Seeking Alpha


Send Message
View TomasViewPoint's Comments BY TICKER:
  • Apple, The Enterprise And Rejection? Not This Time [View article]
    Because Apple has put nothing into it and its not a priority. And it really is a stretch to say Apple is an enterprise play.

    But it creates a little noise for the Apple zombies so they come running.
    Oct 15 08:35 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The iPhone Will Be In Third Place In 2015 [View article]

    Back in the day Merrill Lynch charged $100 per stock trade. Now it is mid single digits. If ML had the mentality that they needed to stay at $100 they would be out of business. They had to change their model and their aspirations.

    Where is Apple going to go if the majority of the population does not fit their model?
    Oct 15 08:29 PM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple, The Enterprise And Rejection? Not This Time [View article]

    You are stretching the definition of enterprise. You are also ignoring enterprises don't want to be in the device business. They don't want to buy them and they don't want to support them. This decoupling of devices from the enterprise has been going on for some time and will only intensify.

    Apps on these devices are pretty light weight so porting them is no big deal.

    Monetizing mobile at FB was not about devices it was about strategy and making it work. And would people even care.
    Oct 15 05:38 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple, The Enterprise And Rejection? Not This Time [View article]

    So if I call Citibank using my Panasonic land line phone am I bringing Panasonic to Citibank's enterprise? That is the logic you are using. I email from my iPhone to my broker does that mean I am bringing my iPhone to his enterprise?

    IT departments are tasked with protecting the data and systems that the company owns and runs on not various devices that may access them. IT departments want to be agnostic about devices and not be forced to prognosticate about the next great device and as much as possible get them out of their support desk area.

    Apple is light years away from being an enterprise company and it would take a cultural change to ever get there just like it did at MSFT.
    Oct 15 03:07 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple, The Enterprise And Rejection? Not This Time [View article]

    MSFT looks at enterprise as their BtoB sales. From an IT support point of view the MSFT server systems and technologies are definitely enterprise as they typically have 99.999% uptime requirements. The PC's are devices that need support but if someone is down there is no great panic (unless it is the CEO of course, LOL).

    MSFT also schedules releases and has QA with enterprise needs in mind around their server solutions. And they have a sales force and consulting services decked against the enterprise.

    Consumer software and devices are shipped by Apple with no thought about impact to the enterprise. That is not an enterprise solution.

    Another litmus test is who do you call when you need support? Is there a help desk for enterprise support?
    Oct 15 02:58 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple, The Enterprise And Rejection? Not This Time [View article]
    Let's define the enterprise first before we get too excited. Devices are not really "the enterprise" and the BYOD move proves it. If they were the enterprise BYOD would not happen. The enterprise is really the technology backbone and data stores that the company runs on. It is often proprietary in whole or part and devices really are only access points to that backbone. Nobody ever thought of PC's as "the enterprise" so why would anyone think mobile devices as "the enterprise?"

    Apple is not an enterprise company by a long shot. IBM is an enterprise company and that's the benchmark. MSFT has become an enterprise company but they run that business separately and have different products for it.

    I could go on but that should be enough.
    Oct 15 12:02 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple's Loser Strategy [View article]

    Not really. You must work for Apple's PR's because you spin everything to make Apple look like a bunch of monks doing God's work.

    Apple is a lousy partner to everyone they work with as their DNA has always been to go it alone and control every aspect of a solution and beat up vendors on price incessantly. That's an approach that a lot of companies use so it does not make Apple any worse or better than any other company but that is who they are not some other fantasy.

    I am not confused. I am talking about valuation of the company and I don't see them moving their numbers substantially. Apple will likely always develop great products so that is not the issue. How they will drive 1.5X to 2.0X revenues is the question. Adding more customers is one way to do it and Jim questions their global strategy in that regards. Revisionist history and creative explanations for Apple's current position are just avoiding the tough questions. Again if Apple had its ducks in a row and everything was so believable they would be at $800 not sub $500.
    Oct 13 01:22 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple's Loser Strategy [View article]
    The Gruber article was decently written but not solid. Comparing Apple to the German car manufacturers misses the major differences between them in history, company ambitions, ownership structure, etc. For example Porsche was family run and owned for decades. Additionally Porsche has partnered with other companies for engineering and product over the decades which Apple is loath to do. These companies are also coming from smaller bases and building into larger middle market bases and are in a market with many good choices. Mercedes is pushing deeper into the middle market and now have a car for less than $30K.

