Why A Mini iPad Will Kill The Kindle [View article]
gtmacd,
Apple was too late to this party? With all due respect, Apple created this party! Apple built this castle where the party is being thrown. Before Apple a tablet was only a pill. By late to the party I assume you mean the 7-inch tablet, but without Apple there would be a No-Inch tablet.
Like I've said in previous writings, It's not that the other products suck. They're good I'm sure--though my personal experience aside--their just not Apple. Apple is the innovator of every recent, significant technological move in a personal stance. They revolutionized cell phones, (though some companies almost did), the created the tablet world and before the iPod, MP3 were a joke, an absolute joke. I would've rather sported my Sony Walkman.
They might not kill the competition in the mini tablet space the way they have in the normal tablet arena, but they will do damn good, you can count on that. And they will have a better jump than you think, by having 3 generations of tablets out already. I have no doubts that the Nexus 7 is a good device. It's just not an Apple. And an Apple is what everyone seemingly wants.
I appreciate the comment, and disclosure. It shows that your humbled opinion is an honest one and I commend you for that. Though my stance may be different, I respect your opinion and appreciate you taking the time to show it, as your first comment. I hope you come to enjoy and learn from SA.
No One Wants The iPhone? Think Again [View article]
Ronin,
You are correct in noting that they have not been rewarded with a higher P/E, despite the fact their margins are so much higher. I think this is party do the the price tag. Though cheap on an earnings basis (or value basis) Apple is still $600 a share.
There are a lot of retailer investors not willing or not able to shell out $60K for 100 shares of Apple. Unfortunately, or maybe even fortunately depending on how you look at it, Apple trades more its price than it does on its fundamentals, IMO.
Why A Mini iPad Will Kill The Kindle [View article]
Apple believes in creating great products for users that want them. If enough people want them, they will make them regardless of what it does to the sales of their own products.
I'm sorry podmeister, this is just the way the Apple philosophy works.
Why A Mini iPad Will Kill The Kindle [View article]
pirota,
haha this is an interesting point. I thought of this as well and I don't know? Trading maybe? :) But even on the go, I have my brokers iPad app which makes managing existing position SUCH a breeze. I can honestly say I use my iPad for just about everything. $2 or something and I got the app to write word documents. So I can work on articles at the beach, on the train, plane or car!
Thanks for the comment and interesting point! Cheers,
No One Wants The iPhone? Think Again [View article]
Gary,
Though Apple sets a relatively conservative forward outlook, in a "technically speaking" manner they missed. I agree, they did what they said they would, and analysts were overly optimistic, but they are strapped to the same rules that all other public companies are. It just is what it is.
No One Wants The iPhone? Think Again [View article]
Jebworks,
Appreciate the kinds words about the article. I found that these statistics are startling, and the article I just wrote about the iPad, in my opinion, is far more interesting than that of the iPhone. However, I tend to agree with you.
And make that millions upon millions have no intention of switching.
Thanks for the comment and again appreciate the kind words. Cheers,
No One Wants The iPhone? Think Again [View article]
Radarthreat,
While I agree Apple will never remain on the top forever, they are on the top now and not going anywhere any time soon. That's why I think we should take note, because Apple is bigger and better than RIMM and Motorola. Only time will tell how long they can make it on top, but I would say for a while longer at least.
thanks for the comment bringing some of us back to earth! Cheers,
Why A Mini iPad Will Kill The Kindle [View article]
High_sierra_Howard,
I can honestly say that I've never used the Nexus. I have an a bad experience with Android, though not in tablet form. The truth however remains that people are addicts about Apple. Each new device has people camping out overnight to get them. Being sold out for weeks at a time. It's not a dis to the Nexus or Kindle, It just isn't what Apple has built the iPad to be.
So in short, I have no personal beef with the Nexus, I just know that it fails to sell the way the iPad does. And in my opinion, should Apple introduce a mini version of the iPad it'll crush any competitor in the way.
