Recent Comments

  • Bart Yee on Apple blows past expectations and its shares fall. What gives? - 'On the memory front, Martin and Wall Street keep fretting about memory makers like Samsung, SK Hynix, Micron and Kioxia raising prices as they “artificially” restrict supply by saying they are pivoting to higher production of HBM AI server driven memory. Will this affect Apple, eventually? If the all consumer facing memory production changes hold, no additional capacity is brought online, and the price increases stick, yes, of course they will be a concern for Apple. But because of Apple’s dominant position in premium smartphones and that iPhone users will buy up in memory, Apple has more buying and price “leverage” for quantity ordering than any single or grouped Android makers. Also, since Apple eliminated the 128gb tier NAND Storage memory in all but the 16e, Apple can stock more of just 256gb, 513gb, and 1TB pieces, and order less different parts, leaving Android to fight over 64GB and 128gb memory to save money. Since Apple already “raised prices” by making the 256gb tier the base or standard across all new models, and 1) kept prices the same on base iPhone 17, creating a great value, and 2) essentially raising the base price on the Pro and Pro Max models to $1099 & $1199 respectively, Apple has neutralized or at least normalized the sticker shock already. Since we just saw Apple print an $85B+ iPhone Quarter where the ASP was variously calculated at $1011 (Counterpoint smartphone Revenue roundup for the Q4CY2025), and from $1028 to $1049 by me, it’s quite obvious Apple upgraders, buyers and some switchers had no problems buying “up” on the prices charged for base and upgraded memory configurations. What about DDR5 and LPDDR5/5X DRAM, particularly high-capacity modules as used in smartphones? High end smartphones particularly use this RAM and it has already begun to rise precipitously. TH Roh of Samsung has hinted Samsung may need to raise prices of all goods with memory, and Counterpoint and others have said between 6-8%. Now many analysts suggest memory could cost as much as 20% of the cost of smartphones, but midrange and low price tiers see memory as a higher percentage than premium models. I suspect Apple has already preordered as much memory as they can get for this year’s production and some for partial iPhone 18 production. Also, since Apple silicon and iOS/MacOS works so well together, Apple does not have to cut back on DRAM to still work very efficiently. Android makers may decide to reduce RAM to maintain prices, or otherwise face increasing prices but risk losing sales. If and when Apple must raise prices, they may not lose much in sales because of the spending power of its users.'
  • David Emery on Apple blows past expectations and its shares fall. What gives? - 'Tesla looks to be getting out of the car business, and Musk wants to merge it with SpaceX. Seems Wall St will bless whatever Musk comes up with.'
  • David Drinkwater on Saturday Apple video: Steve Jobs anticipates genAI (1983) - 'I still think back to the Knowledge Navigator video. Siri isn’t quite there yet, but with a little boost from AI, I think that the Knowledge Navigator is essentially real within 24 months. It would be kinda neat to see Apple release it formally.'
  • Greg Lippert on Saturday Apple video: Steve Jobs anticipates genAI (1983) - 'Ahead of his time.'
  • David Drinkwater on Apple blows past expectations and its shares fall. What gives? - 'Here’s a little color on the AAPL vs TSLA discussion: On January 24, AAPL shares sat at 248.04. On January 24, TSLA shares sat at 449.06. On January 31, AAPL shares sit at 259.48. On January 31, TSLA shares sit at 430.41. I think the answer to the “what gives” question with respect to these too stocks is that some (incorrect) expectations were baked in before the prints. In Tesla, there were fears baked in and the (admittedly horrible) results were “not as bad as expected”, and in Apple, the results were just plain better than expected. But the pies had been baked (???) by Tuesday morning, before the prints came out. So now we do have a couple weeks to kick back and see that a more rational reaction may look like. And holders, as opposed to traders, should be more than patient both to watch and to act. So we’ll see.'
  • Bart Yee on Apple blows past expectations and its shares fall. What gives? - 'Laura Martin of Needham voices her concern for Apple over these two issues: a) AAPL subcontracting its AI future to GOOGL/Gemini; and b) margin compression in FY26 from rapidly rising memory and NAND costs… “AAPL is partnering with GOOGL to build its AI foundation model. We see this as selling its soul/future to the devil. We believe it should have paid Anthropic 2x-4x more and kept its data hidden from GOOGL, its primary competitor for iPhones.” Regarding Google Gemini, Laura is talking out of both sides of her mouth, if not her brain. Here’s a recent interview on CNBC where she’s asked what she thinks of Alphabet and Gemini, and its partnership with Apple: youtu dot be/-M-OM6i-Kp4?si=_JHzpQa90Oj6eBHr “Google is going to be one of the winners with Gemini…because its model has raced ahead of OpenAI’s model…and because they’ve got this chip of their own that’s very efficient, and they’re running a closed ecosystem ((gee, where did they copy that business strategy from???)) , AND Google pays Apple $20B for default search on iOS so what Apple pays them for Gemini is just a reduction in what Google will have to pay Apple.” “Yes, Google and Apple working together is a huge concentration of power but the courts did find Google is a monopoly and they did nothing about it, so I guess it’s fine…so they should keep moving forward because these companies are worth more together than separately…” Now I get her concern that Apple should have developed its own to run with or used Anthropic, maybe, on privacy or competition grounds, but really, shouldn’t Apple use the best partner and model it can find? And Apple can put its own measures in place with Google to secure data and privacy concerns. This does not preclude Apple continuing to work on its own models and data centers. This is much like the Google Maps business model. Also, while Google and its Android is a “competitor” in smartphones, it’s a necessary competitor in the marketplace, but a relatively feeble one when it comes to Apple’s marketplace, namely the premium and ultra premium smartphone, tablet, wearables, and even PC/Notebooks segments, both in sales numbers, and especially revenue generation. Remember, without Android and Chromebooks, Apple would have been declared a de facto Monopoly long ago in many areas (still is even though its consumer choice). As for the fees crossing back and forth, heh, Apple’s payment to Google is just $1B and probably based on future usage which will ramp up over time I suppose. However, AI competition, continued availability of ChatGTP (and others) for Apple users, and the general nature of LLM oversupply and shakeouts will likely keep the costs and fees down, especially if Apple develops its own LLM models and servers over time (in a much more measured and thoughtful process which is less CapEx intensive / explosive) or could pivot to or add AI options. Meanwhile, Google’s core search/ad business in large part still depends heavily on Apple’s coveted iOS user base’s access, usage AND spending/buying power. It would not surprise me one iota that Google, like app developers, probably makes 2-3X more from iOS users on search than it does on all its Android and PC platforms. Why? Because if Android users primarily buy cheaper and less expensive smartphones, their budgets are limited, spending power is limited, and ad rates have less ROI for advertisers. That’s precisely why Google pays Apple ever increasing amounts of money to maintain its Search position and relationship with Apple. For Google, it’s a necessary business expense to generate revenue on a competing platform. For Apple, it giving its users a choice many have already chosen. Frankly, I wouldn’t doubt Apple’s fee to Google will already be covered by the next FY contract with Google search, precisely why Services revenue keeps growing, while AI expenditures are well controlled. BTW, Martin/Needham have a Hold $330 rating on Google, at a current 33.43 PE.'
  • Robert Paul Leitao on Apple blows past expectations and its shares fall. What gives? - 'In my observation it takes about three weeks for the market to adjust Apple’s share price to a level that reflects the most recent quarterly results and management’s forward forecasts. It’s been only a day. If you have strong conviction Apple is undervalued post earnings, buy the stock.'
  • Bill Donahue on Apple's blowout Q1 2026: What the analysts are saying - 'His response actually made me laugh. Of course Tim Long has continued to insist AAPL is a strong sell… but still marking his target price higher! He’s the perfect trailing indicator, and must be proud that his prediction is consistently quite accurate, albeit a year late.'
  • David Drinkwater on Apple blows past expectations and its shares fall. What gives? - 'So AAPL finishes at 259.48 vs Thursday morning’s PED report of “pain” at 257.50. Any chance that Max Pain really was pulling the strings? And that Monday, the strings snap on the slingshot … or the beach ball bounces (I like the alliteration, but the image of the ball rocketing out of the water is also quite appealing) … or as Michael G suggests, Apple starts to wade into the AAPL swimming pool next week? Could be fun to watch (get the popcorn), but It’s probably best just to stay patient if you can and stay on your bounce horse.'
