AAPL - Apple Inc.

[Palantir]

I am not talking about content. yes apple could put content on the tv. but they will have to pay a lot for it. nobody is rolling over and cutting un economic deals for apple anymore.

 

How do you know? Your posts are constantly marked with assumptions (in many cases untrue) and disdain for this company. Apple already has content on Apple TV, if they can cut deals with content providers they could offer a great end-to-end solution that will allow you to pick content rather than bundles from cable channels.

 

Anyways, I have a feeling that in a few years you will be telling us that this is great, but Google's implementation of this is much better.  ;D

[Guest wellmont]

you are talking content. I am talking access. two different things. My original response, and all my clarifications, was to an idea that apple would provide internet ACCESS.

[Guest wellmont]

I am not talking about content. yes apple could put content on the tv. but they will have to pay a lot for it. nobody is rolling over and cutting un economic deals for apple anymore.

 

How do you know? Your posts are constantly marked with assumptions (in many cases untrue) and disdain for this company.

 

because they learned their lessons with music. this is why apple has not cut any significant content deals yet. fool me once....

[Liberty]

you asked me to elaborate then you turn it into a negative.

 

I did no such thing. I just didn't understand what you were talking about for a while, and then when I thought I did, I explained why I don't think there's any reason why Apple would ever become an internet service provider or a wireless carrier, and I explained how I thought they could make an Apple TV. If you see negative in that, you are projecting.

[FFHWatcher]

Why do you guys post all of this crap and then argue about it?  You are wasting your time and not learning or contributing anything.  You guys are guessing what a $450B is going to do next, how they are going to make $$ off of it and then arguing about the details forever...all about stuff that you are guessing about in the future.  That seems to be pretty far away from financial or company analysis. 

All that, in my books, adds up to a HUGE waste of time.  You guys sound smart but you're wasting your lives away.  You will look back in a year or 6 months and go, 'what a waste of time'.  Hey, maybe I'm the idiot and I'm the only one who feels this way.

[VAL9000]

Why do you guys post all of this crap and then argue about it?  You are wasting your time and not learning or contributing anything.  You guys are guessing what a $450B is going to do next, how they are going to make $$ off of it and then arguing about the details forever...all about stuff that you are guessing about in the future.  That seems to be pretty far away from financial or company analysis. 

All that, in my books, adds up to a HUGE waste of time.  You guys sound smart but you're wasting your lives away.  You will look back in a year or 6 months and go, 'what a waste of time'.  Hey, maybe I'm the idiot and I'm the only one who feels this way.

+1

[Liberty]

Why do you guys post all of this crap and then argue about it?  You are wasting your time and not learning or contributing anything.  You guys are guessing what a $450B is going to do next, how they are going to make $$ off of it and then arguing about the details forever...all about stuff that you are guessing about in the future.  That seems to be pretty far away from financial or company analysis. 

All that, in my books, adds up to a HUGE waste of time.  You guys sound smart but you're wasting your lives away.  You will look back in a year or 6 months and go, 'what a waste of time'.  Hey, maybe I'm the idiot and I'm the only one who feels this way.

 

The finances of Apple are well known. What there is to analyze is their products and market position, and where they could go next to keep growing, both with existing products and new ones. It's a consumer product company, not a bank or an insurance company, so a Phil Fisher approach (on top of other mental models) makes sense.

 

The living room entertainment system centered around the TV is one of the biggest markets in the world and certainly big enough for Apple to be interested in. Thinking about how they could go there is definitely not a waste of time to me. If it is to you, feel free to skip posts about it.

[Palantir]

Guys, let's go over to the HPQ thread.

[rmitz]

Why do you guys post all of this crap and then argue about it?  You are wasting your time and not learning or contributing anything.  You guys are guessing what a $450B is going to do next, how they are going to make $$ off of it and then arguing about the details forever...all about stuff that you are guessing about in the future.  That seems to be pretty far away from financial or company analysis. 

All that, in my books, adds up to a HUGE waste of time.  You guys sound smart but you're wasting your lives away.  You will look back in a year or 6 months and go, 'what a waste of time'.  Hey, maybe I'm the idiot and I'm the only one who feels this way.

 

You know some people find this sort of thing fun, right?

[Parsad]

Why do you guys post all of this crap and then argue about it?  You are wasting your time and not learning or contributing anything.  You guys are guessing what a $450B is going to do next, how they are going to make $$ off of it and then arguing about the details forever...all about stuff that you are guessing about in the future.  That seems to be pretty far away from financial or company analysis. 

