Seeking Alpha


View as an RSS Feed
View Skomes' Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Google Cloud Is No Real Threat To Microsoft [View article]
    The author has confused some terms.

    Office 365 is not a cloud computing offering, it is a software as a service (SaaS) offering, hosted "in the cloud", that is to say, on Microsoft's servers.

    Microsoft's cloud computing offering is Azure versus Google's own Compute Engine or App Engine, and Google's cloud offerings are very powerful and significantly cheaper.

    Google's competitor versus Office 365 would be Google Apps which provides office, collaboration, cloud storage, calendar, e-mail and other capabilities for significantly less than an Office 365 subscription but with the downfall of lacking Office's ease of use and powerful features.
    Apr 21 03:47 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Amazon: A Long-Term Buy [View article]
    Amazon did of course. Prime is free for 30 days when you first sign up so long as your account hasn't had prime for some period of time.

    If you have a free Prime trial, when would you use it? When you're busy ordering the most packages.

    So you utilize free 2 day shipping during Christmas and then cancel before you get charged the full yearly price.
    Feb 24 01:59 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Amazon: A Long-Term Buy [View article]
    All the sign ups during the holiday period are because people are taking advantage of free Amazon Prime for 30 days during the busy shopping period and then cancelling right after.
    Feb 24 01:24 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Advanced Micro Devices: Did You Get Fooled Again? [View article]
    It is kind of sad that AMD's real forté lies with graphics where Intel is so weak, but they failed to make any kind of run at mobile and instead Nvidia, which was a graphics only company is now making complete mobile SoCs.
    Jan 24 03:01 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Advanced Micro Devices: Did You Get Fooled Again? [View article]
    I really enjoyed this line

    "I've seen published by my fellow authors here and elsewhere) is easily convinced by arguments that seem plausible but often miss some pretty significant details"

    I feel like you and Tom Luongo are 2 sides of the same coin, one writes bullish articles on Intel and the other writes bullish articles on AMD.
    Jan 24 02:52 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple: Don't Be Afraid To Short [View article]

    Now you're contradicting yourself.

    Your own article claims that the vast majority of the market is dominated by cheaper phones, primarily from Nokia.
    Oct 8 05:50 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple: Don't Be Afraid To Short [View article]
    Oh for crying out loud Drew, grow up, don't try to take his words out of context and paint him as some kind of racist. What an utterly pathetic response to a valid criticism.

    He is clearly talking about from a business standpoint and he is entirely correct.

    Do you think Apple is targeting the poorest people in China? Of course not, and for that same reason they aren't targeting Africa.
    Oct 8 05:27 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Potential Accounting Irregularities Make NetSol A Short [View article]
    How pathetic.

    Why does SA publish these hit pieces?

    You raise some valid concerns but provide absolutely no proof of any problems whatsoever.

    At least when Gotham City Research does hit pieces on Ebix, they point to specific problems and issues and line items that are worrying, this is just general speculation and nonsense.

    You also display that you don't understand public company accounting rules when you attack NTWK for capitalizing R&D, which is perfectly valid and done by every company, including MSFT if the expenses meet certain criteria.
    Oct 2 04:44 PM | 8 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Intel Unhinged: Has The Elusive Double Finally Arrived? [View article]
    This applies to a lot of articles but I just wanted to point out that comparing INTC to the semiconductor industry at large does not mean that it is undervalued.

    It is valued much lower because it is the most tied to the PC market which is declining and because many of its competitors are in higher growth areas such as mobile or memory.

    Simply being valued at a lower P/E than its competitors doesn't really mean it is undervalued unless you can really prove it should be valued at the same level as its peer group.
    Aug 30 08:09 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Activision Making A Play Into China? [View article]
    Interesting article and thanks for the insight.

    Aren't most call of duty sales on consoles though? The PC market seems way more competitive. How much do you think PC only CoD sales can impact the company bottom line?
    Aug 4 09:58 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Activision Making A Play Into China? [View article]
    World of Warcraft is already in China and it has been losing subscribers rather quickly in the past year or so.

    Almost every MMORPG has Chinese servers in fact.

