Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
  • The New Apple iPad Pro Appears Targeted At Amateurs  [View article]
    Tkx Ashraf for bringing some clarification & correction to MB's usual half true statements.
    Nov 24, 2015. 03:03 PM | 20 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • 25% Allocation To Apple - Too Much Risk?  [View article]
    I agree with you. A good long term portfolio is made of Just a few very good long term performers, some enough good performers, some not so good performers (some investment decisions turn to be not so good) which shall be traded because one must recognize a bad decision.
    Nov 22, 2015. 07:42 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • 25% Allocation To Apple - Too Much Risk?  [View article]
    @SGK. Very interesting. How do you do that? Can we do that from an account outside USA? What is the risk associated with your strategy?
    Thanks for your reply.
    Nov 22, 2015. 07:27 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • 25% Allocation To Apple - Too Much Risk?  [View article]
    To authour.
    Diversifying doesn't mean just devidibg your capital to the number of stocks. One must ponderate this to this risk level of each stock. Your capital allocation to each stock has to obey to following formula: C = c1*r1+c2*r2+c3*r3....
    Where C = total capital, c1,2..= capital allocated to stock 1,2.. & r1,2..= risk facror of stock ,2..
    Each member of this formula shall remain within a 80-120% of any other based on your estimation of each stock. Lets say that each member = to any other. c1*r1=c2*r2=c3*r3... This means thst if the risk associated to a stock is high, the capital associated to this stock must be less in order to have a balanced portfolio. Then you can ponderate this by the 80-120% allocation factor. This 80-120% allocation factor depends on your age, your investment horizon, your investing abilities, your advisors, etc.. For exaple a young person can give a much higher weight to a risky stock because he has more years to live (theoricaly).
    The 80-120% can change to a wider range if the stock is present in your portfolio longer and has accumulated. It is not a good move to sell a good winner for less winners.
    Personnaly, my original allocation follows the rule of c1*r1=c2*r2 within a 80-120% ponderation. Then , the accumulation may bring a position to amuch higher percentage.
    By the way, the total number of stocks depends on your capacity for well analysing each stock. Another rule, higher the portion of a stock better it shall be followed and analysed.
    My portfolio has only 11 stocks. I am investing since 2006 and have gone through the subprime crisis. The accumulation of Apple together with it's low long term risk and higher initial capital allocation makes it almost 60% of my portfolio. My total portfolio has doubled since 2006. I am almost 70 and don't see any reason to leave the stock market.
    One more thing, all my stocks shall pay a dividend. My age rules this.
    Nov 21, 2015. 01:14 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple: iPad Pro Is A Bust  [View article]
    To author. Wow, did advise Apple to bring the touch screen to macbook and Apple didn't. Instead Apple made the ipad pro that you have probably not bought and not tried and yet you claim it is a bust. You just demonstrated how ridiculous you can be.
    Nov 20, 2015. 06:08 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple: Sifting iPhone Sales Data  [View article]
    That is why amateur investors shall first find good stocks giving good returns on the long term depending on their investing horizon and after, hold on at least until their investing horizon date without listening to manipulator analysts. Obviously they must reevaluate their investing criteria and readjust if needed but never panicking or acting emotionally one way or another.
    Apple, as Cramer says, is a buy and hold not a trade for private & amateur investors. I am one of them.

    Bought my first Apple stocks early 2007. Never sold. Went thru the 2007-2009 crisis. Added on my holding early 2009. Added some when Apple pulled bach at 370 late 2011. Didn't sell when the stock plunged late 2012 from 700 to below 400 may 2013 but added some at 410. Never sold a single share and do not intend to sell any. I am not able to time the market. I do not like shorting which is a kind of timing the market.
    My original purchase has gone up 1200%. All my other purchases are 50% and more up. I am enjoying the quarterly dividend which is much higher than a so called none risky investments such as bunds can give me. On the long run there is, with Apple's today's and forecastable future metrics, less risk with Apple stock than many of bund there on the market.

