Recent Comments

  • Bill Donahue on Making sense of Apple's 4.8% gain on 'artificial Friday' - 'That’s quite the slant, when the cause and blame rests entirely on the hyperscalers.'
  • David Emery on Making sense of Apple's 4.8% gain on 'artificial Friday' - 'This is fascinating. TheAtlantic.com had an article on price increases, where they -changed the title-. I didn”t capture the previous title, but it was a lot more perjorative than the current title. The subtitle remains “Apple is charging you an AI tax.” https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/2026/07/apple-prices-macbook-memory-shortage/687781/ It does mention, fairly far down the article, that memory price increases are across the industry. But it prefaces that with an implicit “Apple should just eat price increases.” Disappointing!'
  • Aaron Belich on Counterpoint: Apple is snapping up 29% of the foldable screen supply - 'I still do not find value in a device that requires more effort to use, and is shrouded in compromises: Cost Quality Durability'
  • Gregg Thurman on Tim Cook is tying up loose ends before the handoff - 'There are only three keys to successful investing: Management, Management, Management. Since 1997 Apple has led the consumer tech sector (70% of total tech dollars spent) by a mile.'
  • Neil Shapiro on Tim Cook is tying up loose ends before the handoff - '<> No. And I still do not. Why he would? I only have a feeling that if you play with a fire named Trump you are going to get burned. Golden gifts and his presence on command around the world helped Apple and was, perhaps, unavoidable to have to support the man who epitomizes everything that Steve Jobs and Woz founded Apple to fight and then, with the Mac, threw the world’s most memorable hammer. The Lord alone (and if the Devil is not on speaking terms with Him maybe not) knows what threat was given and what gift was refused to be given under duress. Tim Cook did not, I think, step down so much as tripped over some sort of political landmine. Just a guess, a hunch if you will.'
  • Gregg Thurman on Apple asks its supply chain to crank it up - 'Apple Earning Reports, Conference Call and GUIDANCE are the only data points I trust. They come once every ~90 days and prove far more accurate than anything from the internet. The only thing I model these days is AAPL’s daily intraday lows. I’m looking for deviations from historic investor sentiment patterns. The only thing they don’t help with are Black Swans that trigger irrational selling.'
  • Richard Gayle on U.S. Markets are closed to start the July 4, 2026 weekend - 'What a weekend. 250th birthday. World Cup. Wimbledon. Tour de France. I will be sitting in front of the TV most of my waking hours the next few days.'
  • Rodney Avilla on Tim Cook is tying up loose ends before the handoff - 'Thank you Tim Cook, for such a great job, from beginning to end. He may not be setting off fireworks at home, but he sure set off fireworks in my 401k.'
  • Gregg Thurman on U.S. Markets are closed to start the July 4, 2026 weekend - 'Happy July 3rd.'
  • Gregg Thurman on Making sense of Apple's 4.8% gain on 'artificial Friday' - 'I know, it’s a superficial observation, but her voice would drive me crazy after a short period of time, making it impossible to appreciate the content.'
  • Stephen Gordon on U.S. Markets are closed to start the July 4, 2026 weekend - 'Happy 250th! I’m in World Cup heaven. Back to reality after July 19th, unless my team wins it all.'
  • Carl Sullivan on U.S. Markets are closed to start the July 4, 2026 weekend - 'From the looks of that photo, you forgot to say stay stoned! Markets are closed but apparently the dispensary is open!'
  • Greg Lippert on Premarket: Apple is green - 'Congrats Raj and to your cojones of steel. I wanted to make a similar bet (albeit smaller) but in the end didn’t trust the market and didn’t want to risk my cash. Well done!'
  • Greg Lippert on Premarket: Apple is green - 'USAA is great, I don’t even shop rates. They’ve had me for 30+ years.'
  • Gregg Thurman on Premarket: Apple is green - '” Apple is not that far off from retaking the market cap crown as they approach their all time high. ” I’m thinking a print of about $325.00 should do it, with a print over $340 resulting in a mkt cap exceeding $5 Trillion. Should occur well before October earnings.'
