Macworld Pullout Sends AAPL 6.6% Lower [Updated]

| Apple Stock Watch

Shares in Apple Inc. lost 6.57% Wednesday, as investors reacted negatively to the news that the company was pulling out of Macworld after 2009, and that CEO Steve Jobs would not be giving the keynote at the next, its last, Macworld event. The news brought mixed reactions from pundits and analysts.

AAPL closed at US$89.16 per share, a loss of $6.27 (-6.57%), on moderately strong volume of 46.2 million shares trading hands.

The opinion that seems to have grabbed hold of investors' imaginations is that Steve Jobs's decision to not do this year's keynote was in some way related to ongoing concerns about his health.

Several mainstream pundits have speculated that this was the reason, while analyst reaction was mixed.

Oppenheimer analyst Yair Reiner lowered his rating on the stock from Outperform to Perform, and told clients he could barring a public, long-term succession plan from Apple, he could, "no longer continue to recommend Apple as a long-term investment," according to CBS Marketwatch.

"We don't know why Steve Jobs has pulled out of his annual address at Macworld...Maybe he's not feeling well, or maybe he just has nothing new to say," Mr. Reiner wrote. "Whatever the reason, the unexpected announcement has underscored the greatest risk to Apple's long-term success -- its dependence on Jobs' health and its apparent lack of a succession plan."

Other analysts, including Piper Jaffary's Gene Munster and Charlie Wolf of Needham & Co., both dismissed concerns about Steve Jobs' health, though Mr. Munster added that the lack of a Stevenote does indicate that nothing big will come out of this Macworld.

Dow Jones reported that Canaccord had started coverage on Apple at a Hold rating.

Taking a slightly different tack, our own Ted Landau theorized, "This is all consistent with Steve's personality and general mode of operation. Once he decided that Apple's relationship with Macworld Expo was going to be over, he wanted nothing to do with the event anymore. Not even to show up for the Expo keynote next month."

Whatever the reason for Apple's actions and decisions, the market's knee-jerk reaction was to push AAPL lower.

[This article was updated with additional information. - Editor]

*In the interest of full disclosure, the author holds a small share in AAPL stock that was not an influence in the creation of this article.  

Popular TMO Stories


Lee Dronick

Good grief! Some investors need to stop overreacting. Well, maybe if it goes lower over the next few days I will buy some more AAPL

Suppose that next week Steve says that because this will be Apple’s last MacWorld that he changed his mind and will be giving the keynote.


Oh my god…I am flabergasted by the sheer number of computer illiterates still out there.

People, Apple is just a marketing company and that’s all.

I am truly amazed that people buy these obsolete buggy iGarbage from apple…Hats off to their marketing department for conning and brainwashing so many idiots out there…But, I bought an HP iPaq for a couple of hundred dollars - it came with a phone, full featured GPS with voice directions, and oh yea a full Windows Mobile OS long before Crapple’s iPhone ever existed.

And why would anyone pay over $3000 for a crippled, obsolete-out-of the box Apple Mac OS X computer? I bought an HP pavillion laptop, fully loaded, with DVD/Blue Ray, Super Hi-res wide screen, 2 Gig RAM, HD Tuner, built-in web cam etc. etc. etc. for under $1000

And Apple Mac OS X is based on FreeBSD, an open-source Unix look-alike, available FREE for the PC back in 1992, with a artsy-fartsy GUI. Whoopy Doo..

It is too expensive, too buggy, and the only software available is a bunch of dinky puzzles written by 14 year olds. No engineering or scientific applications available for “Mac OS X”...

Apple has a long history of fraud, racism and corruption…Steve Jobs and Nancy Heinen (and her shyster subordinates) are both knowing criminal participants in the stock options scam, and were caught trying to cover it up.

They were caught red-handed in early 2006 when a former employee who was cheated out of all of his stock after being wrongfully dismissed, filed a lawsuit against Apple Con-puter.

In short, dont waste your time and money on apple…

PS: If Apple was supposed to be “invulnerable” to viruses, why are there so many security fixes being passed around? Even with all of Apple’s virus and spyware vulnerabilities…which i’Tard would target a virus against an con-puter “OS” used by 2% of people out there?


The stupidity continues…

At least Carl Howe gets it:


Hi, Kaylar! Let me help you out with a few things:

“Apple is just a marketing company”

Yes, “just a marketing company” that files hundreds of patents a year.

“why would anyone pay over $3000 for a crippled, obsolete-out-of the box Apple Mac OS X computer?”

Why indeed! The most expensive computer Apple sells is the workstation-class Mac Pro. It starts at $2,800. The next most expensive is the MacBook Pro at $2,000.

Perhaps you’re confusing Apple with some other company…

“Apple Mac OS X is based on FreeBSD, an open-source Unix look-alike”

Actually Mac OS X is derived from BSD, with some parts derived from FreeBSD and NetBSD. By the way, Mac OS X is a true, certified Unix. (UNIX 03 certification).

“No engineering or scientific applications available for Mac OS X”

Engineering—385 applications
Science—1,372 applications

...listed here:

More information:

By the way, Unix operating systems are the favorite operating systems of engineers and scientists.

“If Apple was supposed to be ?invulnerable? to viruses, why are there so many security fixes being passed around?”

So that Mac OS X can REMAIN virus free. Is there some part of that process you don’t understand?

“used by 2% of people out there?”

You’re in error by a factor of almost 5. Apple’s U.S. market share is 9.5% as of the third quarter of 2008 and growing.

Are you having trouble keeping up, Kaylar?


Kaylar is a moron.

Bryan Chaffin

Hi Kaylar,

1996 called—it wants its arguments back.


MacWorld Reader

Think about this fact. Most people who use Mac have at one time or other used a PC, and so are in a position to judge one against the other. Quite often they use a PC at work and a Mac at home. Whereas most PC users have never used a Mac, and so are unqualified to judge the differences.

Yes, Macs look expensive compared to all the “deals” out there on PCs but they are generally built for real world use, unlike PCs, which are built with the bang of Blu-ray, but then feature an Atom processor or a 20GB hard drive, you never get it all for cheap and if you do, don’t expect the components to last or the batteries to be decent. The hardware and software are chosen on a Mac in order to complement current and future software and peripherals. I have a 12” PowerBook that is six or more years old. Rather than having to chuck it out, I will be upgrading it to 1 GB of ram and using it to run Adobe CS3 for professional typesetting and design while I am away from my desktop. It is still more than capable of running the current OS and programs. And I’ve never had a ?500 PC laptop (or desktop) that I could say that about - in fact I’ve never had a PC that has lasted me more than 2 or 3 years.

Lee Dronick

Ignore the the troll calling himself Kaylar. He has been making virtually the same post over on the CNET Apple blogs, often several times on the same story.



Judging by his post, I don’t think Kaylar was alive in 1996. It is about on par with a 12 year old.

Log in to comment (TMO, Twitter or Facebook) or Register for a TMO account