AAPL - Apple Inc.

[Guest valueInv]

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.

 

Because little has changed with the fundamentals of the company. You can't have much of a debate based on rumors.

[Guest valueInv]

Besides I've been on vacation. ;D ;D

[Viking]

valueInv, you have hit the nail on the head. Apple stock is getting creamed based on rumors of cut in display orders. Looking at the fundamentals, the stock is crazy cheap; you can buy the premier consumer electronics company, net of cash, for a PE of 8. 

 

I am not a conspiracy theory guy but Apple would be an ideal stock to drive lots of volatility; pump and ride it all the way up and then once it hits the stratosphere ($700 would count) dump it and make money all the way down. Rinse and repeat. 

[Guest valueInv]

valueInv, you have hit the nail on the head. Apple stock is getting creamed based on rumors of cut in display orders. Looking at the fundamentals, the stock is crazy cheap.

 

I am not a conspiracy theory guy but Apple would be an ideal stock to drive lots of volatility; pump and ride it all the way up and then once it hits the stratosphere ($700 would count) dump it and make money all the way down. Rinse and repeat.

 

I'm very happy to surf along. I'd never thought I would get an opportunity to buy Apple again.

[Viking]

I find it interesting that both Apple and Microsoft are trading a such low valuations. MSFT is low because it is feared Apple will hurt its Windows sales. Apple is low because of fears that its business will be commodotized and overrun by competitors like MSFT. I actually like the idea of buying both. I have not followed Samsung at all but should that stock sell off an investor would have quite a nice opportunity to own some pretty amazing companies; all three should do well over the next couple of years, two should do very well and one should do exceptionally well (just not sure who to put where).

[ericd1]

Heck of a premium on the leaps...but stock is still interesting at this price...hummm

[Parsad]

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.

 

Because little has changed with the fundamentals of the company. You can't have much of a debate based on rumors.

 

Well, I think it's also partly because some of the people who thought RIMM & DELL were better deals relative to the underlying assets have been proven right.  Apple is now getting back into the territory where it is starting to pique my interest, while the other two stocks are up 120% and 45% respectively.  If it gets any cheaper, I suspect this thread will start to get busy again.  Cheers!

[PlanMaestro]

Apple Lets Buyers on China Website Pay in Two-Year Installments.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-16/apple-lets-buyers-on-china-website-pay-in-two-year-installments.html

 

[Guest valueInv]

Apple Lets Buyers on China Website Pay in Two-Year Installments.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-16/apple-lets-buyers-on-china-website-pay-in-two-year-installments.html

 

Great! I've wanted them to something along these lines for a long time. Use their cash horde to finance their products and :

- Earn a higher interest rate on their cash

- Improve product penetration by alleviating the price barrier

- Put their cash to use and get Wall Street to shut up.

 

I know T-Mobile is moving in that direction. I hope this becomes a trend.

[Guest valueInv]

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.

 

Because little has changed with the fundamentals of the company. You can't have much of a debate based on rumors.

 

Well, I think it's also partly because some of the people who thought RIMM & DELL were better deals relative to the underlying assets have been proven right.  Apple is now getting back into the territory where it is starting to pique my interest, while the other two stocks are up 120% and 45% respectively.  If it gets any cheaper, I suspect this thread will start to get busy again.  Cheers!

 

Wait, what happened to - Apple cannot innovate since Jobs is dead, Apple will lose as Samoogle has caught up, Apple cannot maintain insane margins, yada, yada, yada?

[Parsad]

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.

 

Because little has changed with the fundamentals of the company. You can't have much of a debate based on rumors.

 

Well, I think it's also partly because some of the people who thought RIMM & DELL were better deals relative to the underlying assets have been proven right.  Apple is now getting back into the territory where it is starting to pique my interest, while the other two stocks are up 120% and 45% respectively.  If it gets any cheaper, I suspect this thread will start to get busy again.  Cheers!

 

Wait, what happened to - Apple cannot innovate since Jobs is dead, Apple will lose as Samoogle has caught up, Apple cannot maintain insane margins, yada, yada, yada?

 

Apple can't innovate as persistently without Jobs.  Apple will lose as Samoogle catches up.  Apple cannot maintain insane margins.  Where in my statements did I say anything differently?

 

You are confusing what is a good business with what may be a good value.  Apple's business will not be as good as it was in the past.  Neither will Dell's, Microsoft's...nor RIMM's.  That doesn't mean at some point there may not be value in the investment. 

 

I didn't say I would buy Apple now.  I said if it continues to drop in price, it will pique my interest and at some point it may be of value.  It ain't there!  Cheers!

[Guest valueInv]

valueInv, you have hit the nail on the head. Apple stock is getting creamed based on rumors of cut in display orders. Looking at the fundamentals, the stock is crazy cheap; you can buy the premier consumer electronics company, net of cash, for a PE of 8. 

