AAPL Pro analysts 51% worse than amateurs

A

ASusilovic

%Err Analyst, Affiliation
----- ---------------------------------------
5.9% Turley Muller, Financial Alchemist
7.2% Daniel Tello, Deagol's AAPL Model
7.2% Robert Paul Leitao, Apple Finance Board
7.3% Andy Zaky, Bullish Cross
8.2% Ashok Kumar, Rodman & Renshaw
8.7% Bill Shope, Credit Suisse
8.8% Patrick Smellie, Apple Finance Board
9.6% Alexis Cabot, Apple Finance Board
9.9% Yair Reiner, Oppenheimer
10.1% Mike Abramsky, RBC Capital
10.3% Ben Reitzes, Barclay's Capital
10.3% Jeff Fidacaro, Susquehanna Financial
10.6% Toni Sacconaghi, Bernstein Research
10.8% Peter Misek, Canaccord Adams
11.8% Mark Moskowitz, J.P. Morgan
11.9% Chris Whitmore, Deutsche Bank
11.9% Tavis McCourt, Morgan Keegan
12.1% Gene Munster, Piper Jaffray
12.3% Doug Reid, Thomas Weisel
12.3% Shaw Wu, Kauffman Bros.
13.3% Keith Bachman, BMO Capital
13.4% Scott Craig, Merrill Lynch
13.7% Brian Marshall, Broadpoint AmTech
14.1% Kathryn Huberty, Morgan Stanley
14.3% Richard Gardner, Citigroup
----- ---------------------------------------
11.6% Professionals
7.7% Amateurs
----- ---------------------------------------
51.4% Pros error increase % on amateurs

http://aaplmodel.blogspot.com/2010/04/apple-beats-up-everyone.html
 
Back in April I posted a couple of charts showing how my "fair value" and "target" forecasts compared to AAPL's price history over the last few years. Several readers have asked for an update, and I said I'd do one when AAPL made a credible move to catch up with its fundamentals, which is the basis for my FV and target forecasts. Seeing as AAPL has run about 80 points in 7 weeks, I was also curious to visualize how far towards a fair valuation has this recent attempt taken it.

I found I needed to make some changes to the chart, mainly on the vertical scale. The details from 2006-2007 were getting squished due to the scale now going up beyond $700, so I decided to use a log scale. Because Excel sucks at doing log scales, I've added a few custom labels and gridlines along the axis, which might seem odd if you're not paying attention (not every gridline is spaced equally in visual distance and some not even in the underlying values). Anyway, here's the chart (click to enlarge):

http://aaplmodel.blogspot.com/2010_10_01_archive.html
 
Quote from ASusilovic:

Back in April I posted a couple of charts showing how my "fair value" and "target" forecasts compared to AAPL's price history over the last few years. Several readers have asked for an update, and I said I'd do one when AAPL made a credible move to catch up with its fundamentals, which is the basis for my FV and target forecasts. Seeing as AAPL has run about 80 points in 7 weeks, I was also curious to visualize how far towards a fair valuation has this recent attempt taken it.

I found I needed to make some changes to the chart, mainly on the vertical scale. The details from 2006-2007 were getting squished due to the scale now going up beyond $700, so I decided to use a log scale. Because Excel sucks at doing log scales, I've added a few custom labels and gridlines along the axis, which might seem odd if you're not paying attention (not every gridline is spaced equally in visual distance and some not even in the underlying values). Anyway, here's the chart (click to enlarge):

http://aaplmodel.blogspot.com/2010_10_01_archive.html
More...

it's like Newton laws. They work only for small scales

you're rationalizing AAPL market value for almost 1 trillion dollars
although company has huge risks to its growth
it has just 4 products, all of them are basically toys
no matter how good apple - the competitive pressure is huge
Imac market share doesn't grow no matter what apple fan say
iphone and ipad market share will go into the same direction - to 5% in several years
I will be really amazed if AAPL in 5 years is above $50
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top