Apple: Who ya gonna believe, Nikkei Asian Review or your lying eyes?

We’ve heard this story before.

From Nikkei Asian Review:

Apple to halve iPhone X production volume in 1Q
Disappointing holiday-season sales see target cut to 20 million units

Apple will halve its production target for the iPhone X in the three-month period from January from the figure of over 40 million units envisaged at the time of its release in November.

The U.S. tech giant notified suppliers that it had decided to cut the target for the period to around 20 million units, in light of slower-than-expected sales in the year-end holiday shopping season in key markets such as Europe, the U.S. and China.

The iPhone X, Apple’s first smartphone equipped with an organic light-emitting diode display, has failed to catch on globally — something many put down to a price tag starting at $999.

Looking forward, the lackluster sales could result in a delay to the company’s plans to introduce OLED screens in other models.

My take: I have no inside information, but unnamed sources at unnamed Apple suppliers sowing fear and uncertainty are a Nikkei Asian Review specialty.

See also:

And this, from Daniel Eran Dilger:

11 Comments

  1. Michael Thompson said:

    Who other than PED is holding the lying analysts, lying brokerage firms and lying fake news media (Especially Nikkei Asian Review) accountable for their years worth of lies and disinformation? No one.

    Once one of the lies gets hatched, there is an echo chamber from the fake news media spreading fear among the weak shareholders.

    I currently hold over 69,000 shares of Apple and growing. I’m willing to forward my brokerage statement to PED to verify this information. I know that many won’t believe it, but it’s the 100% truth.

    The liars are working overtime to get as many people out of the stock as possible prior to the record breaking news and record revenue projections that Apple will forecast for its fiscal 2nd quarter. They have only 3 more days of lies.

    The sad part is that in 90 days or fewer, when the propagandists at the Nikkei Asian Review put out another lie story, the market will still react like they haven’t been repeatedly wrong before.

    5
    January 29, 2018
  2. John Blackburn said:

    When analysts speak to make a stock weak
    it’s tempting to let out a cry
    much better to wait till the uproars abate
    then quietly, patiently, buy

    2
    January 29, 2018
  3. George Providakes said:

    I’m not sure “no one” comments on track records, but clearly the general pattern is NOT to include in the articles any mention of past performance by either the news organization or analyst when making either buy or sell like article.

    There appears to be little to no accountability to these kind of articles so clearly self policing is a myth in the media and therefore without a clear track record all reports good or bad need to be taken with a grain of salt as entertainment more than news.

    I like that Phillip makes a real effort to capture some of this track record and occasionally provide some suggestions regarding either the “process” used or possible motivations of the authors.

    More of this would be valuable, sort of a 5 star rating on predictions over a 12-48 month period would be wonderful. Personally, I think one sigma error bars are a better way of summarizing the predictions. Predictions are always a bit problematic and error bars give a better sense of the “risk” taken by the author and analysts and thereby assumed by the investor if following the analyst’s predictions.

    In science as opposed to the magical world of economists and markets, whose practitioners are more like astrologers than science/engineers, error bars are essentially mandatory or else articles are deemed subjective and not very credible.

    4
    January 29, 2018
    • John Blackburn said:

      A great idea. Mentions of an analyst’s prediction could be accompanied by a link that to that persons “record” and could even include inline a Tufte-like sparkline indicating reliability.

      0
      January 29, 2018
    • David Emery said:

      I suggested something similar to PED privately. Washington Post rates fake news by the number of “Pinocchio” and someone else has a “Pants on Fire” rating for the worst claim.

      What’s a good scale/marker for bad stories on APPL/Apple? “Sour Apples”? But that sounds more like a judgement on the company than on the story. How about worms? The worst stories get 3 worms?

      0
      January 29, 2018
  4. Fred Stein said:

    As AppleInsider says it’s just another January false alarm for Nikkei.

    3
    January 29, 2018

Leave a Reply