    Still this is an interesting opportunity.
    Aug 4 09:55 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why An Apple/China Mobile Deal Is Imminent [View article]

    1. The group in question is China Labor Watch, which is highly reputable and highly prominent. They just accused Pegatron, the Apple supplier in question of labor abuses and as part of their report they noted that employees worked on a plastic iPhone case.

    That isn't some random leak from an anonymous 3rd party.

    2. You're talking about news reports that are from late last year and you're comparing it to this latest quarterly results.

    The Apple supply constraint news reports stopped months ago and wouldn't have affected the latest quarterly figures.
    Aug 4 07:19 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why An Apple/China Mobile Deal Is Imminent [View article]
    CM squandered their advantage for 3G customers, a proprietary network that shut out most smartphones. They kept the low paying, low profit customers and lost the higher paying and more profitable customers.

    They've been hamstrung because the Chinese government keeps forcing them to use proprietary networks, first TD-SCDMA for 3G and now the new TDD LTE, that means smartphones won't work unless they specifically get a TDD LTE modem.

    If they launch LTE, they'll have the same issue as with 3G.

    CM doesn't want to launch a limited proprietary LTE network at great cost and yet lose the customers who will use that network.

    CM is facing the exact same situation now, as they have TDD-LTE with limited global compatibility and its competitors are running FDD-LTE which means they have global compatibility with phones and roaming.

    As for financial upside, I really can't say at this point due to nobody really knowing what the LTE launch costs will be like. I could definitely look into it for a future article though.
    Aug 4 05:16 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why An Apple/China Mobile Deal Is Imminent [View article]
    "My numbers are from AT&T 7 T-Mobile site. Ranchr's numbers must be from the same source"

    No, they aren't. You're confusing TMobile's smartphone payment plan, where you pay $20/month for an iPhone to AT&T and Verizon's combined plan and subsidies but your comparison is completely wrong.

    You're only looking at a small part of the cost instead of the full thing. TMobile does provide financing but the other carriers do not.

    Also, your numbers are out of date because TMobile doesn't even charge $20/month anymore, they charge $0 up front and $27 per month. That is why I asked you to provide a source. Your numbers clearly are not pulled from their website, which you claimed, because their website states $27/month.

    Here is a quick calculation:

    TMobile -
    iPhone - $0
    Plan - $60/month * 24 months = $1,440
    Smartphone payback - $27/month * 24 months = $648
    Total cost: $2,088


    AT&T -
    iPhone - $199
    Plan - $70/month * 24 months = $1,680
    Subsidy - - $450
    Total cost: $1,429


    Difference: AT&T is cheaper by $659. That is the carrier provided subsidy.

    And even if it were true that there were no such thing as a subsidy in the US, which is incorrect, that doesn't mean it applies to China which was the focus of my article.

    I'my not here to discuss the US market, US carriers and their iPhone subsidies. Ranchr's claim that there is no such as a subsidy was flat out wrong since he thought it applied to my article, I corrected him on both counts.

    If you would like to discuss this further, I'd appreciate some sources or backup on your calculation.
    Aug 4 05:08 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Why An Apple/China Mobile Deal Is Imminent [View article]
    You, like Ranchr, are wrong because you are using Ranchr's made up numbers.

    Here are REAL numbers pulled from the carrier sites:

    TMobile: 2GB talk/text plan = $60
    Verizon: 2GB talk/text plan = $60
    AT&T: 3GB + 450 minutes = $70

    T-Mobile, no subsidy.
    $60 * 24 months = $1440

    Verizon, phone subsidy of $450.
    $60 * 24 months = $1440 - $450 = $990

    AT&T, phone subsidy of $450.
    $70 * 24 months = $1680 - $450 = $1230

    Both AT&T and Verizon are cheaper because of how heavily they subsidize the iPhone.

    If you want to discuss this issue, don't make up numbers to try to prove your point. Use the real numbers from real smartphone plans being offered.

    If there are other cheaper and equivalent plans, then let me know but I don't see any $40 plan that is also offered for $20.
    Aug 3 07:17 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment