Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #38809 > unrolled thread

Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system

Contents

  Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2013-01-23 17:07 -0500
    Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2013-01-23 17:41 -0500
    Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2013-01-23 17:54 -0500
      Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2013-01-23 23:04 -0500
        Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2013-01-23 23:05 -0500
          Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2013-01-23 21:27 -0700
            Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2013-01-24 08:06 -0800
        Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2013-01-24 06:03 +0000
          Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2013-01-24 03:56 -0500
            Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2013-01-24 17:34 +0000
        Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2013-01-24 08:01 -0800
          Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2013-01-24 15:34 -0500
            Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2013-01-24 13:44 -0700
              Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Howard.not@home.com (Howard) - 2013-01-24 23:08 +0000
                Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2013-01-24 19:12 -0600
                  Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Howard.not@home.com (Howard) - 2013-01-25 01:52 +0000
                  Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2013-01-25 04:57 -0500
                    Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2013-01-25 07:38 -0800
                    Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Howard.not@home.com (Howard) - 2013-01-27 18:33 +0000
                      Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2013-01-27 15:45 -0500
                        Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2013-01-28 10:46 -0600
            Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2013-01-24 16:04 -0500
              Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2013-01-24 16:58 -0700
                Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2013-01-24 19:20 -0500
                  Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2013-01-24 19:50 -0500
                  Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2013-01-24 16:52 -0800
                    Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2013-01-25 04:50 -0500
                      Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2013-01-25 15:23 +0000
                        Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2013-01-25 07:39 -0800
                        Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2013-01-25 10:58 -0500
                      Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2013-01-25 07:39 -0800
                      Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2013-01-25 11:05 -0700
                        Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2013-01-25 13:27 -0500
                          Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2013-01-25 12:42 -0700
                            Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2013-01-25 16:56 -0500
                              Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2013-01-25 15:10 -0700
                                Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2013-01-25 20:53 -0500
                                  Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2013-01-25 19:59 -0700
                                    Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2013-01-25 23:43 -0500
                                      Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2013-01-26 05:16 -0500
                                        Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2013-01-26 14:03 -0500
                                          Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2013-01-26 15:08 -0500
                                            Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2013-01-26 16:02 -0500
                                      Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2013-01-26 12:16 -0700
                                        Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2013-01-26 14:44 -0500
                                          Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2013-01-26 13:28 -0700
                                            Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2013-01-26 16:14 -0500
                                    Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2013-01-26 00:29 -0500
                                      Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2013-01-26 05:18 -0500
                                      Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2013-01-26 12:13 -0700
                            Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2013-01-25 18:04 -0500
                              Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2013-01-25 16:42 -0700
                                Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2013-01-25 23:30 -0500
                                  Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2013-01-26 12:24 -0700
                        Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2013-01-25 18:01 -0500
                  Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2013-01-24 16:53 -0800
                    Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2013-01-24 19:18 -0600
                      Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2013-01-25 07:15 -0800
                  Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2013-01-24 19:59 -0500
                    Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2013-01-25 07:26 -0800
                      Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2013-01-25 16:07 -0500
                        Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2013-01-25 13:30 -0800
                          Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2013-01-26 09:13 -0500
                            Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2013-01-26 13:24 -0800
                              Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2013-01-26 16:58 -0500
                                Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2013-01-26 14:10 -0800
                                  Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2013-01-26 17:16 -0500
                                    Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2013-01-26 14:25 -0800
                                      Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2013-01-27 09:27 -0500
                                        Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2013-01-27 09:19 -0800
                                          Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2013-01-28 19:41 -0500
                                            Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2013-01-28 19:17 -0800
                                      Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2013-01-28 09:56 -0600
                                  Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2013-01-28 09:54 -0600
                  Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2013-01-25 02:59 +0000
                    Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2013-01-25 07:42 -0800
            Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2013-01-24 16:03 -0800
            Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2013-01-24 16:09 -0800
    Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2013-01-24 15:42 +0100
    Re: Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results Howard.not@home.com (Howard) - 2013-01-24 23:08 +0000

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

#38809 — Apple Q1 2012 Financial Results

http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2013/01/23Apple-Reports-Record-Results.html


47.8 Million iPhones Sold; 22.9 Million iPads Sold

CUPERTINO, California—January 23, 2013—Apple® today announced financial
results for its 13-week fiscal 2013 first quarter ended December 29,
2012. The Company posted record quarterly revenue of $54.5 billion and
record quarterly net profit of $13.1 billion, or $13.81 per diluted
share. These results compare to revenue of $46.3 billion and net profit
of $13.1 billion, or $13.87 per diluted share, in the 14-week year-ago
quarter. Gross margin was 38.6 percent compared to 44.7 percent in the
year-ago quarter. International sales accounted for 61 percent of the
quarter’s revenue.

