hese announcements will drive the stock price. I'm sure you have seen stocks react this way before.
Actually this is not a forum or a pulpit for promoting or dispelling the Mac or the PC. We really just want to make some money.
That's why I usually refer to Apple Computer by its stock symbol.
AOU - Day 4
DEC 8 - AOU CALL $1101 AOU PUT $4914
DEC 9 - AOU CALL $1034 AOU PUT $5046
DEC 10- AOU CALL $968 AOU PUT $5440
DEC 11- AOU CALL $945 AOU PUT $5615
AOU CALL -$156 -14% AOU PUT +$701 +14%
All prices based on ASK.
PS: So far, a bears play. How low can we go?
neither gross margins nor profit margins can be extrapolated linearly. as quantity of sales rise the fixed costs become a smaller percentage, but so do costs of production and costs of sales. This may not have been true for handmade products years ago, but it is true today.
microsoft is an extreme example, so is a big-budget movie...and so, to lesser degree, is any industrially-produced product distributed by mass methods. I certainly agree with you, though, that you must see a projected sales increase to justify any faith
in Apple. My guess is that Apple see itself basically holding its own in its traditional markets with the G3 machines (notice that there are only three basic models to hold down development and tooling costs per unit?) and is putting its bets on big increases in software sales about 3rd quarter, 1998.
By the way... you seem to be having fun in this forum!
It appears that you haven't read, or chose to ignore, the part in the 10-k about the downward pressure on the gross margin.
They went beyond disclaimer - they explained why they expected gross margins to fall.
kstar disputed my analysis by quoting the same numbers I was crunching back at me. I don't see much value in that.
He didn't really dispute my analysis, he just made an unsupported and unreasoned claim that it was wrong. My "analysis" was of the most elementary type. Sales * gross margine - fixed expenses = profit or loss. It was right out of Apple's last 10-k. Pure
plug and chug. My question was which number was expected to improve to make Apple profitable. Either there had to be a really BIG sales increase for the expected gross margin, or you had to get really wildly opitimistic on the gross margin figure, something that Apple says there is a lot of downward pressure on. Fix cost have already been cut a lot.
And then you go saying that I've "bashed" people with no "supported facts". This is ironic. I've not bashed anyone, I just pointed out that wild optimism is not supported by the facts.
Estimates are for a loss of 0.07 for the 1st quarter (ending December). Wish they'd push all these charges in this quarter since there is very little chance of a profit this quarter. I know everybody pulls out these charges when discussing results, but it'd be nice to see black in the second quarter instead of dragging these charges out.
My company is going through the same thing. We are in the middle of a major restructuring, and have taken every charge possible in this quarter (our 4th). We will show a profit 1st quarter next year. Like to see AAPL do the same.
How many companies DON'T include statements like this in their 10Q's? How can one base their estimate on any future profits based on this statement from the 10Q?
"There can be no assurance that the Company will be able to sustain the gross margin levels achieved in 1997."
since you haven't yet gotten around to responding to my last response to you, let me make one more comment
remember that included in the current liabilities, is one years payments on the the debt that you are concerned about. so 1.85 ratio is taking into account payment of that 1 year debt and as i said that ratio presents no problems for me. that was the reason for my comment that long term debt IS longterm.
kstar did not once dispute your numbers.
What was disputed was your analysis of those numbers.
If you wish to bash Apple, and then bash people on this board with no supported facts... do it on the MSFT board.