“Goldman Sachs initiated coverage of Apple Computer at ‘in-line,’ noting that Apple is ‘one of the few companies in tech with the ability to consistently innovate and then monetize that innovation.’ Goldman expects fiscal 2005 earnings of $1.51 per share and fiscal 2006 earnings of $1.85, with a bias to the upside on ‘multiple sources of growth coming together.’ The research firm said, ‘Specifically, we see iPod and other music-related offerings as well as software, services, and peripherals contributing over 80% of Apple’s top-line growth in fiscal 2005 and 90% in fiscal 2006,'” Forbes.com reports.
“Goldman also said that for the first time in three years, the Macintosh installed based should start to grow again with unit shipments rising 10% in calendar 2004. ‘In calendar 2005, stronger sales of Apple’s recently refreshed iMac and Power Mac desktops (off of easy comparisons), pull from the popularity of iPod, and the continued shift to notebooks should fuel unit growth of 10% compared to our industry growth estimate of 9%,’ the firm said,” Forbes.com reports.
Full article here.
Cool!
The more the merrier!
‘Welcome to the mac!’
Welcome to MacDailySpeculation.
Sigh.
WTF is ‘monetize’ ?
max
WTF is ‘monetize’ ?
What the F is http://www.dictionary.com ?
mon�e�tize
1. To establish as legal tender.
2. To coin (money).
3. To convert (government debt) from securities into currency that can be used to purchase goods and services.
And which of those definitions applies? Just curious.
Twilightmoon
It’s another ‘new’ word – worthy of George W.
Complete Boll**ks.
They should try using plain English.
Sizewell
And which of those definitions applies? Just curious.
Sorry for not answering that, I guess was a little irritated that max could not be bothered to at least do the barest amount of research before posting. The one that appliest best is probably “convert from value to money” as in to monetize silver or gold.
(also http://www.askoxford.com from the Oxford dictionary: “convert into or express in the form of currency”)
So the value of Apple’s researched technology is monetized when they sell that technology as innovative products. Think “make money from ideas” in this case.
max
It’s another ‘new’ word – worthy of George W.
This word exists in every online dictionary I looked in:
http://www.dictionary.com
http://www.m-w.com
dictionary.cambridge.org
http://www.askoxford.com
http://www.infoplease.com/dictionary.html
http://www.hyperdictionary.com/
http://www.bartleby.com/
http://www.wordsmyth.net/
except one:
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/
note, on hyperdictionary.com they list Webster’s 1913 Dictionary as having this definition:
“To convert into money; to adopt as current money; as, tomonetize silver.”
So it’s at least as old as about 90 years ago.
Instead of making an ill informed lame jab at Bush, try bookmarking at least one or a couple of those dictionary sites and referring to them when you’re having trouble with a new word. I use them daily myself.
Instead of complaining that other people won’t dumb down the English language to your level, try to improve yourself and learn some new words. Become educated.
I’m sorry, but “monetize” is quite commonly used in the adult world.
In this case, it means to turn an idea into a profitable one. IE, the Newton was an innovation that Apple did not “monetize”, while the iPod is an innovation that they did “monetize”.
Of course, I did once work as a Goldman, Sachs financial analyst.
max, how often do you read forbes? WSJ? Business Week? Do you watch CNNFN? This article was written for investment literate audience. I doubt this applies to you.
No offense, I don’t read them either, but if you want to play with the big dogs, you have to be able to wear a big collar. On the other hand, I wouldn’t presume to go up to a bunch of MDs and tell them they have to start speaking in “plain English.”
twilightmoon,
I’m sorry for not responding sooner as well…. we commonly use the term “marketable idea(s)” instead of “monetize that innovation”… I guess that’s why I’m a software/system engineer and not an analyst.
I did understand what the author was attempting to convey, but I have to agree with max that it was a strange choice of words.
If you had listed “convert from value to money” in your initial definition list, your response would have carried more validity. That was the reason for my comment.
just something else before my head hits the pillow….
max,
I agree with twilightzonemoon. You should try to make use of all the available resources before you comment about a “new” word, or make disparaging (yes, that is a word) remarks against the leader of the most powerful nation in the world. Whether or not you are happy with the outcome of the election (which I can safetly assume you’re not, nor am I) … your comment was not applicable to the discussion.
sorry.. i meant twilightmoom… not twilightzonemoon… freudian slip of the fingers. too much TV in my younger days
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” /> (for those of you that are old enough to remember)
Sizewell
Whether or not you are happy with the outcome of the election (which I can safetly assume you’re not, nor am I) … your comment was not applicable to the discussion.
No disrespect to max, but while I don’t share either of your disdain for Bush, I would not criticize a public figure in the same breath as I asked for the dictionary definition of a word I could easily look up myself, and simultaneously insult the English language. I don’t think people would take me very seriously if I did.
sorry.. i meant twilightmoom… not twilightzonemoon… freudian slip of the fingers.
That’s a lot of slipping there.. watch those fingers they could hurt somebody. Maybe yourself! At least you didn’t separate my name into Twilight Moon as some people on this board are wont to do, even though I clearly have it all one word…
ummmm… I’m not sure where you come up with the misconception that I had a disdain for Bush…
I merely stated that I was unhappy with the outcome of the election. I fully accept and support the decision made by the established election process.
My unhappiness came from the fact that as of 8:44 EST on 07/12/200, the estimated population of the US stood at 294,926,658. After reducing that number to those meeting the requirements to become president established by the “law of the land”, I was hoping for a choice of an individual that would have shown a sign of true leadership ability and not one that was motivated on political or monetary princples.
Stepping off of my soapbox… sorry
man, he’s going off on everyone. lol.
But anyway… I think this Forbes bit is good news.
In plain english it should have said
“Apple consistently turn innovation in commercial success. ”
It’s not difficult to write in everyday language. There are no extra points on offer for “ize- ing’ everything.
haha.. I heard Ballmer use the word PRODUCTIZE.. referring to the.. apparently kick ass Security he and Bill had at home that they wanted to PRODUCTIZE for developers..
*shakes head.. oh man..