Analyst who downgraded Apple has his ‘facts’ all wrong

“Earlier this week, BITG Research analyst Walter Piecyk lowered his rating of Apple shares from ‘buy’ to ‘neutral,’ an interesting move given that most other analysts have been scrambling to raise their price target for Apple shares,” Yoni Heisler writes for Network World. “What’s troubling about Piecyk’s piece, though, isn’t his conclusion per se, but rather that it rests on completely flawed information.”

“You see, Piecyk downgraded Apple stock because he claims that carriers are getting fed up with paying high subsidies to Apple and that subsequent changes to upgrade policies may yield a slower number of iPhone shipments in the next quarter,” Heisler explains. “Piecyk specifically points to AT&T as a carrier exploring stricter upgrade policies as a means to offset subsidy costs.”

Heisler explains, “There’s just one problem – as far as I can tell, there’s no record of any carrier offering consistent upgrade exceptions. In fact, the only example I could find was AT&T offering iPhone 3GS subsidized pricing on the iPhone 4 ahead of the Verizon iPhone 4 launch. The iPhone 4S is the most popular iPhone to date and no US based carrier offered iPhone 4 users still under contract the ability to upgrade to the iPhone 4S at subsidized pricing. In short, what in the world is Piecyk talking about?”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Analyst has his ‘facts’ all wrong. What else is new?

13 Comments

  1. And stupid & ungrateful AT&T is now reduced to giving away its much beloved Lumia 900 after datagate. Where’s the outcry, CONsumer Reports?! in one word – Karma – to AT&T for prioritizing an untested platform over its proven golden goose & Nokia for its patently dishonest smartphone beta test.

  2. Total hit piece on Apple from CNBC. This guys fund has less than 400 million in assets. If he would have been long Apple at 270 he’d have about 4 billion under management.

  3. It is bad enough that the current administration cannot police its own corrupt and inept organization … but to attack Apple and mainstream publishers’ free enterprise business efforts … on top of “analfacts” reporting from the financial sector, imposes a sex crime on common sense and achievement.

    1. … who – including the duffus ANALyst – mentioned an Administration connection? Talk about an egregious and uncalled for assault. And a hit piece from CNBC? For why?
      That said: even if his facts are correct, his conclusions are wrong. AAPL is underpriced based on its TRAILING P/E, never mind its even more impressive leading P/E.
      So. Sell your stock based on his recommend, then buy back in when most of the gullible have done the same. Make 1%-5% (before taxes).

  4. Is there really any carrier who would be happy without selling the iPhone is what I’d want to know? Why this analyst believes that there are carriers who would refuse to pay Apple for the right of carrying the iPhone doesn’t make any sense. The consumers are running the iPhone show and if they want iPhones it would only make sense to give them iPhones and for the carrier to pay the subsidy.

    One would have to figure that if Sprint is practically willing to go into debt just to get the iPhone on its network, then certainly larger carriers shouldn’t have a problem with subsidizing the iPhone. This analyst is talking pure crap based on nothing solid. His belief must lie with Android smartphones becoming equal or better than iPhones and that consumers will no longer want iPhones. So, far that has not happened. He’s misleading his clients.

  5. If you ever look at Google Finance for a quick AAPL quote you’ll see that lately they are featuring a lot of article in the sidebar by some folks called “Value Walk”. I have been reading the “Value Walk” articles for a week or two now and every one of them is clueless and inaccurate, just like this one. They are trying to sell a premium subscription analysis service with these sensational and nonsensical articles. Seldom do any of their authors known what they are talking about. this is just par for the course for Value Walk.

  6. Analysts will come to the wrong conclusion using the right facts.
    Since two wrongs don’t make a right, they will only come to conclusions that are more wrong with the wrong facts.

    If you think this one coudn’t be more wrong, you most likely will be proven wrong.

Reader Feedback

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