This.  Changes. Everything

  • Avatar

    Posted: 26 August 2012 12:56 AM

    The verdict means

    ....less price erosion

    ...more, potentially much more, licensing revenues.  Billions and billions

    ....less chance of commoditization.


    What is THAT worth?

    20 percent bump I say, and fast.

    Signature

    One trillion or bust

         
  • Posted: 26 August 2012 01:45 AM #1

    Is your 20% price increase based solely on an earnings increase?  I’m thinking there will also be an expansion of the PE multiple from the 13-16 range it’s been in to something crazy like an 18-20 range.

         
  • Posted: 26 August 2012 02:40 AM #2

    You’ve all lost your mind. Everyone and the media want to bill this jury verdict as a big deal. It’s not, at least where AAPL and earnings are concerned. The stock may go to 700 this week or next, but it would have done so anyway.

    The only way this decision might be important is if there’s an injunction on sales of Samsung phones. But do you really think that is going to happen? By the time appeals are done any patent infringements can easily be worked around. How much work does it take to change an icon or disable “bounce-back”?

    If anything, this Jury verdict will force Apple competitors to actually innovate which means more competition and not less.

    Personally, the current patent system is broken.  This case is just the latest example of this.  The Jury made it’s decision based largely on email communication. How is admitting inspiration from a competitor’s product patent infringement?

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 26 August 2012 04:25 AM #3

    bick - 26 August 2012 05:40 AM

    How is admitting inspiration from a competitor’s product patent infringement?

    When your inspiration is about how you can copy what someone else has done, rather than about how you can do it better, that is by definition an infringement (of a patent). It’s what the patent system was meant to stop, and in this case it has.

    Signature

    Natura naturans

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 26 August 2012 04:33 AM #4

    Uh… (Mercel, can you find that newer one you posted not so long ago?)

    [ Edited: 26 August 2012 04:35 AM by Mav ]

    Signature

    The Summer of AAPL is here.  Enjoy it (responsibly) while it lasts.
    AFB Night Owl Teamâ„¢
    Thanks, Steve.

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 26 August 2012 05:12 AM #5

    ...

    Deleted

    [ Edited: 27 August 2012 09:57 AM by JDSoCal ]

    Signature

    We filed for over 200 patents for all the inventions in iPhone and we intend to protect them. — Steve Jobs, 2007

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 26 August 2012 08:52 AM #6

    Back of envelope calculation of 20 percent price per share jump,which I will admit is a WAG

    Sammy turned down a 30 dollar per phone settlement.  this verdict will lead to a global settlement with google.  200 Million android phones per year times 30 dollars equals 6 billion a year in licensing earnings.  Call it 4 b after taxes. Multiply by 15, equals 60 b in additional market cap.

    That’s the first ten percent.

    Add licensing fees for iPad .  Call it 3 to 5 percent.

    Add another 3 to 5 per cent relief rally.  A huge worry is going away, or at least being significantly mitigated.

    (The worry that prices will fall and margins eroded.). Multiple expands. Say from average of 13.5 to 14.5. 


    There is your 20 percent.  Which takes us to 800 in short order.

    As for catalysts:

    Koh’s trebling of damages.
    Koh’s injunction

    Plus the usual list:  iPhone 5’ plus iPad mini plus iPod nano plus eventually iScreen.  And iProjector.

    And iPad specially made for cars.  And lower priced 3 GS or iPhone 4 for prepay markets.

    Oh, and Chinese operator with 300 million subscribers gets iPhone 5.  And plant in Brazil opens Latin America.

    And 3 D iPad.  And motion detection pcs.  And siri that works.  And wearable devices.  And stuff we can’t even imagine.

    Remember that moores law is still happening.

    [ Edited: 26 August 2012 09:04 AM by Xtra ]

    Signature

    One trillion or bust

         
  • Posted: 26 August 2012 09:47 AM #7

    Xtra - 26 August 2012 11:52 AM

    Back of envelope calculation of 20 percent price per share jump,which I will admit is a WAG

    Sammy turned down a 30 dollar per phone settlement.  this verdict will lead to a global settlement with google.  200 Million android phones per year times 30 dollars equals 6 billion a year in licensing earnings.  Call it 4 b after taxes. Multiply by 15, equals 60 b in additional market cap.

    That’s the first ten percent.

    Add licensing fees for iPad .  Call it 3 to 5 percent.

    Add another 3 to 5 per cent relief rally.  A huge worry is going away, or at least being significantly mitigated.

    (The worry that prices will fall and margins eroded.). Multiple expands. Say from average of 13.5 to 14.5. 


    There is your 20 percent.  Which takes us to 800 in short order.

