投资者在歧视苹果公司吗?
歧视和被歧视,都不是什么好滋味。对于股市投资,学院派最流行的说法就是长期的“理性”和短期的“随机性”。也就是说,短期而言,股市会波动,产生“不理性”的投机行为。而长期则基本上会基于公司的业绩,就像是投资公司实业本身一样的“理性”和“充满智慧”。
苹果公司的存在,倒是让我们有机会看看,股市的双重标准和“歧视”到底是个什么样子.下面的文章给你一个不错的分析。至于是不是对的,还得基于你自己的思考,人们”歧视”苹果和宠爱谷歌,甚至是已经”过气”的微软,或许也有几分”道理”:毕竟,人家是软件公司,不”像”苹果那样只是一家”硬件公司”。
很多人对于苹果打造的生态系统的价值视而不见。从长期看,很可能很多人会看走眼:最终苹果很可能会证明多数是错误的,它所打造的生态系统就是一个独立的充满价值的”软件”王国。这份价值,很可能最终会给投资者带来不错的回报。
自己读读,自己想想。
不过,还是那句话:我无意给谁推荐股票,也不想被人埋怨。
股市投资的成功,远不仅仅只是选择正确的投资对象那么简单。时机把握的重要性,不仅仅只是体现在买入,还有卖出时机的选择。心态和智慧的结合,才会增加你成功的可能性。分析和把握时机,还得靠你自己。
如果你是一个急性子,我觉得你不应该在股市晃荡。
记住一句话:你可能买对了时机,但最终还是因为买错的时间而亏钱。
这种亏我吃过很多次,而且还很难不继续吃同样的亏。很弱智?是吗?有点!很有点!!!这就是人性的弱点决定的。想改都难。大师也有吃这种亏的时候,何况我们这些普通人。
Apple Bears Getting Really
Desperate
Nov 4 2013, 02:56
When
it comes to Apple (AAPL), there are those who just don't like the company (or the
stock). No matter what Apple does, the bears will criticize the company. Just
last week, Apple had a great quarter and
issued stronger than usual guidance. But guess what? It didn't seem good
enough, and the Apple bears were out in full force. Even when Apple does
something these people want, they find a way to criticize the company for it.
Today, I'll take another look at Apple, and explain why the Apple bear crowd is
getting really desperate.
The quarter was NOT
disappointing:
Literally, just a
few hours after Apple reported, and after my article above was published, this
is what was seen on Yahoo! Finance's homepage. Look at the headline.
(Source: Yahoo!
Finance homepage)
This
was the actual Reuters article that
goes with that headline image. Here are the first two "paragraphs"
from the article:
(Reuters) - Apple Inc's profit and margins slid despite selling
33.8 million iPhones in its September quarter, prompting a brief but sharp
selloff as disappointed investors cashed in some of the stock's recent strong
gains.
Wall Street had hoped for a stronger beat on quarterly sales
after the company predicted in September that its revenue and margins would
come in at the high end of its own forecasts.
The
second part of that is absolutely hilarious. Apple originally guided to
revenues of $34 billion to $37 billion, and gross margins of 36% to 37%. After
the great iPhone weekend, Apple, as the article states, said that revenues and
gross margins would be at the higher end of its ranges. What did Apple come in
at? How about $37.47 billion and 37.02%, respectively. Apple came in half a billion above in terms of revenues and above the high end of the gross
margin range. Apple beat analyst estimates for the iPhone, iPad, and Mac, its
three most important lines. The only product category that missed was the iPod,
whose unit sales totaled just 1.53% of Apple's quarterly revenues.
So
how was this a disappointment? It wasn't. Apple beat by $630 million on the
revenue front and $0.33 in earnings per share. Where does the Reuters article
state this? The second and third to last sentences of the article. Yes, buried at the bottom, the fact that
Apple crushed estimates. Sorry Apple bears, but trying to say this quarter was
a disappointment is just wrong. Find someone else to pick on. Apple came in
well above the high end of its revenue range, and above its gross margin
guidance too. Oh, and unlike Microsoft (MSFT) or
Google (GOOG), the beat wasn't fueled by dramatically lowered
expectations. By the way, Google's beat was not as impressive, and yet the
stock soared to new all-time highs. Google is certainly held to a different standard, and that is partially due to all
of those Apple bears out there. Microsoft saw its revenue estimates come down
by more than a billion between quarters and more than a dime for earnings. That
didn't happen to Apple.
Guidance was very good:
Another complaint of
Apple bears was that guidance, particularly gross margin guidance, was not very
good. Well, Apple guided to a revenue midpoint of $56.5 billion, and the
analyst estimate was $55.65 billion, so Apple was almost a billion ahead.
Remember, for fiscal Q4 the original midpoint was $35.5 billion, and Apple beat
that by nearly $2 billion. While Apple has been giving more realistic guidance
in the past few quarters, the company still has been conservative to some extent.
So
on to gross margins. The company guided to a midpoint of 37%, basically flat
with Q4. This was seen as a huge negative, with many expecting a midpoint
closer to 38%. Well, Apple detailed on the conference call an
issue with deferred revenues. It was stated that about $900 million would be
pushed into fiscal Q1, and that would hurt gross margins. Management stated
that gross margin guidance would have been around 38.5% if not for the
deferral. More on this in the next section. But even with the "light"
guidance, I still calculated Apple's earnings per share, based on all guidance
midpoints, at $13.51. That was below the $13.86 estimate, but I also did not
assume any benefit from the buyback plan. Don't forget, Apple exceeded its
fiscal Q4 guidance by anywhere from 60 to 90 cents in EPS, depending on what
share count you used.
Also,
if guidance was so disappointing, why have analysts raised their expectations since the report? Going into the report, as mentioned above, expectations
were for $55.65 billion and $13.86, respectively.Current estimates call for $57.04 billion and $13.93,
respectively. If Apple's guidance was disappointing, analysts would but cutting
estimates, not raising them. As you can see from the table below, estimates
were already rising into the report, so it's not like estimates were low to
begin with.
Additionally, those
that are criticizing Apple for weak margin guidance are the same that were
arguing for a cheaper iPhone. Those are the people that didn't like the iPhone
5C, because it was priced too high. Well, if Apple had a cheaper phone, margins
would have been lower. So the bears criticized Apple for not having a cheaper
phone, and then also criticized Apple for low margins. You can't have it both
ways.
Back to that deferred hardware
revenue:
I want to get back
to that $900 million in deferred revenue. Apple bears are pointing out that if
it were not for that money, fiscal Q1 revenue guidance would be a bit lower,
and perhaps the midpoint would only be in-line with analyst expectations. Well,
if that were the case, and these revenues instead were booked in fiscal Q4,
Apple would have produced a tremendous revenue beat, roughly $1.5 billion. Had
Apple come in around $38.4 billion in revenues with in-line guidance, the bears
would have criticized the guidance. But in that case, Apple would have had a
tremendous Q4 beat. Again, you can't have it both ways. It was not a
disappointing quarter, and guidance was not bad.
Domestic cash and stock
buybacks:
Apple's cash pile
has been another hot spot for bears to attack the technology giant. There are
those out there calling for Apple to better use its cash, primarily for capital
returns. Carl Icahn is arguing for a $150 billion buyback. To this point, a
larger buyback may be possible, but it all depends on the time frame (2 years,
5 years, 10 or more?). For this argument, I'm not calling Icahn an Apple bear,
because he's been bullish on the stock, and also is invested in Apple. Well,
the following table shows some key Apple cash pile statistics, with dollar
values in millions.
*Number may be
slightly off due to rounding of foreign balance.
Apple's domestic
cash pile value declined by about $5 billion as Apple roughly bought back that
much stock in fiscal Q4. The domestic cash pile is key, because it is the only
fund Apple can use for dividends and buybacks. If Apple wants to use its
foreign funds, more than $111 billion at the end of fiscal Q4, it has two
choices. It can bring those funds back into theUS, and face billions in
repatriation taxes, or Apple can borrow against those balances. Apple issued
$17 billion worth of debt earlier this year, to accelerate part of its buyback.
So what's up with
Apple bears here? Well, a number of those people arguing for a larger buyback
are those that are also criticizing Apple's earnings (especially in the last
quarter or two) for being propped up by the buyback. Obviously, as Apple
reduces its share count, earnings per share figures are helped. But again, you
can't have it both ways. How can you argue that Apple needs a bigger buyback,
then criticize it when earnings per share are helped by said buyback?
Additionally, if Apple does take out debt and raises the buyback, don't
criticize the company for having a weaker balance sheet.
Apple is expected to
return about $100 billion to shareholders over a three year period between the
dividend and the buyback. That is a tremendous amount, and should not be taken
lightly. Apple has a little more than $37 billion left on the buyback ($22.86
billion worth of shares bought back already), and the company expects the
buyback to be done by the end of calendar 2015. That means a little more than
$4 billion can be spent on average over the next 9 quarters. Apple should
generate enough cash over the next two years where it could pay the dividend
(and raise it by a fair amount) and finish off the buyback without completely
depleting its domestic cash balance. However, it would not surprise me if the
company did issue a little more debt, just so it has the so-called "margin
of safety" in its domestic cash pile.
In terms of
increasing the buyback, I've already said Apple could easily do it, but play
around with the timing. I'm on the record saying that Apple could raise the
buyback to a trillion dollars, just with no expiration date. On average, Apple
is going to buy back about $20 billion worth of stock a year for three years.
