Jump to content

There is a school of thought that believes...


Guest valueInv
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

...that Apple won't innovate like it used to under Jobs.

 

http://live.gdgt.com/live-wwdc-2012-keynote-coverage/

 

Yeah, right.

 

To be fair, most of what we're seeing right now was almost certainly pretty far along before Jobs died. We'll truly know in a few years.

 

The company is full of extremely talented people, so they certainly have the potential to keep it up. But Jobs truly was special, both for his taste and purity of vision, and without him it's less probable that they'll be able to keep doing as well as they have in the past 10 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest valueInv

...that Apple won't innovate like it used to under Jobs.

 

http://live.gdgt.com/live-wwdc-2012-keynote-coverage/

 

Yeah, right.

 

To be fair, most of what we're seeing right now was almost certainly pretty far along before Jobs died. We'll truly know in a few years.

 

The company is full of extremely talented people, so they certainly have the potential to keep it up. But Jobs truly was special, both for his taste and purity of vision, and without him it's less probable that they'll be able to keep doing as well as they have in the past 10 years.

 

Its not like Jobs was working 70 hours a week till the day he died. Read the biography, he stopped working around July 2011-almost a year ago. These a probably yearly release cycles, meaning Jobs had little influence on it. Further, Apple is known to make a lot of last minute changes. So what you see has been worked on recently and still a few months away from release.

 

Most time Jobs spent going into work in those final days was primarily on the long term, high level direction of the company. They were working on releasing IOS around the time of his death.  It's unlikely that he was dealing with the minutiae of the subsequent IOS 6 release a year down the road.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest valueInv

 

 

Yeah, right.

 

why do you say that?

 

There was a debate after the iPad 3 was released that Apple was losing its edge after Steve Jobs.

A look at what they have announced shows that they have not. What is more interesting today is that they are announcing

a lot of integrations - with other Apple devices (iPads, iPhones and Macs), social networks, cars, etc. It almost seems that the

theme of this release was integrations. This is very important. Essentially, they're deepening the moat around their castle.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Yeah, right.

 

why do you say that?

 

There was a debate after the iPad 3 was released that Apple was losing its edge after Steve Jobs.

A look at what they have announced shows that they have not. What is more interesting today is that they are announcing

a lot of integrations - with other Apple devices (iPads, iPhones and Macs), social networks, cars, etc. It almost seems that the

theme of this release was integrations. This is very important. Essentially, they're deepening the moat around their castle.

 

The question is are they overvalued? How many businesses have continued to produce revolutionary products that see adoption rates that Apple has? How much growth can they achieve and can they efficiency allocate the capital earnings or will they ultimately destroy it searching for the next best idea? I don't see anything special in their announcement today, seems to continue on the path of other companies such as Google.

 

I have never been an apple guy. I do use a first gen i-pad that my wife received at work but nothing else. I prefer my Android phone to my wife's I-phone. I am sure I have enough exposure to Apple in my mutual fund based 401k accounts that I don't need to own it in my value portfolio. Having said that, I will certainly be watching it, just not investing in it at this time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People seem to foget how much can change in a few years.  I was out for a run this weekend and got to thinking about my life.  I spend the bulk of my days when not at work with 3 other people I did not know a little over ten years: my wife, and two kids. 

 

My way of saying that neither the tech industry, nor Apple will be the same in ten years, or even three years for that matter.  Either, internal, or external factors will normalize Apple at some point.  As a value investor I wouldn't touch that stock with a barge pole. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest valueInv

People seem to foget how much can change in a few years.  I was out for a run this weekend and got to thinking about my life.  I spend the bulk of my days when not at work with 3 other people I did not know a little over ten years: my wife, and two kids. 

 

My way of saying that neither the tech industry, nor Apple will be the same in ten years, or even three years for that matter.  Either, internal, or external factors will normalize Apple at some point.  As a value investor I wouldn't touch that stock with a barge pole.

 

I remember that you said that Apple would top out at $500-$600B market cap in January. They're now at $542B market cap.

 

I bet you $5000 that they will surpass $750B in the next two years. Wanna take me on?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People seem to foget how much can change in a few years.  I was out for a run this weekend and got to thinking about my life.  I spend the bulk of my days when not at work with 3 other people I did not know a little over ten years: my wife, and two kids. 

 

My way of saying that neither the tech industry, nor Apple will be the same in ten years, or even three years for that matter.  Either, internal, or external factors will normalize Apple at some point.  As a value investor I wouldn't touch that stock with a barge pole.

 

I remember that you said that Apple would top out at $500-$600B market cap in January. They're now at $542B market cap.

 

I bet you $5000 that they will surpass $750B in the next two years. Wanna take me on?

 

So exactly how was Uccmal wrong...at least to this point? 

 

Don't get too carried away.  I went through the whole presentation after you linked it, and I wasn't particularly impressed with what they were doing.  There was nothing really significant, other than getting the Macbooks up to speed with the iPad3 and iPhone. 

 

Integration with Facebook and pushing their navigation over Google Maps?  You don't think Google is already working on this...that they've got far more smartphones already using Android and they won't fight back?  The one thing that always happens with regularity, is that parity comes easier than the retention of supposed moats. 

 

With proper curing concrete becomes stronger and impermeable to moisture...but if you get any cracks...even the smallest amount of moisture can start to tear it apart over time.  Those cracks appear more frequently within technology companies.  Cheers!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People seem to foget how much can change in a few years.  I was out for a run this weekend and got to thinking about my life.  I spend the bulk of my days when not at work with 3 other people I did not know a little over ten years: my wife, and two kids. 

 

My way of saying that neither the tech industry, nor Apple will be the same in ten years, or even three years for that matter.  Either, internal, or external factors will normalize Apple at some point.  As a value investor I wouldn't touch that stock with a barge pole.

 

I remember that you said that Apple would top out at $500-$600B market cap in January. They're now at $542B market cap.

 

I bet you $5000 that they will surpass $750B in the next two years. Wanna take me on?

 

So exactly how was Uccmal wrong...at least to this point? 

 

Don't get too carried away.  I went through the whole presentation after you linked it, and I wasn't particularly impressed with what they were doing.  There was nothing really significant, other than getting the Macbooks up to speed with the iPad3 and iPhone. 

 

Integration with Facebook and pushing their navigation over Google Maps?  You don't think Google is already working on this...that they've got far more smartphones already using Android and they won't fight back?  The one thing that always happens with regularity, is that parity comes easier than the retention of supposed moats. 

 

With proper curing concrete becomes stronger and impermeable to moisture...but if you get any cracks...even the smallest amount of moisture can start to tear it apart over time.  Those cracks appear more frequently within technology companies.  Cheers!

 

 

before the ipod-iphone there was the ? ? ?  Oh yeah.  The indominatable Sony Walkman :)

 

The key step in the development of the ipod-iphone wasn't even technical.  It was getting the recording studios to sign off on the Apple secure royalty scheme.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest valueInv

Integration with Facebook and pushing their navigation over Google Maps?  You don't think Google is already working on this...that they've got far more smartphones already using Android and they won't fight back?  The one thing that always happens with regularity, is that parity comes easier than the retention of supposed moats. 

 

With proper curing concrete becomes stronger and impermeable to moisture...but if you get any cracks...even the smallest amount of moisture can start to tear it apart over time.  Those cracks appear more frequently within technology companies.  Cheers!

 

In that case would you like to take me up on that bet? Either you or Uccmal, anyway is fine. I have $5K up for grabs  ;)

 

And no, I don't think Google is working on giving the Facebook the kind of integration and placement that Apple has. Doing so will effectively kill

their own social network while it is still a sapling. If they don't, they will make Android phones less attractive to the hundreds of millions of regular Facebook users. What are they going to chose? Their social platform or their mobile platform?

 

No, they're not going to have the kind of integrations that Apple has with its phone, tablet and laptops. Thats because few people are buying Android tablets and even those that are - they're buying Amazon's. There are fewer still with Chromebooks. So, what value does the integration bring? Cool demos?

 

Apple has already announced the second version of Siri. Google still needs to announce its first.

 

And what would be the point of Google's catching up? Only 7% of their users have upgraded to the current version of Android. How many can or will upgrade to the next version? All those demos make for great PR but if your users can't get the features, why create them in the first place?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And no, I don't think Google is working on giving the Facebook the kind of integration and placement that Apple has. Doing so will effectively kill their own social network while it is still a sapling. If they don't, they will make Android phones less attractive to the hundreds of millions of regular Facebook users. What are they going to chose? Their social platform or their mobile platform?

 

I wasn't talking about Facebook...but Apple's challenge to destroy Google Maps. 

 

No, they're not going to have the kind of integrations that Apple has with its phone, tablet and laptops. Thats because few people are buying Android tablets and even those that are - they're buying Amazon's. There are fewer still with Chromebooks. So, what value does the integration bring? Cool demos?