All that, in my books, adds up to a HUGE waste of time.  You guys sound smart but you're wasting your lives away.  You will look back in a year or 6 months and go, 'what a waste of time'.  Hey, maybe I'm the idiot and I'm the only one who feels this way.

 

LOL!  So FFHWatcher, what do you think Apple's going to do next?  ;D  Cheers!

[VAL9000]

The finances of Apple are well known. What there is to analyze is their products and market position, and where they could go next to keep growing, both with existing products and new ones. It's a consumer product company, not a bank or an insurance company, so a Phil Fisher approach (on top of other mental models) makes sense.

 

The living room entertainment system centered around the TV is one of the biggest markets in the world and certainly big enough for Apple to be interested in. Thinking about how they could go there is definitely not a waste of time to me. If it is to you, feel free to skip posts about it.

 

I think where the issue lies for me in these discussions is..  even if you are 100% correct or 100% incorrect in your guess, would it even matter?  This applies to all of the theories that are floated on these threads.  Specifically, this example, if you knew definitively that Apple will move into the living room and make Apple TV a priority, would you buy more stock today?  Or sell?  Given that answer, what are you going to do?  Nothing, because you don't know.

 

In general the feeling I get is that Apple investors are quite content to let Apple move at their own pace, with little-or-no foreshadowing on what the next move may be.  Given that baseline, I am vexed by all the time spent guessing about how Apple will execute its next moves.  You've already thrown in with Apple, so whether they pick the living room or the laundry room, you won't know anything until everything is already in place and the product is 3 weeks from launch.  Then it's time for discussion.

[tengen]

This is the kind of discussion I could see happening in a pub over a few beers, except there isn't any beer.

[VAL9000]

This is the kind of discussion I could see happening in a pub over a few beers, except there isn't any beer.

Speak for yourself. ;)

[Guest valueInv]

Why do you guys post all of this crap and then argue about it?  You are wasting your time and not learning or contributing anything.  You guys are guessing what a $450B is going to do next, how they are going to make $$ off of it and then arguing about the details forever...all about stuff that you are guessing about in the future.  That seems to be pretty far away from financial or company analysis. 

All that, in my books, adds up to a HUGE waste of time.  You guys sound smart but you're wasting your lives away.  You will look back in a year or 6 months and go, 'what a waste of time'.  Hey, maybe I'm the idiot and I'm the only one who feels this way.

 

Because products form businesses which drive financials.

 

Not understanding products or the business can result in a nasty surprise is the financials down the road. Especially in a dynamic market such as tech. We saw a fine example of that with RIM.

[Guest valueInv]

The finances of Apple are well known. What there is to analyze is their products and market position, and where they could go next to keep growing, both with existing products and new ones. It's a consumer product company, not a bank or an insurance company, so a Phil Fisher approach (on top of other mental models) makes sense.

 

The living room entertainment system centered around the TV is one of the biggest markets in the world and certainly big enough for Apple to be interested in. Thinking about how they could go there is definitely not a waste of time to me. If it is to you, feel free to skip posts about it.

 

I think where the issue lies for me in these discussions is..  even if you are 100% correct or 100% incorrect in your guess, would it even matter?  This applies to all of the theories that are floated on these threads.  Specifically, this example, if you knew definitively that Apple will move into the living room and make Apple TV a priority, would you buy more stock today?  Or sell?  Given that answer, what are you going to do?  Nothing, because you don't know.

 

In general the feeling I get is that Apple investors are quite content to let Apple move at their own pace, with little-or-no foreshadowing on what the next move may be.  Given that baseline, I am vexed by all the time spent guessing about how Apple will execute its next moves.  You've already thrown in with Apple, so whether they pick the living room or the laundry room, you won't know anything until everything is already in place and the product is 3 weeks from launch.  Then it's time for discussion.

 

I check in with my companies constantly to understand them better, to see if things are progressing according to my thesis, to look for red flags and to recheck my thesis.

 

[Liberty]

The finances of Apple are well known. What there is to analyze is their products and market position, and where they could go next to keep growing, both with existing products and new ones. It's a consumer product company, not a bank or an insurance company, so a Phil Fisher approach (on top of other mental models) makes sense.

 

The living room entertainment system centered around the TV is one of the biggest markets in the world and certainly big enough for Apple to be interested in. Thinking about how they could go there is definitely not a waste of time to me. If it is to you, feel free to skip posts about it.

 

I think where the issue lies for me in these discussions is..  even if you are 100% correct or 100% incorrect in your guess, would it even matter?  This applies to all of the theories that are floated on these threads.  Specifically, this example, if you knew definitively that Apple will move into the living room and make Apple TV a priority, would you buy more stock today?  Or sell?  Given that answer, what are you going to do?  Nothing, because you don't know.

 

In general the feeling I get is that Apple investors are quite content to let Apple move at their own pace, with little-or-no foreshadowing on what the next move may be.  Given that baseline, I am vexed by all the time spent guessing about how Apple will execute its next moves.  You've already thrown in with Apple, so whether they pick the living room or the laundry room, you won't know anything until everything is already in place and the product is 3 weeks from launch.  Then it's time for discussion.

 

Yes, it can have an impact on my confidence in the company, how much I invest, whether I hold or sell, and what are the signs to look for to tell me how things are going.

[VAL9000]

Yes, it can have an impact on my confidence in the company, how much I invest, whether I hold or sell, and what are the signs to look for to tell me how things are going.

You mean if you can invent a scenario in your head about how a company might expand, you feel more confident about their prospects?  I feel like that's an oversimplification of you process, but I'm not sure I see the difference between what you're saying and what I'm saying.

[Guest ajc]

I think where the issue lies for me in these discussions is..  even if you are 100% correct or 100% incorrect in your guess, would it even matter?  This applies to all of the theories that are floated on these threads.  Specifically, this example, if you knew definitively that Apple will move into the living room and make Apple TV a priority, would you buy more stock today?  Or sell?  Given that answer, what are you going to do?  Nothing, because you don't know.

 

In general the feeling I get is that Apple investors are quite content to let Apple move at their own pace, with little-or-no foreshadowing on what the next move may be.  Given that baseline, I am vexed by all the time spent guessing about how Apple will execute its next moves.  You've already thrown in with Apple, so whether they pick the living room or the laundry room, you won't know anything until everything is already in place and the product is 3 weeks from launch.  Then it's time for discussion.

 

I agree with this.

 

Does anyone really think Buffett is anxiously calling Munger to discuss IBM's recent billion dollar Linux investment?

Alternatively, is he reading every other tech blog written daily about 'developments' at Big Blue?

 

How about Phil Fisher? Did he call up the Motorola management every week and press them for breaking news?

Or did he buy 50 different publications every day in the hope there'd be some new snippet of information he could quickly understand and incorporate into his investment thesis and then furiously scribble that all down for the rest of the week?

 

Of course, we can't know for sure but if I was trying to be roughly right about it I'd say those thoughts are probably quite laughable.

 

My 2 cents is that because there are inherently more unknowables and unforseeables in the tech industry there is a far greater tendency for investors in this space to fool themselves into thinking they know more than they do because of the added feeling of security it brings.

 

There are many ways to do this, the most popular I think being burying yourself in every bit of information instead of only the few and most relevant pieces (that come along maybe every few months or so).

After that, you focus your discussion intensely and often (preferably everyday) on all that you 'know' and you create a mental feedback loop that reinforces the beliefs you've already decided on (then hey look, I've got lies, damned lies and statistics - as well as all sorts of other stuff of course - to back it up. How wonderful, and completely indubitable and massively intelligent of me!).

 

Really, it's just Psych 101.

There's uncertainty and people tend not to like experiencing and living with that on a daily basis as you have to in this business, so they gather huge amounts of information to support their views and the one with the most info (you see that on these tech threads virtually everyday) 'wins'.

 

Except they don't, because it's all just one big psychological comfort blanket.

Nothing but a mental construct built for the sake of security in a place where in reality there is very little to be had...   

[Liberty]

Yes, it can have an impact on my confidence in the company, how much I invest, whether I hold or sell, and what are the signs to look for to tell me how things are going.

You mean if you can invent a scenario in your head about how a company might expand, you feel more confident about their prospects?  I feel like that's an oversimplification of you process, but I'm not sure I see the difference between what you're saying and what I'm saying.

 

I mean that if I looked at Apple and they had the exact same financials that they do now but had Blackberry's products, technical capabilities, market opportunities, and design philosophy, it would change my view of the company a lot.

 

Saying you shouldn't talk about products in a product company discussion is like saying you shouldn't talk about retailing and logistics in a Walmart or Amazon discussion. It's what the company does and it matters. Too many investors in RIM forgot that (there are ways to make money with the cigar butt approach, but what I'm looking for here is great company at fair price -- i think Apple's a good deal with no growth and just buybacks, and growth in new and existing categories is a nice option on top, which I'm trying to better understand).

 

Edit: also, it's not quite just 'inventing a scenario in my head'. They already have Apple TV and partnerships with many content companies (both on itunes and apple tv), iOS is already one of the biggest gaming platforms out there. Now they have a 'desktop level' SOC that can address more than 4 gigs of RAM and brand new GPU cores, STeve Jobs was known to have been working on the TV (not alone presumably, and i doubt that effort stopped when he died), and one of Apple's core competencies is human-machine interfaces (a gaming controller wouldn't be out of character). On top of that, the tv is one of the few consumer markets big enough to be worth making a new category at Apple (maybe along with the car) and John Malone is predicting debundling. I'm just putting the pieces together after analysis, not pulling it all out of thin air. Heck, it's so not speculative that it's not even that different from microsoft's strategy with the xbox. I just think apple can probably once more put together a product that is significantly better than the competition even if they weren't first in the space.

[Liberty]

Does anyone really think Buffett is anxiously calling Munger to discuss IBM's recent billion dollar Linux investment?

Alternatively, is he reading every other tech blog written daily about 'developments' at Big Blue?

 

How about Phil Fisher? Did he call up the Motorola management every week and press them for breaking news?

 

That's kind of a strawman, though, because that's not what is being done here (at least, I don't see it as equivalent at all).

 

Reviewing the quality of the products of a consumer product company and looking at where they could go next tells you if the company's worth anything. This isn't a slow changing mature enterprise business (and i understand how that turns off some) where products are bought on price or spec lists, with the buyers and users being different people. Some of the crap the enterprise does to its users would be fatal in a consumer market.

[Palantir]

I think the TV discussion was interesting, too bad it got sidetracked.

[Guest valueInv]

I think where the issue lies for me in these discussions is..  even if you are 100% correct or 100% incorrect in your guess, would it even matter?  This applies to all of the theories that are floated on these threads.  Specifically, this example, if you knew definitively that Apple will move into the living room and make Apple TV a priority, would you buy more stock today?  Or sell?  Given that answer, what are you going to do?  Nothing, because you don't know.

 

In general the feeling I get is that Apple investors are quite content to let Apple move at their own pace, with little-or-no foreshadowing on what the next move may be.  Given that baseline, I am vexed by all the time spent guessing about how Apple will execute its next moves.  You've already thrown in with Apple, so whether they pick the living room or the laundry room, you won't know anything until everything is already in place and the product is 3 weeks from launch.  Then it's time for discussion.

 

I agree with this.

 

Does anyone really think Buffett is anxiously calling Munger to discuss IBM's recent billion dollar Linux investment?

Alternatively, is he reading every other tech blog written daily about 'developments' at Big Blue?

 

No, but he does talk about an hour speaking to Ajit about the insurance business everyday.

 

BTW, Buffet doesn't invest in companies like Apple. Most of the companies he invests in are over a 100 years old.

 

How about Phil Fisher? Did he call up the Motorola management every week and press them for breaking news?

Or did he buy 50 different publications every day in the hope there'd be some new snippet of information he could quickly understand and incorporate into his investment thesis and then furiously scribble that all down for the rest of the week?

The business cycles during Phisher's time we much longer. But he did speak to a lot of people and understood every aspect of the businesses he owned.

 

Of course, we can't know for sure but if I was trying to be roughly right about it I'd say those thoughts are probably quite laughable.

Are you trying to say that we should understand less about the companies we own?

 

 

My 2 cents is that because there are inherently more unknowables and unforseeables in the tech industry there is a far greater tendency for investors in this space to fool themselves into thinking they know more than they do because of the added feeling of security it brings.

 

There are many ways to do this, the most popular I think being burying yourself in every bit of information instead of only the few and most relevant pieces (that come along maybe every few months or so).

After that, you focus your discussion intensely and often (preferably everyday) on all that you 'know' and you create a mental feedback loop that reinforces the beliefs you've already decided on (then hey look, I've got lies, damned lies and statistics - as well as all sorts of other stuff of course - to back it up. How wonderful, and completely indubitable and massively intelligent of me!).

 

Really, it's just Psych 101.

There's uncertainty and people tend not to like experiencing and living with that on a daily basis as you have to in this business, so they gather huge amounts of information to support their views and the one with the most info (you see that on these tech threads virtually everyday) 'wins'.

 

Except they don't, because it's all just one big psychological comfort blanket.

Nothing but a mental construct built for the sake of security in a place where in reality there is very little to be had... 

 

I don't get it. Why are you trying to dictate what we discuss? Why are you trying to dictate how we behave?

 

I think the macro threads are pretty useless. Even expert economists are lousy at predicting the economy, let alone a bunch of value investors on the web. But I don't go to those threads and tell people what they should be talking about. I simply ignore it.

 

In fact, you were the guy who posted pages on every mind numbing detail about Amazon's warehousing. And you couldn't even answer the  question that mattered to investors: why was it costing them to more to sell a dollar of inventory than Walmart?

 

If you don't like it, don't click on it. Stop trying to tell everyone what to do.

[VAL9000]

Yes, it can have an impact on my confidence in the company, how much I invest, whether I hold or sell, and what are the signs to look for to tell me how things are going.

You mean if you can invent a scenario in your head about how a company might expand, you feel more confident about their prospects?  I feel like that's an oversimplification of you process, but I'm not sure I see the difference between what you're saying and what I'm saying.

 

I mean that if I looked at Apple and they had the exact same financials that they do now but had Blackberry's products, technical capabilities, market opportunities, and design philosophy, it would change my view of the company a lot.

 

Saying you shouldn't talk about products in a product company discussion is like saying you shouldn't talk about retailing and logistics in a Walmart or Amazon discussion. It's what the company does and it matters. Too many investors in RIM forgot that (though there are ways to make money with the cigar butt approach, but what I'm looking for here is great company at fair price -- i think Apple's a good deal with no growth and just buybacks, and growth in new and existing categories is a nice option on top, which I'm trying to better understand).

 

Edit: also, it's not quite just 'inventing a scenario in my head'. They already have Apple TV and partnerships with many content companies (both on itunes and apple tv), iOS is already one of the biggest gaming platforms out there. Now they have a 'desktop level' SOC that can address more than 4 gigs of RAM and brand new GPU cores, STeve Jobs was known to have been working on the TV (not alone presumably, and i doubt that effort stopped when he died), and one of Apple's core competencies is human-machine interfaces (a gaming controller wouldn't be out of character). On top of that, the tv is one of the few consumer markets big enough to be worth making a new category at Apple (maybe along with the car). I'm just putting the pieces together after analysis, not pulling it all out of thin air. Heck, it's so not speculative that it's not even that different from microsoft's strategy with the xbox. I just think apple can probably once more put together a product that is significantly better than the competition even if they weren't first in the space.

 

Ok I think that's fair.  Products are important I agree.  Where we diverge is in the value of the guessing game.  There are too many variables in my opinion, so I don't think it's a productive debate, that's all.

[Myth465]

Why do you guys post all of this crap and then argue about it?  You are wasting your time and not learning or contributing anything.  You guys are guessing what a $450B is going to do next, how they are going to make $$ off of it and then arguing about the details forever...all about stuff that you are guessing about in the future.  That seems to be pretty far away from financial or company analysis. 

All that, in my books, adds up to a HUGE waste of time.  You guys sound smart but you're wasting your lives away.  You will look back in a year or 6 months and go, 'what a waste of time'.  Hey, maybe I'm the idiot and I'm the only one who feels this way.

+1

 

+2

[Liberty]

Ok I think that's fair.  Products are important I agree.  Where we diverge is in the value of the guessing game.  There are too many variables in my opinion, so I don't think it's a productive debate, that's all.

 

That's fine. I still wouldn't call it guessing in this case, or at least not just guessing (mix of knowns and unknowns, which is what any analysis of a company is), but your opinion is fine.

 

I just don't want you to give the impression that because there's more discussion of product stuff, that it means that I believe that it's the only thing that matters or the centerpiece of my thesis. It's not, but fundamentals and product news in the consumer electronics space work on different metabolic rates, so of course there will be more discussion of product news than discussions about buybacks and bond issues and capex. Doesn't mean it trumps everything else, just that it's also important if you want your model of the company to have decent predictive power (I'll go back to my example of RIM; those who only looked at the numbers missed the product problems, and shortly thereafter, the product problems became the numbers).

 

If Samsung was to spin off its consumer-electronics division and people started a discussion thread about investing in it, to know how the company is doing I hope they would take a close look at the products and potential expansion markets and not just read the Ks and Qs every few months, thinking that's all they need because "it's the fundamentals"...

 

Can we get back to Apple?