Recent Comments

  • Gregg Thurman on Apple shares break $290 for a new record high - 'Looks to me that the institutions, a cautious group if ever there was one, have done their research and feel very good about Apple’s future, as do I.'
  • David Emery on Apple shares break $290 for a new record high - '“There’s a lot riding on this upcoming WWDC. Apple can’t afford to disappoint.” I think this is right. It’s both investor/speculator/WallSt risk and also consumer/customer risk. Apple has a reputation of being late, BUT getting it right. If it’s late, and then gets it wrong, that seriously compromises Apple’s reputation.'
  • David Emery on Counterpoint: Apple's iPhone 17 sweeps the March quarter - 'Yup! I still see folding phones as a gimmick.'
  • Robert Stack on Evercore: How hyperscaler demand is disrupting Apple's precurement advantage - 'Maybe that’s not an error Ted, as a long time Apple strategy is to buy up critical components before others so as to leave the others short of what they need. Thus “precurement”, defined as procurement before everybody else! 🙂'
  • Robert Paul Leitao on Premarket: Apple was red, turned green - 'In my view there’s a lot of headroom between Apple’s new all-time highs today and several of the recently revised price targets for the shares. I believe much of that gap can be filled with Apple’s current pace of hardware innovation and serious progress being made and announced on AI-integration across Apple’s operating systems and an updated timeline and roadmap for the long-promised major and conspicuous upgrade to Siri. This includes performance on voice queries through Apple’s services platforms such Apple Music and Apple Maps.'
  • Robert Stack on Nearly half of all global smartphone revenue in the March quarter went to Apple - 'Bart: I so appreciate your many contributions to this site. Also your humility…'
  • Robert Stack on In Siri settlement, Apple could pay iPhone owners up to $95 per device - 'Dan: With all due respect, Jobs had similar feelings towards Bill Gates/Microsoft who brazenly stole Apple’s GUI as the basis for Windows. And yet, without the Gates/Microsoft investment during a critical period during Apple’s “dark years”, many have argued Apple likely would have gone bankrupt. IIRC, Jobs even invited Gates to address on video – was it a WWDC even? – and when he was booed Jobs reined in the crowd. Point is, sometimes you gotta do things you don’t like. Sort of how I view what poor Tim Cook has to do re Trump…'
  • Gregg Thurman on In the U.S., Apple's newest iPhones took all the top spots - '”The premium-priced iPhone 17 Pro and Pro Max together accounted for over half of sales. A year ago, iPhone 16 Pro and Pro Max made up only 38% of sales.” Without a unit volume increase, revenue increased by virtue of the model mix towards more expensive handsets. F2026 is going to be a significant revenue inflection point.'
  • Ted Kluger on Evercore: How hyperscaler demand is disrupting Apple's precurement advantage - 'PED, you have typo to fix in the title. 😉'
  • Gregg Thurman on Evercore: How hyperscaler demand is disrupting Apple's precurement advantage - 'Adoption of Google’s TurboQuant memory compression technique will impact memory demand negatively. More so because it’s software, which means future Dara center upgrades may include TurboQuant to expand memory without replacing hardware.'
  • Robert Paul Leitao on Premarket: Apple was red, turned green - 'Yes! Apple is printing new all time highs today! However, the share price performance year-to-date (7% at this moment) trails the performance of the tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite (11.83%). I’m excited Apple is setting the first new all-time high since early December and I’m grateful for the performance of Apple over the past three decades. I do expect more as Apple keeps to its commitment made to consumers at WWDC 2024 and delivers on a conspicuous upgrade to Siri that alleviates widespread global frustration with Apple’s digital assistant. In my view, delivering on the company’s promise will lift the share price significantly higher and restore lost confidence in the company’s ability to deliver for its customers.'
  • Gregg Thurman on Counterpoint: Apple's iPhone 17 sweeps the March quarter - 'None of Samsung’s listed Top 5 sellers are Foldables. Why would Apple want to compete with a handset that doesn’t make it into the originator’s Top 5, or the industry’s overall Top 10?'
  • Gregg Thurman on Premarket: Apple was red, turned green - 'Fred, if I recall correctly, your preferred options trade is to Sell Puts. Did you sell any since Earnings?'
