Seeking Alpha


Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View fauxscot's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Apple Bears: The Fake iPhone Panic Must Stop [View article]
    Where else do you put a buck? Treasuries?

    Profit-free growth outfits like Amazon? (I even LIKE Amazon as a business, but where and when are those profits? Is the goal just to kill off Sears, WalMart and downtown America?)

    Google? What's its yield again?

    The entire PC sector? What's the one glowing little star there, now? Dell? HP? Lenovo? Which one is SELLING OUT of a $3,000 base price America-built desktop supercomputer? Might that be..... Apple? Do you think they have a margin on those... the one thing every other PC leaves off their bill of materials?

    The volumes of late have been anemic. Not much confirmation in the moves either way. Looks like most folks are staying put.

    Again, where else to put a buck? Lottery tickets?
    Apr 7 06:34 AM | 8 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple's Q2 Results Are Likely To Disappoint [View article]
    Other folks don't seem to agree with your negativity, Mr. Blair.
    Apr 4 08:11 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple's Q2 Results Are Likely To Disappoint [View article]
    Article number 5 in the continuing series of articles I am not reading because I could predictably identify the author from the headline.

    Same song. Different day. Self-serving run down of a stock by a short seller and consistent bear, I presume. (Didn't read.)

    The press has been generally positive for the last few weeks. I've been wondering how long it would take and it looks like you are slowing down on your cycle. Stretched about two weeks this time.

    Next edition in 7 days or so?

    Here.... let me write the headline:

    Apple (faces__ probably____) (headwinds____ losses____ catastrophy___) (underperforming____ misses____ fear____) (uncertainty____ target____) (disappoints_____ had better____) (panic____ run for the hills____) (rotten__ take a bite out of____ peeled___)

    Check a bunch of these. find some irrelevant data from General Motors and add a graph.

    Save yourself a lot of work.

    Most of us look at Apple with a suitable amount of skepticism. And a suitable and cautious amount of optimism. On any given day, we're balancing the two. Your conclusions (in my experience) are uniformly negative and as often as not, based on thin evidence. I quit reading them, as a result. Is that the effect you seek? Personal credibility erosion due to a poverty of variety? It's working.
    Apr 4 04:46 AM | 11 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple: Very Strong Demand For Mac Pro 2014 [View article]
    I'm glad you have to wait and am glad i am not in the market.

    Apple owns mobile profits. The profit-free also rans own market share.

    Apple owns laptop and desktop profits. The rest are share hogs and money losers.

    Apple obviously knows what it's doing vis a vis its products. A $3000 (base) desktop selling out when Dell has to give away $500 boxes? And still can't? Go Apple!

    Cook and the boys can ship as many as they want to, given that they can buy another 5 or 10 factories. They will optimize, soon enough. Startup is always hard and new product demand is always unpredictable. Of course, if you're Nokia, Blackberry or HP, you usually OVERPLAN production. Apple is different.
    Apr 2 08:36 AM | 15 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple Investors May Need A Reality Check [View article]
    Tinfoil hats, anyone?
    Apr 2 05:30 AM | 20 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple's Dividend At $20 In 5 Years? Not Gonna Happen [View article]
    For an investor buying today, your pessimism might be correct.

    For one like me, the yield based on my antique basis is rather high. (I've been in since AAPL was in the 2- and low 3- digits.) I can look at the current share value as unrealized gains, of course, but the question is... should I dump something that has growing capital security, growth potential (however modest), real income, probable income growth and a still-developing story to gamble that a google will return 3% if and when it starts paying a dividend and has me investing at the TOP of its valuation? Or that Cisco, a decent company, will suddenly surge to the stratosphere of global ubiquity of Apple?

    Worth considering your argument, of course. I'm on the fence and not in need of immediate action. I'm more interested in the next 3 years than the next 30 with Apple, and when I ask myself what has happened in 3 years segments in each of the 4 of them since I acquired AAPL, it seems patience has proven wise, though I acknowledge that I could have made more actively trading, but only in retrospect.

    My main observation about this stock is that it does not follow rational valuation. It is heavily discounted compared to other similar companies. I won't bore you with the facts; you know where they are.

    If Apple makes it to $20/yr, great. If not, I'd settle for $17 or $18 and a 1k share price and not complain too much.
    Mar 31 08:14 AM | 13 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Google Is About To Change The Market Forever [View article]
    Internet bubble stock Global Crossing went bankrupt in the early 2000's, reorganized, and simply invalidated all of its common stock, then reissued more, to other investors. Previous owners and supporters and investors just saw their assets literally disappear. No potential for long term recovery of the enterprise... nothing. Poof.

    Little issues like "class A" versus "class C" are important, but securities laws and corporate governance being what they are, it's worthwhile to remember you are not buying a thing, you are buying air. Image. Hope. Potential. Under the right circumstances, a little clever legal work and the value goes to zero. If your interests and Larry Page's don't align, and he's got the votes, guess who will win?

    Hint... not you.
    Mar 31 01:45 AM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • WSJ's Apple / Comcast Story Not Accurate, News Being Overblown On Wall Street [View article]
    Well, what can we say?

    Not a day goes by here that some yahoo doesn't prognosticate on something vacuous, piling speculation on top of wishful thinking. Hell, professionals trade in rumor and innuendo.

    Not to say that is sane, of course, but for speculators, wild swings are good. For investors, you'd think the opposite... that analysis would be good, but it's not. In the short term, wisdom be damned, the minnows move the stock 10% in a day, and drive the thoughtful to drink, nearly.

    Here's a thought, though.... someone HAS content and Apple probably WANTS it. May not be Netflix, Comcast or anyone we know. Good to know your observations aren't tainted by ownership and I will re-read your article several times. Thanks for the effort and unbiased opinions/observations.
    Mar 24 06:55 PM | 7 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple's Future: iPhone Replacements? [View article]
    Folks might not want to upgrade based on features, but the phones do wear out, particularly the batteries. Apps creep toward better features, too, as do OS upgrades. So at some point, it becomes a buy versus buy choice, and someone who has owned an iPhone for a long time is by definition, probably a committed iPhone user. The gradient pushes folks in the direction of more-of-the-same. Speaking more in favor of that, of course, is preservation of accessory and app investment, which can be substantial. Apple profits handsomely off of accessories AND apps.

    Unless there is a compelling reason to switch, many iPhone users would be financially foolish to consider doing so. The incremental cost to upgrade is the issue, not the cost of a standalone new phone, too. The cost of abandonment of apps, AND the uncertainty of having to learn a new ecosystem is also in Apple's favor.

    Mr. Blair is probably correct in suggesting that the old phones will become in-house door stops, kid toys, iPod-replacements, family plan hand-me-downs.
    Mar 16 04:17 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Rough Waters Ahead For Apple In China [View article]
    I'm with you there, netflixlong. Range bound.

    Might have something to do with consistent negative interpretation. Apple drives readership. In blogger-land, it's a sure fire way for modest skills to ride good ones into visibility. As the sole bear in a warming world, Mr. Blair is unique. He's polite, consistently negative, and I hope, soon bankrupt from shorts-gone-bad. Money in the short-term market is made from other people, and we can hope to make some by moving it from his account(s) to ours. In the long market, money is made from the performance of the company. Apple will do what it does regardless of what the armchair quarterback brigades dream. So far, Apple wins.

    Save your reading time for better uses than Mr. Blair. He has 1000 ways of saying the same thing, and seldom varies more than a few degrees from his chosen part, icebergs or not.
    Mar 13 06:34 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • ModernGraham Quarterly Valuation Of Apple [View article]
    I think we understand this.

    What I don't think you appreciate is that there is a PURPOSE behind the number... an implication. If Graham was interested in what the current ratio signifies, he'd be an idiot not to recognize that Apple clears the hurdle. Marketable securities and treasuries (111 billion bux worth of the latter) are not the same as plant, property and equipment (PPE).

    I resist exceptionalism, too, but I see the need for common sense. Again, is Warren Buffet or Bill Gates poor based on what's in their wallet? Surely, you can't make this case and be serious.

    I'm not picking on you, and I do sincerely appreciate your consistency, but in the 40 years or so I have been studying companies, I haven't seen ANY that have broken the molds so convincingly. This one is a tank. Please, and I mean this in all sincerity, please show me another company that did, has done, or may do what Apple has and probably will? I'll settle for one. Past or present. Closest I can come is Ford in the early days. I'd say RCA, but they consistently lost money even though they changed the globe.

    Your examples? Where is a comparable?
    Mar 13 06:24 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • ModernGraham Quarterly Valuation Of Apple [View article]
    current ratio = current assets / current liabilities.

    there is another one called quick ratio... (cash and accts receivable)/current liabilities.

    it's supposed to be a gross indicator how how 'safe' a company is if all of a sudden, its creditors demanded payment. for a hardware store, it's useful. for General Motors, less so. For Apple, not at all, in my opinion. It's like asking if Warren Buffet is rich based on what he has in his checking account or wallet.
    Mar 12 10:11 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • ModernGraham Quarterly Valuation Of Apple [View article]
    If this were 1959 and we were looking at General Motors or General Foods, this approach would be fine, and even now, it's good for an average company. However, you can see one weakness here that is so glaring it demands a response, and that is the conservative current ratio numbers.

    The current ratio fails in a spectacular fashion to assess what is intended here. It is a measure weakness if a company sports a 2:1 or a 1.5:1 ONLY if current assets are a significant percentage of total assets. In Apple's case, this is clearly not applicable. It WAS and IS suitable for companies that have followed the time honored rule of not keeping TOO much of their earnings, usually just a sufficient buffer to the unforseen.

    Apple's ocean of cash has invalidated your FAILs for these two approaches, and to me, at least, means the scores were 5/7 and 5/5. In fact, if you discount the fact that the dividend is increasing (and is likely to again, soon), you might want to score this as 5.5 or 6/7 and 5/5. A lot can happen in a few years, of course, but a 10 year dividend history gets as much weight as other, more critical factors in my opinion. All of these elements are not equal weight. AND, when this method was developed, perhaps there was no equivalent company to Apple to consider?

    Without question, Apple is undervalued by metrics. It's undervalued by multiples. There's not another company that is a good match that you can make a case is a better investment vehicle, again in large part because of the ocean of Apple cash issue.

    Still, it is comforting to see even a conservative approach like this yielding a positive view, too. Thanks for the work and the article.
    Mar 12 09:02 AM | 13 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Rough Waters Ahead For Apple In China [View article]
    Still on my Blair reading diet and as usual, knew it was you from the headline, which is all I read. All I had to read. All any of us has to read.

    Let me guess. Apple is doomed. Headwinds abound. Danger lurks. Fear. Uncertainty. Doubt. Some charts. Questionable and selective analysis. Pessimistic interpretation, regardless of how differently things can be dissected. Sources of modest value.

    Conclusion precedes data collection and composition, right? Is that the method?

    Keep striking that bell. It always sounds exactly the same.
    Mar 11 05:49 AM | 7 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple's iPhone 6 Will Be A Monster [View article]
    Apple needs to get competitive?

    What are we competing for? If it's profit, Apple won.

    A spec here, a spec there? BFD.

    Now... if the Also-ran crowd wanted to get 'competitive', they'd have to figure out how to make a company that was a good as the phones they ship. That's a little harder. Part of that is making stuff that sells, for a profit, not just making stuff. Blackberry makes stuff. Nokia makes stuff. Dell used to make stuff. HP makes stuff. Are any of them remotely close to 'competitive' with Apple?

    I think Apple is doing more than OK with its tech. Argue with that if you want. They seem to be doing OK with their R and D, if you look at a few of their leapfrogging feats. Sure, they might do a little better, but I'm willing to concede "OK". When it comes to the other 75% of an enterprise... the part that supports, produces, markets, etc. the stuff they sell, Apple has NO competition whatsoever. That's why the retention rates are 80% or more. WHen it comes to financial strength, they have no competition, unless you know of any other company out there with 160,000,000,000 in the bank?

    Take a gander at those zeros, friend. Then tell me what Apple needs to do to be competitive again.
    Mar 10 06:39 AM | 15 Likes Like |Link to Comment