Juggler

Long only, long-term horizon, tech
Juggler
Long only, long-term horizon, tech
Contributor since: 2012
This is whole story is just BS. To "hack" the sensor they took a 2400 dpi photo of the fingerprint with a DSLR, then had to use a laser print, some latex and so on. How are you supposed to do that in real life? Say "excuse me, turn your hand please, I'd like to take a picture of your fingerprints"?
All the fingerprints that you leave behind normally (say, on a glass of water) would not be sufficient to deceive the sensor.
This just proves how hard you have to try to fool this sensor. Barely more feasible than forcing the owner of the fingerprint to place her finger on the sensor.
The German hack is just BS. To "hack" the sensor they took a 2400 dpi photo of the fingerprint with a DSLR, then had to use a laser print, some latex and so on. How are you supposed to do that in real life? Say "excuse me, turn your hand please, I'd like to take a picture of your fingerprints"?
All the fingerprints that you leave behind normally (say, on a glass of water) would not be sufficient to deceive the sensor.
This just proves how hard you have to try to fool this sensor. Barely more feasible than forcing the owner of the fingerprint to place her finger on the sensor.
Agree. Actually a consolidated close below these level would mean further weakness coming. Strong supports I talked about in the article? Gone in a day.
If the stock closes below 450-445 at the end of the week 405 might easily be the next step.
As said as it can be, Atkins may very well be right. Until Apple doesn't pull a hat trick that can get the growth back going the smart money will prefer chasing evanescent P/Es (just look at some at the S&P best performer YTD and you get an idea).
Still they seem forgetting that even at 0 growth Apple could buy 1 YHOO a year (not that it would be a good deal, but still).
Thanks. I think the 5S might actually sell better than the 5C in Asia - or at least get really close. Given the narrow price difference, many people buying it for the status are going to skip the plastic to get the real deal.
Screen size is something that will be most surely shortly addressed, Cook hinted at it himself in the last few months. I don't see a phablet coming though, probably something more in the 4.5-5 inch area: too many compromises between the two categories and nothing real of either of them. It is not even said that demand for this phones is going to grow sustainably. In any case, a bigger iPhone would not be a game-changer.
Good analogy, User. I don't think that Cook is only numbers though, pretty sure he learnt a few things from Jobs in 10 years+ about product vision too.
Where do you get these P/E metrics from? I see a trailing P/E of 21 and a forward-P/E of 17.75.
MishaF, thanks for your comment.
The Mac actually hasn't reaped 50% of PC sales, it has helped, but the slowing in these latter should be attributed to the iPad and the rise of the tablet /smartphone in general.
What is astonishing about the Mac is that with less than a 12% share of the PC market it managed to rake almost 50% of the market's profits. Arguably, though, the Mac contributes way less than the iPhone to Apple's bottom line (15%-20% compared with 50%+ of the iPhone).
You're right, I might have done a better comparison, but my point was that, for diverse reasons (recounted later in the article), Apple's profits from the iPhone could shrink (not that it is any news, but the citation that I posted offers an interesting point of view on the way it could effectively happen), with this latter going therefore "the way of the Mac".
Quite some differences though... At $700 AAPL had 20% of its market cap in cash, with a 15 PE. At $900 GOOG has 13% of its market cap in cash (and no 1.5% dividend), with a 27 PE.
Not double the valuation but close..
Hadn't Dan Loeb exited HLF?
What are the barriers to entry here though? Is there something that can prevent other solar companies to get in the business model SCTY is pioneering?
Paulo, that's not completely true. Ferrari is not remotely comparable to Tesla, first and foremost on a price stand-point: the cheapest Ferrari sells at ~2.5 the price of a Model S.
And you do see some Porsche advertising around...
The demand may have not peaked yet, but 200k is a 10-fold increase in cars sold, or 1000%. Where on earth can that growth come from?
And we're officially at 11... For how long are we supposed to get it in the mail? 1 week?
Was it at least incredibly insightful...
Is it just me or they have sent this same update via email four times?
Glad it was a good read for you, thanks.
The board actually seems to really want him at least after 2020, since they've given him 1million shares if he stays until then.
I'm not saying that he should be fired - quite far from that -, but I think that he has been too passive in the face of this falling knife that is AAPL.
Well said.
MF, there's no way Apple would have been worse with SJ still alive and well. As for the cheap shot to TC, I simply think that I'm no position to tell him what to do or not to do. I'd simply like him to do something (possibly quite smart) with that cash. There are many start-ups and grown companies with a lot of talent that could be extremely accretive to Apple.
skleiniv, I share many of your points. While I do think that puck is correct saying careful to "a CEO has to do whatever it takes for the shares to go up", I'm convinced that he shouldn't have allowed this downfall without doing anything. As I said in the article, those who are paying for this are the only the retail investors.
Davel, indeed the market is currently giving Apple a ridiculously low valuation - but that's only a part of the story that I tried to tell in the article.
More than looking at mere fundamentals I put a lot of focus on the technicals (which have driven the stock for the last six months) and on next week's release.
To me, it's an opportunity to buy more, but I want to look at the numbers Tuesday before, and especially see how the market reacts.
Thanks for your comment! Indeed a dividend boost seems likely, but I wouldn't count on it, especially since the yield is now not so far from 3%.
I'm actually confident that the growth investors will pile back in as soon Tim Cook decides to churn out one of the great things that seems to be in the pipeline.
The fact that currently the market has less confidence in Apple than in Dell is ludicrous. Apple sub-$400 could be the once in a decade buy-opportunity.
As much as taking Apple private makes sense (the whole Apple mentality and culture makes the company look much more suitable for being private than public: in fact, SJ had always seen Wall Street as nothing else than a necessary evil) nobody really has the money - not even Apple itself (yet). Interesting thought though.
Great points, thanks for the comment!
Thanks for your comment.
You raise some good points, however there's a long route between where Microsoft stands now and bankruptcy. What the article suggests is that MSFT is going down, not going to 0.
I mean, the stock has been dead money for 10 years+ when they had 0 competition. This scenario has changed and Microsoft has not managed to position itself correctly for the future market.
There are many stocks with a better valuation than MSFT. The article focuses on the implications a massive slowdown in PCs may have on the company's income.
About XP, maybe, but nobody says that these corporates have to necessarily move off XP quickly and, most importantly, that they have to buy other Windows PCs: now there is much more to choose from than 10 years ago.
What you say may be absolutely correct, but the Samsung co-CEO (of whom I'm not a fan at all by the way) is not saying that the Galaxy S4 is better than a Lumia, he's saying that consumers prefers Android over Windows.
And not only they prefer the Galaxies over the Samsung Windows phones, but they clearly prefer the Galaxies over the Lumia as well: Nokia sold 4.4 million Lumias in Q4. That number stays at the Galaxies as the Surface's numbers stay at the iPad.
Great link: the video really makes you think a lot. I do hope this is not where we're heading to
You're simplifying the matter a little bit here... Dark sunglasses are actually a good example: it is considered bad manners to present yourself to somebody you don't know or even greet somebody with dark sunglasses on.
Then try to wear dark sunglasses in a bar, maybe at night: you'd look pretty weird, probably people would think that you're blind.
That's not always true: I bought some shares in summer 2011 which turned profitable just recently.
I don't know where you get your data from, but it differs from mine (which corresponds to that on Gfinance): they earned 0.60 in 2012.
As for the forward P/E, I don't like to invest based on analysts estimates. I think that IMAX is a great company, just a little bit stretched now.
Richbar, the whole point of the article is that Apple looks cheap, but might not be. The point is that Apple needs a new product, or earnings may indeed start to shrink.
While I don't share your bearish view on Apple, I think that caution is the best practice approaching the stock here.
If the stock was indeed cheaper after the dot-com bubble I apologize for the error, it means that my sources are wrong.
Analysts actually loved Tim Cook for the first 12 months though. I'd also say though that the whole analyst-system around Apple should be reviewed: they were just so damn wrong. When the stock was at $700, price targets were flying to the moon. Only when the stock started to fall like a rock they lowered their estimates. I mean, really?
Furthermore, I've been a fan of Mr. Cook since the beginning, and if you look at my articles I've actually defended the stock many times. Now, I just think he could do more to protect retail investors. A big buyback would nearly dent Apple reserves.
And then again, as I said in another comment, making nothing to counter this negativity sentiment around the stock and the company is also bad for sales. People may start to listen to the terrible mainstream media coverage that surrounds Apple and really buy that the company cannot innovate anymore.