  • Gregg Thurman on Premarket: Apple is green - 'Way off topic, but I was just notified by my insurer (USAA) that my credit rating is 740. They use Experian data to come up with that score. That made me curious what my score was at Experian (688). That made me check Transunion (650) and Equimax (719). I’ve concluded from this exercise that credit scores are worthless. I insure with USAA because they don’t discount your coverage while increasing their premium. Your property is insured at replacement costs. This is important to me because my house (3 bdrm, 3 bath, formal living room, formal dining, breakfast room, 3,200 sq ft Craftsman) was built in 1907 (on Historic Register). USAA estimates replacement costs over $1,100,000 with another $300,000 for personal property, while all the big insurance names only insure market value. In Spokane market value on my home is ~$600,000. USAA rates are about double everyone else’s, but if the unthinkable happens the extra coverage is priceless.'
  • Gregg Thurman on Premarket: Apple is green - 'That was a gutsy move. Glad it worked out for you. I’ve held out in the past, with less than stellar results. I was prepared to hold out after WWDC, but this time it was just too much, even for my risk taking nature. With what I expect is going to happen in the next 6 months it won’t matter.'
  • Michael Goldfeder on Apple's contempt in Epic case goes to the Supreme Court - '@Bart: Thank you for those postings. Have a nice holiday weekend to you and everyone on Apple 3.0.'
  • Bart Yee on Apple's contempt in Epic case goes to the Supreme Court - 'Continued 3. E-Commerce Comparison: Amazon & eBayDigital marketplaces charge fees that often add up to Apple’s rates, but their fee structures are unbundled. • Amazon: Amazon charges a baseline 8% to 15% “referral fee” (commission) on the sale price of an item. However, if a seller wants Amazon to store the product, pack it, ship it (Fulfillment by Amazon), and advertise it via sponsored links, the total fees typically consume 30% to 45% of the product’s selling price. ((Gee, Apple hosts, downloads, uploads, delivers, secures, policies, and helps monetize developers apps in a private and secure manner that users expect and trust.)) • eBay: eBay generally charges a base final value fee of 12% to 15% depending on the category, plus optional fees for promoting listings. ((eBay also charges a fee based on the shipping charges)) The Difference: On Amazon or eBay, the higher fees are optional. A seller can choose to handle their own shipping, customer service, and external marketing to keep their fee at just 10-15%. Epic Games’ core argument is that Apple does not give developers a choice; it charges a near-30% flat fee regardless of whether the developer uses Apple’s payment system or handles everything themselves on the web.” “If you’d like, I can provide more details on how Apple’s Small Business Program lowers commissions to 15% for smaller developers, or explain how Epic Games’ parallel lawsuit against Google’s Android store turned out. Which would you like to explore?” And that’s where I stopped. Hope it was of interest to you.'
  • Bart Yee on Apple's contempt in Epic case goes to the Supreme Court - 'This is a long, involved multiple item prompt: “So how did Apple build this very user attractive App Store system? How much have they spent and do they spend to maintain, secure, and grow the App Store, plus help involve and incentivize developers to work with it? Should not Apple be allowed to get a commission for creating and maintaining and promoting its marketplace better than anything else out there? For comparison, how much does a local grocery store charge a vendor for prime shelf space? How much does a Best Buy store charge to allow a product to be sold and advertised in their store? How much does Amazon or EBay charge for a product to be advertised and sold in their platforms?” Gemini Response: The questions you are raising lie at the very heart of Apple’s legal defense. Apple uses these exact economic comparisons to argue that its 30% (or 27%) commission is a normal, market-rate business practice. However, antitrust regulators and the courts look at this differently. Here is a direct breakdown of how Apple built its ecosystem, what it spends, and how its business model compares to physical retail and e-commerce platforms. 1. How Apple Built and Maintains the Ecosystem • Apple built the App Store by introducing a closed, highly curated ecosystem where hardware and software are seamlessly integrated. • The Investment: Apple spends billions of dollars annually on R&D to develop iOS, proprietary software development kits (SDKs), APIs, and Xcode—the tools developers must use to build iPhone apps. • Security & Curation: Apple runs a rigorous manual and automated “App Review” process. Apple’s security infrastructure blocks billions of dollars in fraudulent transactions and filters out malware, creating a trusted marketplace where users feel safe entering their credit cards. • Developer Incentives: Apple hosts global educational initiatives, provides deep data analytics, and maintains a global payment processing system that handles local currencies, taxes, and compliance in over 175 regions. The Court’s View: The U.S. courts agree with you. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals explicitly ruled that Apple is legally entitled to collect a commission to compensate for this work. The legal issue is not if they can charge a fee, but whether they can use monopoly power to force a 27% fee on transactions that happen entirely outside of Apple’s infrastructure (where Apple provides zero payment processing or hosting). 2. Retail Comparison: Grocery Stores & Best Buy Physical retail uses an entirely different economic model based on finite shelf space.“ Chart: Metric – Upfront Cost – (Slotting Fees) Local Grocery Store $250 – $1,000/store, per SKU Best Buy Varies; can be 5 to 6 figures Metric – Typical Profit Margin or Markup Taken Grocery Store Retains 15% – 35% of the retail price through wholesale markups Best Buy Retains 30% – 50% of the retail price depending on electronics type • Slotting Fees: Because physical shelves are physically limited, grocers charge upfront “slotting fees” ($250 to $1,000 per store, per item) simply to mitigate the risk of a product failing and taking up valuable real estate. • The Difference: If a vendor doesn’t want to pay Best Buy’s or a grocer’s high margins, they can walk across the street to Target, Walmart, or a local boutique. The antitrust argument against Apple is that the App Store has infinite digital shelf space, yet Apple blocks developers from opening their own retail storefronts on the iPhone. ((Guess what – Walmart, Target, Home Depot, etc. ALL brick and mortar stores charge these fees and costs, no one is giving away their land, customers, and exposure for free.)) Continued'
  • Bart Yee on Apple's contempt in Epic case goes to the Supreme Court - 'Continued: “so why can’t developers go to the competing marketplaces, namely Google Android Play Store with its 3.5 billion users, dwarfing a Apple’s user base? why can’t they go to Windows and make apps for that marketplace? why don’t developers go to third party app stores in countries which allow that?” “Developers cannot simply abandon the iPhone App Store for alternative platforms because the mobile marketplace functions as a digital duopoly, and users cannot be easily migrated across ecosystems. While switching to Android, Windows, or regional app stores sounds like a straightforward business decision, developers face severe economic and structural barriers when attempting to bypass Apple entirely. 1. The Mobile Marketplace is a Duopoly • In the smartphone industry, developers do not choose between Apple and Google; they must build for both to reach the entire population. The Fragmentation of Android: Even though Android has 3.5 billion users globally, its user base is highly fragmented across thousands of device types, varying hardware capabilities, and different operating system versions. This significantly increases development and optimization costs compared to iOS. • Apple Users Spend More Money: Statistically, iOS users spend significantly more money on premium apps and in-app purchases than Android users. For many developers, losing access to Apple’s customer base means losing 70% to 80% of their actual revenue, even though iOS has fewer total users. Bypassing iOS is financially fatal for most software businesses. 2. Windows is an Entirely Different Market Moving mobile apps or mobile games to Microsoft Windows does not solve the problem because desktop operating systems cater to entirely different consumer behaviors. • Lack of Mobility: You cannot play a mobile location-based game (like Pokémon GO) or order an Uber easily from a Windows desktop. • Form Factor & Audience: Mobile games are specifically optimized for touchscreens, short sessions, and on-the-go mechanics. Porting them to a PC requires completely rebuilding the user interface for mice, keyboards, and monitors, targeting a completely different demographic. 3. Third-Party App Stores Suffer from the “Chicken and Egg” Problem In regions like the European Union—where the Digital Markets Act (DMA) has forced Apple to allow alternative app stores—developers still face massive hurdles: The User Adoption Barrier: Consumers are deeply accustomed to clicking the default App Store icon. Forcing a user to go to a website, download a secondary marketplace, approve security warnings, and put their credit card into an unfamiliar platform results in a massive drop-off in customer conversions. Apple’s Protective Fees: Even where regional laws force Apple to allow alternative marketplaces, Apple has implemented strict structural terms. For example, under EU rules, Apple introduced a “Core Technology Fee” of €0.50 per first install per year for popular apps, making it economically risky for free or low-cost apps to distribute outside the official App Store. Why Epic Games is Fighting the Battle This dynamic explains exactly why Epic Games spent over $1 billion fighting Apple rather than just walking away. Epic did launch its own alternative Epic Games Store, and they do distribute on PC and Android. However, because they cannot realistically tell their millions of iPhone players to go buy a Windows PC or an Android phone just to play Fortnite, they are legally fighting to force open the iOS platform itself.”'
  • Steven Philips on Counterpoint: Apple is snapping up 29% of the foldable screen supply - 'I hate those creases to pieces! 🙂'
  • Kirk DeBernardi on Counterpoint: Apple is snapping up 29% of the foldable screen supply - 'One word, like the rest of us that age… Creases.'
