|
Post by lovemyipad on Dec 27, 2013 17:26:01 GMT -8
The bar is open!
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on Dec 27, 2013 17:28:08 GMT -8
And I'm waiting for earnings already, unless we somehow get a bounce in the next week or two. Bleh.
I need a market hangover cure, please.
|
|
|
Post by lovemyipad on Dec 27, 2013 17:36:48 GMT -8
And I'm waiting for earnings already, unless we somehow get a bounce in the next week or two. Bleh. I need a market hangover cure, please. I am really curious to see how this earnings season will influence market-wide sentiment.
|
|
|
Post by lovemyipad on Dec 27, 2013 17:42:54 GMT -8
I don't think weeklies constrain AAPL from rising (or falling) as much as sentiment does. The problem is that sentiment is dependent on catalysts. We have 52 weeks of Max Pain. Today was not sentiment. IMHO, every day is sentiment; and I don't think sentiment is wholly dependent on catalysts. Greed & Fear Factors influence (drive?) sentiment. Some of our mutual hated names in high-beta tech are currently exhibiting "all greed and no fear" by the bulls. Where's the catalyst? In comparison, I don't think AAPL bulls have entirely forgotten the fear factor of Portfolio Decimation 2013. (I sure haven't!) And we're ending the year right in the same price range where the nightmare began...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2013 18:53:48 GMT -8
The high-beta tech stocks have no OI, comparatively speaking, to restrain irrational exuberance. Apple has been a catalyst stock for some time, given the secrecy and products that consume all the oxygen inside CNBC (et al) studios.
I'm simply appalled at the acquiescence of financial media to AMZN and GOOG valuation. Then again, it's easy to speculate how many iPhones Apple sold. It's not so easy to explain the pivot points to AMZN and GOOG valuations. I think the talking heads aren't qualified to talk about it and because they're LAZY.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2013 19:09:42 GMT -8
"The Compensation Committee believed that the Company’s operating income for 2012 would be difficult to repeat in 2013, in part, because the Company’s business plan for 2013 included the introduction of new versions of existing products with higher cost structures and flat or reduced pricing, the introduction of iPad mini with gross margin significantly below the Company’s average product margins, and price reductions on certain products, including iPad 2 and iPhone 4. The Committee believed that significant leadership efforts would be required to achieve the 2013 performance goals. The table below shows the target and maximum goals and the Company’s actual performance for 2013." 2013 (in Millions) Performance Criteria
Target Goal Maximum Goal Actual Performance Net Sales
$ 165,250 $ 170,000 $ 170,910
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2013 19:10:24 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 Dec 27, 2013 19:16:58 GMT -8
"The Compensation Committee believed that the Company’s operating income for 2012 would be difficult to repeat in 2013, in part, because the Company’s business plan for 2013 included the introduction of new versions of existing products with higher cost structures and flat or reduced pricing, the introduction of iPad mini with gross margin significantly below the Company’s average product margins, and price reductions on certain products, including iPad 2 and iPhone 4. The Committee believed that significant leadership efforts would be required to achieve the 2013 performance goals. The table below shows the target and maximum goals and the Company’s actual performance for 2013." 2013 (in Millions) Performance Criteria Target Goal Maximum Goal Actual Performance Net Sales $ 165,250 $ 170,000 $ 170,910 Interesting.
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on Dec 27, 2013 19:19:30 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by rickag on Dec 27, 2013 19:27:59 GMT -8
"The Compensation Committee believed that the Company’s operating income for 2012 would be difficult to repeat in 2013, in part, because the Company’s business plan for 2013 included the introduction of new versions of existing products with higher cost structures and flat or reduced pricing, the introduction of iPad mini with gross margin significantly below the Company’s average product margins, and price reductions on certain products, including iPad 2 and iPhone 4. The Committee believed that significant leadership efforts would be required to achieve the 2013 performance goals. The table below shows the target and maximum goals and the Company’s actual performance for 2013." 2013 (in Millions) Performance Criteria Target Goal Maximum Goal Actual Performance Net Sales $ 165,250 $ 170,000 $ 170,910 That is pretty damn accurate forecasting , well done Apple.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2013 19:44:02 GMT -8
I find it fascinating that Apple board members didn't expect 2013 operating income to grow or even match the 2012 total. This was back in Sep/Oct 2012 when AAPL was near its $700 ATH, and Wall Street was still expecting 10%-20% growth.