    As for catalysts:

    Koh’s trebling of damages.
    Koh’s injunction

    Plus the usual list:  iPhone 5’ plus iPad mini plus iPod nano plus eventually iScreen.  And iProjector.

    And iPad specially made for cars.  And lower priced 3 GS or iPhone 4 for prepay markets.

    Oh, and Chinese operator with 300 million subscribers gets iPhone 5.  And plant in Brazil opens Latin America.

    And 3 D iPad.  And motion detection pcs.  And siri that works.  And wearable devices.  And stuff we can’t even imagine.

    Remember that moores law is still happening.

    30$ was a starting point but in reality it cant be that much. My friend bought an android for 50$ unsubsidized. MSFT gets 7$ for their patents from some android manufacturers.

    I’d say they will all work around it or pay max 10-12$ for all patents apple has.

         
  • Posted: 26 August 2012 10:38 AM #8

    Steve coming back to Apple changed everything

    The purchase of NeXT changed everything

    The consolidation of computing products into a 2 x 2 grid changed everything

    The Bondi Blue iMac changed everything

    The iPod changed everything

    The iTunes music store and its introduction for Windows changed everything

    The iPhone changed everything again

    So did the iPad

    The verdict is a positive, but it does not change everything, in my opinion.

         
  • Posted: 26 August 2012 10:53 AM #9

    bick - 26 August 2012 05:40 AM

    You’ve all lost your mind. Everyone and the media want to bill this jury verdict as a big deal. It’s not, at least where AAPL and earnings are concerned. The stock may go to 700 this week or next, but it would have done so anyway.

    The only way this decision might be important is if there’s an injunction on sales of Samsung phones. But do you really think that is going to happen? By the time appeals are done any patent infringements can easily be worked around. How much work does it take to change an icon or disable “bounce-back”?

    If anything, this Jury verdict will force Apple competitors to actually innovate which means more competition and not less.

    Personally, the current patent system is broken.  This case is just the latest example of this.  The Jury made it’s decision based largely on email communication. How is admitting inspiration from a competitor’s product patent infringement?

    I take issue with several of your points here, however not that I have “lost my mind” which cannot be disputed. But, I digress.

    Do I think an injunction is going to happen? Yes, I think in fact it’s much more likely than not.  Judge Koh already has issued an injunction, sales ban, on some Samsung devices. This tells me that the Judge, who is a patent expert, had the same pre-trial evaluation of the case as the jury eventually hashed out.  Monetary damages only address the historical effects of infringement. An injunction would address damages going forward should Samsung continue to sell these devices in the US market.  Yes, Samsung may come up with work arounds for their infringements, but those would constitute different devices and issues for another day.

    A more close issue, IMHO, is what the Judge does about increasing damages?  There are two sides to this: One is the jury award is so large that trebling damages would be beyond the scope of the intent of the statute which allows the increase.  The flip side: the statute was put in place to distinguish neglectful or unintentional conduct from willful.  The jury did find willful infringement.  I think she will increase damages but not triple the award.

    The patent system may or may not be broke, but if it is broke it certainly has nothing to do with the jury using email to decide a case.  Emails, text, and video evidence are used in American courtrooms daily and constitute some of the very best evidence available.  Apple, in this case, paraded up a number of their own employees and experts to lecture the jury on infringement and what Samsung was doing with their devices.  But the jury found emails by Samsung constituted admissions of guilt. It’s not what others said about infringement, it’s what Samsung was saying at the time about their own actions.  Very damming stuff. 

    The inspiration argument was a joke, big mistake, by the Samsung lawyers. I posted my thoughts on this in the trial thread at the time.  So this is not a new thought.  I would never have used that argument.  I think it concedes way too much. 

    How much will this drive earnings and the stock price?  Not sure, trying to get my head around this the last few days.  Will we ever know?  I believe there will be cross-licencing fees that generate revenue.  I think this puts some other rivals of Apple who do not have Samsung’s resources in a big hole.  This effect may force Samsung out on an Island where other competitors enter into licencing deals, which makes it harder for Samsung to hold out and argue the Apple patents are invalid.  I think we get a major pop on Monday and it has some legs.  More than any other factor, this decision will drive sentiment in a positive direction for awhile.  That alone is significant.

    [ Edited: 26 August 2012 10:58 AM by Grover ]      
  • Avatar

    Posted: 26 August 2012 11:09 AM #10

    roni - 26 August 2012 01:38 PM

    Steve coming back to Apple changed everything

    The purchase of NeXT changed everything

    The consolidation of computing products into a 2 x 2 grid changed everything

    The Bondi Blue iMac changed everything

    The iPod changed everything

    The iTunes music store and its introduction for Windows changed everything

    The iPhone changed everything again

    So did the iPad

    The verdict is a positive, but it does not change everything, in my opinion.

