10 Things that "Absolutely suck" about the iPhone. (Yes I have one)

[Denny Crane]

Perhaps, but by the end of the weekend, almost every apple store and AT&T store were out of stock. Not bad for a $600 device locked to one carrier.

To make something a success, does it have to completely sell out in 30 hours. Could it be the apple was smart enough to have supply equal demand?

Has the Treo EVER sold out.....anywhere?

 

[Denny Crane]

Why did Apple have to say it? The analysts were far from shy in saying the same. And remember that they did not sell out in those 30 hours. People could walk in on Saturday and just buy one without any queues. That 270 000 could be the present peak in demand.

Surur

Keep hope alive man!

 

[Denny Crane]

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




and my favorite...


*Edit - Stock is up over 11 points in after hour trading. Guess the Street loved those number after all.

LMAO!!!!

 

[Denny Crane]

Its about what what Palm sells? lol. Treos are available on numerous carriers WORLDWIDE and they MAYBE match the iphone sales from only one single carrier over just a the past few weeks? That` s pathetic.

The iphone is putting the treo to shame.

BAM!

 

[braj]

BAM!

Hey Batman, watch out for the.. KAPOW!

 

[mikec#IM]

Well thats good enough for me. MikeC goes into an apple store and is told iphone sales are slowing. Do you work for CIBC?

No I do not. Just making an observation, surfer.

 

[mikec#IM]

Nice mature response. Of course you totally avoided the implication that you have no idea why the stock went up today.

Look surfer, it's obvious why stock went up:

- Apple reports strong sales of Mac and iPod
- iPhone results as expected

Wow, it's freaking black magic voodoo.

 

[mikec#IM]

Um, you did yesterday.

Um, surfer, you can stop lying. I said no such thing.

 

[mobileman]

Um, surfer, you can stop lying. I said no such thing.

So please explain this comment when AT&T announced their iPhone activations in the first 30 hours of sales.

Reality sucks for fanboys.

Anyway, I look foward to your future analysis and first hand observations of how iPhone sales are slowing down after your next trip to the local mall.

 

[mobileman]

That is just not true. There were plenty left after the initial surge.

From the Apple Conf. Call today, during the questions and answer part near the end.....

"How many iPhones did AT&T stores have left over?" Most of their stores were stocked out, but there were still some in transit to AT&T at the end of quarter. 270K includes some AT&T store iPhones."


You sure you don't work for CIBC MikeC?

 

[surur]

From the Apple Conf. Call today, during the questions and answer part near the end.....

"How many iPhones did AT&T stores have left over?" Most of their stores were stocked out, but there were still some in transit to AT&T at the end of quarter. 270K includes some AT&T store iPhones."


You sure you don't work for CIBC MikeC?

Actually the implication is that they are counting shipped to AT&T as sold to consumers.

Surur

 

[treobk214]

You gotta love it mobileman. The windows fanboys like mikeC were chomping at the bit for apple to report dismal sales of the iphone with comments like "reality sucks for apple fanboys" just prior to the earnings reports.

It didn't happen, and in fact apple's stock exploded on the news so now they try backpeddling with comments like ," well I never said this or never said that" or "yeah, the iphone sales were amazing but not "insanely amazing". pfft. Come on. Who's kidding who?

You just have to laugh at it, all the way to the bank if you're invested in apple as well.

For a first stab at the cellphone industry, the iphone is an absolute hit. period. Whether the sales matched predictions 100% perfectly or not, it's still a success and will only expand that success as it is made available to other carriers in both Europe and Asia in the coming year or so.

The 'doze fanboys would love to have been able to boast such a positive showing with WM smartphones on just a single carrier like this.

They can't, hence their constant displays of apple envy.


Pure entertainment, I say.

 

[treobk214]

Granted, the stock's explosive run up was also due to the impressive mac / ipod sales this quarter, but would not have been as remarkable had investors not perceived the iphone's numbers to be promising as well.

 

[surur]

Granted, the stock's explosive run up was also due to the impressive mac / ipod sales this quarter, but would not have been as remarkable had investors not perceived the iphone's numbers to be promising as well.

Not "mainly due to impressive mac/ipod sales" as most of the financial commentary sites are reporting?

Surur

 

[treobk214]

The game of semantics. The stock's gains were due to impressive mac / ipod sales and bolstered with strong iphone numbers. That doesn't take away from its contribution to the runaway share price increase.

All three branches of apple's business model were very successful. The iphone particularly so as it is just in its infancy compared to the others.

Obviously, it will play an even bigger role in the future as it is made available to additional carriers in other countries.

 

[Denny Crane]

So please explain this comment when AT&T announced their iPhone activations in the first 30 hours of sales.



Anyway, I look foward to your future analysis and first hand observations of how iPhone sales are slowing down after your next trip to the local mall.

That will leave a mark....

 

[Denny Crane]

Actually the implication is that they are counting shipped to AT&T as sold to consumers.

Surur

Be careful....You will "spin" yourself into the ground.

 

[samkim]

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).

Positive bias exists. "Almost all" is an exaggeration.

Part of the bias is due to the relationships between investment banks and their clients. Since companies rewarded investment banks for good coverage, analysts had to balance the needs of fund managers (who read their reports) with the needs of the corporations. That was diminished somewhat a couple years back through rules changes, but I'm sure it still exists in some form.

Most of the rest can be explained by the fact that analysts choose which companies they cover. Analysts generally don't waste their time covering stocks that no one owns or wants to buy. So of course they'll have positive ratings for the majority of stocks they cover. There's little point in spending countless hours and resources studying a company they've told their clients not to own - unless that company is a significant competitor to a more highly rated one.

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."

You're correct in that performance is generally measured against major stock indexes, such as the S&P; and certainly every stock in the S&P 500 is covered by some analyst. But your claim of a mathematical proof that most analysts must be incorrect is wrong. Let's say there are 300 analysts, and each of them covers 30 stocks; they cover all 500 companies in the S&P, but not evenly. It's mathematically possible (though extremely unlikely) for all 300 analysts to beat the S&P. For example, they could each pick 2 underperformers along with the top 28 stocks.

Name an analyst who, long term (say, over the course of 10 years) has been right more often than wrong.

To answer your question, Abby Joseph Cohen, Goldman's perpetual bull, has been right more often than wrong since the early 90s.

I suspect that you're confusing analysts with fund managers. It's well known that the majority of fund managers underperform the market average. But they're a different group of people, and their jobs and objectives are completey different.

I'm not aware of any comprehensive study of analyst performance (not bias) over a long period of time.

 

[treobk214]

Hey Batman, watch out for the.. KAPOW!

Thats gonna happen in a few months

 

[surur]

Now that the opening weekend brouhaha is more or less over, back to our regular programming; Why the iPhone sucks...

Check for Update -- still current

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Every day I connect my iPhone to the computer, open iTunes, and excitedly click "Check for Update", hoping a bunch of new functionality will come rushing into my iPhone. And every day, there's nothing.

I don't want much -- just the sort of features my first Palm Pilot had in um... 1996. Sync ToDo list and Notes, cut and paste between records and applications, search the entire device for text, the possibility of other applications being added to it. Sure, I'd also like some features that didn't yet exist in 1996, but I don't want to push it.

Oh yeah... Steve said something like, "It is an iPod that can also be used as a telephone." So my expectations are completely unfounded.

But I'll keep dreaming. And clicking that "Check for Update" button.

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=333345

Dreaming of an update... As Treo 700p owners know, its a sad life, and an update is not even guaranteed to fix all the issues...

Surur