Jump to content

AAPL - Apple Inc.


indirect

Recommended Posts

Yeah I agree with that - I think it will drive more sales. I think it's the right strategy, it's hard to be superpremium in this field, just being regular premium will be very profitable. That being said, hopefully they will not go too low. They know what they are doing though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Guest rimm_never_sleeps

this seems to be a temporary promotion by wal-mart to clear inventory. the real issue is that appl is giving up the entire low and mid range to Android. I am talking the $150-$350 phone market globally, which is where most of the unit growth is coming from. apple has chosen not to have an offering there. and now they have a legit threat in galaxy and note at the high end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this seems to be a temporary promotion by wal-mart to clear inventory. the real issue is that appl is giving up the entire low and mid range to Android. I am talking the $150-$350 phone market globally, which is where most of the unit growth is coming from. apple has chosen not to have an offering there. and now they have a legit threat in galaxy and note at the high end.

 

Yeah I agree with that - I think it will drive more sales. I think it's the right strategy, it's hard to be superpremium in this field, just being regular premium will be very profitable. That being said, hopefully they will not go too low. They know what they are doing though.

 

I just bought a brand new 16GB black iPhone 5 through Telus for completely free on renewal of my 3-year contract!  So either Telus is subsidizing the cost, or Apple is going to eat it on the net margin side.  They were offering that deal at $79 after a special $100 Christmas for the iPhone 5, but I hardballed them into nothing, as well as unlimited text, incoming calls and national long-distance.  Very nice phone...just wish the screen was at least another 0.5" bigger.  Cheers! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

this seems to be a temporary promotion by wal-mart to clear inventory. the real issue is that appl is giving up the entire low and mid range to Android. I am talking the $150-$350 phone market globally, which is where most of the unit growth is coming from. apple has chosen not to have an offering there. and now they have a legit threat in galaxy and note at the high end.

 

Yeah I agree with that - I think it will drive more sales. I think it's the right strategy, it's hard to be superpremium in this field, just being regular premium will be very profitable. That being said, hopefully they will not go too low. They know what they are doing though.

 

I just bought a brand new 16GB black iPhone 5 through Telus for completely free on renewal of my 3-year contract!  So either Telus is subsidizing the cost, or Apple is going to eat it on the net margin side.  They were offering that deal at $79 after a special $100 Christmas for the iPhone 5, but I hardballed them into nothing, as well as unlimited text, incoming calls and national long-distance.  Very nice phone...just wish the screen was at least another 0.5" bigger.  Cheers!

  You negotiated ...played hard ball with the PHONE COMPANY on a renewal and one phone. MY goodness you be the man my friend did you offer them a recommendation of Telus on Corner of Berkshire.  LOL
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

comparing apple to sony or nokia proves that Greenwald doesn't know what he's talking about, and hasnt even bothered to do some research. Apple is fundamentally a software company; they have a sticky software ecosystem that they monetize through beautiful hardware. Sony and Nokia are hardware companies, just like RIM, and thus had/have no customer stickiness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest valueInv

 

comparing apple to sony or nokia proves that Greenwald doesn't know what he's talking about, and hasnt even bothered to do some research. Apple is fundamentally a software company; they have a sticky software ecosystem that they monetize through beautiful hardware. Sony and Nokia are hardware companies, just like RIM, and thus had/have no customer stickiness.

Hmmm... where have we seen this before? When an hypothesis does not agree with facts, what do you do?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hardincap,

 

hmm, i am not sure if i agree with you. (still thinking about this)

 

look at appl vs msft

 

msft's ecosystem argueable is more establish than appl no? i think appl  has a higher risk of being hurt by a bad release, because their profit is so dependent on the next big thing. If the next thing they release bombs, their profitability takes a huge hit, which will make the valuation questionable.

 

you can also compare appl to nintendo

 

i just think appl's  has more of the characteristic of a hits driven company vs msft (getting less so if/when their ecosystem gets more entrench etc). msft's revenue/profit is not so dependent of the next big thing (more diversified to put it simply).

 

I guess what i am getting at is appl on a scale vs msft. appl is closer to sony/nintendo/rim/nok than msft is. how much closer is debateable.

 

now what if msft can sell as many hardware as appl (msft just need a percentage of the PC/pc tablet etc market, not the entire market).

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest valueInv

hardincap,

 

hmm, i am not sure if i agree with you. (still thinking about this)

 

look at appl vs msft

 

msft's ecosystem argueable is more establish than appl no? i think appl  has a higher risk of being hurt by a bad release, because their profit is so dependent on the next big thing. If the next thing they release bombs, their profitability takes a huge hit, which will make the valuation questionable.

 

you can also compare appl to nintendo

 

i just think appl's  has more of the characteristic of a hits driven company vs msft (getting less so if/when their ecosystem gets more entrench etc). msft's revenue/profit is not so dependent of the next big thing (more diversified to put it simply).

 

I guess what i am getting at is appl on a scale vs msft. appl is closer to sony/nintendo/rim/nok than msft is. how much closer is debateable.

 

now what if msft can sell as many hardware as appl (msft just need a percentage of the PC/pc tablet etc market, not the entire market).

 

Apparently the iPhone 5 has been a bomb. Lets see how they do this quarter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

valueInv

 

has iphone 5 been a bomb? i guess its all relative

 

EDIT: I am not saying apple will become nok or rimm. All i am saying is at this point in time AAPL on a scale is closer to nok/rimm vs a company like MSFT. The risk is higher than msft, that appl can become a nok/rimm.  I am not saying they will.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hardincap,

 

hmm, i am not sure if i agree with you. (still thinking about this)

 

look at appl vs msft

 

msft's ecosystem argueable is more establish than appl no? i think appl  has a higher risk of being hurt by a bad release, because their profit is so dependent on the next big thing. If the next thing they release bombs, their profitability takes a huge hit, which will make the valuation questionable.

 

you can also compare appl to nintendo

 

i just think appl's  has more of the characteristic of a hits driven company vs msft (getting less so if/when their ecosystem gets more entrench etc). msft's revenue/profit is not so dependent of the next big thing (more diversified to put it simply).

 

I guess what i am getting at is appl on a scale vs msft. appl is closer to sony/nintendo/rim/nok than msft is. how much closer is debateable.

 

now what if msft can sell as many hardware as appl (msft just need a percentage of the PC/pc tablet etc market, not the entire market).

 

Apparently the iPhone 5 has been a bomb. Lets see how they do this quarter.

 

I thought that they've sold 27M of the iPhone 5's.  Not a bomb. 

 

Very nice, fast phone.  The size and lightness of the phone does not bother me at all, unlike what many other buyers have said.  I think this is the best case design since the iPhone 3 came out.  Much nicer than the iPhone 4 design.  I wish the screen was a bit bigger, but at least the retina display makes it easier on my eyes when reading.  There is definitely room for improvement with the iPhones though, as their competitors are in overdrive chasing them down.  Cheers!   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I watched these videos. 

 

Greenwald doesn't really seem to know what he's talking about, unfortunately.  For example, he mentioned that Amazon decided to go after Oracle and IBM and Google and so they released their AWS services.  But Amazon was one of the first movers in IaaS computing! 

 

I'm not sure how much homework he has done on these names he's opining on. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

apple retracted the statement - cheaper iphone (or iphone mini, whatever you want to call it) looks like its coming. i am all for it. $600 phones dont work in china and other emerging markets, and having <10% and declining marketshare is a dangerous position to be in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest valueInv

 

apple retracted the statement - cheaper iphone (or iphone mini, whatever you want to call it) looks like its coming. i am all for it. $600 phones dont work in china and other emerging markets, and having <10% and declining marketshare is a dangerous position to be in.

 

Its a lot more than $600:

 

http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2013/01/09/the-iphones-global-price-expensive/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

same thing was reported last year, just before apple blew away analyst estimates.

 

it is being reported that they had originally ordered 65M screens. Did anyone really expect them to sell 65M iPhones? (this quarter is expected to be around 50 which is above analyst estimates of 47)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest valueInv

 

same thing was reported last year, just before apple blew away analyst estimates.

 

it is being reported that they had originally ordered 65M screens. Did anyone really expect them to sell 65M iPhones? (this quarter is expected to be around 50 which is above analyst estimates of 47)

 

Its hard to say whats going on - the reports are conflicting. On one hand, their marketshare in the US is increasing. Tim Cook also just said that he expects China to overtake US, that would indicate China is doing well too. So the shortfall is coming from Europe,Japan?

 

There has been some major changes in manufacturing that make it hard to compare with previous years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apple is trading at $485; it has $120/share in cash. It should earn about $45/share. In the past 4 months it has refreshed most product lines.

 

It looks to me that the market is assuming no further breakthrough innovation from the company.

 

$485 looks like a reasonable entry point to buy a world class company. More importantly, I expect they are not done with breakthrough innovation (TV is one such opportunity)...

 

With earnings coming the end of this month I expect lots of volatility (up or further down). :-)

 

PS: interesting that there has not been more discussion on the name given the size of the fall... perhaps a little Apple fatigue?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PS: interesting that there has not been more discussion on the name given the size of the fall... perhaps a little Apple fatigue?

 

I think so.  Also, this thread sort of devolved a bit, and most people seem to have strong opinions that don't change that much on either side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...