Beware Long-Term Damage From Stock Market Bubble Forming Now [View article]
James, not to put too fine a point on it but I think that you have a hard time being wrong. Your analyses are either "right" or "wrong". There is no shame in being "wrong", and I do respect that you put your forecasts out there for all to see. I also respect your impressive qualifications.
However, what I find disingenuous is your insistence that you are not "wrong" even when your forecasts are clearly wrong. Like I said, there is no shame in putting out a forecast and being wrong. There is, however, shame in not being able to accept that maybe, just maybe, you don't know what you think you know. And that maybe, just maybe, your blown calls are evidence of that. I understand the concept of "expected return", and I understand that you think the risk/benefit ratio has been too high for the last couple of years. Perhaps you may have based your beliefs on faulty analysis? It wouldn't be a crime if you had. I will be the first to admit that I am frequently wrong about many things in life.
I think that my position is "reasonable", and that I have been fair with you. For your part, you have continued to repeat your mantra: "I am not wrong, the rest of the world is". Eventually James, there will be a correction. Then you can finally be "right" and let us know all about it.
Beware Long-Term Damage From Stock Market Bubble Forming Now [View article]
Yeah Varan. I noticed that too. Eventually he will be right as a broken clock is right twice a day. In the mean time, I will just continue to make money.
Beware Long-Term Damage From Stock Market Bubble Forming Now [View article]
James, for all of your sophistry you can't accept that you are frequently wrong in your predictions. You have rationalized your blown calls by insisting that you were "right" even when you were wrong. If making a very poor investment call, and then claiming to be "right" is success in your book then yeah, you are very successful.
Beware Long-Term Damage From Stock Market Bubble Forming Now [View article]
Wow. You turned bullish in Aug 2012 after the market had been on fire for the first half of the year. Loved the follow-up article about even though you were wrong about 2012, the market just shouldn't have gone up and that your bear call was right. Lol. You keep being "right" even when you're wrong and I'll just keep making money.
David Trainer's $240 Apple Price Target Analysis Just Doesn't Add Up [View article]
Mr. Trainer, Bruce Greenwald doesn't say anything about ROIC, or a $240 price tag. You still have not explained how AAPL gets to a ROIC of 52%, or more importantly WHEN it gets there.
David Trainer's $240 Apple Price Target Analysis Just Doesn't Add Up [View article]
Mr. Trainer, if your "financial analysis" is off limits for critique, and we are instead supposed to focus on "Apple's future", then are you suggesting that you have a crystal ball?
Are you able to see the future and authoritatively state that AAPL will be worth $240 any time soon? That is patently ridiculous.
David Trainer's $240 Apple Price Target Analysis Just Doesn't Add Up [View article]
You have clearly articulated the problem with Mr. Trainer's analysis. He chooses an unrealistically pessimistic ROIC and then backs up into an unrelaistically pessimistic stock price.
If he is going to say that AAPL is only worth 240 dollars per share, then how about explaining via units sold, ASPs, and margins, how AAPL actually gets to such a low valuation.
All of this coming from a guy who recommended the stock unabashedly a year ago when ROIC and stock price was much higher. Did the fundamentals change at all in the last year? No.
So.... you blew the call last year when ROIC was higher than it is now, and so was the stock price, BUT..... Had I invested when you wrote your 2012 article, I would have lost money. BUUUUT now that the stock price is lower, and the all important ROIC is lower, I am supposed to trust you and sell this time because AAPL is only worth 240 dollars?
Is this like the advice that you gave to sell SBUX? Hmmm?
Saw your bit on TV today... You want to keep investors informed so they can make good decisions? Lol. OK.
Your ROIC valuation model assumes that AAPL earns ~ 8 billion a year. ITunes earns 4-5Bn per year and is growing. So, the entire rest of the company will only generate 3-4 Bn dollars? AAPL made~ 8bn last quarter. What about the div, and the buybacks. If AAPL executed their buyback at 240 dollars per share, that would reduce the share count by around half. Did you consider the effect of such a reduction in share count?
I'm not impressed with your attempt to "help" investors with your $240 stock price tag. I am impressed with your self-promotion though. Kind of reminds me of the guy from Topeka Capital who predicted a price tag of $1111 last year. I suppose he was trying to "help investors" too...
Apple, Zynga Lead Sharp Rise In Short Interest On Tech Names [View article]
I don't think Simple is sayingt that. He is saying that if all of these shorts came in after earnings, then why the runup in price? Even with the positive catalyst of buybacks and div hike, it is unlikely that a fast runup would have occurred with a doubling of the short interest occurring right after the report.
It's more likely that shorts jumped on the falling knife that was AAPL before the earnings report. No way to tell though, just speculation.
Shorts are not doing very well though at the moment no matter if they bought in immediately pre- or post- earnings report. That said, this much short interest is interesting. I wonder what negative catalyst is coming down the line to justify the increase in short action. 20 million shares short at 400 dollars a share is an 8 billion dollar leveraged bet that will cost some hedge funds a LOT of cash if that bet goes the wrong way.
Beware Long-Term Damage From Stock Market Bubble Forming Now [View article]
However, what I find disingenuous is your insistence that you are not "wrong" even when your forecasts are clearly wrong. Like I said, there is no shame in putting out a forecast and being wrong. There is, however, shame in not being able to accept that maybe, just maybe, you don't know what you think you know. And that maybe, just maybe, your blown calls are evidence of that. I understand the concept of "expected return", and I understand that you think the risk/benefit ratio has been too high for the last couple of years. Perhaps you may have based your beliefs on faulty analysis? It wouldn't be a crime if you had. I will be the first to admit that I am frequently wrong about many things in life.
I think that my position is "reasonable", and that I have been fair with you. For your part, you have continued to repeat your mantra: "I am not wrong, the rest of the world is". Eventually James, there will be a correction. Then you can finally be "right" and let us know all about it.
To Understand The Future You Must Know The Past [View article]
Bear Pep Talk: Timing Not Required [View article]
Beware Long-Term Damage From Stock Market Bubble Forming Now [View article]
Beware Long-Term Damage From Stock Market Bubble Forming Now [View article]
Beware Long-Term Damage From Stock Market Bubble Forming Now [View article]
The Most Misleading Words In Investing: You Can't Go Broke Taking A Profit [View article]
David Trainer's $240 Apple Price Target Analysis Just Doesn't Add Up [View article]
Apple Increases iPhone Discount To 36% To Counter Samsung's Upsurge In India [View article]
Skullcandy Institutional Ownership Ready To Create Short Frenzy [View article]
Sorry I couldn't resist. Tom Payne used to pump this stock like crazy, but has apparently retired from the SA publishing business.
David Trainer's $240 Apple Price Target Analysis Just Doesn't Add Up [View article]
Are you able to see the future and authoritatively state that AAPL will be worth $240 any time soon? That is patently ridiculous.
David Trainer's $240 Apple Price Target Analysis Just Doesn't Add Up [View article]
If he is going to say that AAPL is only worth 240 dollars per share, then how about explaining via units sold, ASPs, and margins, how AAPL actually gets to such a low valuation.
All of this coming from a guy who recommended the stock unabashedly a year ago when ROIC and stock price was much higher. Did the fundamentals change at all in the last year? No.
Mr. Trainer has no credibility.
Danger Zone For This Week: Apple [View article]
Is this like the advice that you gave to sell SBUX? Hmmm?
Danger Zone For This Week: Apple [View article]
Your ROIC valuation model assumes that AAPL earns ~ 8 billion a year. ITunes earns 4-5Bn per year and is growing. So, the entire rest of the company will only generate 3-4 Bn dollars? AAPL made~ 8bn last quarter. What about the div, and the buybacks. If AAPL executed their buyback at 240 dollars per share, that would reduce the share count by around half. Did you consider the effect of such a reduction in share count?
I'm not impressed with your attempt to "help" investors with your $240 stock price tag. I am impressed with your self-promotion though. Kind of reminds me of the guy from Topeka Capital who predicted a price tag of $1111 last year. I suppose he was trying to "help investors" too...
Apple, Zynga Lead Sharp Rise In Short Interest On Tech Names [View article]
It's more likely that shorts jumped on the falling knife that was AAPL before the earnings report. No way to tell though, just speculation.
Shorts are not doing very well though at the moment no matter if they bought in immediately pre- or post- earnings report. That said, this much short interest is interesting. I wonder what negative catalyst is coming down the line to justify the increase in short action. 20 million shares short at 400 dollars a share is an 8 billion dollar leveraged bet that will cost some hedge funds a LOT of cash if that bet goes the wrong way.