Apple Corp (Symbol-AAPL)

Discuss your favourite picks, broker, and trading or investment style.
User avatar
adrian2
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 13333
Joined: 19 Feb 2005 08:42
Location: Greater Toronto Area

Re: Apple Corp (Symbol-AAPL)

Post by adrian2 »

zinfit wrote:If its bullshit its bullshit that's working. I could say the same about Coke ,add a little sugar and some ingredients to some carbonated water and make billions for ions .
I feel reasonably confident Coke will make billions decades from now, using the same formula. Can you say the same about Apple and iPads?
Imagefiniki, the Canadian financial wiki
“It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong.” [Richard P. Feynman, Nobel prize winner]
User avatar
Bylo Selhi
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 29494
Joined: 16 Feb 2005 10:36
Location: Waterloo, ON
Contact:

Re: Apple Corp (Symbol-AAPL)

Post by Bylo Selhi »

adrian2 wrote:I feel reasonably confident Coke will make billions decades from now, using the same formula. Can you say the same about Apple and iPads?
Sure. All we have to do is assume that Steve passed on the secret formula for iStuff Classic™ to Tim and Jon :roll:
Last edited by Bylo Selhi on 20 Mar 2012 13:05, edited 1 time in total.
Sedulously eschew obfuscatory hyperverbosity and prolixity.
User avatar
Descartes
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 1856
Joined: 03 Nov 2008 09:59

Re: Apple Corp (Symbol-AAPL)

Post by Descartes »

Bylo Selhi wrote:Don't fall for the bullshit that Apple feeds its fanboys.
Don't misread what I'm saying. I'm explaining it from a business perspective not a consumer perspective.
In other words, I am not saying that the products are truly superior. I am answering your question:
Why is it
Answer: because it makes business sense, it is consistent with their "saviour's" philosophy, and ...they can get away with it.

Consider your Lenova example again:
- Lenova does not have retail stores from which to provide service accessibility like Apple
- Lenova has a lot of competition (e.g. I use a ThinkPad at work, but my kids have Dells)
- Apple is not about the Mac. The Mac has never had a significant marketshare and never will. Apple is about the consumer devices. This was recognized many years ago by Apple when they dropped the label "Computer" from their company name.
"A dividend is a dictate of management. A capital gain is a whim of the market."
User avatar
Bylo Selhi
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 29494
Joined: 16 Feb 2005 10:36
Location: Waterloo, ON
Contact:

Re: Apple Corp (Symbol-AAPL)

Post by Bylo Selhi »

Descartes wrote:Don't misread what I'm saying. I'm explaining it from a business perspective not a consumer perspective. In other words, I am not saying that the products are truly superior. I am answering your question.
My admonition was generic. Of course they do it for business reasons. The issue is whether that model is sustainable once the fanboy infatuation ends and/or competition heats up. For some insights on how things will likely turn out with a similar business model (cool, innovative, proprietary, expensive, faddish, cultish, secretive, and very lucrative,...) one has only to look at how well it worked for, well, RIM.
Sedulously eschew obfuscatory hyperverbosity and prolixity.
User avatar
Descartes
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 1856
Joined: 03 Nov 2008 09:59

Re: Apple Corp (Symbol-AAPL)

Post by Descartes »

one has only to look at how well it worked for, well, RIM
I don't think RIM ever captured the general consumer imagination the way that Apple did with the ipod, iphone, and now the ipad.
And RIM never had Apple's "holistic" philosophy to consumer devices ...which Apple is trying very hard to expand with iCloud and (I suppose) the upcoming iTV.

