1. marcol's Avatar
    And by the way, I never said "all" were in that range.
    Your memory deceives you.

    If you are going to quote/assert, please be accurate.
    I quoted you directly. Here it is again (emphasis is the bit I quoted above):

    Because of their historical record.

    I can show you countless examples of analyst of completely blowing it, predicting things (based on their "in-depth" research) that turned out to be so wrong it wasn't even funny.

    I thought no was buying "unactivated" iPhones :-). So activations to me = true users.

    I am sure Apple is spinning their numbers as we speak, so that they look a lot better. It's not like they haven't weaseled before before (ex. backdating scandal).

    Now, as I have stated, we need to get the data for all of July to get an indication of the numbers.

    But still, no one predicted 150K in that first weekend...it was all in the 500K to 1M range. Reality sucks for fanboys.

    The real question is this - after the uptake in July, will the growth continue a the hyped pace? Will they hit the 18 month mark?
    Post 1585 in this thread:

    http://discussion.treocentral.com/sh...postcount=1585

    (But I still love that avatar).
    07-25-2007 12:54 PM
  2. mikec#IM's Avatar
    M O S T


    American Heritage Dictionary
    adj. Superlative of many, much. Greatest in number: won the most votes.
    Greatest in amount, extent, or degree: has the most compassion.
    In the greatest number of instances: Most fish have fins.
    n. The greatest amount or degree: She has the most to gain.
    {Slang} The greatest, best, or most exciting. Used with [the:] That party was
    the most!
    pron. (used with a sing. or pl. verb) The greatest part or number: Most of the
    town was destroyed. Most of the books were missing.
    adv. Superlative of much. In or to the highest degree or extent. Used with many
    adjectives and adverbs to form the superlative degree: most honest; most
    impatiently.
    Very: a most impressive piece of writing.
    {Informal} Almost: Most everyone agrees.

    my argument did not point to any single analyst or Piper Jaffrey, specifically. the original poster said "most analysts" are wrong. based on the above definition it would imply that the greatest number of analysts are wrong. i do believe that many are wrong, i just don't believe that "most" of them are. there are many that are very right in both the credit and equity marketplace.

    regards
    Again, I posted from 3 major analysts, the ones that said anything. That's most, even though the population of analyst stating something is small.

    Why is there such revisionism going on, and such a love of "analyst"
    07-25-2007 12:56 PM
  3. marcol's Avatar
    One analyst from some no-name company says 50K. Even I would call that absurdly low.
    So would I, but that wasn't the point.
    07-25-2007 12:57 PM
  4. mikec#IM's Avatar
    M O S T


    American Heritage Dictionary
    adj. Superlative of many, much. Greatest in number: won the most votes.
    Greatest in amount, extent, or degree: has the most compassion.
    In the greatest number of instances: Most fish have fins.
    n. The greatest amount or degree: She has the most to gain.
    {Slang} The greatest, best, or most exciting. Used with [the:] That party was
    the most!
    pron. (used with a sing. or pl. verb) The greatest part or number: Most of the
    town was destroyed. Most of the books were missing.
    adv. Superlative of much. In or to the highest degree or extent. Used with many
    adjectives and adverbs to form the superlative degree: most honest; most
    impatiently.
    Very: a most impressive piece of writing.
    {Informal} Almost: Most everyone agrees.

    my argument did not point to any single analyst or Piper Jaffrey, specifically. the original poster said "most analysts" are wrong. based on the above definition it would imply that the greatest number of analysts are wrong. i do believe that many are wrong, i just don't believe that "most" of them are. there are many that are very right in both the credit and equity marketplace.

    regards
    Oh, and the credit and equity markets are completely different.

    You should avoid topics you know nothing about.
    07-25-2007 12:58 PM
  5. cmaier's Avatar
    I stand by my statement. Most analysts are wrong. Period.