Average weekly revenue was $4.2 billion in the quarter compared to $3.3
billion in the year-ago quarter.

The Company sold a record 47.8 million iPhones in the quarter, compared
to 37 million in the year-ago quarter. Apple also sold a record 22.9
million iPads during the quarter, compared to 15.4 million in the
year-ago quarter. The Company sold 4.1 million Macs, compared to 5.2
million in the year-ago quarter. Apple sold 12.7 million iPods in the
quarter, compared to 15.4 million in the year-ago quarter.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#38810

Tim Cook used a somewhat unrelated question to adddress the issue of
speculation about order cuts.

He said that such speculation is often wrong and should never be taken
seriously.

His answer is correct. What is significant is that Cook felt it
important to address this issue early on i the question/answer period
even though it was not asked.

Drop in Mac sales: partly due to cannabilsation from iPad, part because
new iMac was not only late in quarter but also delivery/production
constrained.

iPad mini was also production constrained throughout the quarter as was
iPhone5.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38811

Revenus for FY12: ( millions)

US:	 57,512
Europe:	 36,323
China:	 22,533
Japan:	 10,561
APAC:	 10,741
Retail:	 18,828

Total: 156,508 millions.


So while the USA is the largest single sector ahead of Europe and China,
it represents only 36% of total revenue. (Note that US is really
"Americas" so if you included only USA, the numbers would be lower)



BTW, Tim Cook re-iterates some of Job's argumenst that you should not
fear cannabilisation because if you don't cannibalise yoru own products
with new ones, someone else will. (reference to tablets cannibalising
computers, and iPhone cannibalising ipods)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38827

It appears the analysts won't be happy...

The is the headline in the media such as BBC:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21172259

Apple revenues miss expectations as iPhone sales disappoint


It appears that analysts had bet on 50 million iphones at the Wall
Street Casino Roulette, and apple only sold just over 47.8 million so
prepare for Analysts to beat up the Apple stock.

(Michele, could you run to your nearest Apple store and buy 2.2 million
iphones today so that Apple could meet the casino's bets ? :-)


What is interesting is that Cook and the others emphasised that many of
the devices were production constrained during the period (including
even the iphone4). This means that production did not match demand.

So the low sales are not the result of poor demand but rather production
rampup that didn't meet demand.


The Analysis by Rory Cellan-Jones at the above BBC web site does a good
sizing up of the situation in my opinion.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38829

In article <5100b2b5$0$28424$c3e8da3$aae71a0a@news.astraweb.com>, JF
Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> It appears the analysts won't be happy...

they're clearly not.

the stock is down over 50 in after hours trading, hovering in the 460
neighborhood.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38834

In article <230120132305598301%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> In article <5100b2b5$0$28424$c3e8da3$aae71a0a@news.astraweb.com>, JF
> Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> 
> > It appears the analysts won't be happy...
> 
> they're clearly not.
> 
> the stock is down over 50 in after hours trading, hovering in the 460
> neighborhood.

I think that Tidbits.com summed it up perfectly:

      Apple is the poster child for failing to meet unreasonable 
      expectations; its stock price was down 10 percent (at $460 per 
      share) in after-hours trading following the earnings report. 
      Analysts pull unrealistic numbers out of dark unmentionable regions, 
      or complain that the company¹s profits are growing but not fast 
      enough. At this point we assume that most analysts are competing in 
      their own financial reality show that emphasizes drama over actual 
      reality.

    What¹s encouraging is that Apple, while a public company, doesn¹t 
    chase the stock price as its indicator of success. It also doesn¹t 
    heed analysts¹ unreasonable calls to sacrifice profit at the expense 
    of market share. ³We want to make the best products,² said Cook in an 
    oft-repeated mantra, citing the success of the iPod in the market as a 
    happy consequence, but not a goal.

-- 
Ignore this sig.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38871

In article <michelle-77BA4A.21273223012013@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> In article <230120132305598301%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
>  nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> 
> > In article <5100b2b5$0$28424$c3e8da3$aae71a0a@news.astraweb.com>, JF
> > Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> > 
> > > It appears the analysts won't be happy...
> > 
> > they're clearly not.
> > 
> > the stock is down over 50 in after hours trading, hovering in the 460
> > neighborhood.
> 
> I think that Tidbits.com summed it up perfectly:
> 
>       Apple is the poster child for failing to meet unreasonable 
>       expectations; its stock price was down 10 percent (at $460 per 
>       share) in after-hours trading following the earnings report. 
>       Analysts pull unrealistic numbers out of dark unmentionable regions, 
>       or complain that the companyšs profits are growing but not fast 
>       enough. At this point we assume that most analysts are competing in 
>       their own financial reality show that emphasizes drama over actual 
>       reality.
> 
>     Whatšs encouraging is that Apple, while a public company, doesnšt 
>     chase the stock price as its indicator of success. It also doesnšt 
>     heed analystsš unreasonable calls to sacrifice profit at the expense 
>     of market share. łWe want to make the best products,˛ said Cook in an 
>     oft-repeated mantra, citing the success of the iPod in the market as a 
>     happy consequence, but not a goal.

Couldn't have put it better myself.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38846

In message <5100b2b5$0$28424$c3e8da3$aae71a0a@news.astraweb.com> 
  JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> It appears the analysts won't be happy...

> The is the headline in the media such as BBC:

> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21172259

> Apple revenues miss expectations as iPhone sales disappoint

Highest sales ever. Highest profits ever. Most iphones sold, ever. Most
iPads sold, ever. More money this quarte then they made in all of 2009.

Yeah, 'disappointing'. WHat a bunch of fucking idiots.

> It appears that analysts had bet on 50 million iphones at the Wall
> Street Casino Roulette, and apple only sold just over 47.8 million so
> prepare for Analysts to beat up the Apple stock.

Already happened. Down 10% in after-hours trading.

-- 
"If it's a hobby to us and a job to you, why are you doing such a shoddy
job?" - Linus Torvalds to Microsoft

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38858

In article <slrnkg1jku.1fj6.g.kreme@mbp55.local>,
 Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> In message <5100b2b5$0$28424$c3e8da3$aae71a0a@news.astraweb.com> 
>   JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> > It appears the analysts won't be happy...
> 
> > The is the headline in the media such as BBC:
> 
> > http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21172259
> 
> > Apple revenues miss expectations as iPhone sales disappoint
> 
> Highest sales ever. Highest profits ever. Most iphones sold, ever. Most
> iPads sold, ever. More money this quarte then they made in all of 2009.
> 
> Yeah, 'disappointing'. WHat a bunch of fucking idiots.

Everything is relative. If a company predicts that they're going to grow 
20%, but they only grow 10%, it's a disappointment, even though 10% 
growth is good.  The stock price prior to the announcement was based on 
the expectation of 20% growth.

Of course, pricing a stock based on expectations rather than results is 
counting your chickens before they're hatched. But that's the whole 
point of the stock market game -- it's all about making bets on future 
earnings, and cashing in when the earnings come in.  The only reason why 
stock sales are possible is because different investors have different 
expectations (you sell when you think a company's prospects are poor, 
someone else buys it from you because he thinks the prospects are good). 
If everyone invested just based on past results rather than future 
expectations, we'd all have the same opinion and there would be much 
less trade.

-- 
Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38876

In message <barmar-6452A4.03560524012013@news.eternal-september.org>
  Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> In article <slrnkg1jku.1fj6.g.kreme@mbp55.local>,
>  Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

>> In message <5100b2b5$0$28424$c3e8da3$aae71a0a@news.astraweb.com>
>>   JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
>> > It appears the analysts won't be happy...
>>
>> > The is the headline in the media such as BBC:
>>
>> > http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21172259
>>
>> > Apple revenues miss expectations as iPhone sales disappoint
>>
>> Highest sales ever. Highest profits ever. Most iphones sold, ever. Most
>> iPads sold, ever. More money this quarte then they made in all of 2009.
>>
>> Yeah, 'disappointing'. WHat a bunch of fucking idiots.

> Everything is relative. If a company predicts that they're going to grow
> 20%, but they only grow 10%, it's a disappointment, even though 10%
> growth is good.  The stock price prior to the announcement was based on
> the expectation of 20% growth.

The expectation of the anal-cysts on Wallstreet. Apple met its own
guidance.

--
Do Alaska and Hawaii have Interstate Highways?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38870

In article <5100b2b5$0$28424$c3e8da3$aae71a0a@news.astraweb.com>,
 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> It appears the analysts won't be happy...
> 
> The is the headline in the media such as BBC:
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21172259
> 
> Apple revenues miss expectations as iPhone sales disappoint
> 
> 
> It appears that analysts had bet on 50 million iphones at the Wall
> Street Casino Roulette, and apple only sold just over 47.8 million so
> prepare for Analysts to beat up the Apple stock.
> 
> (Michele, could you run to your nearest Apple store and buy 2.2 million
> iphones today so that Apple could meet the casino's bets ? :-)
> 
> 
> What is interesting is that Cook and the others emphasised that many of
> the devices were production constrained during the period (including
> even the iphone4). This means that production did not match demand.
> 
> So the low sales are not the result of poor demand but rather production
> rampup that didn't meet demand.
> 
> 
> The Analysis by Rory Cellan-Jones at the above BBC web site does a good
> sizing up of the situation in my opinion.

Meanwhile, long investors pointed at the crybaby "analysts" and giggled.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38886

On 13-01-24 11:01, Jolly Roger wrote:

> Meanwhile, long investors pointed at the crybaby "analysts" and giggled.

Dropping $60 in half a day is no reason to giggle.

What YOU think of Apple's future doesn't matter if other investors are
fleeing the stock because they have decided it is overpriced and Apple
has lost its edge.

It doesn't matter that you are right and they are wrong. Stock market
doesn't reflect your opinion, even if it may be factually correct, it
reflects market sentiment.

And right now, market sentiment has decided Apple is no longer a good
investment.  And there is nothing Apple can do to impress the Wall
Street Casino Analysts if they continue to place their bets on random
goals that Apple can't achieve so every quarter Apple will "disapoint"
despite showing continued growth.

If WSCAs place their bets on iPhone sales but Apple doesn't provide any
guidance on iPhone sales, then  these bets are random/unedcated and
Apple has no control over what the analysts will speculate.  Had Apple
provided guindance that they expected 45 million iPhones sold, then
WSCAs wouldn't have speculated and bet on 50 million and when Apple
reached 47.8 million, aalysts would have cheered and propelled AAPL upwards.

So the speculation from Wall Street Casino Analysts is hurting Apple
investors, and Apple's refusal to provide guidance on the metric by
which those WSCAs measure Apple (iPhone sales) hurts Apple investors
because Apple will never meet those random overly exhuberant speculative
targets.


On the bright side, Apple's "poor performance" (by unachievable
standards set by WSCAs) may keep speculative investors away for good,
leaving only longer term ones, at which point AAPL will no longer
fluctuate so much.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38887

In article <51019ac0$0$21003$c3e8da3$1cbc7475@news.astraweb.com>,
 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> What YOU think of Apple's future doesn't matter if other investors are 
> fleeing the stock because they have decided it is overpriced and Apple 
> has lost its edge.

And in the meantime Apple will continue to make great products, and rake in 
the money.

-- 
Ignore this sig.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38905

Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> In article <51019ac0$0$21003$c3e8da3$1cbc7475@news.astraweb.com>,
>  JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> 
> > What YOU think of Apple's future doesn't matter if other investors are
> > fleeing the stock because they have decided it is overpriced and Apple
> > has lost its edge.
> 
> And in the meantime Apple will continue to make great products, and rake in
> the money.

Ezacty. What these analysts and fellow stock people here fail to grasp
is that Apple doesn't give a fuck about the Stock value drop. Cook will
give it about 1 minute's thought and then get on with another record
breaking year.
The drop only matters to anslysts, and short term shareholders who are
playing their stocks game and not real investors ... and the Media.

