peter02l

Apple: Great Products = Great Investment?

"Apple has been in existence since the technology revolution began in the late 70s and early 80s. Apple products had been termed as elitist with its high cost computer hardware and operating system. It remained closed to the outside world and Apple did not team up with other companies. Since 2000 this aspect has changed. Apple now allows independent developers to use its platform for further application development. Opening up has allowed Apple to grow."

What a bunch of crap. Have you heard of Microsoft Word, Microsoft Excel, Adobe Illustrator, ...?

Palm Pre, iPhone 3GS Snag Sales from RIM

I, on the other hand, had left my iPhone on a piece of bread. Unknowingly, I put some turkey and lettuce on it and ate it. The next day the device was deposited in the bowl in a pile of excrement. But I am happy to report that it still works like new. My old phone was a Blackberry 8300 which suffered the same calamity. However, I cannot attest to the quality of its make as I flushed it by mistake.

Is the Deal Between Apple and AT&T Anti-Competitive?

"I believe the AT&T subsidy is about $200 per phone. So Apple should be required by law to sell an unlocked GSM iPhone for $399."

And what if you believed it to be $1?

"I've been a T-Mobile (DT) customer for over ten years and I never sign a plan with them. I buy my Blackberries (RIMM) at full retail value and never get the subsidy."

For real? You could have saved at least $1000 by your estimate with no skin off your back. But that's because you believe something else - no obligations right?

"... there is a small (and growing) market of people like me who will pay a premium for an unlocked phone."

It must be the start of an epidemic.

"And the government should let that market grow and flourish."

Yes of course, by forcing companies to make products that support every available technology.

"Just like it is the law of the land that phone numbers are portable from carrier to carrier, it should be the law of the land that phones should be portable from carrier to carrier. Anything else is anti-competitive."

Never mind that a phone number has no physical attributes. How about requiring McDonalds to sell In-N-Out burgers? Sometimes you have to drive too long to find one.

Ok, free time is up, everyone get back to your room.

10 Reasons Not to Buy Apple

On Jul 08 02:21 AM Paul H. M. wrote:

> "Don't you dare mention that anybody has a chance against them!"

Pray tell, who and how?

> "Don't you even THINK that at this price, it might be better to wait!
> Even when the market retreats, this stock will shoot up like a rocket!
> "If you're not long on AAPL 100 percent of the time, you're an idiot!"

No one here is claiming you should be be long anything 100% of the time, or when the stock will shoot up or that you should jump in and put all your money into AAPL.

> Jesus, guys. The IPhone is pretty cool, but why not just address
> his points without all the hate?

There is no mention of hate either, just incompetence.

> Seriously guys, its dangerous to fall in love with your stock.
> That's how you end up holding at $200, and riding it down to $80.
> Only a company with major threats would rise and fall so easily.
> That much is obvious.

No dear boy. In case you were born yesterday, let me inform you that in addition to investors we have speculators, manipulators, people who need to raise cash to cover other losses, etc. Do you blame the quality of a house when its price doubles and then halves in a matter of a few years? Was there something wrong with the oil that was pumped out of the ground last year that we saw prices go to $140 and then back down to $60?

This Hao Jin fellow comes up with 10 reasons to claim Apple is a bad investment. Not one of them has to do with its valuation or the company's financial condition. He doesn't even suggest that the tanking economy will hurt any other company than Apple. Palm, Nokia, etc. are supposedly in a position to offer stiffer competition in this economy. Microsoft, with it's "90%" OS share is not cited as bad investment because of a "saturated" OS market. Why does he bring up Sony's walkman in the fifth "reason"? Is he suggesting that the 385 million is a ceiling for number of music players a company can hope to sell?

On top of that most of his numbers and claims are factually incorrect. Apple's iTunes store passed Walmart to become the top music seller in April of 2008. Ho says it's third behind Best Buy!

I suppose someone who writes stuff on a financial web site should be aiming to inform people. In this case, the readers are informing this guy how wrong his information is. And it's not just one or two or five errors - it's just about everything he says. That, is embarrassing.

10 Reasons Not to Buy Apple

If anything, the iPod could be argued to cannibalize the iPhone, given iPod touch does everything except the phone part.

Selling to the consumer market is a risk? Sorry, but the corporate market is where most of the trouble is. Even Microsoft is laying people off. If you need further proof, look at the Dell results.

It is shamfully embarrasing to suggest Apple makes less than $30 on iPhones.

Are you suggesting Apple is planning new "substantial fixed investment in equipment, lease improvements and inventory controls in all its 250+ store?

Nokia and Palm have been losing market share in the smartphone category ever since the iPhone came out. Palm may not even be around a year from now, with its negative equity, heavy debt, and the rate it's burning through cash. RIMM's 2 for 1 sale is over. They will start losing market share this year. Some competition!

The most ridiculous statement is number 4. That statistic hasn't changed from last year, or are you suggesting 90% of people have smart phones? Do you actually believe that people who buy cell phones these days never owned one before?

Regarding Steve's health and SEC investigations: give it a rest, that horse is dead.
Can you say with a straight face that you expect all phone manufacturers to offer phones which will be a central controls for home entertainment systems, and Apple for some reason will miss the boat? Never mind that there is a remote app for Apple TV.

PALM: Ready to Break Out?

You seem to forget when iPhone initially came out there were no products quite like it. Pre on the other hand was one-upped in a week.