    The verdict does not change everything. Apple’s legal strategy does. Just like iphone was 5 years in the making, so was Apples legal strategy to protect their mobile products. Before the verdict, everyone was saying the patent laws were vague, and being copied is just a cost of doing business. The verdict was an affirmation that Apple has innovated to protect themselves.

    There’s a saying about trespassing Disney’s copyrights, “Don’t f*** with the mouse.”
    We can add Jobs “I’m willing to go to thermonuclear war on this,”

    Signature

    The more I learn the higher I go,
        The higher I go the more I see;
    The more I see the less I know,
        The less I know the more I’m free.

         
  • Posted: 26 August 2012 12:27 PM #11

    bick - 26 August 2012 05:40 AM

    If anything, this Jury verdict will force Apple competitors to actually innovate which means more competition and not less.

    I disagree with every single point you made in your post but this one is the worst. So, now all of a sudden competitors will successfully innovate (launch new/different products that the mass market wants) because they have to after Apple won this case? Uhhhh, I don’t see any other companies innovating like Apple and if they could have done so in the past they would have. This is a HUGE roadblock for nearly every Apple competitor out there. Innovating isn’t as simple as “well, now we have to make a new/different great product that will sell well against Apple’s products so let’s make it happen.” It’s easy as hell to say it but it’s damn near impossible to do it.

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 26 August 2012 01:00 PM #12

    adamthompson32 - 26 August 2012 03:27 PM
    bick - 26 August 2012 05:40 AM

    If anything, this Jury verdict will force Apple competitors to actually innovate which means more competition and not less.

    I disagree with every single point you made in your post but this one is the worst. So, now all of a sudden competitors will successfully innovate (launch new/different products that the mass market wants) because they have to after Apple won this case? Uhhhh, I don’t see any other companies innovating like Apple and if they could have done so in the past they would have. This is a HUGE roadblock for nearly every Apple competitor out there. Innovating isn’t as simple as “well, now we have to make a new/different great product that will sell well against Apple’s products so let’s make it happen.” It’s easy as hell to say it but it’s damn near impossible to do it.

    It took Apple (arguably the most innovative company this decade) 5 years to create the iPhone.  So far, the competition has merely made cheaper copies that basically do the same thing.  Unless another company has already came up with a new idea and started the process, nobody’s going to overtake Apple anytime soon…

    Signature

    Because Longer is better…....

         
  • Posted: 26 August 2012 01:19 PM #13

    adamthompson32 - 26 August 2012 03:27 PM
    bick - 26 August 2012 05:40 AM

    If anything, this Jury verdict will force Apple competitors to actually innovate which means more competition and not less.

    I disagree with every single point you made in your post but this one is the worst. So, now all of a sudden competitors will successfully innovate (launch new/different products that the mass market wants) because they have to after Apple won this case? Uhhhh, I don’t see any other companies innovating like Apple and if they could have done so in the past they would have. This is a HUGE roadblock for nearly every Apple competitor out there. Innovating isn’t as simple as “well, now we have to make a new/different great product that will sell well against Apple’s products so let’s make it happen.” It’s easy as hell to say it but it’s damn near impossible to do it.

    I agree, however only for the sake of argument: let’s assume other companies do innovate.  That does not take place overnight.  So at least short term, Apple = big advantage.

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 26 August 2012 01:24 PM #14

    Dissection time

    1. Innovation is easy.  I can see several ways to decorate my house.
    2. Innovation with low price.  okay, this is harder.  Apple is the new champ of supply line
    3. Innovation with or without patent licensing.  Some companies may not want to spend for licensing.
    4. Innovating so that the broader market will buy.  This is hardest now.  Apple design is currently the leader overall.

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 26 August 2012 08:08 PM #15

    bick - 26 August 2012 05:40 AM

    You’ve all lost your mind. Everyone and the media want to bill this jury verdict as a big deal. It’s not, at least where AAPL and earnings are concerned. The stock may go to 700 this week or next, but it would have done so anyway.

    The only way this decision might be important is if there’s an injunction on sales of Samsung phones. But do you really think that is going to happen? By the time appeals are done any patent infringements can easily be worked around. How much work does it take to change an icon or disable “bounce-back”?

    If anything, this Jury verdict will force Apple competitors to actually innovate which means more competition and not less.

    Personally, the current patent system is broken.  This case is just the latest example of this.  The Jury made it’s decision based largely on email communication. How is admitting inspiration from a competitor’s product patent infringement?

    I bet all of Mercel’s money :-D that you own a Droid.

    -10