The sell off began then and didn't stop for 9 months.
I wonder if it was a board member who tipped off WS to the impending apple slowdown, because there was nothing at all in any of Apples official communications or filings that suggested they expected negative operating income growth for the next 12 months.
|
|
JDSoCal
Member
Aspiring oligarch
Posts: 4,182
|
Post by JDSoCal on Dec 27, 2013 21:07:19 GMT -8
I find it fascinating that Apple board members didn't expect 2013 operating income to grow or even match the 2012 total. This was back in Sep/Oct 2012 when AAPL was near its $700 ATH, and Wall Street was still expecting 10%-20% growth. The sell off began then and didn't stop for 9 months. I wonder if it was a board member who tipped off WS to the impending apple slowdown, because there was nothing at all in any of Apples official communications or filings that suggested they expected negative operating income growth for the next 12 months. This is known as the Greg Thurmann Theory™. I still have a hard time believing it, as it is an indictable offense, and we aren't talking penny stock manipulation here. But this certainly lends a little credence to it. I just wish whoever - if anyone - leaked it had given me a phone call around September '12, yo.
|
|
|
Post by sponge on Dec 27, 2013 22:29:01 GMT -8
I find it fascinating that Apple board members didn't expect 2013 operating income to grow or even match the 2012 total. This was back in Sep/Oct 2012 when AAPL was near its $700 ATH, and Wall Street was still expecting 10%-20% growth. The sell off began then and didn't stop for 9 months. I wonder if it was a board member who tipped off WS to the impending apple slowdown, because there was nothing at all in any of Apples official communications or filings that suggested they expected negative operating income growth for the next 12 months. I recall very clearly in each conference call long discussions about falling margins and drops in iPhone adoption rates. With each passing quarter the evidence became more relevant as numbers came out and guidance pointed to a drop in net income as compared to year ago WS asked why the guidance was so low for net income and eps and TC and OP kept talking about the things mentioned above. None of us believed them and those who did kept selling. TC tried to keep folks on board with data on everything else but net income. As the stock dropped, I suspect they anticipated, they put together a share buyback plan to stop the bleeding. It worked perfectly as they bought most below 550 and put a floor in the stock around 425. What I don't understand is why they would discuss target revenue growth for a full year but yet not tell us. Unless they are only obligated to give quarter to quarter projections. I wonder what their target revenue is for 2014. Gregg, give us the numbers.
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on Dec 27, 2013 22:44:42 GMT -8
Apple did a horrific job providing some kind of sign about the impending margin situation. IMHO, that's in the rear view mirror for at least a fiscal year.
|
|
|
Post by sponge on Dec 27, 2013 23:14:09 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 Dec 27, 2013 23:29:34 GMT -8
Bnn.ca? Hm. Will go looking for corroborating sources.
Impressive preordering, considering it seems to be a sign-up, then we'll-call-you-back system with NO subsidy/plan/pricing chart available yet. So...will go look for corroborating sources. ;D (Don't mind me, I'm just a skeptic.)
|
|
|
Post by Lstream on Dec 28, 2013 4:17:01 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by rickag on Dec 28, 2013 7:10:24 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by rob_london on Dec 28, 2013 9:07:19 GMT -8
PED: "...Apple is playing in the big leagues and that it knows what it's doing better than any tweet-writing corporate raider who's just trying to increase the value of shares he's owned for less than a year." tech.fortune.cnn.com/category/apple-2-0/
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 28, 2013 10:09:19 GMT -8
I find it fascinating that Apple board members didn't expect 2013 operating income to grow or even match the 2012 total. This was back in Sep/Oct 2012 when AAPL was near its $700 ATH, and Wall Street was still expecting 10%-20% growth. The sell off began then and didn't stop for 9 months. I wonder if it was a board member who tipped off WS to the impending apple slowdown, because there was nothing at all in any of Apples official communications or filings that suggested they expected negative operating income growth for the next 12 months. This is known as the Greg Thurmann Theory™. I still have a hard time believing it, as it is an indictable offense, and we aren't talking penny stock manipulation here. But this certainly lends a little credence to it. I just wish whoever - if anyone - leaked it had given me a phone call around September '12, yo. It's not a theory. Apple performed badly during F2013, and anybody doing a YoY comparison of Apple's 10Qs would have seen it. For all the number crunching I do, I did not compare YoY. Wish I had. Had you been doing that, while you may have missed the top, you wouldn't have been damaged on AAPL's way down (as I was). This is Fundamentals trading at its finest. Enough of the rear view spilt milk whining. Given Cook's oft stated comments about new products, and the signing of Docomo and China Mobile, even a continuation of past performance with Apple's core markets will result in significant Revenue/Net Income growth during F2014 and F2015. Now there is some interesting speculation that HTC and Samsung are preparing to ditch Android for Tizen. If that happens platform market shares are going to undergo a major shift. I believe this will happen, it makes sense for both HTC and Samsung to do so. Oh, and I've never thought, nor stated, that anyone inside Apple alerted the Street about management's expectations.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 28, 2013 10:40:37 GMT -8
Anybody know when Samsung is expected to report? The Korean press is expecting Samsung to report dramatically lower number from CQ3 due to the poor performance of the S4. There is going to be a platform/unit/manufacturer shift in market shares reported for the December quarter. And the shift is going to favor iPhone/iOS/Apple.
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on Dec 28, 2013 11:05:12 GMT -8
Sentiment shift depends on actual smartphone growth rate, players, and spin.
If $150 ASP phones are now considered smartphones, that compare is moronic, and we have a sense for goalposts and narratives.
Will the media have a new upstart set up or heralded as challenging/"further eroding" the former reigning king Apple that never really was (as we all know here, Apple continues to be the upstart, not Samsung)? Is Xiaomi really that candidate?
HTC, Huawei, Lenovo, LG, Nokia, ZTE - how are they doing, really?
Shipped vs. sold.
The perception of Samsung as "true leader" in the smartphone space (which they are and have been for years).
Lots of questions, lots of storylines, potentially lots of BS to sort through. Me, I'm just looking to see Apple post a iPhone YOY unit growth rate of >20%. That would be a good base case to start from.
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on Dec 28, 2013 11:38:02 GMT -8
Still looking for those corroborating China Mobile preorder # stories. The sooner we get some numbers, the better - if ever. About shares outstanding: Here's what things looked like the year before. Table date - Dec. 17 Shares stated as outstanding: 938,818,605 investor.apple.com/secfiling.cfm?filingID=1193125-12-515422&CIK=320193Actual "Basic" shares reported for Dec. quarter: 938,916,000 (really close to the preliminary proxy statement) Actual diluted shares reported for December quarter: 947.2M www.apple.com/pr/library/2013/01/23Apple-Reports-Record-Results.htmlThe gap between basic and diluted shares has narrowed considerably over the past few quarters. As of fiscal Q4 2013 it was just about 5M. Yep, I'm only extrapolating from a single data point, but my WAG is diluted shares outstanding are a bit under 900M now. I'll probably take a flyer and use 898M as my diluted share denominator.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 28, 2013 11:48:48 GMT -8
Sentiment shift depends on actual smartphone growth rate, players, and spin. Lots of questions, lots of storylines, potentially lots of BS to sort through. Me, I'm just looking to see Apple post a iPhone YOY unit growth rate of >20%. That would be a good base case to start from. Apple sold 29% more iPhones for the FQ Dec 13 than in did FQ Dec 12, so a 20% increase would not seem an improvement. Some even characterized FY 13 as a terrible year, which I think is absurd. I'm talking Apple, Inc., not AAPL. Anyone who expected Apple to repeat margins of FY 12 in FY 13 is naive. My mistake is that WS reacted to it the way it did. After all, WS supposedly discounted Apple's high margins -- complaining these were not sustainable. They sure weren't.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 28, 2013 11:50:21 GMT -8
Au Contraire. WORLDWIDE September quarter market share numbers (however inexact) show Apple as the #2 manufacturer with 12+%. #3 held a distant 5+%.