  • David Drinkwater on Apple blows past expectations and its shares fall. What gives? - 'I dunno, Joe. AMZN shares that I acquired 12 years ago are up 15X. That’s a 12-year CAGR of 25%. But I guess if you wait long enough, you can fool anyone….'
  • John Konopka on Apple's blowout Q1 2026 in five easy charts - 'Interesting. If you take the Q1 EPS shown in the chart since 2020 and chart it the linear trend line makes a good fit. R**2 of about 0.9.'
  • John Konopka on Apple's blowout Q1 2026 in five easy charts - 'No question, memory has gone up by multiples. I wonder how much of the total cost of goods is memory?'
  • David Emery on Apple's blowout Q1 2026 in five easy charts - 'Do you think the reason Apple didn’t significantly pop today is because they did NOT predict memory price impacts? Could that reflect a belief on the part of some ANALysts that Apple is lying about the memory impact? Or just that Apple is too dumb to figure out that soon memory will soon have significant impacts that Apple hasn’t taken into account? Well, it’s as plausible an explanation as any, I suppose…'
  • Darren DMW on Apple's blowout Q1 2026 in five easy charts - 'Lucky I am a big enough Neil Young fan to get the joke. Very good.'
  • Joseph Bland on Apple blows past expectations and its shares fall. What gives? - 'PPS: AAPL volume today was 82.3 M as of 2 PM California time. Very healthy. Eat your heart out, Max Pain gamblers!'
  • Joseph Bland on Apple blows past expectations and its shares fall. What gives? - 'Hi, John and Gregg. The trailing P/E on Yahoo Finance/Apple Stocks is 32.85. Has the much higher EPS already been accounted for? If so I’ve never seen it happen this fast before. It usually takes days. It also means Apple is once again REALLY undervalued! Buy that AAPL Apple! PS – it looks like MSFT’s EPS has finally updated. Apple Stock App is showing a P/E for them of 26.9. Yikes!'
  • Gregg Thurman on Apple blows past expectations and its shares fall. What gives? - 'Also, the P/E is ~34 so perhaps a lot of the good news is already priced in. That’s a trailing earnings multiple. Forward multiple is even lower'
  • John Konopka on Apple blows past expectations and its shares fall. What gives? - 'I expect they’ll raise the dividend by four cents per year but I’m hoping for at least double that.'
  • John Konopka on Apple blows past expectations and its shares fall. What gives? - 'Apple now up over 1% with ten minutes to go. Volume is a healthy ~60M. Looks like it will close in the green. Horace used to mention that Apple’s problem was that it was producing home runs. Investors would look at a great quarter and cheer but then doubt that they could do it again. On the other hand, a business with a monopoly is better for investors because they have a steady income stream. This is one of the arguments for increasing service revenues. Services have been going up steadily quarter after quarter. Also, the P/E is ~34 so perhaps a lot of the good news is already priced in. Finally, I heard an off-hand comment on CNBC that someone claimed various fund managers used Apple to cash to buy other things they expected to pop more quickly.'
  • Digant Jariwala on Apple blows past expectations and its shares fall. What gives? - 'Given the market overall is in the red (including gold and silver), any green is a positive. (Too many colors in that sentence)'
  • Gregg Thurman on Apple blows past expectations and its shares fall. What gives? - 'Tommo’s dead horse has been putrid smelling for a while. It’s past time it should be buried.'
  • Daniel Epstein on Apple blows past expectations and its shares fall. What gives? - 'According to my screen Apple shares just turned positive for the day. So while not an overwhelming positive response a good bounce from the negative response at the beginning of the day. So maybe the knee jerk reaction from this morning is fading.'
  • Michael Goldfeder on Apple's 2nd largest acquisition is a startup with tech to read micro facial movements - 'Apple paid $3 Billion for Beats. Now $2 Billion for this company. From what I can tell this flew under the radar screen. One article mentioned that the same person had previously sold his prior company to Apple about 10 or 12 years earlier for around $345 Million.'