  • Dan Scropos on In Siri settlement, Apple could pay iPhone owners up to $95 per device - 'I’m not as worried about failed “shots” as I am the ones that have moved forward. Eric Schmidt sat on Apple’s board and betrayed Apple and Steve Jobs in 2006. Before the iPhone’s 2007 debut, early Android prototypes (codenamed “Sooner”) resembled BlackBerry devices with physical keyboards. After seeing the iPhone, Google scrapped that design and shifted Android to a touch-based, multi-gesture interface that Jobs believed was a “wholesale” theft of Apple’s ideas. Steve Jobs famously vowed to “destroy” Android, labeling it a “stolen product” and threatening to spend all of Apple’s $40 billion cash reserve and his last breath to engage in “thermonuclear war” against Google. Today? Tim Cook’s Apple *partners* with Google to be the brains behind 15 years of failed Siri. A legion of AI and Siri folks have quit and left for other companies. When you put Siri and this new partnership (dependence is probably more accurate) in the context of HomePod, Car, Vision Pro, Apple TV and other misfires, and couple that with almost a trillion dollars in buybacks, you’d think Apple’s BOD would show guys like Giannadrea and Tim Cook the door. And that’s precisely what I suspect happened. This was far, far more than a “misstep.”'
  • Gregg Thurman on Premarket: Apple was red, turned green - 'ALL TIME HIGH. $292.07 and only 30 minutes into today’s session. I am one lucky guy. On Tuesday a surge caused my 100 JUL $235/$240 Call Spreads to sell @ $4.65, leaving me all cash. Then on Wednesday an unexpectedly fast decline caused my crap low Buy order for 135 JUL $270/$275 Call Spreads order to fill @ $2.33. Since then AAPL has rallied about $7.xx. In 22 years of options trading I’ve never been so lucky with the placement of my orders.'
  • Steven Philips on Counterpoint: Apple's iPhone 17 sweeps the March quarter - 'I wouldn’t expect even a good selling folding phone to have the volume to compete with the volumes all of these phones sell at.'
  • Bart Yee on Premarket: Apple was red, turned green - 'AAPL opens today at a new All Time IntraDay High (ATIDH) of over $289 and it has already tracked above $290 less than 10 minutes in. How far it will go or where it will close is anyone’s guess but if any positivity, sentiment improvement or white swan like an Iran ceasefire happens, $300 is in sight. Holding that threshold will be a key test of AAPL strength.'
  • David Emery on Counterpoint: Apple's iPhone 17 sweeps the March quarter - 'None of those are folding phones, right? That says to me the folding form factor doesn’t have much attraction for those willing to pay for a premium device.'
  • Bart Yee on Apple stopped buying its own shares for nearly two months last quarter - 'Horace, I disagree, please see my reasoning, documentation and comment below in this thread.'
  • Bart Yee on Nearly half of all global smartphone revenue in the March quarter went to Apple - 'Hey Robert, good catch, that was my calculation error while writing my comments to PED at midnight. Should have Siri recheck my numbers. Should have read “the remaining 34% of revenue to split up in lower than 4% increments among the remaining Android manufacturers.” This is the fallacy of cheap Android products at relatively high volumes, sales volumes and numbers look great, but relative revenues, margins and profits are quite small. Take Xiaomi for example. They sold 13% of 1.25 billion smartphones in 2025, or specifically 165M smartphones. But if their ASP was only $156 (and this was/is a cheered improvement over the $148 a couple of years ago), while rising, that still isn’t a huge gain. Here’s Gemini to help with the numbers, with my currency conversions: Prompt: “what has been xiaomi’s smartphone ASP by year since 2020” “Xiaomi’s smartphone Average Selling Price (ASP) has consistently risen due to its premiumization strategy, reaching record highs, including approximately RMB 1,211 in Q1 2025 and RMB 1,138.2 in 2024. The ASP has generally increased year-over-year from 2020 through 2025 as the company focuses on higher-tier models. 2020: Approximately RMB 1,039.8 ($150 USD) (Total revenue 152.2B CNY / 146.4M units). 2021: Approximately RMB 1,077.5 (~$160) (Based on rising ASP reported that year). 2022: RMB 1,111 ($165 USD) (Set a record high at the time). 2023: Continued upward trend, with 2024 results confirming continued year-over-year increases. 2024: RMB 1,138.2 (Up 5.2% year-over-year). 2025 (Q1): Reached a new high of RMB 1,211 ($178 USD). The trend shows a steady, deliberate increase in ASP as Xiaomi shifts its portfolio towards higher-priced devices (RMB 3,000+ or €300+).'