    Apple on the other hand is the largest company in the world based on market cap and they are a huge target. Arguing they have found a niche and are going to grow would make it seem they are small and have plenty of room to grow. That is not the case. And arguing that Apple users and PC users are different people is also not something I have seen demonstrated. My take is that most people operate across both platforms.

    The iPod created the road to success for the iPhone and the growth in Mac sales. The iPod was created for the mass market. Price points are fairly low and it is easy to acquire. So to ignore the mass market now ignores how Apple got to this point. The real issue for Apple is that they are battling the law of large numbers, the global market drives a lot of complexity in product, services, sales and operations and the margins are lower.

    Open wide and swallow hard. That is why Apple's stock is not $800.
    Oct 12 11:31 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • It May Be Apple Harvest Time [View article]

    You are immature, emotional and biased beyond hope. That is the peak of stupidity. And I am not going to educate you.

    See ya!

    Oct 5 03:57 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • It May Be Apple Harvest Time [View article]

    Your comment is full of inaccuracies and bias. Briefly:

    1. Apple has been around since the 70's. Do the math.
    2. Xerox invented GUI and Microsoft gave Apple first shot at the market and then blew them away with the release of Windows.
    3. BB developed the smart phone market
    4. Tablets have been around a very long time.
    5. Moore's law has nothing to do with Apple.
    6. Future computing needs will be to just carry your own hard drive if so chosen and keyboards will not be necessary. Everything will be in the cloud. Screens will be ubiquitous. This is post Apple and everyone else.
    7. The smartphone market is not mature.
    8. Success is consumers having great choice at great prices.
    9. Investment success is knowing what to buy and Buffet does not buy tech because he is not a trader.

    But I am trading the heck out of Apple. You are emotionally involved with Apple.
    Oct 3 10:33 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • It May Be Apple Harvest Time [View article]

    Get a life.
    Oct 2 07:49 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • It May Be Apple Harvest Time [View article]

    I agree that our disagreement is becoming too fine and is starting to circle around what stocks really are tech stocks. The startup companies I have worked for and with all want to be classifed as tech companies because the valuation is higher. I recognize that MS has a services arm as does Oracle and other large tech companies but they will not trade their tech valuation for and IT Services valuation so they talk to it but the describe their companies as being high tech. I always look at their revenues for a sense of what they are selling and if they own any of the IP in the products they are selling. I get your point on Rackspace.

    I downloaded IOS7 and the cartoon like feel of the main page is strange. Maybe it is the pastel colors. I don't get it yet and it is different than the other icons for apps that you add to the device. One thing i do like is that the text messaging is easier to read. I am still getting my arms around it.

    Unless Apple really blows out some cool products I think they are range bound between 400 and 600. I would buy like crazy on the low end of that range and lighten up on the upper range unless new catalysts emerge that could take it higher. It is possible that institutional money could push it higher late this year if the xmas season looks good and they need to boost portfolio returns.

    I would like Ichan to lose his shirt however. He adds no value whatsover.
    Oct 2 07:48 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • It May Be Apple Harvest Time [View article]

    I don't believe Apple is like RIMM or BBRY, you know that company in Canada that is royally screwed up. I don't believe Apple will ever be that far out of reality where they lose track of consumers and what is going on in the tech world. IMO part of BBRY's problem was that they were based so far from the center of gravity of the tech world they did not know what was going on and lived in their own fantasy world. Apple proceeded to eat their lunch and Samsung jumped in for desert and there was nothing left. A stunning failure. It is worth noting however that handset makers come and go historically which is sobering.

    Apple's biggest problem is putting together a follow up act to the last 5 to 6 years. The Rolling Stones opened the show now comes the house band. Insert bands of your own choice.

    Actually Rome is not an analogue to Constantinople but rather Constantinople succeeded Rome as the center of western thought both from the Roman and Greek empires and survived 1000 years, much longer than Rome or Greece. Constantinople and the Byzantine Empire is a very interesting study and is not as well known as it should be. So perhaps the lesson is to always follow the money. What seems permanent never is.
    Oct 2 07:25 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple's Huge Ecosystem Blunder [View article]

    Look for tech companies that have their brightest days ahead of them. Buy about 5 of them as a few will fail and then hang on for the ride. MSFT is so yesterday and has such huge numbers to move in order to get their stock price to move.
    Oct 2 02:13 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple's Huge Ecosystem Blunder [View article]
    Sony sucks.

    Can't make it any simpler.
    Oct 2 02:11 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
More on AAPL by TomasViewPoint