Liberty

http://philebersole.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/riseofteddyroosevelt2.jpg

Looks like the WSJ might have jumped the gun: http://business.financialpost.com/2013/12/05/apple-inc-china-mobile-iphone/?__lsa=8c0c-048c Seems like it'll be a nice xmas on the computer side of the business too:

High volumes continue, but this time pushing in the other direction. Found on SH (sorry about the formatting):

That's great. Having iPhones in all China Mobile outlets around China will, in an indirect way, massively increase Apple's retail presence in the country. They still need to build out their stores (that'll be work for Angela), but this is exciting, if not surprising, news.

One thing I've found out the more I learned about Canadian RE is that there's little you can trust. No third party, transparent body is keeping track of sales. You get stats from realtors, who mutilate the numbers so much you don't know what they mean anymore. They silently go back and revise past year numbers so the YoY comparisons look better, some houses listed in 2-3 systems get reported as 2-3 sales when they are sold, they throw out data arbitrarily, etc. And then they play the media little a fiddle most of the time, with realtor press releases reprinted as news and even going as far as having realtors of asian origin pose as wealthy chinese buyers for TV crews in Vancouver (in a now infamous yellow helicopter ride), with bankers being cited as sources for most RE articles (as if big banks were unbiased parties in this). It's all about sentiment. Everybody thinks prices are very high, and the only thing that can make them buy is if they're sure they'll keep going up and that waiting will price them out (fear) and cost them more. When sentiment turns, it'll get interesting, because it's not as if most people think that prices are reasonable and growth is just a nice bonus; they feel like they need it both to justify buying and to feel like it'll help them carry all that debt later later thanks to capital gains, and of course they don't want to miss out on all the profits everybody are making on their houses (greed). So it's very possible that some area of Montreal is very hot. Things might even keep going across the country for years. But I'm certain it's not sustainable, and what can't keep going won't. In the meantime, I'm happy renting and I take what I read about RE with a big grain of salt.

Actually, I think the gift cards are for the Apple Store and not the App Store/iTunes store, though I'm not 100% certain if the second counts as a subset of the first (but not the other way around if you have an itunes gift card, f.ex). Either way, it certainly doesn't hurt.

Not sure. It's from the Economist, so I'd guess it was in an article about that and they also included some other countries as comparison points.

Everybody discounts that day. The point is, these devices are a big success, shoppers are choosing them in a crowded field, and there's strong demand on one of the busiest shopping days of the year in Apple's biggest market. It certainly bodes well for xmas. Also interesting to note that the discounts given by Apple were Apple Store gift cards, and not discounts on the devices themselves (you have to use the gift card on something else, can't use it immediately on the device afaik).

Via many people on Twitter lately: http://i.imgur.com/YBqsya1.jpg

I'm not expert on REITs, but when Garth Turner mentions them, he seems to think that they'll do ok because the renting market isn't nearly as bubbly as the buying one (and many REITs are heavy or exclusively in the commercial sector).

http://www.localytics.com/blog/2013/ipad-air-wins-black-friday-cyber-monday-new-devices-increase-by-51/ Wow. http://www.localytics.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Untitled.png

http://9to5mac.com/2013/12/04/imaginative-use-of-ibeacon-gives-bar-patrons-free-access-to-newsstand-magazines/ People already starting to invent new ways to use iBeacons. You go to a bar or waiting room with your iOS device and while there you have free access to content. Attracts customers for the business, and makes iOS devices more valuable. Seems like this could be popular in all kinds of places, including hotels, airports, bars & restaurants, art events, etc.

Yeah, I think the more interesting thing, though, is that Apple is struggling to keep up to Samsung's innovations (in this case, eye tracking) and needs to do so through acquisition. What matters is implementation. Samsung has some very nice technologies, but they rarely implement them in a way that actually works to a high standard. They make a lot of demo features that are then turned off by users and never thought about again... Big difference between a good technology and a good product (unlike the Samsung Gear). Apple has never been about being first. Wasn't first digital music player, not first smartphone, not first tablet. All about quality of experience.

Wow, that's novella-length. I'm digging in, thanks! Update: I think I already read this one, but it was probably around the time it was released in 2010, so I've forgotten many of the details and flavor of it. Good to revisit.

My favorite is the SENS Research Foundation: http://www.sens.org

Thanks ajc. I came here to post that but you beat me to it. Good read. Nothing totally new, but well argued. The argument about put-backs to the banks from CHMC is particularly interesting, though it's hard to know how that would play out.

It depends how many they had. If they had millions and ran out, that's certainly impressive. If they had a baker's dozen... meh.

I'm guessing this is the reason why Apple is up so much on a day when everything's down (not the Twitter-related acquisiton). More and more signs of an imminent China Mobile deal.

Not only that, but check out what can happen if you don't have an armor plate and a battery protecting you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJUWXRWK4xs

Well, I suppose every company has to be good at something. lol. LOL! That was a good one. Cheers! Yeah, even better if you own it. Nice moat that not many can copy. LOL How can they not copy it? Can't someone just plop down $500M and build a plant after getting regulatory approval? Cheers! I think he was making a joke about the talent for reaching new 52wk lows :)

So one company's products against everybody else had three+ times more sales. And of course, it would look even better if you compared Apple one-on-one. Not a bad position, I'd say. When Tim Cook talks about web usage and number of apps downloaded and such, he's not trying to use non-standard metrics to confuse people. He's looking at what really matters, which is that when people really love a product, they use it all the time, and that makes it more sticky, more valuable to them (worth paying more), and the ecosystem as a whole becomes more valuable. Quality over quantity. I have access to some non-public web stats that represent tens of millions of pageviews, and the numbers are similar to Cook's. About 80% of the mobile traffic is from iPhone and iPad, and everything else (Android, Windows, Blackberry, etc) is 20%. Another thought: Markets where phones aren't 'subsidized' could move toward that model, because it's good for carriers. It gets people to buy more expensive phones because they don't have to pay for it up-front, longer contracts keep customers from switching, and carriers get more money over the life of the contract. I'm not sure about timing or what exactly is required before that can happens (better developed credit infrastructure in those countries? that's probably why there's so much prepaid), but once there's 1 carrier that starts offering iPhones for $100-200 (with older or "C" models for 'free') on a contract in some country, it'll be very hard for its competitors not to follow suit and keep asking people to pay the whole thing up-front.

Buffett has always said that growth was a component of value. I don't think the line can be drawn there that easily. One is concerned with price and one is not. Obviously a value investor would consider the return on equity but it would extend to the price he/she would be willing to pay. Ah, now I see what you meant. I interpreted it differently.

Buffett has always said that growth was a component of value. I don't think the line can be drawn there that easily.

Thought this paragraph in the Economist was interesting. Wanted to share it with you all: http://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/21590589-germans-are-avid-savers-they-do-not-invest-under-mattress

Tyler Cowen has a theory that Bitcoin's high prices are in good part a result of capital controls in China (and probably other countries): http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2013/11/china-and-the-soaring-price-of-bitcoin.html