 

It's not about tablets.  Tablets are just another media outlet for the end user, and over time it will morph into something else, just like desktops, laptops, etc.  The iPod for all intents and purposes is irrelevant now, even though people still buy it, there is support for it and it generates revenues through iTunes...but it is irrelevant and will eventually go the way of the VCR or DVD player.  The end goal is to provide the user the most useable device and the greatest number of integrated devices.  So as long as Apple's competitors are outselling it in smartphones, laptops and eventually televisions, they will eat into the marketshare over time. 

 

Don't forget that Jobs created the graphic interface (or at least brought it to market), but who ended up with the monopoly...Gates with Windows.  Things change so quickly in technology that moats can dissolve in much less than a decade.  Granted, it will take Apple's competitors considerable time to eat into their space significantly, but it will happen over time.  It always does!  Cheers!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest valueInv

And no, I don't think Google is working on giving the Facebook the kind of integration and placement that Apple has. Doing so will effectively kill their own social network while it is still a sapling. If they don't, they will make Android phones less attractive to the hundreds of millions of regular Facebook users. What are they going to chose? Their social platform or their mobile platform?

 

I wasn't talking about Facebook...but Apple's challenge to destroy Google Maps. 

 

No, they're not going to have the kind of integrations that Apple has with its phone, tablet and laptops. Thats because few people are buying Android tablets and even those that are - they're buying Amazon's. There are fewer still with Chromebooks. So, what value does the integration bring? Cool demos?

 

It's not about tablets.  Tablets are just another media outlet for the end user, and over time it will morph into something else, just like desktops, laptops, etc.  The iPod for all intents and purposes is irrelevant now, even though people still buy it, there is support for it and it generates revenues through iTunes...but it is irrelevant and will eventually go the way of the VCR or DVD player.  The end goal is to provide the user the most useable device and the greatest number of integrated devices.  So as long as Apple's competitors are outselling it in smartphones, laptops and eventually televisions, they will eat into the marketshare over time. 

 

Don't forget that Jobs created the graphic interface (or at least brought it to market), but who ended up with the monopoly...Gates with Windows.  Things change so quickly in technology that moats can dissolve in much less than a decade.  Granted, it will take Apple's competitors considerable time to eat into their space significantly, but it will happen over time.  It always does!  Cheers!

 

So, are you taking the bet?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, are you taking the bet?

 

So, you would actually bet on the short-term, speculative nature of predicting whether Apple might be a $750B capitalization company within a year or two?

 

What if someone asked you whether you would make a $5K bet on Apple being a $750B company on June 13, 2013?  Would you be silly enough to take that bet? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, are you taking the bet?

 

So, you would actually bet on the short-term, speculative nature of predicting whether Apple might be a $750B capitalization company within a year or two?

 

What if someone asked you whether you would make a $5K bet on Apple being a $750B company on June 13, 2013?  Would you be silly enough to take that bet?

 

Why would they bet 50/50 on a 750B$ mkt cap when they could buy Jan 2014 calls for a much better risk/reward for the longs?

 

BeerBaron

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Things change, you would be crazy to bet on Apple at this point aiming for a 50-100% return in a few years IMO. I just bought a 200€ sony xperia U with latest android, dual core 1ghz, 3,5"screen, great camera, and a lot of other things that are actually at least as good as the previous iphone generation. Most online reviews actually give it a better rating than Apple's Iphone 3g. For 200€! I could have bought a 650€ Iphone 4s that is slightly better but why would I?

 

I doubt Apple will retain it's hip image for which people pay up 25-50% in 3-5 years, let alone after that period. Maybe they do, maybe they don't. Not knowing this is enough to stay away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Valueinv, My own dirty tricks being used against me.  I recall offering Peter Burke a similar bet about subscribers to RIM increasing.  He passed, I was actually right, but I wouldn't make the same bet now, only 8 months later.  :).

 

Betting against you with cash is the same as shorting AAPL which I wouldn't do either.  No telling how long it will kick around this stock price before coming down a little.  The fact its share price is no longer rising says something to me, as a value investor.  The market is unwilling to price in a greater risk premium that they can continue to pull rabbits. 

 

I stick to my assertions in that past post that there is alot more that can go wrong for AApL going forward than right.  BTW, I love my IPad.  I also love my house but wouldn't buy it at 2012 prices in Toronto. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting thread to say the least.  I'll say I was disappointed in the products released yesterday.  I'm a long time Mac user, have an iPhone etc.  I use Twitter but not Facebook, all of this Facebook integration is useless to me.  So if I upgraded my phone to that new version maybe half the new features I would never use.  To make it worse there's probably a "post to Facebook" button on every screen that I could inadvertently hit, then it would try to hit the site, and timeout before I could continue with what I was trying to do.

 

I'm really split on the new direction of OS X.  I liked the slick engineering they had this past decade, it really trumped Windows.  The whole drift to the cloud is a turnoff though.  What if my network is down, what if I don't want my documents posted online?  I don't want to spend $2000 on a dumb terminal. What I always loved about OS X was it seemed transparent, it let me get what I wanted done without needing to interact with the system itself. 

 

It's funny what goes around comes around.  About 10 years ago Sun tried the SunRay experiment, everything on the server (cloud).  Users hated it, adoption never took off and it failed.  I've used systems like this, and they're painful.  Yet suddenly it's in vogue again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting thread to say the least.  I'll say I was disappointed in the products released yesterday.  I'm a long time Mac user, have an iPhone etc.  I use Twitter but not Facebook, all of this Facebook integration is useless to me.  So if I upgraded my phone to that new version maybe half the new features I would never use.  To make it worse there's probably a "post to Facebook" button on every screen that I could inadvertently hit, then it would try to hit the site, and timeout before I could continue with what I was trying to do.

 

I'm really split on the new direction of OS X.  I liked the slick engineering they had this past decade, it really trumped Windows.  The whole drift to the cloud is a turnoff though.  What if my network is down, what if I don't want my documents posted online?  I don't want to spend $2000 on a dumb terminal. What I always loved about OS X was it seemed transparent, it let me get what I wanted done without needing to interact with the system itself. 

 

It's funny what goes around comes around.  About 10 years ago Sun tried the SunRay experiment, everything on the server (cloud).  Users hated it, adoption never took off and it failed.  I've used systems like this, and they're painful.  Yet suddenly it's in vogue again.

 

I think there's a big difference here--now it is duplication not solely on the server.  If the network is down, you still have your latest updated files.  I assure you, the processing power of the macbook pro does not qualify as a "dumb terminal" =p.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its not like Jobs was working 70 hours a week till the day he died. Read the biography, he stopped working around July 2011-almost a year ago. These a probably yearly release cycles, meaning Jobs had little influence on it. Further, Apple is known to make a lot of last minute changes. So what you see has been worked on recently and still a few months away from release.

 

Most time Jobs spent going into work in those final days was primarily on the long term, high level direction of the company. They were working on releasing IOS around the time of his death.  It's unlikely that he was dealing with the minutiae of the subsequent IOS 6 release a year down the road.

 

I've read the biography and watched the interviews and followed Jobs for years. I believe that his two biggest contributions were his ability to set strategic direction by knowing what to do and especially what not to do (when he came back and redefined Apple's computer line as a grid of "desktop-laptop/consumer-pro" that was genius in itself) and his taste as a consumer/beta-tester/designer (how he could try a product prototype find minute flaws in design and reject anything not "good enough", as well as define some attributes of what "good enough" was).

 

Considering the length of product cycles and how it seems like until the very end Apple was Jobs' passion, I'm pretty sure that he still steered the company in certain directions and was shown prototypes and gave his approval and disapproval. That doesn't require spending 70 hours a week at 1 Infinite Loop or whatever. Could be done in very little time, but still matter a lot. I'm not saying he approved all the little details we're seeing now, but chances are that he steered prototypes in certain directions and put resources into certain lines of R&D (TV?).

 

IMO the next product cycle will be more interesting for the post-Jobs era.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting thread to say the least.  I'll say I was disappointed in the products released yesterday.  I'm a long time Mac user, have an iPhone etc.  I use Twitter but not Facebook, all of this Facebook integration is useless to me.  So if I upgraded my phone to that new version maybe half the new features I would never use.  To make it worse there's probably a "post to Facebook" button on every screen that I could inadvertently hit, then it would try to hit the site, and timeout before I could continue with what I was trying to do.

 

I'm really split on the new direction of OS X.  I liked the slick engineering they had this past decade, it really trumped Windows.  The whole drift to the cloud is a turnoff though.  What if my network is down, what if I don't want my documents posted online?  I don't want to spend $2000 on a dumb terminal. What I always loved about OS X was it seemed transparent, it let me get what I wanted done without needing to interact with the system itself. 

 

It's funny what goes around comes around.  About 10 years ago Sun tried the SunRay experiment, everything on the server (cloud).  Users hated it, adoption never took off and it failed.  I've used systems like this, and they're painful.  Yet suddenly it's in vogue again.

 

I think there's a big difference here--now it is duplication not solely on the server.  If the network is down, you still have your latest updated files.  I assure you, the processing power of the macbook pro does not qualify as a "dumb terminal" =p.

 

Obviously...

 

The biggest thing for me with the cloud is who owns the data and what can be done with it?  There is a big grey area on these things right now, both Google and Apple claim the right to modify and redistribute as well as create derivative works.  They also claim the ability to delete objectionable material as they deem fit.  And lastly they can turn over your data to law enforcement without your permission.

 

Why does this matter?  What if you are accused of something Google or Apple might cough up the data without question or without a court order. 

 

And of course the last concern is hacking and data privacy.  If I only have files on my own computer I am responsible for security, and someone needs to specifically target me.  If I use a cloud thing and Apple or Google are compromised private or confidential files could be made public due to a lack of security on someone else's part.  And don't think that the document clouds won't be targeted, they're like giant honeypots.  Imagine the information stored in there if someone cracks it, a scary thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest valueInv

So, are you taking the bet?

 

So, you would actually bet on the short-term, speculative nature of predicting whether Apple might be a $750B capitalization company within a year or two?

 

What if someone asked you whether you would make a $5K bet on Apple being a $750B company on June 13, 2013?  Would you be silly enough to take that bet?

 

Why would they bet 50/50 on a 750B$ mkt cap when they could buy Jan 2014 calls for a much better risk/reward for the longs?

 

BeerBaron

 

To prove a point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest valueInv

So, are you taking the bet?

 

So, you would actually bet on the short-term, speculative nature of predicting whether Apple might be a $750B capitalization company within a year or two?

 

What if someone asked you whether you would make a $5K bet on Apple being a $750B company on June 13, 2013?  Would you be silly enough to take that bet?

 

Here's the bet - "between now and June 12, 2014, I am betting $5000 US that Apple will exceed $750B in market cap at least once."

 

You can label it speculative, silly, whatever you want. The odds are stacked against me, right? I am betting on almost 50% gain on a humungous company that is going to screw up soon and taken over by competitors, right? This should be easy money for you or Uccamal. Like taking candy from a kid ;) You're value investors, you know a sure bet.

 

You are the guys who started making short term, specific predictions - not me. I am simply challenging you on it. Are you confident in your analysis?

Well, put some money beyond those words then. C'mon!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest valueInv

Its not like Jobs was working 70 hours a week till the day he died. Read the biography, he stopped working around July 2011-almost a year ago. These a probably yearly release cycles, meaning Jobs had little influence on it. Further, Apple is known to make a lot of last minute changes. So what you see has been worked on recently and still a few months away from release.

 

Most time Jobs spent going into work in those final days was primarily on the long term, high level direction of the company. They were working on releasing IOS around the time of his death.  It's unlikely that he was dealing with the minutiae of the subsequent IOS 6 release a year down the road.

 

I've read the biography and watched the interviews and followed Jobs for years. I believe that his two biggest contributions were his ability to set strategic direction by knowing what to do and especially what not to do (when he came back and redefined Apple's computer line as a grid of "desktop-laptop/consumer-pro" that was genius in itself) and his taste as a consumer/beta-tester/designer (how he could try a product prototype find minute flaws in design and reject anything not "good enough", as well as define some attributes of what "good enough" was).

 

Considering the length of product cycles and how it seems like until the very end Apple was Jobs' passion, I'm pretty sure that he still steered the company in certain directions and was shown prototypes and gave his approval and disapproval. That doesn't require spending 70 hours a week at 1 Infinite Loop or whatever. Could be done in very little time, but still matter a lot. I'm not saying he approved all the little details we're seeing now, but chances are that he steered prototypes in certain directions and put resources into certain lines of R&D (TV?).

 

IMO the next product cycle will be more interesting for the post-Jobs era.

 

Jobs was a micro manager. He attended to every detail and made changes until the last minute. Things were taken out, changed, put in, etc at the last minute. He was also know to change his mind frequently. During his final days, they were working on IOS 5, iPhone 4S and the iPad 3. Do you think he was ignoring that and working on IOS 6? Prototypes evolve a lot during development. Even if Jobs was shown some initial prototypes, what you saw yesterday is likely to be very different from what Jobs would have seen 18 months ago.

 

Jobs may have set a high level, strategic direction but with Apple its the details that make the product. Further, Apple was free to reject Job's direction after he stepped down. For example, the new AppleTV interface was one that Jobs hated and had rejected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share




×
×
  • Create New...