Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

Apple Stock Plummet


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

#1 of 27 mattCR

mattCR

    Advanced Member

  • 9,829 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 05 2005
  • Real Name:Matt
  • LocationOverland Park, KS

Posted January 24 2013 - 07:20 AM

http://www.foxbusine...tarp-rejection/


Apple Stock is currently at this moment down about 11%.. it lost double-digit percentages in a day since 2008.   Sam, time to buy, or was the quarterly report, which wasn't as positive as some wanted, going to be a lingering factor.


(BTW, no big concern, their cash reserves are still over $100B+)


trakt.tv

Ask Me about HTPC! (Threads in HTPC / PMs always responded to)

This signature is povided by MediaBrowser 3 Trakt Plugin: Media Browser 3


#2 of 27 andrew markworthy

andrew markworthy

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 4,753 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 30 1999

Posted January 24 2013 - 08:17 AM

I think there are two things going on here. First, the market is having one of its little moments of readjustment. The investment experts (most of whom it should be remembered, are no more accurate than a cat choosing shares at random, as was proved last year) have decided a stock is overvalued and so they are making a fuss about it. Read the book, seen the film, bought the T shirt. This happens to big name stocks every once in a while. The second reason is that we're finally reached saturation point with Apple. The day was bound to come when most people who are ever going to be able to afford Apple products will have bought their iPhone, iPad or whatever. The only way Apple can surge forward again is by finding a new niche. But what will that be? Tinkering with the iPhone is unlikely to win all that many more converts. At the end of the day it's a freakin' phone with a few gizmos attached. Once you get past the tiny proportion of the population who actually live for this sort of thing, most of us mere mortals couldn't care less about retina displays, dual core processors or anything else that Apple and the computer press delude themselves that everyone is interested in. I would bet that a good 90 per cent of iPhones are bought because they are a fashion statement, and they came at what the consumers conned themselves was a good price with a phone rental package. Apple computers are still the most reliable and user-friendly, but this is a diminishing market. For most people, who basically play at computing, a tablet is more than sufficient. So revolutionising desktops is unlikely to win converts. The laptops have now got a good hold on university campuses , and that market is, I would guess, likely to stay buoyant. But how much more can you do with a computer that by definition has to have a compact and relatively constricted keyboard and a small display? iPads are great, but Apple are in danger of dropping the ball on this one. Every iPad user I have spoken to wants two things - a USB socket and easy ability to use the iPad more freely for data storage, and second, larger memory (64GB is not enough, full stop). So what does Apple do? It does its damndest to stop you being able to transfer anything from your computer unless it's via iTunes, and instead thinks a faster processor is the thing to go with (and this extra speed is needed for what, exactly?). I don't know what the answer is to Apple's woes, but the one thing I don't think it's in is the much-speculated upon TV monitor. Joe Six Pack is not that interested in yet greater detail in the TV screen. We might be on this forum, but we are not representative of the general population. Look at the slug-like take up of blu-ray and 3D as proof. I think we're in for interesting times with Apple. I should add to this that I have two iMacs, a MacBook Pro (ditto both my kids) and an iPhone and an iPad (plus numerous iPods for the gym, etc). So I'm not a Mac hater.

#3 of 27 Sam Posten

Sam Posten

    Nutter

  • 14,808 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 30 1997
  • Real Name:Sam Posten
  • LocationAberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ

Posted January 24 2013 - 09:16 AM

Not sure if you were asking me or if that was a typo. Either way, you would go broke taking my investment advice. I think that Apple's stock price is entirely irrational, juggled by Agents Provacateur, and boring compared to their products and philosophy. We have been discussing it in depth in this thread: http://www.hometheat...r-in-his-grave/ WRT to Tim and Apple's next moves:

He introduced the iPad Mini which multiple reviewers are calling the best tablet on the market despite not having a retina screen. Under his watch 80% of Apple's products were refreshed in a 3 month period. You know when the last time that happened? Right before iPhone was introduced so they could focus on that. They've introduced and expanded the capabilities of Siri. Siri is expected to open to 3rd parties sooner rather than later. They've entered the Maps market, perhaps with some difficulty but it gives them a foothold to radically expand what 3rd parties can natively do with that tech in their own maps using OS level vector maps speed. They've clearly got something cooking with TV. Anything less than a smash hit on that will be considered a flop, be ridiculed and then if history is a guide, will be iterated on until it's almost impossible to remember before it existed =p They've got something big lined up for Pro markets to be unveiled soon with the Mac Pro, and expected 2 year cycle updates to Logic, Aperture and other creation apps. China. China. China. To be continued with more in tech-growth nations.

Additionally: iPhones now account for 85% of all AT&T smartphones and something similar was posted for Verizon last week. (edit: 6.2 of 9.2 million this quarter) They are the most profitable company in history They have ingrained the philosophy of disruption into the company's DNA and that will not change despite the loss of Jobs (to be proved later) And none of that matters to the stock price. So I choose to not care.

"Sam, you are the biggest nutter we have here."

Blog: Navesink.net - My Flickr Stream - Dolby Atmos Discussion Thread - Updates at Twitter - Join the HTF Flickr Pool


#4 of 27 Edwin-S

Edwin-S

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 5,459 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 20 2000

Posted January 24 2013 - 07:06 PM

All the "investors" who bought this at 700 dollars a share are caring right about now, since it is sitting right now at what? 450 dollars or so. Wish I was the gambling type and would have had the guts to short it. I'd have nice payout right now.
"You bring a horse for me?" "Looks like......looks like we're shy of one horse." "No.......You brought two too many."

#5 of 27 RobertR

RobertR

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 9,318 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 19 1998

Posted January 25 2013 - 12:24 AM

I know a guy at work who bought it at 14, so he's still ok. :)

#6 of 27 Steve_Tk

Steve_Tk

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 2,833 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 30 2002

Posted January 25 2013 - 02:34 AM

They only made 13.1 Billion. We should all sell. The reality is there are only so many people that can own current Apple products. Current refreshes might not make people go rebuy a product they just bought 8 months ago. This a problem all tech companies face. Not really a problem when you make 13.1 billion in a quarter though. Apple has stiff, good competition now. Apple still releases amazing products. Stock was probably overpriced.

#7 of 27 Michael_K_Sr

Michael_K_Sr

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 1,328 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 14 2005
  • Real Name:MichaelK
  • LocationChicago 'burbs

Posted January 25 2013 - 02:41 AM

Yeah...a guy I work with has been buying since 2000 when it was at 6. I'm not even sure why he still works with us. :P

#8 of 27 DaveF

DaveF

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 12,521 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 04 2001
  • Real Name:David Fischer
  • LocationOne Loudoun, Ashburn, VA

Posted January 26 2013 - 05:19 AM

The reality is there are only so many people that can own current Apple products. Current refreshes might not make people go rebuy a product they just bought 8 months ago. ... Stock was probably overpriced.

??? Toyota is priced at $96/ share with a PE of 16. It's priced higher that apple was before this "correction". It's 50% higher with Apple below a PE of 10. Is the argument also made that everyone who's bought a car, has bought car. That refreshes are only once every 5 years, and too modest to replace a car they bought a a year or two ago? Has there been a been similar pullback on all products with a "saturated" market? This might make sense if Apple had been at $1400/share a month. If it were priced like a tech fantasy, like an Amazon, a big pullback could make sense. But it was priced modestly.

#9 of 27 Ted Todorov

Ted Todorov

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 2,858 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 17 2000

Posted January 26 2013 - 05:03 PM

Originally Posted by andrew markworthy 

The second reason is that we're finally reached saturation point with Apple. The day was bound to come when most people who are ever going to be able to afford Apple products will have bought their iPhone, iPad or whatever. The only way Apple can surge forward again is by finding a new niche. But what will that be?
....

I don't know what the answer is to Apple's woes, but the one thing I don't think it's in is the much-speculated upon TV monitor. Joe Six Pack is not that interested in yet greater detail in the TV screen. We might be on this forum, but we are not representative of the general population. Look at the slug-like take up of blu-ray and 3D as proof

67% Y/Y growth in China, with the iPhone still not being on China Mobile with its 600 million (!!!) subscribers and having all of 11 Apple Stores in "greater China" says your first point is wrong.  Apple still has no presence in the billion plus populated India, etc. etc.  Sky is the limit.


Secondly, an Apple HDTV (aka iTV) will be about simplicity, great UI, iOS app support and content -- not 3D or 4K resolution.  The only reason it hasn't happened yet is because content providers -- the studios/networks -- are refusing to offer their content  a la carte or for streaming.  I think Apple is waiting to line up enough content deals before they release the content.  But if Apple does release an HDTV, I'm betting it will be a huge success -- anyone whose dealt with the setup menus and the plethora of modes and inputs (and garish picture) of most modern HDTVs will be the highly willing target audience.



Quote:
The reality is there are only so many people that can own current Apple products. Current refreshes might not make people go rebuy a product they just bought 8 months ago.
See my comments above. Even in the US, Apple is still scratching the surface, with Microsoft having a 90% share in business/government.  The iPad is poised to make huge inroads in this area, aided immeasurably by Vista 2, aka Windows 8.  Note also how Apple's market share continues to grow on AT&T and Verizon, and they are about to officially hit T-Mobile for the first time this year, leaving no major carriers without the iPhone.

I believe the current AAPL price is an aberration, driven by hedge funds that will eventually jump back in and ride the AAPL rocket back into the stratosphere -- they are just driving it as low as possible first, so the ride back up will be all the more profitable.  The sub 8 P/E for a company vastly outgrowing its competitors in profit is unsustainable -- if it continues for a couple of more years, Apple will have enough cash on hand to go private. (Amazon, after what 15 years in business, is losing money and has a P/E of almost 4000)

Hold on tightly, let go lightly.
My Twitter page

#10 of 27 Edwin-S

Edwin-S

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 5,459 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 20 2000

Posted January 26 2013 - 05:38 PM

I just bought my first APPLE product in years: an IPOD Shuffle. If you have invested in APPLE, your investment is safe. APPLE stock should be back up to 700 dollars a share shortly. :laugh:
"You bring a horse for me?" "Looks like......looks like we're shy of one horse." "No.......You brought two too many."

#11 of 27 Sam Posten

Sam Posten

    Nutter

  • 14,808 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 30 1997
  • Real Name:Sam Posten
  • LocationAberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ

Posted January 29 2013 - 02:40 AM

Listen, normally I wouldn't link to BI, but when the worlds biggest idiot Apple Bear starts telling you the stock is now too cheap, you know there is a problem: http://www.businessi...ks-cheap-2013-1 These guys are going for page views, drama, and confusion. Reality isn't even a consideration. Obviously I agree with him here, this time. But that's besides the point. The little guy doesn't have a chance when media and big money are colluding to create churn. Think I'm crazy? Blodgett was kicked off the exchange for doing it in the past.

In 2002, Mr. Blodget—then an analyst at Merrill Lynch—was accused by regulators of publicly issuing positive ratings on stocks of the firm's investment-banking clients while privately deriding them in email messages. He was permanently barred from the securities industry in 2003 and paid $4 million to settle regulators' charges against him.

http://online.wsj.co...0608254796.html

"Sam, you are the biggest nutter we have here."

Blog: Navesink.net - My Flickr Stream - Dolby Atmos Discussion Thread - Updates at Twitter - Join the HTF Flickr Pool


#12 of 27 DaveF

DaveF

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 12,521 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 04 2001
  • Real Name:David Fischer
  • LocationOne Loudoun, Ashburn, VA

Posted January 29 2013 - 11:04 AM

I think Apple stock is terribly underpriced. But I think it will go lower.


If I had money to burn, I'd buy stock.


And I still regret not buying in at $10/share. I knew I should. I had a few dollars. But I didn't :)



#13 of 27 DaveF

DaveF

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 12,521 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 04 2001
  • Real Name:David Fischer
  • LocationOne Loudoun, Ashburn, VA

Posted January 29 2013 - 11:11 AM

http://www.businessi...guidance-2013-1



Quote:

Amazon reported revenue and earnings that were below Wall Street's printed expectations, but the stock responded by soaring to an all-time high.



#14 of 27 Ted Todorov

Ted Todorov

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 2,858 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 17 2000

Posted January 29 2013 - 04:33 PM


Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveF 

http://www.businessi...guidance-2013-1


Amazon is pure comedy right now -- forget about missing some analysts' guesses: their profit are down, what, 45% Y/Y?  And the stock goes up because someone is expecting...growth?


http://www.slate.com...45_percent.html


Matt Yglesias:
Quote:
That's because Amazon, as best I can tell, is a charitable organization being run by elements of the investment community for the benefit of consumers. The shareholders put up the equity, and instead of owning a claim on a steady stream of fat profits, they get a claim on a mighty engine of consumer surplus. Amazon sells things to people at prices that seem impossible because it actually is impossible to make money that way. And the competitive pressure of needing to square off against Amazon cuts profit margins at other companies, thus benefiting people who don't even buy anything from Amazon.*

Sooner or later of course AMZN will encounter reality and the stock will go down by 90% in no time at all -- whoever times that short will be very, very rich -- but I'll bet many have lost their shirts trying to short them in the past...


*I'd agree with Matt Yglesias that it is for the benefit to consumers -- until Barnes & Nobles and St. Marks Books [insert your favorite indie bookstore hear] go under -- then things will get very, very bad for consumers...


Hold on tightly, let go lightly.
My Twitter page

#15 of 27 DaveF

DaveF

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 12,521 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 04 2001
  • Real Name:David Fischer
  • LocationOne Loudoun, Ashburn, VA

Posted January 29 2013 - 11:33 PM

But how do you make money? In volume.

#16 of 27 andrew markworthy

andrew markworthy

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 4,753 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 30 1999

Posted January 30 2013 - 08:47 AM

67% Y/Y growth in China, with the iPhone still not being on China Mobile with its 600 million (!!!) subscribers and having all of 11 Apple Stores in "greater China" says your first point is wrong. Apple still has no presence in the billion plus populated India, etc. etc. Sky is the limit. Secondly, an Apple HDTV (aka iTV) will be about simplicity, great UI, iOS app support and content -- not 3D or 4K resolution. The only reason it hasn't happened yet is because content providers -- the studios/networks -- are refusing to offer their content a la carte or for streaming. I think Apple is waiting to line up enough content deals before they release the content. But if Apple does release an HDTV, I'm betting it will be a huge success -- anyone whose dealt with the setup menus and the plethora of modes and inputs (and garish picture) of most modern HDTVs will be the highly willing target audience.

Just because billions of people could potentially buy a product does not mean they will. First, you need to remember that the billions figure is illusory - the poverty in these countries is still massive and there is no way that the majority of the population could every afford Apple products. With regard to the remainder, India and China have proven resistant to a LOT of both cheaper and more expensive Western brands in the past. This is why a lot of seasoned market analysts are suspicious about the size of the Asian market for a lot of Western goods. As regards Apple TV, you can wish away all you like about the features. However, that was not the point I was making. The product is unlikely to appeal to a mass market because it's just more of the same as far as the general public is concerned. You and I know that it's better, but Joe Six Pack doesn't, not will Joe cough up the extra bucks for what at the end of the day is a flat screen that will remain uncalibrated and is something to watch the football game on.

#17 of 27 RobertR

RobertR

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 9,318 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 19 1998

Posted January 30 2013 - 09:59 AM

iPhones now account for 85% of all AT&T smartphones and something similar was posted for Verizon last week. (edit: 6.2 of 9.2 million this quarter)

It's curious that you would emphasize the market share of Iphones on Verizon and AT&T when you said this in another thread:

Market Share: Explain to me why anyone cares? It is meaningless.



#18 of 27 Sam Posten

Sam Posten

    Nutter

  • 14,808 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 30 1997
  • Real Name:Sam Posten
  • LocationAberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ

Posted January 31 2013 - 02:11 AM

It's curious that you would emphasize the market share of Iphones on Verizon and AT&T when you said this in another thread:

Sure if you take that out of context you can say "hypocrite!!!". But let's break it down further: -Android fans claim Android is winning because they are selling so much better than iPhones. Curiously Verizon and AT&T's most recent numbers seem to call that into question. I was as surprised by that percentage as anyone and remarked on it as someone who was impressed, not as someone who was beating his chest saying "wooo Apple is #1". -Apple's stock drop seems to be predicated on the concept that they have reached market saturation and slowed growth. I don't believe either is true as there are clearly opportunities for those who refuse to not just not pay up front for a phone (you can get a free iPhone today after all) but those who are put off by data plans and other costs associated with a smart phone. I continue to believe Apple will address this aggressively while still making a healthy profit. -Others believe that the disruptive core of Apple died with Steve. I have no facts but only belief that that simply is not true and look forward to seeing the real announcements of new products and how Apple tosses out their own highly successful products this year. We'll see =)

"Sam, you are the biggest nutter we have here."

Blog: Navesink.net - My Flickr Stream - Dolby Atmos Discussion Thread - Updates at Twitter - Join the HTF Flickr Pool


#19 of 27 RobertR

RobertR

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 9,318 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 19 1998

Posted January 31 2013 - 04:18 AM

Sure if you take that out of context you can say "hypocrite!!!". But let's break it down further: -Android fans claim Android is winning because they are selling so much better than iPhones. Curiously Verizon and AT&T's most recent numbers seem to call that into question. I was as surprised by that percentage as anyone and remarked on it as someone who was impressed, not as someone who was beating his chest saying "wooo Apple is #1".

It's not a matter of "hypocrisy", it's a matter of contradicting yourself. You claim market share is "meaningless" and "no one should care about it", then you proceed to simultaneously TRUMPET it and be "impressed" by it. So which is it? Does market share matter or doesn't it? You can't have it both ways. You trumpeted the AT&T and Verizon numbers as if they very much matter. If it does matter, then you'd have to concede the importance of the fact that Android has 75% overall market share to Iphone's 15% (a fact not contradicted by the numbers for two carriers).

#20 of 27 Sam Posten

Sam Posten

    Nutter

  • 14,808 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 30 1997
  • Real Name:Sam Posten
  • LocationAberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ

Posted January 31 2013 - 06:24 AM

OK I'll bite, how is it that those numbers aren't contradictory? Is this a fluke that this quarter the ratios have flipped and things will all of a sudden go back to 75/15 next report?

"Sam, you are the biggest nutter we have here."

Blog: Navesink.net - My Flickr Stream - Dolby Atmos Discussion Thread - Updates at Twitter - Join the HTF Flickr Pool





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users