    You keep ignoring my evidence. Perhaps the math confuses you. But it's a simple fact. Since almost all analysts say that almost all of the stocks they cover will do better than the median stock, and since only 50% of stocks could possibly do so, you just need to subtract one number from the other to find out how many are wrong.

    Economists have done so. And most analysts are wrong, most of the time.

    Sure, the stocks go up, but that's not what they are predicting. They are predicting the stocks will rise faster than the median of all other stocks. And it's impossible for them all to be right. Only half the stocks they pick will do so. And since almost none of them are right all of the time, most analysts are wrong.

    The very few people who have any success getting it right are not analysts. They are billionaires.
    07-25-2007 01:02 PM
  6. cmaier's Avatar
    By "credit" do you mean bonds? The bond market is a lot more stable and easier to predict than the equity market.
    07-25-2007 01:04 PM
  7. mikec#IM's Avatar
    My post was a response to your statement "But still, no one predicted 150K in that first weekend...it was all in the 500K to 1M range".

    One instance of a prediction outside of that range is enough to disprove that.
    Opps..that's what I get for slang use "all in"; I meant many/most, not every single one. (ex. "They was all in his face", or they was all acting crazy")

    I apologize for stating you were misquoting me. I picked the wrong week to stop sniffing glue.

    I agree it was not "all", but my rebuttal evidence still stands.
    07-25-2007 01:06 PM
  8. marcol's Avatar
    Opps..that's what I get for slang use "all in"; I meant many/most, not every single one. (ex. "They was all in his face", or they was all acting crazy")

    I apologize for stating you were misquoting me. I picked the wrong week to stop sniffing glue.
    No problem

    I agree it was not "all", but my rebuttal evidence still stands.
    Nothing to rebut. My only point was that it wasn't all.
    07-25-2007 01:11 PM
  9. mikec#IM's Avatar
    Your memory deceives you.


    I quoted you directly. Here it is again (emphasis is the bit I quoted above):



    Post 1585 in this thread:

    http://discussion.treocentral.com/sh...postcount=1585


    Yes, it did. I use "all" and "all in" differently, but that's my bad for not being crystal clear.

    I apologized as well. I apologize again.
    07-25-2007 01:17 PM
  10. oalvarez's Avatar
    I stand by my statement. Most analysts are wrong. Period.

    You keep ignoring my evidence.
    i'm not arguing your point and i'm not ignoring your evidence. i appreciate your stance.
    07-25-2007 01:21 PM
  11. braj's Avatar
    i'm not arguing your point and i'm not ignoring your evidence. i appreciate your stance.
    but still you find it impossible to admit you are wrong?
    07-25-2007 01:25 PM
  12. whmurray's Avatar
    but still you find it impossible to admit you are wrong?
    I think that you have gone from trying to be acknowledged to trying to pick a fight. Let it go.
    07-25-2007 03:03 PM
  13. braj's Avatar
    I think that you have gone from trying to be acknowledged to trying to pick a fight. Let it go.
    I'm not trying to pick a fight, sorry if it seemed like that. I just wanted closure
    07-25-2007 03:22 PM
  14. cmaier's Avatar
    So I guess Apple's overall numbers greatly exceeded expectations, but i don't see iphone numbers other than the "1 million by end of its first quarter" (which implies they're nowhere near a million yet).
    07-25-2007 04:36 PM
  15. sxtg's Avatar
    Back at you, big guy. Are you outperforming the average poster...like the vast majority of posters are? :stick:
    LOL
    From the lack of a comment, I wonder if he gets it yet.
    07-25-2007 05:33 PM
  16. samkim's Avatar
    I stand by my statement. Most analysts are wrong. Period.

    You keep ignoring my evidence. Perhaps the math confuses you. But it's a simple fact. Since almost all analysts say that almost all of the stocks they cover will do better than the median stock, and since only 50% of stocks could possibly do so, you just need to subtract one number from the other to find out how many are wrong.
    First, most analysts don't rate "almost all" the stocks they cover as outperforming the market.

    Second, most stocks are not covered by any analyst.