In a way this is sort of the point I was trying to make. That in the short term the Euro may continue to to rise, almost up to 124.50 currently, but over a longer time span than just a few days or weeks, it has a lot of negative catalysts. I would think that with the rallying we've been getting and our the rise in European markets, we'll continue to see the Euro until it begins hitting resistance. I think from there it will be a good short.
Starbucks Re-Examined After Earnings [View article]
David,
A couple points. My first is that if the Fed or ECB (or both) step in with more stimulus, this will be bad for SBUX. As commodity prices rise, such a coffee, SBUX will feel more of a pinch in their margins and this will be reflected in their earnings.
The second, the point of Roubini's perfect storm is kind of irrelevant. Should this perfect storm arise, and I'm not bull, SBUX may very well trade at $20 like you state. BUT almost every other stock will get halved in that instance as well. Whether they have a high PE or not, stocks will get killed if that series of events plays out.
You sound like a pissed off Ford shareholder. This whole article has ONE sentence about Ford in it, ONE. This isn't about Ford at all, they're only used as an example for a poor pre-announcement. If you would rather sit here and gabble away about how great Ford is, why don't you go to my other article:
EU Summit Agreement Bogus: Global Bear Market To Resume [View article]
James,
While I have been fortunate enough to successfully ride these waves the past few days, I tend to agree. On Thursday we could all see the markets turning towards the EOD, as folks put there rally caps on a got ready. Friday, as we all know, huge run. As I said in stock talks, "I hate to piss on everyone's parade, here but this earnings season is likely going to be very bad."
I think a lot of investors and traders have a lot to think about over the weekend. Friday was a manic, euphoric drive higher, by the "Europe is fixed" thought. But it appears when people, and there aren't a lot who are/do, delve into the details of what was released, the final agreement is not very substantial. Since it's the weekend, it should give a lot of people a chance to really take a look at what happened.
That, combined with possible window dressing for the 1H/2Q of the year, who knows how far this thing was pushed up. We're also at some stiff resistance in the S&P, with a ceiling at ~1360. Thoughts?
It is unlikely that a "quality dividend stock" will shave 1/2% a day for two straight months, on the premise of losing 30% that quickly. Spec plays lose 30% that fast. Growth stories gone bust lose 30% in two months. High flyers with no game left in their name, lose 30%. Not quality dividend stocks. You don't see the T, KO, MO, KFT, BMY, MCD, PG, and JNJ shaving off that kind of market cap that fast.
Your insistence of averaging up has it's points, and certainly has a place when discussing averaging up, vs. averaging down. That is not to say either on is entirely dominate compared to the other. Money is to be made on both, as is the arguement of long vs. short. Or an options seller vs. and options buyer. In the end it all comes down to the investor/trader, and no method is completely better than the other.
Your above example, is of course wrong. Let me point out several issues with your statement. How, if you bought a stock before it imploded down 30%, would one be able to know that they once again were not buying before more downfall. What if it went down 15%, and you saw support. But as it fell you again, sold at down 8%, as this would be still part of the 30% downfall. Now you'd be done 16% and will likely miss the bottom before the stock continues to climb. But as you have indicated, after 3-4 years we should all be professional knife catchers. So let's use the author's real example of averaging down, which you fail to mention in your above example, as you leave the position hanging with a staggering loss, and in no way include an avg. down.
Had the share price started at $100 and fell 30%, it would be trading for $70, agreed? Let's say the investor added 50 shares every 10 points down, starting at 100, and ending at 70. One would have 200 shares with a cost basis of $85 dollars each.
This will leave the avg. down investor needed to make up 15 points, on a likely highly oversold stock. better yet, if it is a quality dividend stock, buyers will likely be rushing into this name and will have a handsome yield while being undervalued.
However, even if they are not, the position is no longer down 30%, nor does it need to recover ~43% to get back to even. At $70/share, the investor only needs to see $85 for breakeven. in this situation the investor is down approximately 17%. Compared to avg. up, being down 16%, and thus having no position in it, I can't say that avg. up has an advantage here. Unless, of course, one is indeed perfect at calling the bottom, in which they would never have losses to begin with.