Of the five manufacturers you listed 3 are listed in the Other category, another was failing so badly it was sold off to a deep pocket with near zero presence in the category.
Of the many in the sector nobody profits as does Apple. In fact, of the many in the sector, only two are making a discernible profit, most are losing money.
Given that Apple created the smartphone as we know it today, and most importantly is not resting on its laurels, I do not see another platform disrupting the sector as iOS and Apple hardware did. Possible? Yes. Probable? Only to the most distorted analysis.
Name one platform with the backwards upgradability, resistance to malware, UI, customer satisfaction, technology, expanding customer base, gross margins, its own processors and ecosystem that iOS/iPhone enjoys. Everybody else is dependent on one, or more, other technology firms to advance their product. iPhone is only dependent on production capacity.
Samsung came closest, but being a "fast copier" has its limits, and Samsung has hit those limits.
To challenge Apple at this stage is going to require a deep pocket with a radically new interface. That means a wealthy innovator with production capacity. With another billion in cash Palm might have made it, but none of the current crop of players have what is needed. They can only compete on price, which is a race to the bottom. Apple is wise to eschew that strategy, focusing instead on making its product better and more desirable to the market segment that will insure its long term success.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 28, 2013 11:51:44 GMT -8
Mav, that's a good # for O/S, diluted. My original estimate was 896M, but due to weighting and the recent published basic number, something between 898M - 900M should do the trick.
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on Dec 28, 2013 11:52:44 GMT -8
Base case, Mercel. Base case. First off, I don't think anyone disagrees that maintaining a growth rate with that volume of smartphones is much tougher to do with each passing year. WS has baked that in and we can "accept" that just fine. Growth rate (% terms) WILL trail off someday, maybe in 2015-2016, who knows. That said, I know that "like-for-like" iPhone growth was actually something like 39% and at least mid-30s% YOY in fiscal Q1 2013 even if you adjust for Oppenheimer's classic sandbagging. I also believe that 2013 was a transition year and a "blah" one for iPhone, so IMHO there's a real chance unit growth % will accelerate noticably this year for iPhone and iPad. Not sure exactly why iPhone 5S seems more popular, even accounting for "pulling ahead demand" via China , but I'm not questioning the possible S generation effect, heck no. ;D Don't get me wrong, 5S is worthy (so was the 5!), it "deserves" the growth and success in the marketplace. But is it more to do with 5S being better-appreciated, Touch ID and other features getting attention while a lot of the Android world is being seen as more gimmicky, nothing really new aside from ridiculously unwieldy size, more malware and the occasional OS update? Keeping my home gamer cards close to the vest for now Mercel, heh. I'll probably have a iPhone YOY unit growth number stronger than 20% not long before earnings.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 28, 2013 12:03:19 GMT -8
My point is, it will be unlikely for Apple to grow iPhone unit sales in this Dec quarter like it did a year ago. If it matched last years % increase YOY in the Dec. quarter, it would need 62M iPhones this time
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on Dec 28, 2013 12:10:04 GMT -8
Yeah, 62M iPhones is probably too high. We might well need a guidance revision from Oppenheimer for that to be possible. iPad is the bigger question for me. Is the iPad category really gonna put in as "poor" a showing as my WAG estimates suggest? Subject to change, total non-expert etc. etc. but a "high end" scenario I have puts iPad at something like 15% YOY growth. I mean, really? iPad mini retina doesn't look to be the limiting factor, supply improved much more quickly than it did for iPad mini 1. So...is iPad mini retina not as popular? Is iPad Air more constrained? Will ASP sharply reverse at the "expense" of less units than we're thinking? Is the tablet market around Apple's price range just not as fast growing as the world thought it was?
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on Dec 28, 2013 12:17:46 GMT -8
|
|