    So the answer to how a private investor (not trader) can take profit out of Apple is TO HOLD.
    Nov 13, 2015. 06:12 AM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple: Sifting iPhone Sales Data  [View article]
    CSestimate is 45-50 M units
    Nov 13, 2015. 05:43 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple: Sifting iPhone Sales Data  [View article]
    Statical datas are like the mini skirts. They show a bit but hide the most essential parts.
    Nov 12, 2015. 07:49 PM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why Investors Should Second-Guess Apple  [View article]
    IMHO, Apple is a buy & hold stock. As a buy & holder one must look at the chart according to one's own standards. If one's investing horizon is X years, then only the X years chart matters. The full chart has to be segmented in X years periods and, if the return is according to or better than one's goal then, the stock is worth buy & holding.
    The Apple chart for the period of 2006 (just before the start of subprime crisis) to today shows an overall gain of 1290% not considering the dividend which comes on top of this. If one's investing horizon is 2 years, Apple has given always a very good return excepted for the 2 years period starting 1/1/2008 (Apple at 28,6 split adjusted) to 31/12/2009 ( Apple at 31,4 split adjusted) where Apple gained only 10%. But one shall have in mind that this period included the biggest crisis ever where Apple plunged (but less than many other stocks) to 12,8 (split adjusted) end February 2009 and took only 10 month to recover all losses and end up with 10% gain. The average 2 years gain for the 10 years period of 2006 to end 2015 Is 1290%/5 = 258% NOT BAD AT ALL. If every investment decision gives me a 129% gain per year I will sign for it with 2 hands.
    The problem of this author and many others is that they write for investors with trader's arguments. They forget the investing horizon factor. Marc Hibben has an investors oriented approach. He is disappointed with the guidance (to me the guidance = 3% growth is much better than what I was expecting for = flat) but calls for holding the stock. His investing horizon is longer than 3 months.
    An investor with a 2 years horizon will never base his decision on the fiscal 2015 performance alone. He will consider the stock's performance of several years before and add it to other type of facts and figures. A modern buy and holder shall not and will not hold a stock for ever without analyzing the underlying facts and the present ability of the company to deliver it's guidances quarter after quarter. One miss doesn't mean anything but a repetition of misses shall worry.
    A company like Tesla is promising since years and have gone past the delivering horizon it fixed. Subsidies which were the driving force behind the stock price are vanishing. Even with those high subsidies they burn money like hell. Without those subsidies the selling price shall be doubled if not more or, they have to sell 10 times more cars. Their approach of electric cars global business is not sustainable. Tesla is not a buy and holders stock. The last 3 years chart is appealing but an investor needs much more past good performances of the stock in order to incorporate a stock in his portfolio and, above all, the underlying fundamentals shall be solid for a buy and hold decision. Tesla is a stock for traders. Traders also have a trading horizon. Some are day trades. Some try to time the market. Some decide on factors like guidances, quarterly results or more or less confirmed news. Some also base their decision on analysts opinions and the criteria such as supply chain orders check or carriers sales data. I don't see any reasonable supply chain or carriers CEO giving them such data. Usually their checks are based on some employee saying something about orders or sales figures. This is not a global view on a stock and certainly not on a stock like Apple where there are a lot of suppliers if the production is an issue or Carriers if the sales is an issue.
    Happy invsting
    Nov 12, 2015. 09:33 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why Investors Should Second-Guess Apple  [View article]
    100% with chardjharris. The author has no opinion and above all no facts or figures to back his non opinion stand. I have followed this author many times when he used to write on The Street during the end 2012 - 2013 Apple sink period where he claimed TC's head for not being capable to lead a company like Apple he proved to be wrong 100%. As always he writes for the sake of writing. He never says directly what he wants to say which usually can be resumed in 2 or 3 sentences.
    Nov 12, 2015. 07:59 AM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple Sales Could Decline This Year: Investors Need To Lower Expectations  [View article]
    @ author,
    Analysis must bs based on fact and figures. Not imaginations or beliefs.
    "2 analysts claimed that, their survey of Apple supply chain or careers indicated Apple orders were cut."

    They just announce such statements and show nothing proving their claims. So no facts nor figures.
    Shall we, as investors, base our action on just "words" from those analysts? Why shall we trust them?
    A third analyst, the actual author of this article, believes (are we in a church?) they are right (based on what ?) and imagines Softer than predicted sales.
    The same analyst forgets that the prediction comes from the guidance given by Apple management which is known to be very conservative and most of the time sand bagging.
    So who shall we trust?
    - The 2 analysts who say have checked some possible Apple supply chain companies (just words) and a third analyst who is basing his arguments on the assumptions of the 2 previous analysts ?
    - or the Apple management who have the exact figures in hand and base their guidance on their real sales figures and have the reputation of constantly being conservative and sand bagging ?

    Each investor has to do his due diligence and base his investment decisions on facts and figures not what such analysts believe or imagine.

    Happy investments.
    Nov 11, 2015. 06:22 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple Is Buying Back Shares Like There's No Tomorrow  [View article]
    On dividend, one shall pay the related tax. On share's price increase due to buy back if one times it well there is no tax.
    Nov 9, 2015. 08:01 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple Is Buying Back Shares Like There's No Tomorrow  [View article]
    Apple can buy it's shares with it's overseas money as long as Apple doesn't offset thoses shares and keeps them on it' balance sheet as any other equity. If Apple can hold bonds or mutual funds or any other equity on it's balance sheet why not Apple's own stock.
    The offshore money earns not more than 2% which is about the same as the dividend.
    The impact of such shares purchase will be almost as good as a buyback:
    A) purchaed shares are no more on the market. The EPS doesn't go up by the effect of share's number declining but, the share's will go up by the the effect of less shares on the market and more demand versus offer.
    B) Apple will not pay any dividend to shares on it's balance sheet (in fact Apple will pay a dividend to itself) and Apple will not issue debt for shares buyback and therefore will not have any debt cost which is over 2% on average.
    C) Apple uses it's offshore money for such share purchase and keeps it's US money for other purposes such as acquisitions, etc...
    D) Apple can sell such purchased shares any time suits them and make a good profit by well timing. Obviously Apple will pay any tax relate to the profit it makes from such operation.
    Nov 9, 2015. 07:53 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple Sold 13 Million iPhones On Launch Weekend - That Should Frighten Investors  [View article]
    @MB. It is time that you understand that comparing Apples and oranges is not valid.
    - at least 90% of android phones are mid or low end items not enterring the comparaison with iphones.
    - those 10% of android phones comparable to iphones hardly make any profit. Only samsung's high end phones are profitable.
    - according to all specialists S6's cpu performance were lower or = to iphone6. 6s is much more performant (according to same specialists).
    Sep 30, 2015. 08:01 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple Sold 13 Million iPhones On Launch Weekend - That Should Frighten Investors  [View article]
    How can one say that Apple failed with iwatch or imusic after only a few month. Weren't the watch sales higher than the original iphone and ipad. Benjamin frost would have then said that the iphone or ipad is a failure. We all know how succesful these idevices were.
    Lets wait and see how the sales will be in one or 2 years. Then one can judge.
    Sep 30, 2015. 07:46 PM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment