Bloomberg:
I’ve long been a critic of Apple, but today I give up: It’s the perfect tech company for this day and age, an example to the rest of Silicon Valley.
After Apple’s latest results announcement, one could knock it yet again for its stable dependence on a single mature product — the iPhone. That product delivered 62.2 percent of the company’s sales; the average for the previous 10 quarters was 62.4 percent, so the growth in earbud, smartwatch and streaming subscription sales does nothing to reduce the iPhone’s dominance.
Apple appears to be happy to think small and focus on its shareholders, not on pie-in-the-sky ideas, like other tech companies, including industry leaders.
But I’m no longer knocking Apple for any of this. In fact, I’m sorry I ever did.
I look forward to many more analysts offering up the same apology.
Don’t count on it, Shawn. Not as long as any of them can still make money by creating their own group narrative.
Diversity in every ecosystem has survival benefits.
Apple still has an exposed iPhone flank.
And, though trivial, nixing Airport line was a bad move on both the tactical and Strategic levels (routers are the entry into a home network… when the front door to HomeKit is a reliably secure Airport, the whole shebang is better.)
HK is not dependent on AP in any way. it’s still a secure protocol and continues to be so even while the others aren’t. stop exaggerating.
Don’t hold your breath …
Analysts would never admit they were wrong. They actually believe they know everything about Apple and their stupidity and arrogance can really trick shareholders into dumping their Apple stock. Analysts use of supply chain checks can certainly put Apple stock into a tailspin, so they use that crap every financial quarter and the trusting sheep fall for it. I’m not worried because I’m in Apple for the dividends which I’ll get even if the share price goes down.
I’m a long-term Apple shareholder and I wish Apple wouldn’t have to keep depending on the iPhone for such a high percentage of revenue. I’m sure they could find another product or business to growth revenue with. Surely there must be some non-hardware acquisition that would make them some decent money.
Warren Buffett has recently been quoted saying that it’s actually hard for him to purchase whole companies at the type of valuations offered in the open market: in other words, retail investors are getting deals he can’t beat. Very likely this is true for Apple as well; in fact much more so when operating in their high-tech/Silicon Valley universe.
Under these circumstances I commend Apple for making only strategic, usually-small acquisitions whose worth can be compounded at high rates, rather than attempting the typical Wall Street “M&A” activity that causes all sorts of sycophantic excitement without any real justification aside from customer-unfriendly price-boosting and/or service reduction thanks to decreased price competition.
if the apology is not from Bloomberg’s top apple pro troll Mark Gurman, it’s worthless. he still designs the hater narrative and will continue to do so.
He’s not apologizing. Read it carefully, he’s being sarcastic.
He’s saying he’s right to be so down on Apple because the good results is wonky ‘dependence on a single mature product’ and Apple has FAILED in breaking out of that after many quarters. He’s also saying other tech firms are better because Apple unlike them is no longer pushing the tech envelope but is just sucking up to Wallstreet “happy to think small and focus on its shareholders”.
I’m a shareholder, Bloomberg’s has been completely idiotic in the coverage in the run up to earnings and now they’re giving sarcasm.
That’s… not an apology. You see that, right? But you’re looking forward to more snarky non-apologies?
I posted before I read your note. And… wow, I sure had to read a lot of other notes to get here. Nobody else seems to have actually understood what they were reading. Everybody just saw “apology” and raced to comment. I sure hope these people didn’t actually read that whole quote and come away thinking that was an apology.
Also, to address the too-common criticism he voiced in that quote… You know, if you have the best selling tech product of all time, pretty much by definition it dominates your balance sheet. Apple does appear to be exploring non-iPhone directions, and they do sometimes point out thinks like “this subgroup of our products would be a Fortune 300 company all by itself” means they’re actually trying and succeeding.
Yeah I read it in a similar way, a very backhanded sorry. He’s still accusing Apple of all the typical stuff you see everywhere, only now just packaged in this bizarre faux praise piece.
Just wait until the 3-4 weeks before earnings are reported this quarter. The same BS will be coming from the same analysts regarding gloom and doom based on their “channel checks”. Either these analysts are illegally supporting short sellers or they’re incompetent. I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt and say they’re incompetent, I’ll never take their analyses seriously again.
“I’m sure they could find another product or business to growth revenue with. Surely there must be some non-hardware acquisition that would make them some decent money.” LOL You’re sure, are you? So, why do you think they aren’t doing what you are so sure of?
When hammering Apple gets lost in the din find another way to stand out. Ignorant gems like this underscore why this surrender reads more like insincere clickbait than a concession:
Think Small. Really?!
Maybe we should sum it up with his summation.
“For that, I am thankful. (But I won’t buy a $1,000 phone; sorry, Mr. Cook.)”
What a dick.
The other point is that even the other 37.8% of Apple’s revenue alone is … enough to make it a huge, very successful company.
Ultra maroon!
What a maroon. If he hadn’t nursed his axe to grind for so long, he would have know that stuff a long time ago. Pretty piss poor journalism.
Wasn’t exaggerating, but was probably wrong. On second thought I agree w you on no significant link between AP and HK.
Although my example was inapt, I’m not wrong about my comments regarding diversity of ecosystems (natural or artificial) being the best hedge for long term survival.
I had the same take as you did from what Shawn posted, but then I read the entire article. It’s more nuanced than it seems and not nearly as snarky. Read the entire article. He’s still clearly knocking Apple for lack of innovation, but he seems genuinely sincere in his appreciation for how Apple is handling themselves today versus other tech companies.
I know…I know. The blurb Shawn pulled isn’t the best representation of the article. Read the entire thing first. I have some quarrel with it too, but much less after having read it in its entirety.
“but then I read the entire article” LOL That’s kinda key. 🙂
Yes, I noted this seemingly obvious step in another post. But, as I’m sure you’ll admit, it’s a rarity on the internet before posting. Outrage comes first!
Shawn, this was the most backhanded, snarky, non-apology possible. Basically, he said Apple only does small things, caring only about shareholders, while other tech companies, the actual industry leaders, focus on big ideas. Since our capitalistic society only cares about share price and profit, rather than actual ideas, I give up. Apple, and their single hit product cash cow, wins.
WTF? You want more from trolls like this?
EDIT: Having actually read the entire article (a novel idea, I know), not just the blurb Shawn posted, I have to concede the “apology” is a bit more nuanced than I thought. It’s still a knock on Apple for lack of innovation, but it does appropriately take other tech companies to task.
Hi. I read it. As I’ve said, I’m biased.
I chose that quote because it was on loop, but there’s a lot more there to pick at if you’re a critic of Apple critics. Particularly his parting shot at the iPhone X.