Howard

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38925

On 1/24/13 5:08 PM, in article 1kx85ii.1q79zj5mx0uv4N%Howard.not@home.com,
"Howard" <Howard.not@home.com> wrote:

> Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
> 
>> In article <51019ac0$0$21003$c3e8da3$1cbc7475@news.astraweb.com>,
>>  JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
>> 
>>> What YOU think of Apple's future doesn't matter if other investors are
>>> fleeing the stock because they have decided it is overpriced and Apple
>>> has lost its edge.
>> 
>> And in the meantime Apple will continue to make great products, and rake in
>> the money.
> 
> Ezacty. What these analysts and fellow stock people here fail to grasp
> is that Apple doesn't give a fuck about the Stock value drop. Cook will
> give it about 1 minute's thought and then get on with another record
> breaking year.
> The drop only matters to anslysts, and short term shareholders who are
> playing their stocks game and not real investors ... and the Media.
> 
> Howard

SCREW the Media and the ANALists. INVSTORS are not sheep playing Day Trade.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38929

George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On 1/24/13 5:08 PM, in article 1kx85ii.1q79zj5mx0uv4N%Howard.not@home.com,
> "Howard" <Howard.not@home.com> wrote:
> 
> > Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
> > 
> >> In article <51019ac0$0$21003$c3e8da3$1cbc7475@news.astraweb.com>,
> >>  JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> >> 
> >>> What YOU think of Apple's future doesn't matter if other investors are
> >>> fleeing the stock because they have decided it is overpriced and Apple
> >>> has lost its edge.
> >> 
> >> And in the meantime Apple will continue to make great products, and rake in
> >> the money.
> > 
> > Ezacty. What these analysts and fellow stock people here fail to grasp
> > is that Apple doesn't give a fuck about the Stock value drop. Cook will
> > give it about 1 minute's thought and then get on with another record
> > breaking year.
> > The drop only matters to anslysts, and short term shareholders who are
> > playing their stocks game and not real investors ... and the Media.
> > 
> > Howard
> 
> SCREW the Media and the ANALists. INVSTORS are not sheep playing Day Trade.

The ones selling are. Oh yes.

H

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38937

On 13-01-24 20:12, George Kerby wrote:

> 
> SCREW the Media and the ANALists. INVSTORS are not sheep playing Day Trade.
> 

At the end of the day, even if Apple makes a qazillion dollars of
profits in a quarter and sells 2 billion iphones, if the WSCAs are not
happy and drive the share price down, the value of YOUR investment goes
down with the WSCAs recommedations,

So even if YOU are happy with the way Apple is managing itself and the
profits it makes, this will not change the market senstiment/trends set
by the WSCAs.


Since the WSCAs have more influence on the value of your AAPL shares
than Apple's profit statements, you cannot ignore what the WSCAs say.

It doesn't mean you have to believe what they are saying. But because
they weild so much inflience with their opinions, their opnions, no
matter how erroneaous they may be, matter a lot to the value of your
investment.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38944

In article <5102571e$0$1236$c3e8da3$fdf4f6af@news.astraweb.com>,
 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> On 13-01-24 20:12, George Kerby wrote:
> 
> > 
> > SCREW the Media and the ANALists. INVSTORS are not sheep playing Day Trade.
> > 
> 
> At the end of the day, even if Apple makes a qazillion dollars of
> profits in a quarter and sells 2 billion iphones, if the WSCAs are not
> happy and drive the share price down, the value of YOUR investment goes
> down with the WSCAs recommedations,

The value of the *stock* goes down. My investment in Apple, the company, 
is still as strong today as it was a year ago, because Apple, the 
company, is stronger today than it was a year ago. I don't expect 
short-sighted people to see or respect this distinction though.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39048

JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

>  the value of YOUR investment goes
> down with the WSCAs recommedations,

The stock 'value' today is only relevant if you want to sell today.
Otherwise it is irrelevant.

Howard

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39056

Apple has lost the title of the world's most valuable compay.
Exxon-Mobil back on top.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21205692



In it is a perfect example of the incluence of the Wall Street Casino on
the media:

##
Apple, which posted disappointing iPhone sales figures on Wednesday, has
seen its shares fall 37% since their record high last September.
##

What the media should be saying instead is

"despite record iPhone sales, the stock was battered because some
analysts realised their predictions had been wrong".


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-21194396
In another BBC article which compare Samsung to Apple to Nokia, there is
a more positive spin, with a note that while Samsung gets all the prise
estimates are that only only sold 40 million Galaxy S phones while Apple
sold 47.8 million.

Of note: Mobile phones now account for half of Samsung's profits. So
Apple is no longer the only one whose smart phones are profitable.



In contrast, Nokia Lumia sold 4.4 million phones. But at a cost...
average price was  for Lumias was $250 while iPhones sold for average
$641. Not much room for profit there.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system

csiph-web