  • David Emery on Premarket: Apple is green - 'As soon as their customers figure it out and move to Android, Apple will be doomed! (Because the only thing Apple sells is phones…) /s'
  • Bill Donahue on Horace Dediu expects iPhone prices to go up $100 - 'Real reporters don’t do that. Peddlers of crap do that.'
  • Bart Yee on Apple's contempt in Epic case goes to the Supreme Court - 'Cont’d Gemini conversation: Prompt: “so apple “should” be legally allowed to seek a “reasonable” commission for its work to maintain and grow the App Store, to the benefit of developers and Apple users I might add?” ”Yes, legally, Apple is entitled to collect a commission for its platform. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals explicitly affirmed that Apple has a legal right to charge a fee for the use of its intellectual property, developer tools, and ecosystem infrastructure. However, the ongoing legal dispute is not about whether Apple can charge a fee, but how much it can charge and how it enforces it. The Two Sides of the Commission Argument The core of the legal and economic debate is structured around two distinct perspectives: Apple’s Argument (The Platform Value): Apple contends that the App Store is a massive, trusted marketplace it spent billions to build. The commission pays for security curation, developer tools (SDKs), global payment processing, and marketing exposure that helps developers scale. Apple argues a 27% fee is fair because developers are still utilizing Apple’s proprietary technology and user base to generate the initial lead, even if the transaction finishes on the web. The Developers’ & Court’s Argument (The Monopoly Power): Epic Games and regulators argue that while Apple deserves compensation, a 27% to 30% fee is an artificial monopoly price, not a competitive market rate. Because iOS is a closed system, developers cannot choose a cheaper competing marketplace. Critics point out that when Apple forces a 27% fee on external web links—where Apple provides zero payment processing or hosting—it is no longer charging for a service, but rather imposing a “tax” designed to prevent competition. What the Courts Ordered Apple to Do Next To balance these two arguments, the courts laid out a specific mechanical sequence for how Apple must adjust its fee structure: • Stop the 27% Workaround: Apple must immediately cease charging the 27% fee on out-of-app purchases, as the court deemed it an anti-competitive barrier. • Conduct a Formal Cost Study: Apple must hire independent, third-party experts to calculate the actual, granular costs of maintaining the iOS ecosystem. • Propose a “Cost-Based” Fee: Apple must submit a new, significantly lower commission rate based strictly on those audited platform costs, rather than historical profit margins. If you want to look closer at the financial impact of this case, I can break down how much revenue Apple stands to lose from a zero-commission ruling, or detail how other countries (like South Korea and the EU) have legally capped Apple’s fees. Which direction would you like to explore?” Continued'
  • Bart Yee on Apple's contempt in Epic case goes to the Supreme Court - 'Here’s my conversation with Gemini, prompts used and responses: Prompt: “what was the actual language of the apple epic ruling in california” “Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers ruled that Apple’s anti-steering policies violated California’s Unfair Competition Law (UCL) by limiting consumer choice. The September 2021 injunction permanently prohibits Apple from restricting developers from including buttons, external links, or calls to action to alternative purchasing methods. Specifically, the court ordered that Apple cannot restrict the “style, language, formatting, quantity, flow or placement of links for purchases outside an app,” or similar calls to action. Following initial efforts to circumvent the ruling, the court found Apple in civil contempt for violating the injunction’s text, confirming that restricting the design or language of external links is prohibited. These contempt findings are currently under appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. For the full legal documentation, you can review the U.S. District Court Judgment or the FindLaw Caselaw.“ Prompt: “did the contempt ruling have anything to do with the commission Apple is entitled to or how much?” “Yes, Apple’s commission rate was the primary reason the company was held in contempt. When Apple updated its policies to comply with the original 2021 anti-steering injunction, it began allowing external links but simultaneously imposed a 27% commission on any purchases made through those links within seven days. The contempt ruling directly addressed the amount and intent of this fee through several key legal conclusions: 1. The 27% Fee Evasion Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers ruled that the 27% fee was a bad-faith workaround designed to make alternative payment methods “not economically viable” for developers. Because Apple’s standard App Store commission is 30%, developers saving a mere 3% had no real incentive to set up external payment systems. The court noted that not a single developer implemented external links during the initial compliance period, proving the fee had a “prohibitive effect” that nullified the original injunction. 