Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
  • At Apple, There's No Need For Tim Cook To Be Revolutionary  [View article]
    @dezee - Once upon a time, I was a closed-minded Microsoft devotee like you. But when it came time for my daughter to go off to college and I envisioned periodically spending time on the phone with her to sort out her latest problem with a Microsoft laptop, I opted for an iBook, the first Apple computer I ever bought because they claimed in TV ads that it "just works". Said daughter never once had a problem with her iBook during her 4 years of college and graduated to a Macbook Pro, which she now uses, post-PhD. Because of what I saw with her and her Mac, I switched to a Mac about 10 years ago and... I've never looked back.

    If you don't like Apple, that's fine, but you don't have to be so sour grapes about it.
    Sep 19, 2014. 03:14 PM | 11 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Investors Can't Believe The Apple Hype  [View article]
    Welcome back Rocco. My favorite articles on any stock are neither the Crameresque raging bulls nor the Michael Blaire-esque ones, but the ones which labor to be thoughtful. Good labor on your part.

    Regarding Starbucks pay-with-your-phone app, none in my family have ever used it because we don't like the extra drop/fumble risk of handing our phones to someone.

    But the Apple pay with NFC is appealing.

    Regarding the Apple Watch, since it is related with its ability to do Apple Pay ... at first, I would have answered any survey regarding it by saying I'd never buy one. But then I saw a video of the portion relating to it, from the recent Apple Event and also read the recent Time Magazine article about the Apple Watch and now I fully intend to get one and others in my family may also because it far exceeds what our expectations had been for Apple's foray into the smartwatch realm.
    Sep 17, 2014. 02:06 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple And Conspicuous Consumption: So What?  [View article]
    Michael Blair more resembles an idiot at best, an outright liar at worst than a stock analyst. Whenever I see one of his articles announced in my email, I've taken to deleting the email and not wasting a nanosecond on the article.

    I've been using personal computers since they were first introduced as the Altair (the very first personal computer for the masses) and others. I became a devotee of the Microsoft OS (operating system) until MS introduced XP which would have forced me to buy yet another hardware system and trash the former computer.

    I switched to Apple OS around the time that Apple introduced their hardware which utilized Intel CPUs.

    The reason I became an Apple computer devotee and never again looked back to Microsoft OS computers was nothing to do with the ridiculous Veblen notion witch Blair wrote about. I switched to Apple computers because of what I witnessed with my two youngest daughters.

    Before those daughters left home and went off to college, they each had a Microsoft-based personal computer and I was their "IT" guy who would fix their all-too-frequent computer hang-ups.

    As a high school graduation gift for each of them, I gave them laptops to use in college. The laptops I gave them were the first Apple computers I'd ever bought, iBooks.

    They literally "just worked," like the Apple ads on television at the time claimed they would. Never even ONCE during either of their years in college did either of them have a problem with their Apple computers. Their friends in the dorms who used Microsoft-based computers had plenty of problems, but my daughters' Apple computers "just worked" and did the work asked of them.

    I was totally amazed and as a result I switched from a "PC" to a Mac and never looked back.

    Michael Blair only writes for the $500 per article and he writes negative instead of positive articles about Apple simply because such articles get even more clicks and therefore more money from clicks than do the articles with neutral or positive titles. For Blair, its all about the money he gets and nothing to do with the foundational truth of Apple products compared to others. It's sad, that he has sold his soul for filthy lucre.

    Pay no attention to Blair.
    Sep 16, 2014. 09:30 PM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple Pay - Taking A Bite Out Of Payments  [View article]
    Place your stop-loss order at $142.
    Sep 11, 2014. 11:05 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Update: Apple's Watch Launch Event Remained A Bit Disappointing  [View article]
    The reason I won't be buying an Apple watch is because it has pathetic battery life, needing to be re-charged nightly and therefore it would not function as a sleep-tracking device.

    Sleep tracking is the main function I was looking forward to with the Apple watch and any of its other feature would be perhaps useful but not anything special to get a watch for.

    Since the Apple watch won't do the job of sleep tracking, I'll continue to use the Jawbone UP wristband for sleep-tracking.
    Sep 10, 2014. 04:32 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple Is A Luxury Brand And That Is The Problem  [View article]
    The author's logic for selling is weak at best.

    As for the Apple watch, I won't be buying one because it lacks the one function I had assumed it would have, which is a function to track sleep.

    The Apple watch is also crippled by short battery life which prevents it from being a sleep tracking device during the night. It's battery must be charged nightly, which is totally pathetic compared to my expectations for the Apple watch before it was revealed.

    What I had expected was that the Apple watch battery life would vastly exceed battery life of any other smart watch and that it's battery would be capable of being charged with a charger but that it would normally not need any such charging because it would be constantly supplemented via a solar cell and an internal device which would convert kinetic energy into electricity for the battery. But sadly it has no such clever features to avoid needing a nightly battery charge.

    I currently use a Jawbone UP wristband for the purpose of tracking sleep. Tracking sleep is the only use I have for that wristband and so it remains on the night table by the bed all the rest of the time and "nags" me every day because it doesn't get enough steps to track during my awake time.

    I was looking forward to retiring the Jawbone UP wristband and not using it at all, in favor of an Apple watch which would track sleep at night and have the added bonus of other features during the rest of the time.

    But I really only want a sleep tracking device and don't need those other smartwatch features and don't need a watch for the sake of knowing what time it is ... a smartphone works well as a time reference.
    Sep 10, 2014. 04:26 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple Watch Is Finally Here  [View article]
    I had planned to buy an Apple watch before they were revealed, but will not buy one because the one feature I wanted was sleep tracking, which the watch lacks.

    Even if an app was written for the watch to track sleep, it would not work because the watch must be charged nightly.

    Sadly -battery life is far too short.

    What I had expected was a watch whose battery would perhaps need charging once every month or few at the most and which would in the meantime, between charges, have its battery life extended by charging from two built-in sources (solar cell and conversion of movement energy to electricity).

    I use the Jawbone UP band to track sleep and since I don't have any use for any of the other functions of the UP band, I only wear it when sleeping. It is a minor nuisance that it constantly "nags" me to tell me I'm not walking very many steps, since it spends most of the time laying on the bedside table.

    As for wearing a watch - I stopped doing that years ago but would try wearing one again if it would also function as a sleep tracker device.
    Sep 10, 2014. 04:10 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Union Pacific Corporation - An Investment To Look Forward To  [View article]
    My first thought was, how worthwhile can an article be, when the author didn't even get the Company's name right? Union Pacific Railroad began in 1862 and has been UNION (not "United") Pacific RR for over 150 years.
    Jul 17, 2014. 11:00 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Wall Street 'Bloodbath' Captured On Live TV  [View article]
    Dear Lou (Author ),

    Perhaps the company you work for prohibits you from owning or shorting any stocks you analyze. But if you are not forbidden to do so, I think your analysis would be enhanced and you would have an additional advantage over those with whom you debate on live TV, if you'd just buy one single share of the stocks on which you are publicly, published as bullish and sell short one single share of any stock on which you are publicly, published as bearish.

    Either way (whether you invest a little of your own money or not), thanks for the article and keep up the good work.
    Mar 27, 2014. 01:24 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Allied Nevada Gold Corp misses on revenue  [View news story]
    The press release for ANV which is linked to at the end of the article doesn't say anything about a negative EPS. It states that the (adjusted) EPS was $0.17 per share. It also mentions that the net income from "selling record gold and silver ounces" was $0.01 per share. Both positive numbers. It seems that for some reason someone added the two different numbers, .17 and .01 to arrive at .18 and then changed the sign of the result from positive to negative, in the "breaking news" flash. It will be sorted out tomorrow.

    The press release about the earnings report sounds very good.
    Feb 25, 2014. 01:08 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple Would-Be Shorts: Bide Your Time, Apple's Run Will Be Over Soon Enough  [View article]
    You are obviously a bull on your own religion. Atheism has been defined as a religion by high court rulings. With regard to different religions, each person must decide for himself or herself what is bull and what is not.

    Seeking Alpha is not a forum for discussing religious beliefs, even the beliefs of an ardent fanboy of atheism.
    Nov 28, 2013. 03:25 PM | 7 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple Would-Be Shorts: Bide Your Time, Apple's Run Will Be Over Soon Enough  [View article]
    Michael started out by saying that he might initiate a short within the next 72 hours. I was really, really looking forward to seeing how that worked out for him.

    With other stocks such as GOOG and LINKD rocketing above $1,000 while they have rarified atmosphere PE ratios and no dividends, its only a matter of time before AAPL makes its own launch toward the $1,000 per share club.

    But by the end of the article, he had already backed off (without commenting on that fact that he would no longer initiate a short position in the next 72 hours) and stated that he might initiate a short position "in January," after the quarterly report is released.

    Ho hum... so there's really nothing of any immediate relevance in this article, but he managed to use bear-bait-and-switch with the article title, to attract plenty of readers.
    Nov 28, 2013. 03:13 PM | 24 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Nuverra Environmental Q2 results miss expectations  [View news story]
    Sell NES and buy TSLA!
    Aug 8, 2013. 11:13 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Facebook: Analysts Get Bullish  [View article]
    With 2.4 billion shares outstanding, Facebook is currently allegedly "worth" over 6 trillion dollars. That is one heck of a pricey bubble.

    I value Facebook at about one billion dollars, or approximately $0.42 per share.

    42 (cents) is the answer to the ultimate question of how much is a share of FB worth.
    Jul 18, 2013. 03:48 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • 5 Reasons Facebook Is Finally A Buy  [View article]
    Facebook has 2.4 BILLION shares outstanding. That is 240,000,000 shares. Multiply 240,000,000 times current bubble-ific price of over $26 per share and you get a total worth for Facebook of 240,000,000 x $26 which equals a number TOO HUGE for my hand calculator to display, so it displays instead, "6.24e+9" which is its way of saying $6.24 times 10 to the ninth power.

    Using a calculator with a larger display, that value comes out to be $6,240,000,000. You gotta be kidding? Seriously, you gotta be kidding.

    No way is Facebook worth over SIX TRILLION DOLLARS, or even one trillion dollars.

    I doubt that it is even worth a billion dollars, in actual, matter-of-factual value.

    Facebook is the Greece, Ireland, Iceland of websites (before the true value of the bubbles in Greece, Ireland and Iceland were revealed).
    Jul 18, 2013. 03:37 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment