In article <trhcum$12nlo$1@dont-email.me>, badgolferman ><REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
Apple (AAPL) reported its Q1 earnings after the closing bell on
Feb. 2, missing analysts' expectations on the top and bottom line
as iPhone sales came up short, declining more than 8%
year-over-year.
in the earnings call, tim cook said iphone sales would have grown had
there not been supply shortages.
Apple (AAPL) reported its Q1 earnings after the closing bell on Feb. 2, missing analysts' expectations on the top and bottom line as iPhone sales came up short, declining more than 8% year-over-year.
Apple (AAPL) reported its Q1 earnings after the closing bell on
Feb. 2, missing analysts' expectations on the top and bottom line
as iPhone sales came up short, declining more than 8%
year-over-year.
in the earnings call, tim cook said iphone sales would have grown had
there not been supply shortages.
There were supply shortages in 2021 as well but I remember you telling
us they were killing it then.
Apple (AAPL) reported its Q1 earnings after the closing bell on Feb. 2, missing analysts' expectations on the top and bottom line as iPhone sales came up short, declining more than 8% year-over-year.
According to IDC’s Worldwide Quarterly Mobile Phone Tracker, shipments of Apple’s iPhone fell 14.9% year-over-year, from 85 million units in Q4 2021 to 72.3 million units in Q4 2022.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/apple-misses-q1-earnings-expectations-as-iphone-sales-fall-short-213355848.html
All the major smartphone companies had declines
apple was hit hard in november/december due to the covid shutdown, and
things are now back to where they'd like.
nospam wrote:
apple was hit hard in november/december due to the covid shutdown, and
things are now back to where they'd like.
Adult observation...
iKooks
"smartest choice"
They could sell igloos to an Inuit
stupidity
In article <trhh61$13d17$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
All the major smartphone companies had declines
yep.
it's also disingenuous to focus on only one quarter, rather than the
long term outlook.
All the major smartphone companies had declines
yep.
it's also disingenuous to focus on only one quarter, rather than the
long term outlook.
not at all.
nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
In article <trhh61$13d17$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
All the major smartphone companies had declines
yep.
it's also disingenuous to focus on only one quarter, rather than the
long term outlook.
not at all.
Never good to evaluate a company in the consumer space based on a single quarter. China's recent Covid strategy is an absolute failure, and
these results are an indicator in part.
(Note that the M2 Mini/M2 Max MacBook Pro rollout was delayed - the announcement video was filmed much earlier in Q4 (prior to Oct) or Q1 (Oct-Dec) but they delayed the release into Q2 - likely because of
supply and/or manufacturing issues).
Apple made oodles of profits for its shareholders in any case - which is
why the stock price hardly moved. Apple doesn't care much about meeting "analysts" expectations.
The sad thing is the stock didn't plunge. That would be a good time to
snap up short minded stock sales to hold long term. Got some dividend
cash that needs a new home.
Never good to evaluate a company in the consumer space based on a single quarter.
Apple made oodles of profits for its shareholders in any case - which is
why the stock price hardly moved. Apple doesn't care much about meeting "analysts" expectations.
In article <9t7DL.556651$iS99.444139@fx16.iad>, Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
Never good to evaluate a company in the consumer space based on a single
quarter. China's recent Covid strategy is an absolute failure, and
these results are an indicator in part.
exactly.
(Note that the M2 Mini/M2 Max MacBook Pro rollout was delayed - the
announcement video was filmed much earlier in Q4 (prior to Oct) or Q1
(Oct-Dec) but they delayed the release into Q2 - likely because of
supply and/or manufacturing issues).
that was a major reason why mac sales were down. people were waiting
for an announcement that ultimately happened a few weeks ago.
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 07:53:24 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:
Never good to evaluate a company in the consumer space based on a single
quarter.
If this was a great quarter, you'd be saying the exact opposite of that.
Apple made oodles of profits for its shareholders in any case - which is
why the stock price hardly moved. Apple doesn't care much about meeting
"analysts" expectations.
You don't know much about business economics if you believe that not
meeting your expectations (which Apple previously helped set with those analysts) isn't something that Apple management cares very dearly about.
There are large specialist teams at Apple focused solely on just that.
In article <trie0l$1arh1$1@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>
wrote:
All the major smartphone companies had declines
yep.
it's also disingenuous to focus on only one quarter, rather than the
long term outlook.
not at all.
wrong. what matters is the long term, not a single quarter,
which the
trolls will cite as doom and gloom, despite no evidence to support it.
On 2023-02-03 02:44, Chris wrote:
nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
In article <trhh61$13d17$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
All the major smartphone companies had declines
yep.
it's also disingenuous to focus on only one quarter, rather than the
long term outlook.
not at all.
Never good to evaluate a company in the consumer space based on a single quarter.
China's recent Covid strategy is an absolute failure, and
these results are an indicator in part.
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 07:53:24 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:
Apple doesn't care much about meeting "analysts" expectations.
You don't know much about business economics if you believe that not
meeting your expectations (which Apple previously helped set with those analysts) isn't something that Apple management cares very dearly about.
There are large specialist teams at Apple focused solely on just that.
All the major smartphone companies had declines
yep.
it's also disingenuous to focus on only one quarter, rather than the
long term outlook.
not at all.
wrong. what matters is the long term, not a single quarter,
It's a snapshot,
which may be an indicator of direction.
Hence, they host a
call for these quarterly figures. If it didn't matter Tim Apple wouldn't
have addressed the figures at all.
which the
trolls will cite as doom and gloom, despite no evidence to support it.
What trolls think, if they are capable, matters not. Industry and markets
do care and make decisions based on quarterlies, especially for companies
as large as Apple.
Apple doesn't care much about meeting "analysts" expectations.
You don't know much about business economics if you believe that not meeting your expectations (which Apple previously helped set with those analysts) isn't something that Apple management cares very dearly about.
There are large specialist teams at Apple focused solely on just that.
"Apple doesn't care much about meeting "analysts" expectations" may be
the most clueless thing that poster has ever written. And that's saying
a lot!
Indeed, in today's buy-side/sell-side froth, companies live by the
quarter, die by the quarter.
nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
In article <trie0l$1arh1$1@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>
wrote:
All the major smartphone companies had declines
yep.
it's also disingenuous to focus on only one quarter, rather than the
long term outlook.
not at all.
wrong. what matters is the long term, not a single quarter,
It's a snapshot, which may be an indicator of direction. Hence, they host a call for these quarterly figures. If it didn't matter Tim Apple wouldn't
have addressed the figures at all.
which the
trolls will cite as doom and gloom, despite no evidence to support it.
What trolls think, if they are capable, matters not. Industry and markets
do care and make decisions based on quarterlies, especially for companies
as large as Apple.
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 07:53:24 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:
Never good to evaluate a company in the consumer space based on a single
quarter.
If this was a great quarter, you'd be saying the exact opposite of that.
Apple made oodles of profits for its shareholders in any case - which is
why the stock price hardly moved. Apple doesn't care much about meeting
"analysts" expectations.
You don't know much about business economics if you believe that not
meeting your expectations (which Apple previously helped set with those analysts) isn't something that Apple management cares very dearly about.
There are large specialist teams at Apple focused solely on just that.
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
On 2023-02-03 02:44, Chris wrote:
nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
In article <trhh61$13d17$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
All the major smartphone companies had declines
yep.
it's also disingenuous to focus on only one quarter, rather than the
long term outlook.
not at all.
Never good to evaluate a company in the consumer space based on a single
quarter.
All data are useful.
China's recent Covid strategy is an absolute failure, and
these results are an indicator in part.
Exactly. Therefore useful.
On 2023-02-03 12:12, sms wrote:
"Apple doesn't care much about meeting "analysts" expectations" may be
the most clueless thing that poster has ever written. And that's saying
a lot!
Coming from you, your lack of discernment is not surprising.
How it works:
-Apple issue guidance from time to time
-Analysts listen to that _and_ gather whatever other data they can.
-Analysts then provide and/or publish their reports.
If they get it wrong, why would Apple care?
Apple made oodles of margin despite the lower sales volume.
And anyone who believes Apple's next quarter won't be immensely
profitable (again) is a fool.
Indeed, in today's buy-side/sell-side froth, companies live by the
quarter, die by the quarter.
Something Apple could care less about - their internal planning is 5+
years. They have to make "guidance" and "earnings" calls, but Apple
doesn't care about the stock price day to day, quarter to quarter.
Reacting to such is bad for business. Something quick-buck Wall Street hates.
On 2/3/2023 8:07 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 07:53:24 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:
<snip>
Apple doesn't care much about meeting "analysts" expectations.
You don't know much about business economics if you believe that not
meeting your expectations (which Apple previously helped set with those
analysts) isn't something that Apple management cares very dearly about.
There are large specialist teams at Apple focused solely on just that.
"Apple doesn't care much about meeting "analysts" expectations" may be
the most clueless thing that poster has ever written. And that's saying
a lot!
In article <rDcDL.168128$PXw7.97682@fx45.iad>, Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
On 2023-02-03 12:12, sms wrote:
"Apple doesn't care much about meeting "analysts" expectations" may be
the most clueless thing that poster has ever written. And that's saying
a lot!
Coming from you, your lack of discernment is not surprising.
How it works:
-Apple issue guidance from time to time
-Analysts listen to that _and_ gather whatever other data they can.
-Analysts then provide and/or publish their reports.
analysts deliberately make up numbers for their own benefit and that of
their clients.
Indeed, in today's buy-side/sell-side froth, companies live by the
quarter, die by the quarter.
Something Apple could care less about - their internal planning is 5+
years. They have to make "guidance" and "earnings" calls, but Apple
doesn't care about the stock price day to day, quarter to quarter.
Reacting to such is bad for business. Something quick-buck Wall Street
hates.
yep, and they've even stated as much.
Apple doesn't care much about meeting "analysts" expectations.
You don't know much about business economics if you believe that not
meeting your expectations (which Apple previously helped set with those
analysts) isn't something that Apple management cares very dearly about.
There are large specialist teams at Apple focused solely on just that.
"Apple doesn't care much about meeting "analysts" expectations" may be
the most clueless thing that poster has ever written. And that's saying
a lot!
Indeed, in today's buy-side/sell-side froth, companies live by the
quarter, die by the quarter.
Something Apple could care less about - their internal planning is 5+
years. They have to make "guidance" and "earnings" calls, but Apple
doesn't care about the stock price day to day, quarter to quarter.
Reacting to such is bad for business. Something quick-buck Wall Street hates.
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 10:35:20 AM, Alan Browne wrote:
Indeed, in today's buy-side/sell-side froth, companies live by the
quarter, die by the quarter.
Something Apple could care less about - their internal planning is 5+
years. They have to make "guidance" and "earnings" calls, but Apple
doesn't care about the stock price day to day, quarter to quarter.
Reacting to such is bad for business. Something quick-buck Wall Street
hates.
If this poster, Alan Browne, is so ignorant that he can't even understand what "could care less" means, then he's too stupid to understand Apple.
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 9:12:24 AM, sms wrote:
Apple doesn't care much about meeting "analysts" expectations.
You don't know much about business economics if you believe that not
meeting your expectations (which Apple previously helped set with those
analysts) isn't something that Apple management cares very dearly about. >>>
There are large specialist teams at Apple focused solely on just that.
"Apple doesn't care much about meeting "analysts" expectations" may be
the most clueless thing that poster has ever written. And that's saying
a lot!
That poster was so stupid that not only doesn't that poster (Alan Browne?) not know that every company cares greatly about setting & meeting analysts' expectations but he's too stupid to know how to properly speak English.
Assuming English isn't his second language and assuming this Alan Browne isn't a child below about third grade, then the fact he still doesn't know what "could care less" means is a sure indicator that he's extremely dumb.
Not only what he said but how he said it belies his total incomprehension.
If this poster, Alan Browne, is so ignorant that he can't even understand
what "could care less" means, then he's too stupid to understand Apple.
ROFL - pedantic over what doesn't matter and clueless about Apple. You
smell like sms. Anything to that?
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 13:32:28 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:
If analysts do a poor job for their bosses, that is not Apple's concern.
It's not worth trying to convince you of what you obviously can't possibly even begin to understand about how much every public company, including Apple, very much cares about whether or not they met analyst's quarterly expectations & to come up with a believable reason as to why they didn't.
On 2/3/2023 1:41 PM, Alan Browne wrote:
All data are useful.
Indeed - but not to make a sell decision based on a sole quarter.
Everything you say shows you don't understand anything that is said.
If analysts do a poor job for their bosses, that is not Apple's concern.
All data are useful.
Indeed - but not to make a sell decision based on a sole quarter.
You smell of coward.
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 11:43:57 AM, Alan Browne wrote:
You smell of coward.
If from this discussion about what you said, you finally end up learning
what your own words mean, I'll then take your insults as a compliment.
analysts deliberately make up numbers for their own benefit and that of their clients.
I don't believe that - an analyst with a bad track record would not last
long in his profession.
OTOH, none bat 1.000 - nowhere near it.
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 14:58:40 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:
At this point, when they get it wrong, Apple does not care.
That is the part you don't show any ability to understand is very wrong.
It is not Apple's fault when analysts do dumb.
You don't have the acuity to understand so I will leave it alone at that.
In article <2UcDL.484485$8_id.479140@fx09.iad>, Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
analysts deliberately make up numbers for their own benefit and that of
their clients.
I don't believe that - an analyst with a bad track record would not last
long in his profession.
they last long because they make money for their clients (and
themselves).
OTOH, none bat 1.000 - nowhere near it.
true. they're nowhere near that.
one of the mac web sites (i forget which one) compared predictions of financial analysts versus various apple fans and pundits. the analysts generally did much worse than those who follow apple and are familiar
with what they do and don't do (and why). that's not that surprising
since analysts can't focus only on one company.
<https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/05/02/why-was-iphone-x-so-successf ul-at-999-despite-a-mountain-a-false-reporting>
Reporting by Bloomberg, the Wall Street Journal and Japan's Nikkei
created and perpetuated an absurd fiction that Apple's iPhone X was
a "disappointing," "overpriced" product with "weak" sales, when it
reality it remained Apple's most popular iPhone every week this
quarter across 14 percent growth in iPhone sales in a business where
no other company "mostly" sells their most expensive flagships, and
where overall demand for smartphones is actually shrinking globally.
...
Last year, iPhone 7 was falsely maligned for supposed "sluggish
sales." Nikkei similarly claimed Apple had decimated its orders, but
it actually achieved new growth and the highest ever sales for an
iPhone.
The same nonsense news cycle occurred for iPhone 6s. And prior
to that, iPhone 5c was lambasted as a failure but was actually a
top-selling smartphone model beating out other flagships and
attracting a higher percentage of Android switchers.
<https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/01/23/after-speculative-reports-of- slow-sales-iphone-x-is-now-said-to-be-in-the-high-end-of-the-industry-ra
Just one week after delivering a widely-distributed report
speculatively suggesting that 'weak demand' might result in Apple
canceling production of iPhone X this summer, analysts are now
lining up to shift their stories in the days before Apple releases
its actual fiscal Q1 performance data for the winter quarter. In a
remarkable turn, iPhone X is suddenly said to be selling well, and
scuttlebutt about slashed component orders is again looking
uninformed.
At this point, when they get it wrong, Apple does not care.
It is not Apple's fault when analysts do dumb.
analysts deliberately make up numbers for their own benefit and that of >>> their clients.
I don't believe that - an analyst with a bad track record would not last >> long in his profession.
they last long because they make money for their clients (and
themselves).
To make money for their clients, they'd have to get it right as often as possible.
OTOH, none bat 1.000 - nowhere near it.
true. they're nowhere near that.
What you cite are specific cases.
Apple (AAPL) reported its Q1 earnings after the closing bell on Feb. 2, missing analysts' expectations on the top and bottom line as iPhone sales came up short, declining more than 8% year-over-year.
According to IDC’s Worldwide Quarterly Mobile Phone Tracker, shipments of Apple’s iPhone fell 14.9% year-over-year, from 85 million units in Q4 2021 to 72.3 million units in Q4 2022.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/apple-misses-q1-earnings-expectations-as-iphone-sales-fall-short-213355848.html
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
| Uptime: | 164:39:10 |
| Calls: | 10,385 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 14,057 |
| Messages: | 6,416,518 |