I wouldn't buy Apple but neither would I short it at this time.
I'm just very curious how this will play out.
"A dividend is a dictate of management. A capital gain is a whim of the market."
CathyF
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 79
Joined: 01 Feb 2012 08:15

Re: Apple Corp (Symbol-AAPL)

Post by CathyF »

zinfit wrote:Beyond their operating system what does Microsoft have that has an enduring and profitable future?
Their Office suite is probably a pretty big money-maker too. But I agree that Microsoft is a gamble, as with most high-tech companies. The problem with Microsoft, is that there are completely free alternatives to most of their software, and they are almost as good. If I was going to invest in high-tech, I'd go with something that has a large barrier to entry, and is not prone to fads, like Intel.
Bylo Selhi wrote: Competitors could do it if they wanted to or if they wanted to believe Apple's (false) claims that it's an essential requirement for building small, light products. For example, Lenovo ThinkPads outsell Apple's notebooks. They've owned the market for premium Windows PCs for some 20 years. Their smallest/lighest notebooks are every bit as tiny as Apple's. And yet they've always had batteries that are user changeable without tools or hassles. This lets users carry spare batteries and/or larger than standard batteries.
I try to avoid products that don't use standard-form AA or AAA batteries, though I find that difficult to do now. I find Lithium-Ion batteries don't last more than 3 years or so. At least with AAA batteries, I can cheaply replace them with NiMH when they wear out. Of course, Apple wants you to buy their new stuff every 6 months, and throw away the previous model. So much for claiming to be a "green" company.
Descartes wrote: I don't think RIM ever captured the general consumer imagination the way that Apple did with the ipod, iphone, and now the ipad.
RIM owned the smart phone market for years, both for business and consumer. They ran into problems because management became more interested in buying hockey teams than they were in running the business. RIM is going to zero, or if they're lucky will be bought out by Microsoft.
User avatar
Bylo Selhi
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 29494
Joined: 16 Feb 2005 10:36
Location: Waterloo, ON
Contact:

Re: Apple Corp (Symbol-AAPL)

Post by Bylo Selhi »

Descartes wrote:I don't think RIM ever captured the general consumer imagination the way that Apple did with the ipod, iphone, and now the ipad.
But they captured and owned the general business and government market for years.
And RIM never had Apple's "holistic" philosophy to consumer devices
IMO they did for their enterprise customers. Of course analogies are usually only approximation. But there are more similarities than there are differences.

Consider the proprietary OS. Consider the military grade encryption. Consider the enterprise management tools. Consider BBM. Consider the proprietary enterprise e-mail system. Consider the $10/month royalties from cell carriers that guaranteed them a steady annuity. Consider the arrogance of senior management in "knowing" what their customers wanted better than their customers. Consider the customer infatuation with whatever RIM management decided to give them even if it wasn't exactly what they wanted. Eventually all that caught up with them.

Apple's day will come too. Of course we don't know when. But I doubt that in 5 to 10 years Apple will be anything like the consumer powerhouse that it is today.
Sedulously eschew obfuscatory hyperverbosity and prolixity.
FinEcon
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 1306
Joined: 03 Aug 2005 13:41

Re: Apple Corp (Symbol-AAPL)

Post by FinEcon »

zinfit wrote:Three million Ipads sold in one weekend. If its bullshit its bullshit that's working. I could say the same about Coke ,add a little sugar and some ingredients to some carbonated water and make billions for ions . They are more then a hardware company , Leopard isn't hardware. Jobs had some choice and unkind words about the source of Windows and how it was created. Beyond their operating system what does Microsoft have that has an enduring and profitable future? Lenovo might sell more laptops however their profits per unit is razor thin, Apple is probably making 40% on each unit. I think it would take Buffet seconds to understand which situation is better.
You and I agree on many things. Apparently, the similarity and durability of the economic moats of Coke and Apple is not one of them. IMO, the comparison breaks down because Coke's product suite doesn't really change and the logistical and marketing barriers to competition with Coke are insurmountable. Also, Coke is the dominant player in a 2 player game that has been stable for decades and will likely remain stable for decades into the future. Consder too that Coke is profiting from being always and everywhere available for next to nothing in real purchasing power terms whereas Apple is selling new and cool. Although Apple has great potential for toll a bridge like position as they insert themselves between consimers and producers of all forms of contennt (music, tv, movies, textbooks, magazines, etc) many others also will vie for this and they are not minnows. Think, MSFT, WalMart, Amazon, Google, Facebook, etc.

The biggest advantage to Coke IMO is that Coke can capture an above average profit margin on a customer in North America and they can do the same in a market where the customer makes $5 a day. Apple, by the nature of its industry will likely never be able to do that.
Show me the incentive and I will show you the outcome

--Charlie Munger
User avatar
kcowan
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 16033
Joined: 18 Apr 2006 20:33
Location: Pacific latitude 20/49

Re: Apple Corp (Symbol-AAPL)

Post by kcowan »

Bylo Selhi wrote:
Descartes wrote:I don't think RIM ever captured the general consumer imagination the way that Apple did with the ipod, iphone, and now the ipad.
But they captured and owned the general business and government market for years.
And RIM never had Apple's "holistic" philosophy to consumer devices
IMO they did for their enterprise customers. Of course analogies are usually only approximation. But there are more similarities than there are differences.

Consider the proprietary OS. Consider the military grade encryption. Consider the enterprise management tools. Consider BBM. Consider the proprietary enterprise e-mail system. Consider the $10/month royalties from cell carriers that guaranteed them a steady annuity. Consider the arrogance of senior management in "knowing" what their customers wanted better than their customers. Consider the customer infatuation with whatever RIM management decided to give them even if it wasn't exactly what they wanted. Eventually all that caught up with them.

Apple's day will come too. Of course we don't know when. But I doubt that in 5 to 10 years Apple will be anything like the consumer powerhouse that it is today.
I agree that RIM rested on its dominance of the business market for secure email services for too long. I am sure they assured each other that it was a sustainable barrier to entry (until it wasn't).

The question here is: "Is there any evidence that Apple is resting on its dominance in the consumer space?" and I do not know the answer to that. Do you?
For the fun of it...Keith
User avatar
Bylo Selhi
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 29494
Joined: 16 Feb 2005 10:36
Location: Waterloo, ON
Contact:

Re: Apple Corp (Symbol-AAPL)

Post by Bylo Selhi »

kcowan wrote:The question here is: "Is there any evidence that Apple is resting on its dominance in the consumer space?" and I do not know the answer to that. Do you?
Dunno. We have to give Tim Cook and Jon Ives a chance to show us their post-Jobs game.

So my primary question is, "Can Apple continue to dominate the consumer space with new and innovative products now that Steve Jobs has gone to the big iTunes store in the sky?"

A secondary question, if the answer to the previous question is positive, is, "How much can the fanboys afford to spend on iStuff?" Currently it seems to be $100 to $200 a month. (That's WAG. I haven't researched it.) What would it take to reach saturation, i.e. when daddy or the landlord/mortgagee, etc. finally say, "Enough is enough!" and cut the fanboy off his drug supply or show him the street.
Sedulously eschew obfuscatory hyperverbosity and prolixity.
User avatar
tidal
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 3009
Joined: 28 Jul 2006 10:56
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Re: Apple Corp (Symbol-AAPL)

Post by tidal »

Rumor: A $149 Google Nexus Tablet?
The rumors are coming from all angles. Let’s start with the most audacious one: that a forthcoming Google tablet might retail for as low as $149. That comes via a site called Android and Me, which cites a supply chain source calling the tablet “a done deal.” That’s an interesting price....

... Here’s Google’s chance to fight back against the hijackers, then. As Android chief Andy Rubinhas said, “2012 is going to be the year that we double down and make sure we're winning in that space." Perhaps we'll see exactly how in May.
The future is bright for jellyfish, caulerpa taxifolia, dinoflagellates and prokaryotes... rust never sleeps... the dude abides... the stupid, it burns. (http://bit.ly/LXZsXd)
zinfit
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 2517
Joined: 25 Apr 2009 20:24

Re: Apple Corp (Symbol-AAPL)

Post by zinfit »

Google makes very little on each android phone. Apple 's profit margin is 40% on each Iphone. Lots of luck in bringing them to their knees in the tablet market. A big challenge for Apple is size. Big companies have a tendency to forget how they became successful . So far they show that they are still a very creative and innovative company despite their growth and size. G4,cloud and new internet language are a reality. Given that new reality I would rather be Apple then Dell, HP or Microsoft. Comparing RIM to Apple? not really the same. RIM was a one trick pony. Apple sells computers. Sure its only 7% of the market but it is a very solid and profitable 7%. Rim never was into selling music or Ipods. It has never been a serious player in tablets. Tablets are here to stay.They aren't into to the next generation of tv technology . Rim had one product and was unable to innovate or expand beyond their "email device".
Last edited by zinfit on 21 Mar 2012 10:04, edited 1 time in total.
zinfit
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 2517
Joined: 25 Apr 2009 20:24

Re: Apple Corp (Symbol-AAPL)

Post by zinfit »

For RIM fanboys the head honcho is on with Cramer on his" Mad Money" show tonight.
zinfit
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 2517
Joined: 25 Apr 2009 20:24

Re: Apple Corp (Symbol-AAPL)

Post by zinfit »

It might be a fad . School boards in the USA don't believe so. Many have a plan to have an Ipad for every student and teacher. Educational experts are saying that the availability of these devices increases learning. Apple must be smiling. Nothing like entrenching a product brand in the minds of people at a very young age.
User avatar
Descartes
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 1856
Joined: 03 Nov 2008 09:59

Re: Apple Corp (Symbol-AAPL)

Post by Descartes »

Bylo Selhi wrote:We have to give Tim Cook and Jon Ives a chance to show us their post-Jobs game.
This is the interesting part of the story. Cook is generally identified as the operations guy. Ives is generally identified as the design guy. But who or what now fills Job's role as the engine: the requirements guy?

Cook was tagged by Jobs himself as "not a product guy" and Ives always had an existing need to satisfy. Who will now identify and focus the company on the next consumer "need"?

This is ultimately where I see Apple losing its way...but maybe after the existing stuff in the pipeline, like tv (whatever the heck that is supposed to be), is out.
"A dividend is a dictate of management. A capital gain is a whim of the market."
zinfit
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 2517
Joined: 25 Apr 2009 20:24

Re: Apple Corp (Symbol-AAPL)

Post by zinfit »

Business and governments people are carting around Ipads as well. Schools are putting them in the hands of students and teachers. Its more then a consumer market.
User avatar
Descartes
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 1856
Joined: 03 Nov 2008 09:59

Re: Apple Corp (Symbol-AAPL)

Post by Descartes »

zinfit wrote:Business and governments people are carting around Ipads as well. Schools are putting them in the hands of students and teachers. Its more then a consumer market.
I know you aren't a pumper ..but you're really starting to sound like you mortgaged your house to buy stock in Apple ;)
"A dividend is a dictate of management. A capital gain is a whim of the market."
User avatar
kcowan
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 16033
Joined: 18 Apr 2006 20:33
Location: Pacific latitude 20/49

Re: Apple Corp (Symbol-AAPL)

Post by kcowan »

I will see your forecast zinfit and raise you one:
AAPl share could be worth an ounce of gold by 2015!
Will it happen? Well based on all the naysayers I am hearing, it just might...gotta go against the grain! 300 shares and hanging on for dear life! (Why did I sell half?! :roll: Oh I remember, I was balancing my risk!)

(I expect a pullback as is normal with AAPL. But the numbers will speak for themselves eventually.)

Bylo how many shares of RIM are you stuck with?
For the fun of it...Keith
zinfit
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 2517
Joined: 25 Apr 2009 20:24

Re: Apple Corp (Symbol-AAPL)

Post by zinfit »

No I am not a pumper. I own 30 shares which I bought at 495. With the volume on this stock I can hardly see were my postings would have an impact. Just the same I will accept that as compliment. I don't think I have posted anything that doesn't factually reflects the record of this company. I would buy more if it wouldn't wreck my overall investment plan. I still think its an amazing story. I have seen postings which I must seriously question. Excellent article KCowan.
User avatar
Bylo Selhi
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 29494
Joined: 16 Feb 2005 10:36
Location: Waterloo, ON
Contact:

Re: Apple Corp (Symbol-AAPL)

Post by Bylo Selhi »

Descartes wrote:I know you aren't a pumper ..but you're really starting to sound like you mortgaged your house to buy stock in Apple ;)
You mean it's only a coincidence that he parrots talking points from guys named Steve and their handlers? :shock: :rofl:
kcowan wrote:Bylo how many shares of RIM are you stuck with?
20 plus whatever's in my index funds. That's all I've ever owned too BTW. Enough to get me free hors d'oeuvres at the annual meetings.

