"Except it included AMZN in it. It does not include "fix priced" streaming like NFLX. But, I understand that you are too blah, blah..."
You sound angry again. Must be losing more money to add to your $1 million in losses from before. Amazon's streaming is "not popular" today just as e-books weren't 3 years ago. What good did that do idiot shorts?
"So when AAPL's share goes down 10%, it's a bad thing."
Yes, according to your way of looking at things it sure is.
"You must have posted the wrong link. That was a link for downloads, not streaming."
Except it included AMZN in it. It does not include "fix priced" streaming like NFLX. But, I understand that you are too stupid to realize that.
"It did show that Apple's share of downloads dropped 10%."
So when AAPL's share goes down 10%, it's a bad thing. When AMZN's goes down 30%, it's a good thing? And you wonder why people call you stupid?
So streaming video isn't popular? Tell that to hulu and crackle.
At least it is so popular, cable companies are feeling the pinch as more subscriptions fall to free TV and movies, as well as low cost subs for NFLX.
Nice try. Try again.
"Who cares? I merely made the comment that it wasn't popular."
I do. And I merely made the comment shorts thought e-books not being very popular meant they never would be.
"I couldn't care less what you think has any bearing on anything."
I don't care what you think about my comments. If you don't like other people posting reactions to your comments either stop posting or get the heck off the board, wimp.
"I'm saying whether or not it is initially popular has no bearing on anything."
Who cares? I merely made the comment that it wasn't popular. I couldn't care less what you think has any bearing on anything.
"It's just not popular."
Are you saying it IS popular? Or that it WILL be popular? Two completely different things.
Actually YOU'RE the one who said the first quote.
I'm saying whether or not it is initially popular has no bearing on anything. As with Kindle the market prior to its launch and second and third iterations had not yet been developed enough and the right combination of technologies at the right price had not yet been produced to a form of media consumption that would yield significant revenue.
The smart thing to do is to already have your business in place to be one of the earlier movers into the space before their are too many incumbents and switching costs for consumers cause new customer acquisition to become more costly and more difficult.
"They've had it for ages."
Sure, if you can call a little more than a year "ages".
"It's just not popular."
Yes, just like reading e-books was not popular 3 years ago and Jobs said no one read books anymore. Now we have Amazon forcing Apple to scramble to catch up, first colluding with publishers to control e-book pricing (which failed), and now proposing essentially a 30% tax on ibooks customers. If Apple couldn't figure that business out why should we expect timber to?
Streaming Video is a nascent business but it is the old idiot short screed; This business (fill in the blank) is not a huge success NOW with lots of fat profits so why is Amazon getting into it?
But the more idiot shorts shout this, the more money they seem to lose. Timber had lost nearly $1 million at one point last quarter by his own admission posted here. He hasn't denied it could be almost a similar lost this quarter since he sold all the Feb calls from 135 to 185 so as things stand about 90% of those are going to be underwater and it could easily be 100%.