  • Michael Goldfeder on Apple blows past expectations and its shares fall. What gives? - 'Apple has been moving up all morning after being down around $5 near the beginning. Here’s my theory and it has the scientific foundation more in alignment with just a hunch. So I bought into Service Now (NOW) the same day (yesterday) that Apple reported earnings after the bell. The NOW CEO was on Cramer 1-28-2026 talking about his company after it reported very good earnings then was tanking in AH. He approved (Along with the Board) a $5 Billion buyback for 2026 and said they are coming in with $2 Billion of that immediately in the next couple of days when they’re allowed to start their buyback. Took a 14% hit to open trading on the 29th and I bought near the bottom. Just as I did with Apple back on January 3, 2019 after the China miss in December, 2018 and Trump’s tariffs tweets drove Apple down. Today, NOW has moved up quite nice nicely and ironically Apple has been moving back up to the water level as well. Apple will probably start buying back shares Tuesday morning to avoid any SEC issues and right now the shorts are being given their last opportunity to “cover’ before the stock breaks out higher next week. Here is the Short position for the past few reporting periods according to Nasdaq: Short interest was (129.458) Million as of November 28, 2025. 2.939 Short interest was (122.035) Million as of December 15, 2025. 2.949 Short interest was (112.732) Million as of December 31, 2025. 2.707 Short interest was (113.576) Million as of January 15, 2026. 2.59 Just like NOW was waiting to come into the market, and apparently already has from what I can ascertain, so too will Apple on probably Tuesday. A few days after their earnings were reported. Wednesday at the latest. My $.02 based on nothing more than an educated guess in conjunction with Friday options, a minuscule AH session, and the short % to allow covering before what I believe will be the positive earnings rocket fuel to propel Apple back to another series of all time highs in the next 60 days. Again, just a hunch. But the formula seems to be playing out with NOW under somewhat similar circumstances. Have a great weekend and looking forward to next week. BTW, with these record earnings and FCF just reported, I’m going to go out on a limb and predict that the next buybacks tranche will be either $110 Billion or $115 Billion when earnings are reported in April. With another penny increase in the dividend.'
  • Steven Philips on Apple's 2nd largest acquisition is a startup with tech to read micro facial movements - 'Well, I jinxed it! Hopefully it’s just on its “normal” pattern of dropping even on good news, then slowly moving up. I hate the waiting.'
  • Joseph Bland on Apple blows past expectations and its shares fall. What gives? - 'Morning, Greg. And this is a surprise because…? Last I heard, options can still impact stock prices, and options players like Tommo have nothing but disdain for stodgy old businesses – or stodgy old people….'
  • Joseph Bland on Apple blows past expectations and its shares fall. What gives? - 'Morning, Bill. Upvoted. TSLA reminds me of AMZN, which for years was given a P/E of infinity (if you have zero net income, that’s what your trailing P/E will look like). What can one say? Musical chairs and Ponzi schemes will always generate some winners – for a while.'
  • Steven Philips on Premarket: Apple was red, turned green - 'Lots of things!'
  • Greg Lippert on Apple blows past expectations and its shares fall. What gives? - 'Oh Tommo! Keep beating that dead horse. Here’s his newest post headline. “Apple/AAPL Q2: Another “Blowout” Quarter From A Company That’s Quietly Running Out Of Future”'
  • Joseph Bland on Apple blows past expectations and its shares fall. What gives? - 'Upvoted, Daniel. And I know folks are tired of my explaining why buybacks are preferable to dividends, but it’s days like this that underscore the advantage to buybacks. That Apple is trading far below their actual value is nothing new. IMO, they’re deservedly worth a high thirties, if not a low fourties, trailing valuation. Which means that, after 12 YEARS of buybacks, Apple’s buybacks are still very much worth it to long term Apple investors…assuming you don’t just want more dividends so you can invest in something other than Apple…. And yes, as Apple re-enters the open market, the valuation of AAPL will inevitably go up, barring black swans (which, truth be told, are gathering in unprecedented numbers….).'