I agree, that averaging down is not for everyone in every situation. But either is averaging up. Both can be effective depending on who is using the strategy and when they are deploying it. Considering this is not a trader nor a short term investor, avg down in quality dividend names is not likely going to get you killed. This investors is for the long term, and will likely clean up handsomely when the stock comes back up.
You, nor anyone on SA is Buffett, so you can live and die by his rules all you want, but until you have $40B in the bank, don't run around preaching him like he's your best friend. So, as you would say, "Doug,
It is unlikely that a "quality dividend stock" will shave 1/2% a day for two straight months, on the premise of losing 30% that quickly. Spec plays lose 30% that fast. Growth stories gone bust lose 30% in two months. High flyers with no game left in their name, lose 30%. Not quality dividend stocks. You don't see the T, KO, MO, KFT, BMY, MCD, PG, and JNJ shaving off that kind of market cap that fast.
Your insistence of averaging up has it's points, and certainly has a place when discussing averaging up, vs. averaging down. That is not to say either on is entirely dominate compared to the other. Money is to be made on both, as is the arguement of long vs. short. Or an options seller vs. and options buyer. In the end it all comes down to the investor/trader, and no method is completely better than the other.
Your above example, is of course wrong. Let me point out several issues with your statement. How, if you bought a stock before it imploded down 30%, would one be able to know that they once again were not buying before more downfall. What if it went down 15%, and you saw support. But as it fell you again, sold at down 8%, as this would be still part of the 30% downfall. Now you'd be done 16% and will likely miss the bottom before the stock continues to climb. But as you have indicated, after 3-4 years we should all be professional knife catchers. So let's use the author's real example of averaging down, which you fail to mention in your above example, as you leave the position hanging with a staggering loss, and in no way include an avg. down.
Had the share price started at $100 and fell 30%, it would be trading for $70, agreed? Let's say the investor added 50 shares every 10 points down, starting at 100, and ending at 70. One would have 200 shares with a cost basis of $85 dollars each.
This will leave the avg. down investor needed to make up 15 points, on a likely highly oversold stock. better yet, if it is a quality dividend stock, buyers will likely be rushing into this name and will have a handsome yield while being undervalued.
However, even if they are not, the position is no longer down 30%, nor does it need to recover ~43% to get back to even. At $70/share, the investor only needs to see $85 for breakeven. in this situation the investor is down approximately 17%. Compared to avg. up, being down 16%, and thus having no position in it, I can't say that avg. up has an advantage here. Unless, of course, one is indeed perfect at calling the bottom, in which they would never have losses to begin with.
I agree, that averaging down is not for everyone in every situation. But either is averaging up. Both can be effective depending on who is using the strategy and when they are deploying it. Considering this is not a trader nor a short term investor, avg down in quality dividend names is not likely going to get you killed. This investors is for the long term, and will likely clean up handsomely when the stock comes back up.
You, nor anyone on SA is Buffett, so you can live and die by his rules all you want, but until you have $40B in the bank, don't run around preaching him like he's your best friend.
So, as you would say, "Sorry to beat you up, buddy, but I urge you to educate yourself on these issues before you post" a comment. Buy by the way you speak down to others while toting the exact same strategy (in opposite fasion) carries a completely ludicrous thesis.
McDonald's Approaching Dollar Menu Prices [View article]
What's your point? technically, yes. A family of four could buy 10 burgers and all of them could split it. 2.5 burgers a piece. A family of five could have 2 burgers a piece. With the exception of taxes (though not every state is effected by it if I am correct), a family therefore could EAT, notice I said eat and not belligerently over stuff themselves, for $10. Good-buy.
