Is This Guy Serious?
- 3
- Add a Comment
- No Related Post
In an article, a writer of unspecified origin states that Wall Street’s big take on the Apple iPhone is all wrong. He cites how few iPhones will be produced in the grand scheme of things, listing the availability of parts as just one problem.
Further stated is, that since Apple makes a prediction that is so low, 10 million in the next 18 months, that things will not change appreciably in the cell phone landscape.
The author tries to point out the fallacies of the stock market assessments, without acknowledgement of fallacies he uses as fact, and therefore fails to address.
The cited amount of phones produced, 10 million in 18 months, may be true, but like the Volkswagen, which changed little from year to year, due to great initial design, the iPhone will allow a long span of life, unlike the also-rans that need to be replaced each year, in order to keep up brand interest. The iPhone could conceivably have a 10 year lifespan, unheard of in this realm of electronics, but possible here, because of the forward thinking in the design of the original model.
Another item not accounted for in the author’s account of impending history is that the chip ban on the core chipset of CDMA phones. This has been upheld twice now, and this completely impedes the quick movement of any CDMA pretenders to the throne from Verizon or Sprint, the big guns in the CDMA technology area. There is bound to be some loss by these carriers in the near term due to the incredible perceived ‘cool’ of the iPhone.
Beyond the iPhone itself, the rest of the market will do its very best to build an ‘iPhone killer’ which will spark more innovation and greater output. Just the buzz factor will ignite a stream of conspicuous consumption not seen since the advent of the iPod.
[tags]Apple, iPhone, AT&T, CDMA chip import ban, Volkswagen, Verizon, Sprint[/tags]
3 Comments
Bishfish
June 26th, 2007
at 2:35am
Apple does not make mistakes?
See if Newton, MacIntosh, Apple Mini, and the thing that looked like a desk lamp joggs your memory of less than stellar Apple products.
David
June 26th, 2007
at 6:48am
theoracle misses the entire point of the Fleckenstein article, which was not a slam against either Apple or the iPhone. Rather, Fleckenstein is saying that the number of iPhones sold won’t be sufficient to make a market impact on the companies that sell its component parts. This point is bolstered, not refuted, by theoracle’s statement that iPhones will have a ten-year lifespan - if true, this means there’s even less future in buying stock in the companies supplying its components.
BTW, Fleckenstein is a well-known hedge fund manager and market commentator, who’s been posting for at least ten years.
theoracle
June 26th, 2007
at 7:29am
Bish, thanks for the comment. I remember Lisa. Not sure what you mean by desk lamp looking device. Newton was ahead of its time, as were the original Mac, and a couple of others…but all were solid products, that Apple made money on. Lisa was a pig, and a cash sinkhole.
David, you miss my point. It may not peg Fleckenstein’s ‘meter’, but it WILL make a huge difference because of the possible lifespan, and the secondary, and tertiary markets around the product. Also, if you see my point of the ban of competing CDMA chips, it is bound to be slightly lean for Verizon and Sprint in the short term, which will bolster the iPhone’s sales. Thanks for the comment.
BTW, the title was not questioning his credentials, but his conclusions, which I feel are wrong…or else the whole stock system is wrong. [May be true, but you won't get many subscribers to that idea.]