On Jul 02 03:43 PM Techno-Iconoclast wrote:

> Wow there's a lot of revisionist history going on here with the iFanatics.
> Do none of you remember when the iPhone launched? Did it have 3G?
> No. Did it have MMS or tethering? No. Did it have an App Store
> at all or 3rd party applications? No. Did it have initial QC and
> supply problems? Yes. Does the latest model still have QC problems?
> Yes, just google for "overheating 3gs".
>
> Does Palm still have a long way to go? Sure they do. Will they
> be plagued by the same problems as in the past? Probably not, because
> two of the guys that did the real work to turn Apple around are now
> at the helm at Palm. These guys know how to deliver products and
> how to run an organization that designs and builds groundbreaking
> products.
>
> Is Palm going to 'break out'? They have a decent chance if they
> can capitalize on this momentum over the next two years just like
> Apple did over the last 3 years. The smartphone market is only growing.
> To say that Palm and RIMM aren't going to be stealing overall share
> from Motorola, Nokia and Sony/Ericsson is just naive. The big three
> in smartphones will most likely be Apple, Palm and RIMM in two years
> unless someone drops the ball.

Did Apple Steal the Palm Pre’s Thunder?

That was a cheaper way to help Elevation Partners create the impression that the company is worth something. If they can get a buyer, both will benefit. Anyone in UAE interested? It matches any Benz interior beautifully.


On Jul 01 04:25 PM Rg2 wrote:

> An institutional investor is betting big that Palm's phenomenal rise
> over the past few months will continue. Funds that hold the family
> fortune of deceased publishing magnate William Ziff Jr. have added
> to their stake in the smartphone maker by three million shares over
> the past five months, and now hold about 6.5% of the company. --Barron's,
> 7-1-09.
>
> Apple stole Palm's thunder?

Did Apple Steal the Palm Pre’s Thunder?

This is very enlightening given the fact that neither Palm nor Sprint ever announced projected sales number and they have not release any number for sold units.


On Jul 01 12:38 PM RayDong wrote:

> I've read reports that the Pre has sold over two times as many units
> as projected. Additionally, it's a good device with a far cheaper
> plan that AT&T's. The only appeal of the IPhone is the fact
> that all it's owners hold it up and announce that they have an IPhone.

The $99 iPhone Is James Bond, The Others Are Joe Schmoe

Don't waste your breath talking to a Motorola i365.


On Jun 29 04:26 PM EJL wrote:

> You have been pumping the Pre well before it was released. Your
> analysis of the plans is accurate, but I can't get on board with
> the notion that the Pre is a better device than the 3G iPhone. I
> had one for a few weeks to test it out and my feeling is that it
> is neither beats out iPhone for a gooey UI and media/web nor does
> it beat out the Blackberry for messaging/core communication. I feel
> like it's stuck in between. The screen on the Pre is a little too
> small and the keyboard is usable at best (if you don't accidentally
> cut yourself on the sharp edge). I honestly felt like it's iPhone
> junior as it basically copies iPhone with the web browser and gestures.
> The finger gestures were usually accurate, but iPhone still has best
> in class touch. Your myth about the iPhone not multitasking is a
> joke. Of course it does, Apple just chooses to control it in the
> name of a great user experience. This will not end up being a persistent
> competitive advantage, especially in light of Sprint/Palm's marketing
> of this feature so heavily.
>
> What is most striking to me is that the feedback I am seeing on the
> 3G and 3GS is that the new software makes the device faster and improves
> usability and the new hardware really makes a difference in speed.
> While I don't agree with your analysis, the good news is that a rising
> tide lifts all boats and Palm will do fine as more users gravitate
> to smarter devices.

The $99 iPhone Is James Bond, The Others Are Joe Schmoe

I am sure he weighed everything!

(ounce for ounce)


On Jun 29 04:11 PM EJL wrote:

> comedy. please support this with facts. other than a few EAS policies,
> what else is there?

The $99 iPhone Is James Bond, The Others Are Joe Schmoe

Just bum a phone. You don't need a rate plan.


On Jun 29 10:58 AM User 389824 wrote:

> Its the Rate Plan, stupid! Even though the consumer gets one heck
> of a deal at $99, they will end up paying hundreds more over the
> term of the AT&T rate contract, compared to Sprint or T-Mobile.
> And the horrible AT&T coverage. The cost of the phone is only
> the beginning. Doubtless, Apple has produced a wonderful handset
> but it is married to a bum!

The $99 iPhone Is James Bond, The Others Are Joe Schmoe

This is the absolute best article I have read in a long while. Perfect characterization!

The EU Stabs Apple in the Back

P.S.

I didn't know it was the job of the EU or any government to create greater potential for Qualcomm.

The EU Stabs Apple in the Back

"The EU is now mandating that all cell phones be compatible with 3rd-party MicroUSB chargers by January 1, 2012."

This will not affect Apple much. Apples current charger has a USB connector to which the cable connect. That is the cable is not part of the connector. So all they have to do is to replace the USB connector on the charger with MicroUSB, and supply the appropriate cable.

This has nothing to do with the 30-pin connector. EU's concern is that people over the years end up with a multitude of chargers for various devices which they don't know what to do with. That is very wasteful, so I applaud what EU is trying to do here.

Is Execution More Important than Vision?

Just those two categories? So there aren't any that are good visionaries and also great in execution? Or those who suck at both? What about those who can spot talent well and and end up hiring good visionaries who are great at execution?


Fixed it. That second sentence was particularly bad!