AAPL Intraday Updates (Archive)

  • Avatar

    Posted: 21 January 2009 11:03 AM #16

    Winterpool - 21 January 2009 02:58 PM

    Oh boy.  I should heed the afterschool oracle and ‘believe in myself’, ha ha.

    Edited: now all of you are jumping in?  Where were you lot when I was debating a 78.50 purchase?  tongue laugh

    Watching the market in general crash and burn.  tongue laugh

    Signature

    “Knowledge speaks, but wisdom listens.”
    - Jimi Hendrix

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 21 January 2009 11:15 AM #17

    Sliding now… probably should have sold round 81.50.  Might as well wait for earnings, I suppose.

    Edited: I seem to remember we had a poll going last quarter.  Is anyone interested in surveying board opinion on AAPL’s direction after the earnings call today?

    Signature

    Ah, love, let us be true to one another! for the world… hath really neither joy, nor love, nor light, nor certitude, nor peace, nor help for pain

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 21 January 2009 11:43 AM #18

    Winterpool - 21 January 2009 02:03 PM

    Economists and financial observers appear to believe that most large banks (at least UK and US) are insolvent.  Many suggest nationalisation is the only way to salvage the banks and restart lending.  Whilst this might ultimately prove necessary to save the rest of the economy, it will wipe out current bank shareholders.

    On the other hand, without radical measures, the banks will continue to die a slow death and be economically useless in the meantime (‘zombie banks’, ‘dead bank walking’): so—bad for the economy and nothing really saved for the shareholder in this case either.

    The middle way (which I’ve seen the FDIC et al advocate) is separating the bad assets from the banks, generally through some sort of government purchase (this was the of course the original intention of TARP).  However, the consensus now appears to be that the dodgy securities are not worth anything like as much as the banks are claiming, even now, so the government (ie taxpayers) would have to substantially overpay the banks to save them.  But this is the only way to save something for shareholders.

    Despite the fact that I’m currently holding C shares that have lost about 90 per cent of their value, I realise the ‘save the shareholders’ option isn’t at all fair to taxpayers.  On the other hand, I just don’t think a compelled nationalisation (a la S&Ls;in the ‘90s) of the biggest banks in the country could be carried out without massive disruption.  Which is why I suspect the government will have to try some sort of asset quarantine, even though it bails out the capitalists and may not even work.

    We may be fracked.  :eg:

    Aw shucks, AAPL is already up to 79.65 in premarket trading.  I shouldn’t have let this board dissuade me from buying at 78ish.  :groucho:

    To me the people who are suggesting nationalization sounds more like a poop and scoop (opposite of a pump and dump). I think that if the uptick rule was reinstated much of this talk about nationalization and creditor cramdowns (the counter party risk)will slowly dissipate and especially so if the second leg of the TARP helps consumer mortgage holders.

    Signature

    Black Swan Counter: 9 (Banks need money, Jobs needs a break, Geithner has no plan, Cuomo’s grandstanding, .Gov needs a hobby, GS works for money, flash crash, is that bubbling crude?).

    For those who look, a flash allows one to see farther.

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 21 January 2009 11:50 AM #19

    Eric Landstrom - 21 January 2009 03:43 PM

    To me the people who are suggesting nationalization sounds more like a poop and scoop (opposite of a pump and dump). I think that if the uptick rule was reinstated much of this talk about nationalization and creditor cramdowns (the counter party risk)will slowly dissipate and especially so if the second leg of the TARP helps consumer mortgage holders.

    The lack of the Uptick Rule along with massive naked shorting has allowed those with money to create a negative asset bubble. With everybody investing in everybody else (diversification rolleyes ) these attacks have artificially brought down everybody.  As you suggest, it wouldn’t take much for this to quickly bounce back.

    BTW, take a look at FED and watch its price movement since Sept, especially after the no shorting rule was put into place. FED is one of the more massively shorted stocks currently.

    Signature

    “Once we roared like lions for liberty; now we bleat like sheep for security! The solution for America’s problem is not in terms of big government, but it is in big men over whom nobody stands in control but God.”  ?Norman Vincent Peale

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 21 January 2009 11:54 AM #20

    Looks like the bears are taking over again.

    Signature

    “Once we roared like lions for liberty; now we bleat like sheep for security! The solution for America’s problem is not in terms of big government, but it is in big men over whom nobody stands in control but God.”  ?Norman Vincent Peale

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 21 January 2009 11:55 AM #21

    In other news, Tim Geithner plans to use “the claw” to right the economy and build investor confidence. Investors, of course, remain wary of scissors to Mr. Geithner’s paper.

    Signature

    Black Swan Counter: 9 (Banks need money, Jobs needs a break, Geithner has no plan, Cuomo’s grandstanding, .Gov needs a hobby, GS works for money, flash crash, is that bubbling crude?).

    For those who look, a flash allows one to see farther.

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 21 January 2009 11:56 AM #22

    I suppose it comes down to whether you believe the dodgy assets can recover to a ‘sufficient’ extent (ie they are or will be worth something, some day).  For understandable reasons, a lot of punters now believe the assets aren’t worth much at all and short the banks accordingly.

    If one believes the assets are unsalvageable, then the only options are to nationalise or just buy the assets at inflated prices.

    Eric seems to be suggesting a ground-up rescue: save the homeowners which will save the mortgages which will save the securities which will save the banks.  That would probably benefit the most people, but it essentially means re-inflating home prices (many believe they’re still too high), right?  So I’m not sure this is doable.  Whereas simply renegotiating the loans to be more affordable for the homeowners might still wipe out the securities (and thus the banks).

    Eric, have you got a guess either way regarding AAPL after the earnings call?

    Signature

    Ah, love, let us be true to one another! for the world… hath really neither joy, nor love, nor light, nor certitude, nor peace, nor help for pain

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 21 January 2009 11:58 AM #23

    I’ve spent some time this morning digesting a small cap research report. The group focuses almost exclusively on R2000, and uses other indexes and data points to anticipate future direction. The report tends to use TA almost exclusively in making its forecasts. Accompanying this report were survey results from other small cap managers. Here are some selected highlights:

    1. Top sector preferences for 2009: (i) Technology, (ii) Energy, (iii) Consumer Discretionary.
    2. Dollar strength can?t last in normal times (e.g., post-recession). Accordingly, the dollar carry trade will unwind with a consequent flight to safety. The dollar’s rise yesterday (Jan 20) when accompanied with higher gold prices is bearish for equities and indicates a flight to quality.
    3. Expect rising 10-year yields. Data suggests yields have seen a 10-year bottom.
    4. 40% of respondents don’t think 4Q08/1Q09 earnings results will matter as they are already priced in.
    5. Events NOT priced in: automaker bankruptcy, state/local gov’t bankruptcy.
    6. Just over half (52%) of respondents are more bullish than they were 3 months ago.

    There you have it. Many of the above points contradict some of my thinking and I will be re-evaluating based on this information. At this point I’m not fully buying in, but I’m willing to consider the information. GL.

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 21 January 2009 12:08 PM #24

    Winterpool - 21 January 2009 03:56 PM

    Eric, have you got a guess either way regarding AAPL after the earnings call?

    Yes unless I get scar’t out of the trade, history suggests that AAPL will go down on guidance. In other words,

    If Apple suspends guidance, then we’ll make a move toward fundamental analysis as a driver for determining value rather than momentum.

    Signature

    Black Swan Counter: 9 (Banks need money, Jobs needs a break, Geithner has no plan, Cuomo’s grandstanding, .Gov needs a hobby, GS works for money, flash crash, is that bubbling crude?).

    For those who look, a flash allows one to see farther.

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 21 January 2009 12:17 PM #25

    But last quarter, AAPL closed at 91.49 on the 21st October, opened the following day at 97.37 and closed at almost 97 (with an intraday high of 101.25).  21 October was Q4 earnings, no?  Of course that may have been attributable to the Steve Jobs Reality Distortion Field, and I doubt he’ll be gracing us with his presence this time.

    Chartguy, all of the report’s data seems plausible to me (if the economy does begin to recover, many of those developments are natural).  What contradicted your own thinking on these matters?

    Edited: if the Street returns to fundamentals in analysing AAPL—isn’t that a good thing (presuming, of course, that Apple’s fundamentals hold up).

    [ Edited: 21 January 2009 12:22 PM by Winterpool ]

    Signature

    Ah, love, let us be true to one another! for the world… hath really neither joy, nor love, nor light, nor certitude, nor peace, nor help for pain

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 21 January 2009 12:24 PM #26

    Winterpool - 21 January 2009 04:17 PM

    But last quarter, AAPL closed at 91.49 on the 21st October, opened the following day at 97.37 and closed at almost 97 (with an intraday high of 101.25).  21 October was Q4 earnings, no?  Of course that may have been attributable to the Steve Jobs Reality Distortion Field, and I doubt he’ll be gracing us with his presence this time.

    Yes, October was Apple’s Q4 earnings call. Look at Q1 earnings calls for ‘06, ‘07, and ‘08, Winterpool.

    Signature

    Black Swan Counter: 9 (Banks need money, Jobs needs a break, Geithner has no plan, Cuomo’s grandstanding, .Gov needs a hobby, GS works for money, flash crash, is that bubbling crude?).

    For those who look, a flash allows one to see farther.

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 21 January 2009 12:27 PM #27

    Eric Landstrom - 21 January 2009 04:24 PM
    Winterpool - 21 January 2009 04:17 PM

    But last quarter, AAPL closed at 91.49 on the 21st October, opened the following day at 97.37 and closed at almost 97 (with an intraday high of 101.25).  21 October was Q4 earnings, no?  Of course that may have been attributable to the Steve Jobs Reality Distortion Field, and I doubt he’ll be gracing us with his presence this time.

    Yes, October was Apple’s Q4 earnings call. Look at Q1 earnings calls for ‘06, ‘07, and ‘08, Winterpool.

    And that Q4 pop was absolutely attributed to SJ and his highlighting of non-GAAP.

    Signature

    “the market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent”
    -John Maynard Keynes

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 21 January 2009 12:29 PM #28

    Winterpool - 21 January 2009 04:17 PM

    But last quarter, AAPL closed at 91.49 on the 21st October, opened the following day at 97.37 and closed at almost 97 (with an intraday high of 101.25).  21 October was Q4 earnings, no?  Of course that may have been attributable to the Steve Jobs Reality Distortion Field, and I doubt he’ll be gracing us with his presence this time.

    Chartguy, all of the report’s data seems plausible to me (if the economy does begin to recover, many of those developments are natural).  What contradicted your own thinking on these matters?

    Edited: if the Street returns to fundamentals in analysing AAPL—isn’t that a good thing (presuming, of course, that Apple’s fundamentals hold up).

    But October usually presents AAPL with the best guidance scenario (Xmas coming up). Q2 is the worst.

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 21 January 2009 12:34 PM #29

    Winterpool - 21 January 2009 04:17 PM

    But last quarter, AAPL closed at 91.49 on the 21st October, opened the following day at 97.37 and closed at almost 97 (with an intraday high of 101.25).

    And here we are after AAPL’s best quarter of the year sitting at $80. I think there are too many unknowns about what can happen at the CC to be sure of direction tomorrow.
    eg. good guidance, SJ makes an appearance,  However, the general market is bearish and that may overshadow anything the Apple reports.

    And even after good earnings and guidance, IBM is only back to where it was on Jan 6.
    ( Albeit, for AAPL that would be around $95.  rolleyes )

    Signature

    “Once we roared like lions for liberty; now we bleat like sheep for security! The solution for America’s problem is not in terms of big government, but it is in big men over whom nobody stands in control but God.”  ?Norman Vincent Peale

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 21 January 2009 12:41 PM #30

    chartguy - 21 January 2009 03:58 PM

    I’ve spent some time this morning digesting a small cap research report. The group focuses almost exclusively on R2000, and uses other indexes and data points to anticipate future direction. The report tends to use TA almost exclusively in making its forecasts. Accompanying this report were survey results from other small cap managers. Here are some selected highlights:

    1. Top sector preferences for 2009: (i) Technology, (ii) Energy, (iii) Consumer Discretionary.
    2. Dollar strength can?t last in normal times (e.g., post-recession). Accordingly, the dollar carry trade will unwind with a consequent flight to safety. The dollar’s rise yesterday (Jan 20) when accompanied with higher gold prices is bearish for equities and indicates a flight to quality.
    3. Expect rising 10-year yields. Data suggests yields have seen a 10-year bottom.
    4. 40% of respondents don’t think 4Q08/1Q09 earnings results will matter as they are already priced in.
    5. Events NOT priced in: automaker bankruptcy, state/local gov’t bankruptcy.
    6. Just over half (52%) of respondents are more bullish than they were 3 months ago.

    There you have it. Many of the above points contradict some of my thinking and I will be re-evaluating based on this information. At this point I’m not fully buying in, but I’m willing to consider the information. GL.

    Eric and I are on a conference call with these guys… Eric pointed out that I wasn’t too clear about the above data points. I intended to show a bullish environment for AAPL if the above—particularly #1—are true.

    [ Edited: 21 January 2009 12:48 PM by chartguy ]