  • Darren DMW on Premarket: Apple was red, turned green - 'Apple was Red. Apple is Green. Apple is ATH. Long Live The Longs.'
  • Greg Lippert on In Siri settlement, Apple could pay iPhone owners up to $95 per device - 'Dan I find your reasoning very myopic. All tech companies take shots that do not work out. Google, Microsoft, and Meta have a graveyard of failed initiatives. That doesn’t mean it was a waste. I bet Apple learned a lot – including most importantly that it wasn’t a path worth pursuing. AI Siri was a misstep, but one I think they will soon rectify.'
  • Romeo Esparrago on Premarket: Apple is red - 'Thanks, Sacto Joe! Until I read this evening, I didn’t realize we hit 288+ today yay!'
  • Bart Yee on Apple stopped buying its own shares for nearly two months last quarter - 'Sorry, didn’t mean to bold the entire part 2, must have missed the HTML close bold syntax. Hope it’s not too hard on the eyes.'
  • Bart Yee on Apple stopped buying its own shares for nearly two months last quarter - 'Part 2 Now I’ve never been a CFO, CPA, or financial analyst, nor played one on Apple TV or other streaming service, and frankly, I didn’t know how to read a 10Q earnings report until I joined Apple 3.0 in 2019 and realized I needed to learn more about what was being revealed and published by Apple, at least officially to the SEC and under their regulations. And there are still areas of a 10Q that make my head spin. But, perhaps because of my trust in Apple, I take them at there words when they make these statements in the official reporting of a 10Q. On my reading of the 10Q, it appears that Apple still has, from the May 2025 program authorization, $100B – $36.2B used already over Q1 and Q2, leaving $63.8B from the May 2025 program. That doesn’t indicate to me that Apple ran out of funds to repurchase shares in February and March 2026. WHY they stopped or didn’t repurchase shares then was the subject of my speculation and spitballing of my post reprinted here. I and pretty much everyone else don’t have any inside information on the decision making, none of the Analysts in the earnings call noted it or asked about EXCEPT in the context of the dropping of net cash neutral as a corporate goal. This refers back to statements by Kevan Parekh in the call (courtesy of the Six Colors transcript): “During the quarter, we returned $15 billion to shareholders. This included $3.8 billion in dividends and equivalents, and $11 billion through open market repurchases of 42 million Apple shares. Our repurchase activity at any time can be affected by a number of factors that we take into account, and as you’re aware, we recently announced a CEO transition.” “Taking a step back, we plan to continue our capital allocation philosophy of first making all the necessary investments needed to support the business, and then returning excess cash to shareholders over time.” The above policy change was unexpected and an interesting change, apparently discussed and decided on by C-suite and Board. Why now, and in relation (or not) to CFO/CEO, Executive Chairman changes, AI memory crunch, the domestic and world geopolitical situation and all its reverberations, etc., etc., none can say with any certainty (hey Gurman, missed this one, eh?) until Ternus, Parekh or Apple address it directly or indirectly. What they did say on the call “suggested” someone or Apple wanted more financial flexibility to deal with growing extenuating business circumstances, including rapidly rising key memory parts costs, unprecedented demand for Mac Neo, Macs and iPhone 17’s AND production constraints which will require additional and more costly orders of TSMC produced Apple Silicon chips plus memory beyond what was already contracted, and likely even more issues. My quoted speculation above was my thoughts and ideas as to why ~$14B was NOT spent in Q2, why a sudden stop mid fiscal year, and potential reasons, all in the interests of discussion among my fellow learned subscribers. So Horace, while I appreciate and value ALL of your considerable contributions both here and at Asymco, I respectfully disagree that Apple paused buybacks because they had exhausted their program authorized allocation of funds in the March quarter, stating specifically they had almost $64B left. If anything, with this new April 30, 2026 program authorization of an additional $100B, Apple now moves into Q3 FY2026 with $163.8B in authorized share repurchase funds available. But remember, “The programs do not obligate the Company to acquire a minimum amount of shares.” Nor does it specify or determine the time frame for usage so a pause or reduction in buybacks is fair game. We must trust these actions are in the best interest of the company, and by extension, to its shareholders. Note they did NOT reduce or suspend the dividend, unlike other companies when faced with difficult finances, not that Apple is having ANY financial problems. Rather they are having demand-supply balance issues. Any comments or corrections are always welcome and encouraged. TL:DR – I disagree, and here’s why. Bart'
  • Robert Stack on In Siri settlement, Apple could pay iPhone owners up to $95 per device - 'Well Judge Rogers is gonna be very busy, as she also has the Musk/Altman battle on her docket. Both really high profile cases.'