P.S. In case it matters, I've never owned a RIM product. I've owned 2 iPods over the years, neither paid for out of my own pocket. I wouldn't have bought them if I had to pay for them.
Sedulously eschew obfuscatory hyperverbosity and prolixity.
Profit not Prophet
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 948
Joined: 03 Aug 2007 14:24
Location: Southern Ontario aka not TO

Re: Apple Corp (Symbol-AAPL)

Post by Profit not Prophet »

(Kathy I thought I'd send along an example of how my brother and sister in law use there pads, yes plural both have one now. Two kids(one an infant), government jobs, busy the usual drill. She will have semi snoozing baby on one arm and can't move about much until little one nods off. In that time she can keep up with various thing with the pad. It's a nice one hand kind of thing that they grab weather, etc. For the older one they can stream youtube videos to the tv and such that the three year old grazes off of now and then. So unlike I will now do computer work it's closer to a mush of tv-phone-newspaper-notekeeper sort of swiss army knife of stuff.)
zinfit
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 2517
Joined: 25 Apr 2009 20:24

Re: Apple Corp (Symbol-AAPL)

Post by zinfit »

Good god Bylo give your political leanings a rest. When all else fails you are one of the best a turning a discussion into something personal. I think everyone knows your point of view on Harper. Do you really think he is issuing talking points on Apple? May-be you might read KCowan's article and explain that it is nothing more then empty talking points.
User avatar
RomaneeConti
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 137
Joined: 16 Dec 2010 03:07
Location: Toronto

Re: Apple Corp (Symbol-AAPL)

Post by RomaneeConti »

I'm not a fanboy, and never had an Apple product except a clone Apple IIe back in the 1980s. But I'd have to be blind not to notice the appetite for this company's products.

I love it when I visit a store of any company whose shares I own, and I get to see:

- Customers crowds are both young and old
- Staff are smart, can address objections, can sell, provide value, then upsell.
- Customers are leaving with their packages and smiling

All the above were in evidence at my neighborhood Apple store. I bought shares in February. Wish I bought ten years ago.
CathyF
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 79
Joined: 01 Feb 2012 08:15

Re: Apple Corp (Symbol-AAPL)

Post by CathyF »

RomaneeConti wrote:I'm not a fanboy, and never had an Apple product except a clone Apple IIe back in the 1980s. But I'd have to be blind not to notice the appetite for this company's products.

I love it when I visit a store of any company whose shares I own, and I get to see:

- Customers crowds are both young and old
- Staff are smart, can address objections, can sell, provide value, then upsell.
- Customers are leaving with their packages and smiling

All the above were in evidence at my neighborhood Apple store.
Doesn't that smell of a bubble? When everyone is saying everything's perfect, that's usually a peak. That is, perfection is already priced into the stock. (But I've been wrong about that since Apple was $300, so I'm probably still wrong.)

P.S. What is a "clone" Apple IIe? I thought Apple never licensed their stuff, from the very beginning. That's why the IBM PC ate Apple's lunch.
User avatar
Bylo Selhi
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 29494
Joined: 16 Feb 2005 10:36
Location: Waterloo, ON
Contact:

Re: Apple Corp (Symbol-AAPL)

Post by Bylo Selhi »

CathyF wrote:P.S. What is a "clone" Apple IIe?
Send in the clones ;)
I thought Apple never licensed their stuff, from the very beginning.
They didn't. But that didn't stop the clones then any more than it stops them today.
That's why the IBM PC ate Apple's lunch.
Not quite. There were many other reasons, including that it was a faster and better system, but let's not digress.
Sedulously eschew obfuscatory hyperverbosity and prolixity.
Post Reply