2. Stripping Apple’s Ability to Charge Fees As part of the April 2025 civil contempt order, Judge Gonzalez Rogers ordered Apple to halt all fees on external purchases, effectively enforcing a zero-commission regime for linked-out transactions. 3. The Ongoing Appeals Court Battle The financial scope of the contempt ruling was slightly modified on appeal: • The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the contempt finding regarding the 27% fee but ruled that Apple should legally be allowed to collect a “reasonable commission” to cover its actual costs for maintaining the ecosystem. • The U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review Apple’s appeal. Apple is arguing that because the original 2021 text was entirely silent on commissions, the lower courts acted improperly by holding them in contempt over the “spirit” of the law rather than its literal text. If you would like, I can break down how Apple calculated the 27% fee or provide updates on when the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in this case.” Continued'
  • Bart Yee on Premarket: Apple is green - 'AAPL closed up $14.25, +4.84%, at $308.63, near the high of the day of $309.42, on heavy volume of 71.9M shares. TTM PE is now 37.3, Forward PE is a reasonable 32, soon to drop further after earnings. Interesting to see volume over the past week: July 2 71.9M July 1 50.2M June 30 65.1M June 29 66.4M June 26 261.8M (!) Friday June 25 107M (!) Previous Friday to that June 18 88.9M Some heavy trading going on where money flowed out (to INTC, SPCX, other AI) and possibly rotating back into AAPL over this week as attention shifts to Q3 revenue and earnings and ever important directional guidance for Q4 and beyond. When Apple talks, people listen, but apparently selectively and lagging in many cases. Apple foretold price increases 2 quarters ago but nobody believed it, hoping Apple would be the (only) one that could hold prices even when costs went up (“businesses are not charities” so why did anyone expect Apple would eat BOM increases?). Apple said they were chip constrained but were doing all they could to improve that. Some worried that sales would decrease, yet signs point to Apple holding their own. Apple says their product roadmap is strong, I’ll grant we’ve heard that before, but there ARE products that will have some good demand – M5 and on the horizon M6 Macs for AI, Mac Neo, Foldable iPhone, newest iPhone Pro models, plus power refreshes for rest, and relatively modest price increases on select models. I don’t see this as any kind of negative. But bears and hater still make the same comments: “I don’t see these changes as anything but iterative. I don’t understand why or how Apple continues to sell as much or more of their products at these elevated, overpriced prices when there are so many cheaper and just as capable devices out there. Obviously Apple is overvalued because I just can’t see how Apple can keep this up.” “If only people woke up, looked at the specs the competition offers – bigger batteries, faster charging, more RAM, Android as good as or better than iOS, growing ecosystems, improved OS support and of course, overall larger market share at 72% vs iOS 28%! Rational techies will find better value, spending less and getting as much or more than Apple products.” “Apple’s success is solely built on better marketing, convincing less techie oriented teens, middle aged and older (re: elderly) adults, WOMEN, etc. that they need a simpler, easy to use OS that does or chooses so much for them, that the iPhone is a status symbol and “luxury lifestyle” purchase, not a tech “by the specs” purchase, and that obviously (some of these) people have more money than sense so they just throw it at the iPhone instead of checking out all the Android (Pixel, Galaxy, Huawei, Chinese OEM) alternatives, comparing specs, pricing, deals, and come up with their own decisions instead of being brainwashed by Apple to just to buy another one!” Some people will never understand why Apple is successful. And if it was SO EASY to just market better = more sales, why haven’t/ can’t Android makers market better, communicate their points better, do a better job of convincing consumers to buy THEIR products instead? It’s easy and simple right, because Apple can do it, anyone should be able to do it.'
  • Timothy Smith on Apple's contempt in Epic case goes to the Supreme Court - 'I had an extensive conversation with Chatgpt when Apple was found in contempt. How can you contemptuously violate the “spirit” of a ruling when you are complying with the actual language of the ruling, I asked? For one thing, both sides appealed the actual language of the orders. The original appellate decision was based on the actual language. If Epic thought the actual language prohibited what Apple did, Epic either failed to raise the issue, or they lost on that issue, and res judicata prevents them from raising it in a subsequent proceeding.'
  • John Konopka on Premarket: Apple is green - 'Almost 72M shares at the close. Just over $308. Love it. Interesting changes in market cap: NVIDIA: 4.719T AAPL: 4.533T GOOG: 4.346T Apple is not that far off from retaking the market cap crown as they approach their all time high. Oracle is about to test their 52 week low. NVIDIA is almost 20% off their high. MSFT is about 30% off their high. SpaceX is about 28% off of their high. Pretty amazing to see billions of dollars sloshing around like this.'