That is a tremendous amount, and I wouldn't be arguing for them to increase the
buyback into 2015. But once this current $60 billion plan is over, I expect the
buyback to continue, so the current number could be "raised" with an
extension of the timeline.
Top tier tech comparisons:
In
many of my technology articles lately, I've shown comparisons between a number
of the top tier tech names. These names include the three I've mentioned
already here today, plus Intel (INTC) and Cisco Systems (CSCO). The
following table shows a comparison of growth, valuation, and dividend yields.
*EPS and P/E numbers
are non-GAAP.
What's the key
takeaway here? Well, Apple might be the cheapest of any of these names,
depending on what kind of conversion you use for Cisco's non-GAAP to GAAP
earnings. But even if Apple and Cisco have the same valuation, Apple would be
the better value thanks to its stronger growth profile and much larger buyback.
Cisco is the only one of these names that has not reported earnings yet, as it
has a slightly different fiscal year. Cisco will report on November 13th. When
it comes to Intel, Apple seems like a much better investment. More growth at a
cheaper price. Intel has risen a couple of percent since reporting its quarter,
something Apple has not done. Intel issued worse than expected guidance, yet
the stock still rose.
When it comes to
Apple versus Google, Google provides more growth, but no dividend or buyback.
Google also trades at nearly double the valuation when you convert Google
earnings to GAAP. Google's stock has soared more than 15.5% since reporting
earnings, despite a very small beat, and thanks to reduced expectations and a
tax break. I mentioned above my article about Google being held to a different
standard, and the company certainly is. Over the last two years, Google has
missed revenue or earnings numbers several times, yet the stock is at all-time
highs.
When it comes to
Apple versus Microsoft, the two have comparable revenue growth, but Apple has
more earnings growth. Microsoft has a higher dividend yield, but Apple has the
more powerful buyback. Microsoft, however, trades at more than a 10% premium to
Apple, thanks to Microsoft also rising after its earnings report. Microsoft's
revenue and earnings beat was due to estimates being cut dramatically, although
the company did issue decent guidance.
Despite decent
growth and a very reasonable valuation, Apple is down almost 2% since its
earnings report. The three other names that have reported have all risen since
earnings. Personally, I think that is ridiculous, as Apple's beat was the most
impressive.
Updating my Apple target:
I've
gotten a ton of questions about my own price target for Apple since the
earnings report, and I promised I'd be back in a week or so with an update. In my preview article for Apple's fiscal 2014, I set a target of
$567 for the technology giant. As I have done in the past, I am providing a
table of estimates and apply a multiple to each level of earnings. If you want
to know what my price target is on any given day, look at the last table I
provided, take the average earnings estimate from analysts, and do the math.
Here's the table.
One
quick note on these numbers. At current, I am not assuming an Apple-China
Mobile (CHL) deal for
my valuation. Obviously, a deal with China Mobile would be extremely positive
for Apple. I think a deal is worth about 10%, so if a deal were to happen, you
could basically up my target by 10%. As of Sunday, the average analyst estimate
for earnings was $43.27. That gives me a price target of about $587, a $20
increase from my last update. Why have I upped my target? Well, here are the
reasons why:
·
Q4 report was strong and guidance was solid.
·
iPad sales came in strong despite no refresh this spring.
·
Company is buying back stock a little faster than I expected.
As
of Sunday, I was basically in between the mean and median price target among Wall Street analysts.
My target still implies about 13% of upside from here. You'll also notice that
I am not one calling for Apple to be a $1,000 stock, or for it to be a $200
stock. I'm giving a fair representation of where I think Apple will go by the
time it reports fiscal Q4 next year. For those that ask, my target including a
China Mobile deal is about $645 right now.
Final thoughts:
It seems that the
Apple bears are getting really desperate. Apple's Q4 earnings report was not
disappointing, as the company raised its guidance during the quarter then beat
it nicely anyway. Apple's guidance for fiscal Q1 was very strong as well. The
Apple bears are doing whatever they can to discredit this name. They will argue
that Apple needs a cheaper phone, but then they complain over margins. The
bears complain that Apple needs a larger buyback, but then criticize Apple's
earnings for being boosted by said buyback. Apple is the most profitable large
capUStech name, yet it is treated the worst. Apple bears are getting really
desperate after another solid quarter, and I believe Apple's stock does go higher
from here.
Additional disclosure: Investors are always reminded that before making any
investment, you should do your own proper due diligence on any name directly or
indirectly mentioned in this article. Investors should also consider seeking
advice from a broker or financial adviser before making any investment
decisions. Any material in this article should be considered general
information, and not relied on as a formal investment recommendation.
|