Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Apple Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ryan Bartholomew who wrote (166272)	2/22/2014 8:09:05 PM
From: MGV	2 Recommendations Recommended By aaplAnnie Doren Respond to of 213177

Remember, cash balance is much smaller now, and you're talking about multiples of current earnings. First, cash balance is neither "much" smaller or likely any smaller at all nearly 2/3 through the current quarter. You need to do more homework before you throw out comments that appear as flippant as yours routinely do, because you are wasting everyone's time and before long you'll engage no one in discussion. Review how much fcf Apple generates in a quarter. It is hard to fathom but it is there to see in black and white. Second, "we" weren't talking about multiples of current earnings. I said fcf. And in trailing fcf Apple's multiple is about 8.5x and about 7x ex cash. If you want to talk earnings, the multiple is about 12x and about 9.5x ex cash. Expectations are low, discounting little to no growth. Your expectations are clear. They are consensus expectations. Consensus expectations have always underestimated new Apple product categories prior to and up to a year following product launch. Nothing new. As for your running experience, one of the first things you learn in business school is not to forecast sales on the basis of your own tastes and pocket depth. Whether I'm running or mountain biking, I don't like having to rely on a smartphone to see simple display functions. Maybe my pockets are deeper than yours or maybe I run and bike even more but, I'd love a display that plugs into the Apple ecosystem that is visible and accessible when I'm outdoors. Apple's multiples won't remain where they are. If you want a precedent, track Google's share price malaise between late 2007 and mid year 2012.

To: Ryan Bartholomew who wrote (166272)	2/22/2014 8:13:24 PM
From: Kurthend	1 Recommendation Recommended By MGV Respond to of 213177

Remember, cash balance is much smaller now,... Huh?? What company are you talking about?

To: Ryan Bartholomew who wrote (166272)	2/22/2014 8:39:12 PM
From: pyslent	1 Recommendation Recommended By slacker711 Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 213177

"But I would never consider paying $300 for such a thing if my phone itself runs $500." Adding up all the costs certainly increases the sticker shock, but that's the wrong way to think about it. The Phone is a sunk cost. They question is whether Apple can get an iPhone user to spend $300 for added functionality. Of course, that depends on the functionality, but the people who would consider doing so are the ones that could afford to spend $500 on a phone. Those people are MORE likely to buy a smartwatch, not less.