Apple stock’s problem isn’t iMac delay, it’s the P/E ratio

“So Apple won’t be delivering its next-generation iMacs in time for the early school season? Is this delay really worth all the panicked headlines, fret, and a hefty trim in the stock price? I don’t think so,” Seth Jayson writes for The Motley Fool.

“Sure, I’ve argued in the past that Apple’s stock has gotten a bit frothy, but I’m willing to cut Cupertino a little slack on this particular stumble. After all, Apple has a tiny, but loyal following in the computer market. To judge by the angry email that flows my way whenever I criticize Jobs and Co., most Mac fans would crawl over a mile of gravel and broken glass in order to get their new machines


  1. It’s the hot G5 chip, even going to 90nm, it’s still hot.

    New iMac line is going to sport watercooling, like the Dual 2.5 Ghz does.

    The Powerbook G5 will sport it as well, but that’s been the most difficult, don’t expect those anytime soon.

    Back to sweeping the floors at Cupertino and listening at doors, I’ll keep you all informed.

    By the way visit


  2. Yep, gotta get earnings up or stock price down to a P/E ratio the market is comfy with.

    The real problem is that the iMac line hasn’t been selling. Last quarter, I wrote about the fact that Apple’s real sales savior wasn’t a computer at all, but the iPod. What I didn’t have time to mention then was that the iMac sales has been the firm’s preeminent laggard, with sales dropping 20% for the first half of the year.

    By contrast, high-end PowerMacs saw a 21% rise, PowerBooks surged 32%, and iBooks notched a 26% gain. Can the new-generation iMac turn this around? Perhaps, but since Apple’s other products are better sellers, it should be no hardship for the firm to push them for a few weeks until the new iMacs come online.

    The iMac was either too expensive to make, or Apple thought the design merited a premium price consumers weren’t willing to pay. The design may have been brilliant, but the little white dome doesn’t inspire confidence in the machine — a bit too cutesy. Maybe there’s not enough market for a small-form Mac that isn’t a portable. Consumers want a container with a hatch that provides one degree of expandability more than Apple provided, even if they won’t use it. Could Apple have overdesigned the Cube and iMac?

    My suggestion would be to move the gender pointer of the consumer line more in the masculine direction. Less form, more power and one degree of expandability more than provided so far. For a start, metal would help.

    Here’s where I think Apple went back to in designing the new iMac. Or where I think they should’ve gone. Still cool after all these years … the 20th Anniversary POMONA. Now tell me you don’t like it.

  3. i don’t like it…just kidding

    it’s looks great, it’s design is exactly what an imac needs for a strong boost of sales, stylish but strong and powerful, though it does looks a bit sony-ish

    but i doubt the new imacs will be in silver, as all the i-(imac & ibook) represents white and all the power(powermac & powerbook) represent silver.

  4. Yes ‘Less is More’ – that’s almost a summary of my opinion … almost.

    There’s the little matter of a choice of colours.

    Apple gave the consumer that choice twice – the original iMac and the iPod mini. Have any products in recent Apple history sold better?

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.