 

I am not a conspiracy theory guy but Apple would be an ideal stock to drive lots of volatility; pump and ride it all the way up and then once it hits the stratosphere ($700 would count) dump it and make money all the way down. Rinse and repeat.

 

Bloggers have always written crap on Apple as a  way to generate links. Read the title and then look at the data:

 

http://techcrunch.com/2013/01/15/demand-for-samsung-smartphones-jumps-to-23-for-early-2013-iphone-interest-down-21-points-from-last-quarter/

 

Apple is probably doing better than ever.

 

Another myth is that people are switching to Samsung Galaxy devices as they have better features. Here are the latest Galaxy numbers:

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2025188/samsung-ships-100-million-galaxy-s-android-phones.html

 

That is cumulative no of devices shipped since inception (not all sold)

 

No of iPhones Apple is expected to sell (not just ship) in 2012 alone: 150 Million.

 

If Samsung is beating Apple, it is not with its flagship devices, it is with low end devices in which Apple does not yet compete. In other words, its price, not features.

 

Another thing about competitors catching up. Take a look at marketing spend:

http://www.asymco.com/2012/11/29/the-cost-of-selling-galaxies/

 

How does that effect net margins? So is it superior features or is it 4X marketing spend driving sales?

 

What happens if Apple decides to ramp up marketing spend proportionally?

 

 

I have been seeing those clickbait articles for a while now. Gradually, the major publications started picking them up and then the financial community started parroting them.

 

One thing I have learned it that these stories get viral and drive investor money (including value investor money), not analysis or facts.

 

 

The problem for Apple is that if they don't do something, consumers start believe them and they become a self fulfilling prophecy. 

 

 

 

[kevin4u2]

Bloggers have always written crap on Apple as a  way to generate links. Read the title and then look at the data:

 

http://techcrunch.com/2013/01/15/demand-for-samsung-smartphones-jumps-to-23-for-early-2013-iphone-interest-down-21-points-from-last-quarter/

 

Apple is probably doing better than ever.

 

Another myth is that people are switching to Samsung Galaxy devices as they have better features. Here are the latest Galaxy numbers:

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2025188/samsung-ships-100-million-galaxy-s-android-phones.html

 

That is cumulative no of devices shipped since inception (not all sold)

 

No of iPhones Apple is expected to sell (not just ship) in 2012 alone: 150 Million.

 

If Samsung is beating Apple, it is not with its flagship devices, it is with low end devices in which Apple does not yet compete. In other words, its price, not features.

 

Another thing about competitors catching up. Take a look at marketing spend:

http://www.asymco.com/2012/11/29/the-cost-of-selling-galaxies/

 

How does that effect net margins? So is it superior features or is it 4X marketing spend driving sales?

 

What happens if Apple decides to ramp up marketing spend proportionally?

 

I have been seeing those clickbait articles for a while now. Gradually, the major publications started picking them up and then the financial community started parroting them.

 

One thing I have learned it that these stories get viral and drive investor money (including value investor money), not analysis or facts.

 

The problem for Apple is that if they don't do something, consumers start believe them and they become a self fulfilling prophecy.

 

Valueinv, do you actively look for facts and evidence that contradicts your position?  Here are some:

 

Over the xmas holidays I took every opportunity to inquire about smartphones sales whenever I was near a store.  The results indicated to me a shift away from iPhone.  Most places were 3-1 samsung to iphone, and I even had some stores tell me that it was 7-1 for samsung.  Not one store reported iPhones as the most popular phone.  The interesting thing was I would always inquire what type of phone the sales associate had and most had iPhones.  I was surprised to hear them say they would recommend the galaxy S3 over the iphone they had in their pocket.  The "cool" phone definitely isn't the iphone any longer.  Consumers are fickle, the tide may have shifted. 

 

Of course this isn't a scientific study but the results indicated to me a shift had taken place.  The news of apple cutting back orders from suppliers doesn't surprise me at all. 

 

[Uccmal]

I think we wait until January 23rd for some more definitive news. 

 

The cash puts a floor under the stock, but the days as a fast grower are certainly coming to an end.

[DCG]

Over the xmas holidays I took every opportunity to inquire about smartphones sales whenever I was near a store.  The results indicated to me a shift away from iPhone.  Most places were 3-1 samsung to iphone, and I even had some stores tell me that it was 7-1 for samsung.  Not one store reported iPhones as the most popular phone.  The interesting thing was I would always inquire what type of phone the sales associate had and most had iPhones.  I was surprised to hear them say they would recommend the galaxy S3 over the iphone they had in their pocket.  The "cool" phone definitely isn't the iphone any longer.  Consumers are fickle, the tide may have shifted. 

 

I think Samsung's advertising campaign for the S3 was pretty brilliant and probably hurt the 'coolness' of the iPhone among certain crowds. As an Apple product user, I'm ok with that - up until recently, Apple was always the underdog to Microsoft. I think/hope the increased competition will encourage more innovation. I'd been using mostly Apple products for probably the last 10-15 years, and seeing everyone and their grandparents and 3 year old walking around with iPhones/iPods was starting to feel a little weird. It had been sort of an outlier of a brand, and part of me is happy to see a bit of a return to that.

 

Am I worried as a shareholder? Maybe a little bit, but I don't think Apple needs to own 50% of the smartphone, tablet or computer market to be successful and grow.

 

I own 2 iOS devices and a Nexus 7 running Android Jelly Bean. I still feel like the iOS devices are superior, but I admit that the updates to Jelly Bean have narrowed the gap (as I mentioned in the tablet thread, I feel like Google accomplished this by making the current version of Android even more like iOS than ever before, and I think anyone that has used both operating systems over the last several years would agree with that). So people can now get a very comparable OS at often a lower cost. There are still aspects of Android I find clunky and odd, the OS still lags a bit, and the app ecosystem isn't as strong as Apple's, but overall, it's a pretty good experience.

[Guest valueInv]

Bloggers have always written crap on Apple as a  way to generate links. Read the title and then look at the data:

 

http://techcrunch.com/2013/01/15/demand-for-samsung-smartphones-jumps-to-23-for-early-2013-iphone-interest-down-21-points-from-last-quarter/

 

Apple is probably doing better than ever.

 

Another myth is that people are switching to Samsung Galaxy devices as they have better features. Here are the latest Galaxy numbers:

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2025188/samsung-ships-100-million-galaxy-s-android-phones.html

 

That is cumulative no of devices shipped since inception (not all sold)

 

No of iPhones Apple is expected to sell (not just ship) in 2012 alone: 150 Million.

 

If Samsung is beating Apple, it is not with its flagship devices, it is with low end devices in which Apple does not yet compete. In other words, its price, not features.

 

Another thing about competitors catching up. Take a look at marketing spend:

http://www.asymco.com/2012/11/29/the-cost-of-selling-galaxies/

 

How does that effect net margins? So is it superior features or is it 4X marketing spend driving sales?

 

What happens if Apple decides to ramp up marketing spend proportionally?

 

I have been seeing those clickbait articles for a while now. Gradually, the major publications started picking them up and then the financial community started parroting them.

 

One thing I have learned it that these stories get viral and drive investor money (including value investor money), not analysis or facts.

 

The problem for Apple is that if they don't do something, consumers start believe them and they become a self fulfilling prophecy.

 

Valueinv, do you actively look for facts and evidence that contradicts your position?  Here are some:

 

Over the xmas holidays I took every opportunity to inquire about smartphones sales whenever I was near a store.  The results indicated to me a shift away from iPhone.  Most places were 3-1 samsung to iphone, and I even had some stores tell me that it was 7-1 for samsung.  Not one store reported iPhones as the most popular phone.  The interesting thing was I would always inquire what type of phone the sales associate had and most had iPhones.  I was surprised to hear them say they would recommend the galaxy S3 over the iphone they had in their pocket.  The "cool" phone definitely isn't the iphone any longer.  Consumers are fickle, the tide may have shifted. 

 

Of course this isn't a scientific study but the results indicated to me a shift had taken place.  The news of apple cutting back orders from suppliers doesn't surprise me at all.

 

"Valueinv, do you actively look for facts and evidence that contradicts your position?"

 

Maybe I should be asking you that question:

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericsavitz/2013/01/09/verizon-wireless-says-9-8m-smartphone-activations-in-q4/

http://gigaom.com/2013/01/08/att-verizon-had-record-4th-quarters-thanks-to-the-smartphone/

 

Who should we rely on for an idea initial iPhone sales- ATT & Verizon or Kevin4u2? hhmmmm.....

[hardincap]

for the tenth time, jobs was not the innovator behind apple. it was ive & his team. DO YOUR RESEARCH!

 

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.

 

Because little has changed with the fundamentals of the company. You can't have much of a debate based on rumors.

 

Well, I think it's also partly because some of the people who thought RIMM & DELL were better deals relative to the underlying assets have been proven right.  Apple is now getting back into the territory where it is starting to pique my interest, while the other two stocks are up 120% and 45% respectively.  If it gets any cheaper, I suspect this thread will start to get busy again.  Cheers!

 

Wait, what happened to - Apple cannot innovate since Jobs is dead, Apple will lose as Samoogle has caught up, Apple cannot maintain insane margins, yada, yada, yada?