  • Bart Yee on Apple stopped buying its own shares for nearly two months last quarter - 'Hello Horace, thank you for your comment. From 10K FY2025 Q4 report Part II, item 5, under “Purchases of Equity Securities by the Issuer and Affiliated Purchasers” Footnote 1: “On May 2, 2024, the Company announced a program to repurchase up to $110 billion of the Company’s common stock. During the fourth quarter of 2025, the Company utilized the final $19.8 billion under the May 2024 program. On May 1, 2025, the Company announced an additional program to repurchase up to $100 billion of the Company’s common stock. As of September 27, 2025, $221 million of the May 2025 program had been utilized. The programs do not obligate the Company to acquire a minimum amount of shares.” To me that says Apple had, as of Sept. 27, 2025, end of 4th Quarter FY2025, $99.779 Billion dollars left for share repurchases from the May 2025 program authorization of $100B. From Q1 FY2026 10Q, Part II, Item 2, Footnote 1: “On May 1, 2025, the Company announced a program to repurchase up to $100 billion of the Company’s common stock. As of December 27, 2025, $25.2 billion of the May 2025 program had been utilized. The program does not obligate the Company to acquire a minimum amount of shares.” Apple spent $24.07B on share repurchases in Q1 FY2026. IMO and calculating from above, would there not be $74.80B for share repurchases remaining from the May 2025 program authorization going into Q2 FY2026? From the recent Q2 FY2026 10Q report, Part II, Item 2, Footnote 1: “On May 1, 2025, the Company announced a program to repurchase up to $100 billion of the Company’s common stock. As of March 28, 2026, $36.2 billion of the May 2025 program had been utilized. On April 30, 2026, the Company announced the Board of Directors had authorized an additional program to repurchase up to $100 billion of the Company’s common stock. The programs do not obligate the Company to acquire a minimum amount of shares.” (Bold emphasis mine) Continued…'
  • Gregg Thurman on In Siri settlement, Apple could pay iPhone owners up to $95 per device - 'Maybe, just maybe Apple counted on a vendor, and that vendor (a sole source) failed. And maybe, just maybe Apple wanted to give developers time to create new Vision Pro capable apps before Apple engaged aggressive sales effort. After all the Vision Pro is a whole new platform. I do know that Sony fell flat on its face with the screens.'
  • Joseph Bland on In Siri settlement, Apple could pay iPhone owners up to $95 per device - 'From Reuters today: US Supreme Court declines to pause order holding Apple in contempt in Epic Games lawsuit – Lower court found Apple in contempt in Epic Games case – “Fortnite” maker sued Apple, contesting App Store fees – Apple’s appeal sought to stave district court proceedings The U.S. Supreme Court rejected on Wednesday Apple’s (AAPL.O) request to ​temporarily block a judicial order that found the iPhone maker in violation of sweeping court-mandated changes to its lucrative ‌App Store as part of an antitrust lawsuit by “Fortnite” maker Epic Games. Justice Elena Kagan, on behalf of the court, declined to pause a ruling by the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that deemed Apple in contempt in the Epic lawsuit contesting App Store fees. The Supreme Court’s action means Apple will return to ​U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in Oakland, California, to quarrel over what commission the company can lawfully charge for certain ​app-related transactions. Apple’s bid at the Supreme Court had been aimed at staving off returning to the trial ⁠court while it pursued its legal challenge before the justices.'
  • Dan Scropos on In Siri settlement, Apple could pay iPhone owners up to $95 per device - 'I agree, Neal. My main confusion surrounding the Vision Pro is this—why was it released with no support or use case? The technology is incredible. I just don’t know how they can expect people to buy something that they didn’t provide a use case for. The Car was a good pass. Electric cars are many years from becoming mainstream. Perhaps they rekindle that project’s technologies, who knows. CarPlay remains the preferred infotainment system in vehicles. They need to keep it relevant. But I remain concerned with the projects that *did* come to market. Apple TV remains a hobby, HomePod remains an also ran product, and Apple Watch has negative growth. AirPods Max got a new chip after 5 years and still have that useless carrying case. That one was a head scratcher. Silicon remains the crown jewel, though. It’s also the most important ecosystem component, so that remains a massive accomplishment. Silicon is Apple’s primary competitive advantage.'