAPL the others). The ubiquity of it doesn't confer its future relevance -- I've tried to see the "value-add" of Facebook and it's lost on me. Users hung up on Facebook's "home phone," and I believe this bad news is a harbinger of more to come. The great opportunity of mobile is that it's PERSONAL (and thereby more units in service) and the products turn every two years. Now let's see more than one iPhone to reach the variety of demand for smartphones. Differentiation by size is probably first on my list. As one front-line ATT sales rep told me: If Apple offered a 4.9" iPhone, it would crush the Android demand at his store.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2013 5:22:46 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by rickag on May 18, 2013 5:52:10 GMT -8
I agree, but many people do want streaming music. The key quote from that article, referring to Spotify and Pandora was, "But neither of these companies have come close to generating profits; the top record companies hope that Apple and Google can wade in and do a better job of that. And if streaming music turns out not to be a profitable business, these tech titans can afford to take a loss, as long as it makes their overall ecosystems more attractive when considering which smartphone, tablet, or set-top box to buy." So the content holders want the large tech companies to lose money so they can make the money. Apple pretty much was at break even when starting iTunes and still makes very low %s. now they want them to lose money?
|
|
|
Post by lovemyipad on May 18, 2013 7:09:11 GMT -8
Right here, right now, feels like: The broad market is never coming down again -- ever. AAPL is never going up again -- ever. GLD and AAPL still dance partners.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2013 8:13:27 GMT -8
Right here, right now, feels like: The broad market is never coming down again -- ever. AAPL is never going up again -- ever. GLD and AAPL still dance partners. It sure feels that way to me. There are scant signs of new Apple product, exacerbating WS views that Apple is cyclical and it's only as good as its last hit, unlike AMZN and GOOG. WS is rewarding the future potential of the latter two as if the future has already arrived. On the flip side, past performance has never been discounted so much, even in the face of surveys that crown Apple as having the best ecosystem and most loyal customers. GOOG is more than double the price of AAPL and this is supposed to make sense on some level? GOOG failures are ignored and market share (sans profit) is celebrated. Are options partly to blame? Are the institutions staying on the sidelines earning premiums as they sit and wait for the next catalyst?
|
|
|
Post by rickag on May 18, 2013 8:33:26 GMT -8
In the intraday thread lovemyipad posted a link to Short InterestAs of 4/15 there were just over 20 million shares sold short and As of 4/30 there was over 40 million shares sold short. if I read this correctly. I understand there is no time frame/expiration on selling short, but the seller could have to cough up the shares if AAPL goes up enough, unless the seller has the stock or has a lot of equity backing these sells? Looking at AAPL we hit bottom on 4/18(~$390) and basically went up to 4/30(high of ~$444) at the same time the amount of shorts more than doubled. So the increase in shorts had to be sold below somewhere around $444 and most likely much lower. As of 5/2 AAPL has been above $442 until 5/15. That means there had only been one day any of the shorts sold @ $442 could have made money and any shorts sold between $390 and $418 should still losing. Selling short could either be speculation betting AAPL goes down or used as hedges against opposing positions, right? What I'm trying to say is I have no clue what I just wrote or what affect it may have on AAPL going forward, I give.
|
|
|
Post by sponge on May 18, 2013 8:39:25 GMT -8
Or perhaps not in one stock. Works well when it's going your way, not so well when it's not. Diversification does not validate the stock market as a reliable pricing mechanism. The stock market is broken. This isn't just my opinion but among those who are pulling the levers, where complicity keeps the music playing. Here's a great read by the always reliable Daniel Eran Dilger: appleinsider.com/articles/13/05/17/10m-samsung-flagship-phones-in-28-days-a-record-5m-iphone-5-in-3-days-disappointingThe REAL QUESTION is HOW TO FIX THIS? I have some ideas but there are probably more crooks than strategies to right what's wrong. To be fair, all data does point to Samsung selling more smartphones every quarter, they are growing profits, margins, and brand recognition like never before. In the mean time Apple is showing a drop in profits and market share. Heck last quarter the iPhone grew 7% while overall market grew 40%. This is why the stock is going nowhere for a while. We must be patient. It will take at least three more years for Apple to move away from Samsung and introduce the next radical iPhone. 2016 is the year we will all remember like we did with 2007.
|
|
|
Post by sponge on May 18, 2013 8:54:20 GMT -8
Right here, right now, feels like: The broad market is never coming down again -- ever. AAPL is never going up again -- ever. GLD and AAPL still dance partners. It sure feels that way to me. There are scant signs of new Apple product, exacerbating WS views that Apple is cyclical and it's only as good as its last hit, unlike AMZN and GOOG. WS is rewarding the future potential of the latter two as if the future has already arrived. On the flip side, past performance has never been discounted so much, even in the face of surveys that crown Apple as having the best ecosystem and most loyal customers. GOOG is more than double the price of AAPL and this is supposed to make sense on some level? GOOG failures are ignored and market share (sans profit) is celebrated. Are options partly to blame? Are the institutions staying on the sidelines earning premiums as they sit and wait for the next catalyst? I recall quite well the summer of 2006. The stock dropped over 40% and I was way underwater, as the media and WS kept focusing on Mac growth and concern over long term reliance on the iPod. It took a full year to get those losses back and another 6 months to move beyond $86 a share. WS is made up of short term holders and driven my media whores. I conclude that smart money are those who buy and then evaluate their positions every 3 years. If the company is still growing they keep buying. We are in a transition year like 2006. Mav made good points regarding a transition year in management and software in an earlier post. I agree with him.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2013 8:58:31 GMT -8
This corresponds with the huge run up in Put OI of the past couple weeks. Could it be that Put interest is being driven by Bears, vs our original thesis that it was being driven by Bulls selling? Of course you need both sides, but one has to be more interested than the other to get pricing that entices the reluctant side. Is there a way to measure change in premiums?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2013 9:00:47 GMT -8
Me either. I see some popularity for it, but isn't iRadio just a variation od streaming music? And didn't Apples own your music model crush Realnetworks (the former top music service)?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2013 9:06:48 GMT -8
I agree, but many people do want streaming music. The key quote from that article, referring to Spotify and Pandora was, "But neither of these companies have come close to generating profits; the top record companies hope that Apple and Google can wade in and do a better job of that. And if streaming music turns out not to be a profitable business, these tech titans can afford to take a loss, as long as it makes their overall ecosystems more attractive when considering which smartphone, tablet, or set-top box to buy." So the content holders want the large tech companies to lose money so they can make the money. Apple pretty much was at break even when starting iTunes and still makes very low %s. now they want them to lose money? I should have read the next post in line, before contributing. If the critical mass isn't there to make a profit, it isn't a feature/service that will survive. I don't see Apple playing in this playground without profitable terms. The music industry is going to have to budge. Google may well do it as a loss leader for the Android platform, but the consumers they are trying to entice don't use data, or spend money. So what benefit, beyond non-profitable bragging rights, does this provide Google?
|
|