John Konopka on Both Apple and Google to enter smart glasses market in 2026 - '@Bill Agreed. I find the promotions for various AR/VR/AI glasses interesting for how underwhelming they are. The marketing group was tasked with coming up with a number of “gee-whiz” features to make these sound futuristic. The problem with gee-whiz is that it is not sustaining. It becomes boring once the initial surprise fades. I’ve had three AVP demos and I’m coming around to an idea that makes these attractive to me. First of all, there are the obvious features of a great display that envelops your field of view. This is useful for viewing videos or other content. Kind of like an immersive TV screen. Good but not earth-shattering. Personally, I found the idea of creating a virtual work-space the most useful. Think of this as an amplifier for the mind. Instead of being a passive observer it puts me back in the drivers seat. Persistent widgets are very interesting. You can attach them to a vertical solid surface (not a table top, not glass) and they remain there regardless of how you move around. Add in multiple app displays around you and now you can create a virtual work-space with all sorts of digital tools at your disposal. In my case, I can see working with some instrumentation in my direct field of view (electron microscope and spectrometers). Surrounding me would be Keynote for major output comments, Notes for documenting actions in detail, Pages for displaying relevant published work, Safari to display some data related to the current samples, persistent widgets of Periodic Tables showing data about the elements I’m analyzing and Preview showing PDFs of manuals for the instruments I’m using. I have most of that now, but I access it by switching displays or computers, rummaging through various books or just guessing because it is too troublesome to look up. I can imagine a similar setup for many kinds of arts and crafts and engineering, creating an environment that augments what you are actively doing with your mind.'
on Premarket: Apple was red, turned green - 'Oracle is off $25.91 at $197.10 in overnight trading after delivering what’s widely considered to be disappointing results. The quarterly results were released following Wednesday’s market close. After spiking to an all-time high of $345.72 on September 10th the share price has retreated to price levels first seen in June.'
on Premarket: Apple was red, turned green - 'Apple rose $1.60 on Wednesday to $278.78 a share. In overnight trading Apple is currently off $1.77 at $277.01. Index futures are decidedly in the red as the market works through Oracle’s disappoint results and considers the statements of Fed chair Jerome Powell following today’s reduction in the Fed Funds rate. The decision to reduce the rate by 25 basis points was backed by 9 of the 12 voting members of the FOMC.'
on Tim Cook went to Washington. Again. (video) - 'Another example of people using Apple to draw attention to their cause. And Tim Cook doing his job. Apple is wise to pay attention to these legislative efforts as it is clear most legislators don’t understand the technology and social norms they are trying to control. The unintended consequences often have to be pointed out by the people who oppose a concept.'
on Tim Cook went to Washington. Again. (video) - 'Meanwhile, kids’ data, mental, emotional, educational and social health – and physical safety, in many cases – are being sold to the highest social media co bidder.'
on Tim Cook went to Washington. Again. (video) - 'describes itself as “a bill to protect the safety of children on the internet.” That’s why they describe it that way, to give it a superficial psychological advantage. Enter the proverb- the simple believes every word, but a wise man looks well into the matter. Good for Apple, most readers on PED 3.0 are not simple minded.'
on Both Apple and Google to enter smart glasses market in 2026 - 'As a person who has worn glasses for vision issues most of my adult life I am interested in the potential for this product line. Of course how many different ways will the companies try and sell me AI agents could end up being annoying and expensive if they try and charge me a substantial amount for each different device I own. And of course the execution of this matters a lot. It certainly could drive me to a particular optician if the offering is attractive. The glasses business has not been very innovative over the years although they have improved the optics and coatings of the lenses. Of course if everyone is waiting for Apple to “figure out the design” I can imagine all the bad press articles we will be exposed to until they actually deliver a product.'
on Both Apple and Google to enter smart glasses market in 2026 - 'All true, but I suspect in terms of marketing/sales Google will have the edge with Gemini.'
on CSLA hikes its Apple target price $65 (!) to $330 - 'I hate to say what PED’s image makes me think, but I’m glad I’m not the person on the right!'
on Seeking Alpha: Apple gets an F - 'this “report” is AI-generated. “Hey ChatGPT, write me a negative story on AAPL.”'
on Seeking Alpha: Apple gets an F - 'And keep in mind that this “report” is AI-generated. Meaning it’s simply a rehash of everything that’s in reports and articles on Apple in the last year, most likely weighted according to its prevalence in the media. Which is just what everyone is looking for in their financial “analyses”: a rear-view focus on opinions that were likely wrong, uninformed, and certainly not forward-looking.'
on CSLA hikes its Apple target price $65 (!) to $330 - 'Had to go out and find Tim’s conference call statement. “We expect total company revenue to grow by 10 to 12% year over year we expect iPhone revenue to grow double digits year over year, and we expect that that would make the December quarter the best ever in the history of the company,” CEO Tim Cook.'
on Both Apple and Google to enter smart glasses market in 2026 - 'I still don’t believe the AI glasses form factor will ever be a popular or disruptive one, especially if all having to wear glasses gets you is live physical directions or translation – both of which are already available with smartphones that are already in peoples’ pockets or hands. Anyone who thinks having translation captions flashing infront of your eyes while you’re trying to find out something in a foreign language is going to work in real life is deluded. Especially when you consider that AirPods now can deliver in-ear live translation.'
on Both Apple and Google to enter smart glasses market in 2026 - 'Users will be able to take photos using the camera Super creepy. I sense major pushback coming on that feature.'
on Wall Street thinks Apple's AI strategy looks smart — for now - 'Once again, someone confusing a refusal to rush to follow the crowd in spending vast amounts of capex on LLM scaling to chase hyped up AI capabilities as evidence of a lack of strategy. At the recent NeurIPS, the major AI science conference last week, there was substantial discussion – including by researchers at Google, OpenAI, Amazon and people like the University of Alberta’s reinforcement learning guru, Richard Sutton – about how hyperscaling is not going to deliver AGI and the major breakthroughs that people like Sam Altman have been promising are inevitable – if only companies spend trillions of dollars on scaling. Sutton in his keynote (and others) emphasized that LLMs don’t and won’t scale because they require and rely on more available data to make LLM output more accurately reflect what is known and don’t result in AI that can generalize to broad topics, or tackle problems they haven’t already encountered. Which seems pretty obvious, given that LLMs really are interpolative models rather than extrapolative (without even considering their inability to distinguish between crap and gold in training datasets). I’d argue that Apple has among the best strategies – one built on facilitating discrete functional uses of AI by the consumer and commercial masses that provides personal data security and *actually works* for what the user wants to do – and that the ones who lack any coherent AI strategy include anyone else who’s running blindly after LLM hyperscaling, especially when none of them has any comprehensible financial return that justifies the capex.'
on CSLA hikes its Apple target price $65 (!) to $330 - 'Elsewhere, iPhone sales are surging to new highs, driving a 3–5% increase to FY26–27CL revenue and earnings.” Obviously Ahmed didn’t get the memo, Apple guided revenue growth for the December quarter between 10% and 12%. So goes December, so goes the rest of the fiscal year, or doesn’t he track that?'
on Wall Street thinks Apple's AI strategy looks smart — for now - 'Apple was the second-worst performer among the Magnificent Seven tech giants, as its shares tumbled 18% through the end of June. Tariffs, stupid, tariffs. AAPL fell off a cliff in April, almost coinciding exactly with Trump’s worldwide imposition of tariffs against everybody. In June, facing heavy pushback from our trading partners Trump began pulling back those tariffs and issuing carve outs (most notably for Apple). Apple’s/AAPL’s decline had nothing to do with its fundamentals, which have proven resilient in the turmoil caused by those tariffs.'
on Wall Street thinks Apple's AI strategy looks smart — for now - 'Neal, from what I’ve read the Hyperscales funded their AI investments with cash flows for the past few years. However of late they are doing most of it via bond debt offerings.'
on Premarket: Apple was red, turned green - 'The sample size is kinda small, but AAPL seems to be trending between $276 and $279. This would be consistent with historic trend.'
on Wall Street thinks Apple's AI strategy looks smart — for now - 'According to the article linked to on Laura Martin, Apple needs a GenAI strategy. From today’s article, it sounds like Apple already has one, it is just one that, it sounds like, Laura Martin disagrees with. I don’t follow the other companies closely but how are they funding their CAPEX for AI? Is it out of free cash flow? If it is, then they would be significantly more profitable without this spending but may have wasted a ton of money if the large markets for AI products doesn’t pay off(since they may already be commoditized when they are ready for launch).'
on Schwab graphs Apple's technicals, pitches a vertical call option spread (video) - 'Yes, Bullish Cross was AZ (“he who must not be named”). In fact there are a number of people here who joined this group to have a place for discussions after BC went away. Anyway, it didn’t sour me, just made me more cautious. And like I said, I never lost money again after that — it’s simply that not doing options would have yielded more $$ than doing options. YMMV.'
on CSLA hikes its Apple target price $65 (!) to $330 - 'IF they picked $265 a year ago, that would have been a pretty good guess.'
