Analysts at Morgan Stanley today maintained their ‘overweight’ rating on Apple Computer, Inc. Their 12-month target price is $90.
In a research note published this morning, the analysts mention that the current weakness in Apple Computer’s share price, due to data related to Apple’s component supply chain and point-of-sale, is overblown.
According to Morgan Stanley’s note, the February NPD point-of-sale data does not reflect the initial robust shipments of Apple Computer’s MacBook Pro and/or sell-through of the new Mac mini.
Advertisements:
• Apple’s brand new iPod Hi-Fi speaker system. Home stereo. Reinvented. Available now for $349 with free shipping.
• Apple’s new Mac mini. Intel Core, up to 4 times faster. Starting at just $599. Free shipping.
• MacBook Pro. The first Mac notebook built upon Intel Core Duo with iLife ’06, Front Row and built-in iSight. Starting at $1999. Free shipping.
• iMac. Twice as amazing — Intel Core Duo, iLife ’06, Front Row media experience, Apple Remote, built-in iSight. Starting at $1299. Free shipping.
• iPod Radio Remote. Listen to FM radio on your iPod and control everything with a convenient wired remote. Just $49.
• iPod. 15,000 songs. 25,000 photos. 150 hours of video. The new iPod. 30GB and 60GB models start at just $299. Free shipping.
• Connect iPod to your television set with the iPod AV Cable. Just $19.
Related articles:
Bear Stearns: Apple is ‘buying opportunity,’ lowers price target to $100 from $103 – March 17, 2006
Piper Jaffray: Apple on track to meet or slightly exceed iPod unit expectations – March 13, 2006
Bear Stearns: Current Apple weakness is a buying opportunity – March 13, 2006
Citgroup analyst expects ‘fairly eventful’ Apple announcement around 30th anniversary on April 1st – March 13, 2006
Citigroup ups Apple to ‘buy,’ expects Intel transisiton to be complete in all Macs by August – March 13, 2006
“Overweight”
Exactly. Seems the other analysts just want you to buy high.
With stocks, for every winner there is a loser.
Money just doesn’t appear out of thin air.
^ Hi MacDude!
Keeping MDM alive, that’s MacDude.
OHG there sems to be a echo in this thread.
Paul:
Better go back to Econ 101, wealth can be CREATED and not just shuffled around. A company creates value by (mostly) growing its business. If I’m an owner (stockholder) that value comes to me in a higher stock price.
If I buy that stock from someone, the seller is not necessarily a loser unless he sold for a loss. If someone buys Apple at $10, sells it to me at $30, the I sell it for $50, we’re both winners. As long as Apple keeps chugging along, everyone wins. Just because someone buys and another sells, does not mean that there had to be a winner and a loser. Think about it.
DrDude is right. Wealth is not a zero sum game. The amount of money in circulation is not fixed and there is no arbitrary mathematical limit forcing some to have less cash than others.
Just because your splitting your winnings with others doesn’t mean there isn’t a loser or losers.
Sit down and play a game of poker with the guys and tell me how you can make money appear out of thin air so everyone wins without inflation.
For every action there is a equal and opposite reaction.
Everyone can’t win all the time, somebody has to lose in order for you to win.
If Apple’s stock goes up in value, it comes at the expense of another company or companies who lost value.
Wealth is not a zero sum game. The amount of money in circulation is not fixed and there is no arbitrary mathematical limit forcing some to have less cash than others.
Of course the money in circulation is not fixed, population increases, money is used as a means of value exchange.
My argument is that with increased percieved value of a company comes at the expense of less percieved value of other companies.
Everything is in balance, everything can’t be percieved as going up in value together.
With winners there has to be someone to lose.
if Apple’s stock goes up in value, it comes at the expense of another company or companies who lost value.
That’s the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard. You would have failed an investments class if you had ever taken one.
That’s the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard. You would have failed an investments class if you had ever taken one.
Maybe that’s why I’m rich. You have been brainwashed by fools who can’t make any money and wound up teaching investment class out of some stupid textbook.
you guys and your greed. of course the amount of money is fixed (but always under review). if you print more money, you devalue it and increase inflation (just check your history books for boatloads of evidence).
worth or value (as opposed to the paper and coins) is like energy you can’t just ‘make’ it from nothing. if i buy something for $10, sell it to you for $20 and you sell it for $30, does that mean it’s worth $30 and we together have ‘made’ $20 from nothing other than transactions? of course not. all it takes is for the market to decide that the item is now only worth $5. it all comes down to what people are prepared to pay for something.
when you invest a sum of money, the VALUE of your investment can go down as well as up. the amount you invested stays the same. it’s only when you try to transfer your investment to someone else will you find out what they think it is worth to take off your hands.
MW : learned as in from your learned friend
Paper money is effectively worthless anyway. I always demand to be paid in gold and diamonds.
Of course, not everyone has the luxury of having a client base of African warlords
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
SPECIAL NOTE FOR THE INLAND REVENUE :: THAT WAS A JOKE!!!!! YOU KNOW, A JOKE!!! I’M TRYING TO BE FUNNY!!! WHO DO YOU THINK I AM, MARK THATCHER?
Thanks for listening.
MacDude, dream on. If you’re rich, I’m the pope.
The amount of money in circulation is not fixed, it’s increased to fit the needs of the population without decreasing it’s value. But in all essential purposes it’s fixed or we would have runaway inflation.
So unless your some lawmaker that has a law that says a certain percentage of that new money goes immeditaly into your bank account without losing value, you have to gamble like everyone else.
If you buy a stock, it immediatly has the potential to go up or down. Nobody can predict the future exactly, however we can make pretty reasonable guesses in the direction it might be headed.
If you invested long ago, you have a better chance at increasing your value because population growth demands new services and the companies who have been providing these services will naturally grow in value. Provided inflation and taxes doesn’t increase with it.
The US stock market is essentially tapped out of any real great wealth generating opportunities like it was back in the old days when the needs of the US wasn’t satisified.
Now it’s gambling, now we wait if a company or service has a new product that fullfills a need/want, like the iPod, and people (the majority on fairly fixed incomes) will decide to give up something else, like a stereo system from Sony, to buy a iPod from Apple instead.
Apple wins and Sony loses, Apple’s stock goes up and Sony’s doesn’t.
Winners and losers.
MacDude, dream on. If you’re rich, I’m the pope.
Nice to meet you your excellency, enjoy your iPod I sent you? How’s the molestation lawsuits going?
hehehehe