McDonald's Approaching Dollar Menu Prices [View article]
Hmm.. not really..(in terms of thoughts on that). All stocks we trade would be valued in different proportions in that sense. It's fine and dandy for some people to use that if that's what works for them. However, it does not for me. That does not mean I am dismissing it, I just don't use it. MCD to me is trading relatively low and I think it is near a good price to accumulate shares.
Thanks for commenting and interesting perspective!
Why A Mini iPad Will Kill The Kindle [View article]
Apple was too late to this party? With all due respect, Apple created this party! Apple built this castle where the party is being thrown. Before Apple a tablet was only a pill. By late to the party I assume you mean the 7-inch tablet, but without Apple there would be a No-Inch tablet.
Like I've said in previous writings, It's not that the other products suck. They're good I'm sure--though my personal experience aside--their just not Apple. Apple is the innovator of every recent, significant technological move in a personal stance. They revolutionized cell phones, (though some companies almost did), the created the tablet world and before the iPod, MP3 were a joke, an absolute joke. I would've rather sported my Sony Walkman.
They might not kill the competition in the mini tablet space the way they have in the normal tablet arena, but they will do damn good, you can count on that. And they will have a better jump than you think, by having 3 generations of tablets out already. I have no doubts that the Nexus 7 is a good device. It's just not an Apple. And an Apple is what everyone seemingly wants.
I appreciate the comment, and disclosure. It shows that your humbled opinion is an honest one and I commend you for that. Though my stance may be different, I respect your opinion and appreciate you taking the time to show it, as your first comment. I hope you come to enjoy and learn from SA.
Cheers,
Bret
No One Wants The iPhone? Think Again [View article]
You are correct in noting that they have not been rewarded with a higher P/E, despite the fact their margins are so much higher. I think this is party do the the price tag. Though cheap on an earnings basis (or value basis) Apple is still $600 a share.
There are a lot of retailer investors not willing or not able to shell out $60K for 100 shares of Apple. Unfortunately, or maybe even fortunately depending on how you look at it, Apple trades more its price than it does on its fundamentals, IMO.
Thanks for the insight,
Bret
Why A Mini iPad Will Kill The Kindle [View article]
I'm sorry podmeister, this is just the way the Apple philosophy works.
Why A Mini iPad Will Kill The Kindle [View article]
haha this is an interesting point. I thought of this as well and I don't know? Trading maybe? :) But even on the go, I have my brokers iPad app which makes managing existing position SUCH a breeze. I can honestly say I use my iPad for just about everything. $2 or something and I got the app to write word documents. So I can work on articles at the beach, on the train, plane or car!
Thanks for the comment and interesting point! Cheers,
Bret
No One Wants The iPhone? Think Again [View article]
Though Apple sets a relatively conservative forward outlook, in a "technically speaking" manner they missed. I agree, they did what they said they would, and analysts were overly optimistic, but they are strapped to the same rules that all other public companies are. It just is what it is.
Thanks for the comment!
Bret
No One Wants The iPhone? Think Again [View article]
Appreciate the kinds words about the article. I found that these statistics are startling, and the article I just wrote about the iPad, in my opinion, is far more interesting than that of the iPhone. However, I tend to agree with you.
And make that millions upon millions have no intention of switching.
Thanks for the comment and again appreciate the kind words. Cheers,
Bret
No One Wants The iPhone? Think Again [View article]
While I agree Apple will never remain on the top forever, they are on the top now and not going anywhere any time soon. That's why I think we should take note, because Apple is bigger and better than RIMM and Motorola. Only time will tell how long they can make it on top, but I would say for a while longer at least.
thanks for the comment bringing some of us back to earth! Cheers,
Bret
Why A Mini iPad Will Kill The Kindle [View article]
I can honestly say that I've never used the Nexus. I have an a bad experience with Android, though not in tablet form. The truth however remains that people are addicts about Apple. Each new device has people camping out overnight to get them. Being sold out for weeks at a time. It's not a dis to the Nexus or Kindle, It just isn't what Apple has built the iPad to be.