on Wall Street thinks Apple's AI strategy looks smart — for now - 'Laura Martin is a senior analyst who ‘…publishes research on the largest internet and media stocks in the US.’ John Barr actually manages clients money as ‘…Co-Portfolio Manager of the Needham Growth Fund and Portfolio Manager of the Needham Aggressive Growth Fund.’ Who would you trust more? * quotes from their bio pages at Needham Funds'
on Premarket: Apple was red, turned green - 'Today’s the day! Today’s the day we receive the FOMC’s interest rate decision! It’s also the day Oracle and Adobe release results. It might also be the day several of the nation’s biggest banks (and maybe a bunch of regional banks, too!) have to explain their 2026 spending plans after what JPM said yesterday! In the meantime, index futures are dancing on the breakeven line. Apple is up pre-market $0.49 at $277.67. JPMorgan Chase is ahead $0.85 at $301.36 after dropping $14.70 or 4.66% on spending news on Tuesday.'
on Schwab graphs Apple's technicals, pitches a vertical call option spread (video) - 'Bullish Cross, wasn’t that Andy Zaky’s investment blog? If you lost due to his advice you were not alone. He got sued for millions, then disappeared. I can’t blame you for being sour on options after that experience.'
on Schwab graphs Apple's technicals, pitches a vertical call option spread (video) - 'No, all decisions were made on my own. I’ve never, ever used a broker. (I wouldn’t bother, unless they were better at it than I am, and if they were, why would they bother to be working as a broker?) My only real loss was from buying vertical call spreads, back in the days of Bullish Cross, in 2012-2014. A play where time ran out before the stock recovered. But putting that aside, the only trading since then (i.e. from 2012) has been selling occasional AAPL covered calls. And I can say that though I certainly made money on that (because you literally *cannot* lose money selling a covered call), I made *less* money than if I’d never entered into it at all, because AAPL was always going up, up, up, and there’ve been times when the stock has been called away. I’m not saying people can’t make money with options: I’m just here to say your odds of doing it are way lower than you think they are. Someone out there may prove me wrong. Most won’t. Common stock may be boring, but it’s awful forgiving when things go sideways, compared with options. Basically, I’ve held AAPL since 2005, never ever selling, so my return is pretty much astronomical. It’s just that occasional options forays have cut it down by a smidge, not really enough for me to notice, but enough for me to get up on my high horse and issue the warning: “There be dragons here.”'
on Schwab graphs Apple's technicals, pitches a vertical call option spread (video) - 'David, I’m guessing your broker guided your Options decision. Getting burnt in that scenario is understandable. Your broker earns peanuts recommending options. His real earnings comes from commissions on buying/selling equities. That’s where his loyalties exist. It wasn’t options that created the bad taste in your mouth, it was your broker whose interests weren’t aligned with yours. Until you are able to make your own learned decisions, I would recommend that you not trade options. Fee based brokers aren’t going to guide you without their own self interest interfering with their objectivity.'
on Schwab graphs Apple's technicals, pitches a vertical call option spread (video) - 'Options trading is, flat out, dangerous. It’s extremely difficult to ever get right. The real problem is that with stocks, pretty much any decision you make doesn’t have time pressure. Bought some AAPL and hoping to sell it, but it’s lower than when you bought it? That’s OK, just wait. As long as you need to. The problem with options is you not only have to get the direction right, you have to get the timing right. There are too many “black swan” events out there that’ll destroy you. Yes, you can succeed at options. You just probably won’t. (For all the money I’ve ever made with the simplest, most basic strategy, which is selling covered calls which is the first thing they’ll ever recommend you do, it turns out that if I had simply done *nothing*, I would have made a lot *more money. Said differently, even with the most basic of options strategies, I made less money with this strategy than I would have just sitting on my hands.) Every choice you make with regard to stocks (buy a stock? Sell it? Do nothing? Buy an option? Sell it? Don’t do it at all) is a choice on a continuum of infinitely many decisions you must make. *Not* buying AAPL, yesterday, was a choice you made. Or didn’t. All I’m saying is that in my experience, most any choices you will make with options will be… …. worse than the choices that don’t involve options. Take it from someone who has been investing in AAPL since 2005. I’ve made a ton of money on AAPL. Just not with AAPL options.'
on Schwab graphs Apple's technicals, pitches a vertical call option spread (video) - 'Thanks Greg. Options trading has always mystified me, but I ultimately wanted to try – and not lose a bunch of money. The step-by-step process is what I needed but just couldn’t grasp without some hand-holding. Your example above seems to be a good one'