    Sure, the stocks go up, but that's not what they are predicting. They are predicting the stocks will rise faster than the median of all other stocks. And it's impossible for them all to be right. Only half the stocks they pick will do so. And since almost none of them are right all of the time, most analysts are wrong.
    Since the stocks they pick comprise a small fraction of the market, it's possible for them to be mostly right.
    07-25-2007 05:45 PM
  17. cmaier's Avatar
    Dude, all you have to do is google "analyst positive bias" to see tons of academic articles that say exactly what I said. The vast majority of all analyst pronouncements are positive, and most of those are of the "outperform" variety (analysts typically don't just say "this stock will rise," since that's of little interest to investors, most of whom have already decided to invest in the equity market and are merely trying to decide what stocks to buy).

    And in any reasonably large industry you will find most stocks are covered by one analyst or another. When an analyst rates a stock as outperform, he doesn't mean "it will outperform some closely held penny stock from some LLC in Nevada."

    Name an analyst who, long term (say, over the course of 10 years) has been right more often than wrong.
    07-25-2007 05:55 PM
  18. mikec#IM's Avatar
    So 270K iPhones sold....the expect 1M by end of Sept.
    07-25-2007 06:14 PM
  19. cmaier's Avatar
    So 270K iPhones sold....the expect 1M by end of Sept.
    270k in the first 30 hours might actually translate into 400k in the first weekend, particularly if web sales are counted.

    The fact that so many were not immediately activated also tends to dispute the "all buyers were rabid zealots who activated on their powerbooks before leaving the store" sort of argument. Or, in the alternative, says that activation problems may have been more rampant than AT&T lets on.
    07-25-2007 06:27 PM
  20. marcol's Avatar
    To fix this.


    Surur
    Fixed:

    http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=aapl

    07-25-2007 06:32 PM
  21. surur's Avatar
    270k in the first 30 hours might actually translate into 400k in the first weekend, particularly if web sales are counted.

    The fact that so many were not immediately activated also tends to dispute the "all buyers were rabid zealots who activated on their powerbooks before leaving the store" sort of argument. Or, in the alternative, says that activation problems may have been more rampant than AT&T lets on.
    Or ebayers.

    Surur
    07-25-2007 06:35 PM
  22. mobileman's Avatar
    So 270K iPhones sold....the expect 1M by end of Sept.
    270,000 sold in the first 30 hours. Most stores (maybe all) completely out of stock by Sunday night. The sounds very impressive to me. It must almost be fairly impressive to Wall Street as their stock is up over 4 in after hours trading. One thing is certain, MikeC shouldnt give up his day job do to product sales analysis.

    Here are some of his highlights
    Still, it's a black eye (relative to the hype), and the Street is responding.
    I am sure Apple is spinning their numbers as we speak, so that they look a lot better. It's not like they haven't weaseled before before (ex. backdating scandal).
    and my favorite...
    Reality sucks for fanboys.
    *Edit - Stock is up over 11 points in after hour trading. Guess the Street loved those number after all.
    07-25-2007 06:39 PM
  23. marcol's Avatar
    270,000 sold in the first 30 hours. Most stores (maybe all) completely out of stock by Sunday night. The sounds very impressive to me. It must almost be fairly impressive to Wall Street as their stock is up over 4 in after hours trading.
    Currently up ~$11 (>8%).

    EDIT: You beat me to it!
    07-25-2007 06:46 PM
  24. braj's Avatar
    Up $12, no, wait, $15, hold on... $23, golly gee $45! And up and up! No one can deny Apple would have been a good buy a month ago (actually always has been).
    07-25-2007 06:49 PM
  25. surur's Avatar
    I think Wall street is reacting more to the 33% rise in mac sales and 22% rise in Ipod sales, than the IPhone sales of 1 million per quarter projected (which is about what Palm sells).

    Surur
    07-25-2007 06:55 PM
3,194 ... 6465666768 ...
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD