Wall Street Analysts Struggle To Predict Apple.

I was interviewed starting last Friday with follow-up questions earlier this week. I appreciate the coverage of the independent analysts.

[Edited to change topic title]

Well deserved. Congratulations

I really do think you gave the pros too much credit.  On the other hand, to be complementary to them is, from a PR/“hi there I’m an independent Apple analyst group leader and this is how we do things and what it pleasure it is to do a key interview with a big-name news service for the first time” perspective, quite smooth.

It’s PR.  AT, if Robert chose to be more…honest?, would that help his image in the minds of the business news reader who doesn’t even know that independent AAPL analysts exist? 

At the end of the day, it was Robert’s call to be more complimentary or more combative.  The numbers continue to speak for themselves.  And there are other independents who can be quoted and take the fight to the analysts if they want.

The editors must have removed the quote from Alex Gauna, “the truth is I am a compete idiot who doesnt know what I am talking about. Believe me, the fact I am still collecting a rich paycheck surprises me much more than it surprises you”.

Great to see some press for Robert and all the independents, but I would have appreciated the authors asking the pros to explain not why apple is hard to predict, but why the independents keep doing better than them with fewer resources.

Wu might have replied, “I think the problem might be that we simply don’t understand Apple as well as those folks do. Man, have you tried reading the AFB, I might join and benefit from the collaboration and insight offered by this group of specialists. ”

I struggled with the use of quotation marks for combative.  I decided to leave it out.  I also struggled with the word “honest.” 

Because this is a message board, not War and Peace, I just went with those choices.  There’s no “nice” way to deal with the disparity, where the independent kick the pros to the curb most every quarter.  Maybe it’s me, but most readers would see “look, we’re just better than the analysts” in only one way, as true as it is.

adamthompson3232 - 04 February 2012 03:03 AM

Mav - 04 February 2012 02:39 AM

I struggled with the use of quotation marks for combative.  I decided to leave it out.  I also struggled with the word “honest.” 

Because this is a message board, not War and Peace, I just went with those choices.  There’s no “nice” way to deal with the disparity, where the independent kick the pros to the curb most every quarter.  Maybe it’s me, but most readers would see “look, we’re just better than the analysts” in only one way, as true as it is.

Mav,

Crap, I tried to edit my post to add something and deleted it. Crap. I’ll repost shortly

A cooment that having the pro’s resources would’ve been nic, but that didn’t happen either. The bottom line is that DT was the one being interviewed, not me or anyone else. DT handled it the way he was most comfortable, and that’s just fine by me. Well done DT

Good job, DT.

Mace - 04 February 2012 06:49 AM

Good job, DT.

+1

Slowly but surely we are bringing attention to how amazing this company is not just because it sells a bunch of iPhones.  The little guys will keep buying before the financial world really wakes up.

Good morning!

The initial interview lasted about a half hour and covered a range of questions. Obviously, much of the content of the discussion was not included in the final article. What wasn’t included (most likely due to limited space) were additional points on why the estimates between the pros and the independents might differ.

In all I’m quite happy with the outcome and I’m hopeful it’s a start of an ongoing conversation with the independent analysts who work hard at covering Apple.

Great work DT. I think a word of thanks also goes out to PED for including the Independents and holding the Analysts up to their calls.

We can only dream that AAPL will see PE values that make realistic sense for a company growing between 70% and 116% y/y

Keep fighting the good fight amigo

Ha!

Let’s try to make it more constructive AT.

I’d encourage independents to take the gloves off and, if nothing else, boost those profitability assumptions.  Huge alarm bells were going off for me when I ended up with my bearish $41B-ish early estimate and my net income ratio, which was super bearish, matched all the independents.

43% GM minimum.  44%+ preferable.   that’d be a great start.

adamthompson3232 - 04 February 2012 12:04 PM

I think we should encourage more anonymity on this board. If the amateurs were anonymous they might be more willing to increase estimates to a more realistic level this Q.

If they are that afraid of public opinion they are in the wrong place. Besides, the only thing they should fear is the unsupported flame, and I haven’t seen much of that here.

DT might be an “amateur,” but that doesn’t mean he should look unprofessional in a wire story.

Few enjoy bomb-throwing like myself, but if one wants to be taken seriously, you can’t act like an anonymous guy on a message board.

With that said, what the &%$#! were they thinking interviewing Bat Guano? Seriously, why is this guy getting his name in print so much? I mean, didn’t he even take a pass last earnings?

DawnTreader - 04 February 2012 11:40 AM

Good morning!

The initial interview lasted about a half hour and covered a range of questions. Obviously, much of the content of the discussion was not included in the final article. What wasn’t included (most likely due to limited space) were additional points on why the estimates between the pros and the independents might differ.

In all I’m quite happy with the outcome and I’m hopeful it’s a start of an ongoing conversation with the independent analysts who work hard at covering Apple.

I’m curious.  What were those additional points?