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: Steve Andrew who wrote (17721)	9/9/1998 2:04:00 PM
From: Kurt Starnes	Respond to of 213177

Steve: Can you share anything more with us regarding your sources? Sure sounds like speculation to me. If there is widespread evidence of this 'channel stuffing' then let us at it! GO AAPL! Kurt P.S.: Another good report on iMac demand/supply: macweek.zdnet.com

To: Steve Andrew who wrote (17721)	9/9/1998 2:14:00 PM
From: Mark Palmberg	Respond to of 213177

The garbage is littered with stock certificates of companies that reported "unbelievable" sales only to bloat their acct. receivable ledgers and ultimately have to restate their real earnings. I'm not talking about units shipped or revenue, I'm talking about sales...units walking out the door. Perhaps Steve Jobs' success is merely a reflection of how badly Apple was screwed up before his arrival? It's obvious you don't trust Jobs, and I know there are people on this thread who would second that emotion. I find it rather difficult to believe, however, that Jobs would knowingly, and without forethought, gamble on Apple's future by stuffing the channel to such an extent that the act would negatively reflect on future quarters. If he gets caught with his pants down, AAPL takes a dirt ride, no if's, and's, or but's about it. I simply can't count Jobs out after what he's pulled with the iMac. If nothing else, he's learned (and taught us all) the value of the element of surprise. He literally has nothing to gain at this point by showing us all -- or any -- of his cards; a quiet Cupertino should make shorts nervous. Thanks for posting to this thread, Steve. Your opinion is clearly a valuable one. Best of luck, Mark

To: Steve Andrew who wrote (17721)	9/9/1998 2:32:00 PM
From: Robert Mayo	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 213177

"...I only question the veracity of the sales figures. If any of you really believe "sales are sales" I strongly suggest you go out and get some coffee and read thru your WSJ history books...." You got anything besides short-seller fantasies to substantiate your claims of channel stuffing? Bob

To: Steve Andrew who wrote (17721)	9/9/1998 3:31:00 PM
From: HerbVic	Respond to of 213177

Steve, What are you short now, and why the more than passing interest in AAPL? Given that your projections would not make AAPL a good short for at least 6 months, and there are many tax sell off projects to earn on, your interest in keeping this thread on their toes kindles mind theories of a short seller up to his eyeballs in wrong way traffic. I realize that you say you have little position on AAPL currently, but if you will, please define how little and in what direction. Also, you must be short something. What is it? This is a great market for shorts. I'm more than just curious as to where you think the best shorting opportunities are this week. Keep posting. We need all the angles. Your presence is welcome. HerbVic