So in short, I have no personal beef with the Nexus, I just know that it fails to sell the way the iPad does. And in my opinion, should Apple introduce a mini version of the iPad it'll crush any competitor in the way.
Thanks for commenting. I appreciate it!
Bret
Head Fake: Don't Trust The Euro [View article]
In a way this is sort of the point I was trying to make. That in the short term the Euro may continue to to rise, almost up to 124.50 currently, but over a longer time span than just a few days or weeks, it has a lot of negative catalysts. I would think that with the rallying we've been getting and our the rise in European markets, we'll continue to see the Euro until it begins hitting resistance. I think from there it will be a good short.
Starbucks Re-Examined After Earnings [View article]
A couple points. My first is that if the Fed or ECB (or both) step in with more stimulus, this will be bad for SBUX. As commodity prices rise, such a coffee, SBUX will feel more of a pinch in their margins and this will be reflected in their earnings.
The second, the point of Roubini's perfect storm is kind of irrelevant. Should this perfect storm arise, and I'm not bull, SBUX may very well trade at $20 like you state. BUT almost every other stock will get halved in that instance as well. Whether they have a high PE or not, stocks will get killed if that series of events plays out.
What Rally? [View article]
You sound like a pissed off Ford shareholder. This whole article has ONE sentence about Ford in it, ONE. This isn't about Ford at all, they're only used as an example for a poor pre-announcement. If you would rather sit here and gabble away about how great Ford is, why don't you go to my other article:
http://seekingalpha.co...
I'm sure you'll love it. It was written back in May.
Good-buy,
Bret
EU Summit Agreement Bogus: Global Bear Market To Resume [View article]
While I have been fortunate enough to successfully ride these waves the past few days, I tend to agree. On Thursday we could all see the markets turning towards the EOD, as folks put there rally caps on a got ready. Friday, as we all know, huge run. As I said in stock talks, "I hate to piss on everyone's parade, here but this earnings season is likely going to be very bad."
I think a lot of investors and traders have a lot to think about over the weekend. Friday was a manic, euphoric drive higher, by the "Europe is fixed" thought. But it appears when people, and there aren't a lot who are/do, delve into the details of what was released, the final agreement is not very substantial. Since it's the weekend, it should give a lot of people a chance to really take a look at what happened.
That, combined with possible window dressing for the 1H/2Q of the year, who knows how far this thing was pushed up. We're also at some stiff resistance in the S&P, with a ceiling at ~1360. Thoughts?
The Benefits Of Averaging Down [View article]
It is unlikely that a "quality dividend stock" will shave 1/2% a day for two straight months, on the premise of losing 30% that quickly. Spec plays lose 30% that fast. Growth stories gone bust lose 30% in two months. High flyers with no game left in their name, lose 30%. Not quality dividend stocks. You don't see the T, KO, MO, KFT, BMY, MCD, PG, and JNJ shaving off that kind of market cap that fast.
Your insistence of averaging up has it's points, and certainly has a place when discussing averaging up, vs. averaging down. That is not to say either on is entirely dominate compared to the other. Money is to be made on both, as is the arguement of long vs. short. Or an options seller vs. and options buyer. In the end it all comes down to the investor/trader, and no method is completely better than the other.
Your above example, is of course wrong. Let me point out several issues with your statement. How, if you bought a stock before it imploded down 30%, would one be able to know that they once again were not buying before more downfall. What if it went down 15%, and you saw support. But as it fell you again, sold at down 8%, as this would be still part of the 30% downfall. Now you'd be done 16% and will likely miss the bottom before the stock continues to climb. But as you have indicated, after 3-4 years we should all be professional knife catchers. So let's use the author's real example of averaging down, which you fail to mention in your above example, as you leave the position hanging with a staggering loss, and in no way include an avg. down.
Had the share price started at $100 and fell 30%, it would be trading for $70, agreed? Let's say the investor added 50 shares every 10 points down, starting at 100, and ending at 70. One would have 200 shares with a cost basis of $85 dollars each.
This will leave the avg. down investor needed to make up 15 points, on a likely highly oversold stock. better yet, if it is a quality dividend stock, buyers will likely be rushing into this name and will have a handsome yield while being undervalued.
However, even if they are not, the position is no longer down 30%, nor does it need to recover ~43% to get back to even. At $70/share, the investor only needs to see $85 for breakeven. in this situation the investor is down approximately 17%. Compared to avg. up, being down 16%, and thus having no position in it, I can't say that avg. up has an advantage here. Unless, of course, one is indeed perfect at calling the bottom, in which they would never have losses to begin with.
I agree, that averaging down is not for everyone in every situation. But either is averaging up. Both can be effective depending on who is using the strategy and when they are deploying it. Considering this is not a trader nor a short term investor, avg down in quality dividend names is not likely going to get you killed. This investors is for the long term, and will likely clean up handsomely when the stock comes back up.
You, nor anyone on SA is Buffett, so you can live and die by his rules all you want, but until you have $40B in the bank, don't run around preaching him like he's your best friend. So, as you would say, "Doug,
It is unlikely that a "quality dividend stock" will shave 1/2% a day for two straight months, on the premise of losing 30% that quickly. Spec plays lose 30% that fast. Growth stories gone bust lose 30% in two months. High flyers with no game left in their name, lose 30%. Not quality dividend stocks. You don't see the T, KO, MO, KFT, BMY, MCD, PG, and JNJ shaving off that kind of market cap that fast.
Your insistence of averaging up has it's points, and certainly has a place when discussing averaging up, vs. averaging down. That is not to say either on is entirely dominate compared to the other. Money is to be made on both, as is the arguement of long vs. short. Or an options seller vs. and options buyer. In the end it all comes down to the investor/trader, and no method is completely better than the other.
Your above example, is of course wrong. Let me point out several issues with your statement. How, if you bought a stock before it imploded down 30%, would one be able to know that they once again were not buying before more downfall. What if it went down 15%, and you saw support. But as it fell you again, sold at down 8%, as this would be still part of the 30% downfall. Now you'd be done 16% and will likely miss the bottom before the stock continues to climb. But as you have indicated, after 3-4 years we should all be professional knife catchers. So let's use the author's real example of averaging down, which you fail to mention in your above example, as you leave the position hanging with a staggering loss, and in no way include an avg. down.
Had the share price started at $100 and fell 30%, it would be trading for $70, agreed? Let's say the investor added 50 shares every 10 points down, starting at 100, and ending at 70. One would have 200 shares with a cost basis of $85 dollars each.
This will leave the avg. down investor needed to make up 15 points, on a likely highly oversold stock. better yet, if it is a quality dividend stock, buyers will likely be rushing into this name and will have a handsome yield while being undervalued.
However, even if they are not, the position is no longer down 30%, nor does it need to recover ~43% to get back to even. At $70/share, the investor only needs to see $85 for breakeven. in this situation the investor is down approximately 17%. Compared to avg. up, being down 16%, and thus having no position in it, I can't say that avg. up has an advantage here. Unless, of course, one is indeed perfect at calling the bottom, in which they would never have losses to begin with.
I agree, that averaging down is not for everyone in every situation. But either is averaging up. Both can be effective depending on who is using the strategy and when they are deploying it. Considering this is not a trader nor a short term investor, avg down in quality dividend names is not likely going to get you killed. This investors is for the long term, and will likely clean up handsomely when the stock comes back up.
You, nor anyone on SA is Buffett, so you can live and die by his rules all you want, but until you have $40B in the bank, don't run around preaching him like he's your best friend.
So, as you would say, "Sorry to beat you up, buddy, but I urge you to educate yourself on these issues before you post" a comment. Buy by the way you speak down to others while toting the exact same strategy (in opposite fasion) carries a completely ludicrous thesis.
McDonald's Approaching Dollar Menu Prices [View article]
McDonald's Approaching Dollar Menu Prices [View article]
Thanks for commenting and interesting perspective!