Re: "But this walled garden approach doesn’t work."
Perhaps you meant something else? Like it won't work for long? CLEARLY, it working. It's working better than most anyone thought it might. It is working so well it is THE tech story of the new century.
This walled garden approach doesn’t work? Apple has 42 billion reasons in their vault proving it DOES work.
While I wouldn't say this article was poorly written, I would say the logic presented is very poor which makes the article nearly worthless for experienced investors and probably harmful for newbies trying to make sense out of the market.
techy46, If you "don't know a single boomer that would ever buy an Apple" you MUST know very few boomers. Either that and/or you work and live in Redmond.
Significant downside? Why? I understand there is more competition coming, but when I add the number of upgrades that existing customers will purchase over the coming years to the millions of new customers coming into the market I don't see Apple's numbers decreasing for several years. Their existing markets are expanding and Apple will undoubtedly find new ways (new markets) to sell more products. This company is not done innovating. The digital revolution is still in it's early innings... and most of the world's consumers have yet to purchase their first Apple product. There is a big world out there and a long road ahead for Apple.
While Mr. Rein makes some interesting comments his argument if very flawed. On one hand he makes the case that if Google were to stop operations it would "be as serious as blockading oil" to the country – what he apparently considers an act of war. On the other hand he suggests that Google is simple using this "excuse to get out of China because of business failings there." If that were the case Mr. Rein is also suggesting Google doesn't have the right to make it's own business decisions. He apparently thinks that deciding to pull the plug on a poor investment an act of warfare as well. How that for logic?
In my opinion, after being subjected to a massive, well-coordinated, sophisticated cyber attack Google has come to the conclusion the current state of business conditions is untenable – they are undeniably totally subject to the whims of what is clearly an "adversary". If I were to invite you into my home and then steal what is in your pockets as I smile and invite you to stay longer would you stay? Or, might you act as Google has and say you cannot stay as long as conditions remain the same?
Google is simply acting as any responsible business should. I'd like to believe Mr. Rein's logic has been compromised by his apparent patriotism for China and it's people, but his comment that "Google's move is similar to failed U.S. economic sanctions against Iran, Myanmar, Cuba and North Korea" lead me to consider his thinking is much more adversarial in nature. He seems to have a distinct anti-U.S. bias. Why?
Tim Cook: The (Negative) $250,000,000,000 Man [View article]
1. Wall Street does not and should not run Apple. 2. Cook is not the problem. He has been COO or CEO for mor than a decade. He knows Apple better than anyone. He is widely considered by those on WS and the financial press as one of the very best CEO's on the planet. If given the opportunity WS would likely sign him to a very long term contract. 3. The problem is the concern that Apple's main businesses will remain under continuing margin pressure lowering profitability. That concern has extremely little to do with Mr. Cook's leadership abilities and a lot to do with external pressures. The fact that secrecy is a major part of Apple's "secret sauce" enabling it to become the juggernaut it is is at times a major reason for investors anxiousness. If investors want certainty they should invest in Coke or Proctor and Gamble. 4. Stocks go up and stock go down. Under Steve Jobs' leadership I recall suffering a 50% drop in the stock literally overnight (that incident btw, may well be the one of the main reasons why Jobs had Apple hoard cash and become so secretive). 5. As for that cash management, Mr. Cook works for the Board and the Board makes that decision based on the LONG TERM projections of Senior management. That decision should not be based on what WS thinks Apple should do in the next six months. 5. Steve Jobs started the rejuvenation of Apple with a "Think Different" campaign that was mainly a message for the employees. Part of that idea, as described by Jobs was to think BIG. That message became the culture of Apple. It has proven to be the most successful business on the planet. This past quarter Apple made more profit than any company had EVER made in a single quarter and now before the next quarter is even announced you are calling for Mr. Cook to "demonstrate why the market is wrong" in getting nervous about the business. I find that laughable. The CEO is to run the company in the way that will best make long term gains for shareholders. Six months ago Cook was considered a world class champion in that endeavor. Suddenly he's a schmuck? Give me a break!
The big tech selloff that's occurred over the last few weeks has resulted in valuations for many large-cap names once more falling to historically low levels. Here are some trailing P/Es for prominent large-caps, none of which take into account net cash and investments: Intel (INTC): 10.6. Microsoft (MSFT): 10.3. Apple (AAPL): 13.7. Google (GOOG): 15. Cisco (CSCO): 9. IBM: 13.6. EMC: 14.7. Dell (DELL): 6. H-P (HPQ): 5.1. On the other hand, Facebook (FB) still has a trailing P/E of 64.5. [View news story]
Are the above comments meant for the article on the tech sell off or on the latest airing of Fox and Friends? Strange.
I think you need to look into the market research on likely sales of iPhone and iPad over the next five years. Apple will likely sell 3X the number of units. Microsoft's enterprise market growth is basically stagnant.
It was a long winded explanation, but his point was that he was selling BECAUSE of his emotions. As Rocco said, he's "frustrated". That IS reason enough for a trader to sell. But NOT a reason for anyone else to sell. As he said, "My points have nothing to do with fundamentals or technicals."
Rocco's article is simply a trader displaying to the world his soft underside, his weakness, most every trader's weakness: emotion.
The article is not a sell signal. It's more a therapy session. Take it for what it's worth. A lesson in handling one's emotions.
Apple $400: A Look at Apple's Fundamentals (Part II) [View article]
Re: "it is reasonable to expect a 30% annual growth for the next 10 years."
I suggest you get out your calculator an compound $12 billion (ttm earnings) by 30% growth for 10 years. Do you really believe Apple can earn well over $200 billion in a single year? Nearly 5X what Exxon-Mobil makes? By selling electronics? Not going to happen. Apple may be the best positioned large company on the planet, but they won't come close to that.
Apple's iPhone 4 Black Eye Opportunity: Anything Less Than a Recall Is Unthinkable [View article]
A recall is the last this Apple should do. Absolutely no need for a recall. Recalls are for dangerous products. The phone is not going to hurt anyone and performs perfectly under most conditions. An apology and a $30 rebate to pay for a case is an appropriate solution to the immediate problem with a design change coming soon. Any more than that is unthinkable.
How Apple Keeps Screwing It Up [View article]
Perhaps you meant something else? Like it won't work for long? CLEARLY, it working. It's working better than most anyone thought it might. It is working so well it is THE tech story of the new century.
This walled garden approach doesn’t work? Apple has 42 billion reasons in their vault proving it DOES work.
Apple: Take The Money And Run [View article]
Apple: A Baby-Boomer Stock [View article]
What We'll Do After Apple Announces Blowout Quarter [View article]
Significant downside? Why? I understand there is more competition coming, but when I add the number of upgrades that existing customers will purchase over the coming years to the millions of new customers coming into the market I don't see Apple's numbers decreasing for several years. Their existing markets are expanding and Apple will undoubtedly find new ways (new markets) to sell more products. This company is not done innovating. The digital revolution is still in it's early innings... and most of the world's consumers have yet to purchase their first Apple product. There is a big world out there and a long road ahead for Apple.
Google's Act of War on China [View article]
In my opinion, after being subjected to a massive, well-coordinated, sophisticated cyber attack Google has come to the conclusion the current state of business conditions is untenable – they are undeniably totally subject to the whims of what is clearly an "adversary". If I were to invite you into my home and then steal what is in your pockets as I smile and invite you to stay longer would you stay? Or, might you act as Google has and say you cannot stay as long as conditions remain the same?
Google is simply acting as any responsible business should. I'd like to believe Mr. Rein's logic has been compromised by his apparent patriotism for China and it's people, but his comment that "Google's move is similar to failed U.S. economic sanctions against Iran, Myanmar, Cuba and North Korea" lead me to consider his thinking is much more adversarial in nature. He seems to have a distinct anti-U.S. bias. Why?
Is Apple's Threat Real In The Living Room? [View article]
You may be the first person to express that opinion. Apple's marketing has been considered top notch for decades.
I think you meant "One of Apple's major problems is they don't spend nearly enough on marketing."
Tim Cook: The (Negative) $250,000,000,000 Man [View article]
2. Cook is not the problem. He has been COO or CEO for mor than a decade. He knows Apple better than anyone. He is widely considered by those on WS and the financial press as one of the very best CEO's on the planet. If given the opportunity WS would likely sign him to a very long term contract.
3. The problem is the concern that Apple's main businesses will remain under continuing margin pressure lowering profitability. That concern has extremely little to do with Mr. Cook's leadership abilities and a lot to do with external pressures. The fact that secrecy is a major part of Apple's "secret sauce" enabling it to become the juggernaut it is is at times a major reason for investors anxiousness. If investors want certainty they should invest in Coke or Proctor and Gamble.
4. Stocks go up and stock go down. Under Steve Jobs' leadership I recall suffering a 50% drop in the stock literally overnight (that incident btw, may well be the one of the main reasons why Jobs had Apple hoard cash and become so secretive).
5. As for that cash management, Mr. Cook works for the Board and the Board makes that decision based on the LONG TERM projections of Senior management. That decision should not be based on what WS thinks Apple should do in the next six months.
5. Steve Jobs started the rejuvenation of Apple with a "Think Different" campaign that was mainly a message for the employees. Part of that idea, as described by Jobs was to think BIG. That message became the culture of Apple. It has proven to be the most successful business on the planet. This past quarter Apple made more profit than any company had EVER made in a single quarter and now before the next quarter is even announced you are calling for Mr. Cook to "demonstrate why the market is wrong" in getting nervous about the business. I find that laughable. The CEO is to run the company in the way that will best make long term gains for shareholders. Six months ago Cook was considered a world class champion in that endeavor. Suddenly he's a schmuck? Give me a break!
Investors Don't Understand Apple's Math - A Mistake [View article]
Thanks Bill.
Why Apple's Numbers Tell Us Not To Worry [View article]
The big tech selloff that's occurred over the last few weeks has resulted in valuations for many large-cap names once more falling to historically low levels. Here are some trailing P/Es for prominent large-caps, none of which take into account net cash and investments: Intel (INTC): 10.6. Microsoft (MSFT): 10.3. Apple (AAPL): 13.7. Google (GOOG): 15. Cisco (CSCO): 9. IBM: 13.6. EMC: 14.7. Dell (DELL): 6. H-P (HPQ): 5.1. On the other hand, Facebook (FB) still has a trailing P/E of 64.5. [View news story]
Apple: Now A 'Trading' Stock [View article]
Expect Apple To Surge In Coming Months [View article]
You clearly have WS figured out. You MUST be billionaire by now. If not, you should be soon.
Why I'm Selling Apple [View article]
Rocco's article is simply a trader displaying to the world his soft underside, his weakness, most every trader's weakness: emotion.
The article is not a sell signal. It's more a therapy session. Take it for what it's worth. A lesson in handling one's emotions.
Apple $400: A Look at Apple's Fundamentals (Part II) [View article]
Re: "it is reasonable to expect a 30% annual growth for the next 10 years."
I suggest you get out your calculator an compound $12 billion (ttm earnings) by 30% growth for 10 years. Do you really believe Apple can earn well over $200 billion in a single year? Nearly 5X what Exxon-Mobil makes? By selling electronics? Not going to happen. Apple may be the best positioned large company on the planet, but they won't come close to that.
Apple's iPhone 4 Black Eye Opportunity: Anything Less Than a Recall Is Unthinkable [View article]