[Palantir]

No, Jobs is the major innovator. Ive is responsible for industrial design. He did not think up the iPod, the iMac, the iPad, the iPhone, the original Mac or any of these products. Ive in a sense gives "shape" to these ideas, but he is not the source of ideas about product development and origination. I have a feeling it will be Phil Schiller and Eddy Cue.

 

Apple has a great executive team that are all really good at doing their jobs. But when people say "innovation" they're cryptically referring to the sourcing of new ideas, and even Jobs said that Cook "isn't a product guy", so their criticism is not unwarranted.

 

Personally, I have no opinion on how Apple will do. Just wait and see.

[hardincap]

are you sure about that? according to isaacson ipad/iphone were his inventions. ipod was faddell who left. mac of course was jobs but the beauty of the mac today is all ive.

 

No, Jobs is the major innovator. Ive is responsible for industrial design. He did not think up the iPod, the iMac, the iPad, the iPhone, the original Mac or any of these products. Ive in a sense gives "shape" to these ideas, but he is not the source of ideas about product development and origination.

[Palantir]

Ive of course, designed the product, but from what I remember, I don't believe the book suggests that it was his idea. But I could be wrong. I remember Jobs mentioning he was at a barbecue in 2003, and a MS engineer was bragging about a tablet with a stylus, which infuriated Jobs.

 

The Apple stores for example, were primarily Ron Johnson's idea. Putting iTunes on other computers was someone else's idea as well. So Jobs certainly would have made major mistakes without his team.

 

Now you might be right in a sense, Ive could take on that role.

[hardincap]

Ive of course, designed the product, but from what I remember, I don't believe the book suggests that it was his idea. But I could be wrong. I remember Jobs mentioning he was at a barbecue in 2003, and a MS engineer was bragging about a tablet with a stylus, which infuriated Jobs.

 

The Apple stores for example, were primarily Ron Johnson's idea. Putting iTunes on other computers was someone else's idea as well. So Jobs certainly would have made major mistakes without his team.

 

Now you might be right in a sense, Ive could take on that role.

 

i suggest reading the book again.

[PlanMaestro]

Apple Cuts Orders for iPhone Parts

http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB10001424127887323596204578240440691304344-lMyQjAxMTAzMDEwMzExNDMyWj.html

 

Why The WSJ Got The 'iPhone Demand Is Crashing' Story All Wrong

http://www.forbes.com/sites/markrogowsky/2013/01/15/did-the-wsj-get-punkd-on-apple-or-is-it-rotten-to-the-core/

 

 

[hardincap]

Apple Cuts Orders for iPhone Parts

http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB10001424127887323596204578240440691304344-lMyQjAxMTAzMDEwMzExNDMyWj.html

 

Why The WSJ Got The 'iPhone Demand Is Crashing' Story All Wrong

http://www.forbes.com/sites/markrogowsky/2013/01/15/did-the-wsj-get-punkd-on-apple-or-is-it-rotten-to-the-core/

 

why did WSJ remove the 65M figure?? and then confidently attribute order cuts to lower demand? its hard not to see this as manipulation.

[Parsad]

Ive of course, designed the product, but from what I remember, I don't believe the book suggests that it was his idea. But I could be wrong. I remember Jobs mentioning he was at a barbecue in 2003, and a MS engineer was bragging about a tablet with a stylus, which infuriated Jobs.

 

The Apple stores for example, were primarily Ron Johnson's idea. Putting iTunes on other computers was someone else's idea as well. So Jobs certainly would have made major mistakes without his team.

 

Now you might be right in a sense, Ive could take on that role.

 

i suggest reading the book again.

 

Reading the book will make no difference.  In most respects, the Surface is a good product that is pretty comparable to the iPad.  Yet, how was the execution at Microsoft in marketing this thing and perfecting it under Ballmer?  So far, it's been mediocre. 

 

Jobs greatest asset was his ability to perfect a product (his innovation or not), and then get people to pay 2 times more than it was worth relative to other products.  That cannot be taught.  Cook is not going to absorb that through his gills because he spent time around Jobs.  It's like saying that I'll be a great physicist by working with Stephen Hawkings! 

 

Jobs second greatest asset was his ability to get the most out of the talent around him.  He was a slave-driver that forced employees to get things right the first time...not on the second or third attempt.  And ironically, they loved him even more for it while they hated how hard they had to work.

 

That combination of drive, vision, competitiveness, marketing savvy, and understanding of technology in our daily lives is irreplaceable.  Apple will be a good company without Jobs, but it will not be a great company.  It's long-term existence will be similar to other technology companies.  Cheers!

[Palantir]

Instead of telling me to read the book again, why don't you actually point out the specific part of the book that says "Ive came up with the iPad", and then we'll take it from there.