RBC cuts Apple price target to $140, citing iPhone supply chain concerns

“Investment firm RBC Capital Markets slashed its price target for Apple stock to $140 this week, saying data from the company’s extensive supply chain suggests iPhone sales could shrink in 2016,” Neil Hughes reports for AppleInsider.

“Analyst Amit Daryanani lowered estimates on AAPL for both its March and June quarters, reflecting supply chain signals, as well as his own concerns over tough comparisons during the first six months of calendar 2016,” Hughes reports. “According to Daryanani, a ‘host of supply chain data points’ indicate that Apple’s iPhone lineup is set to face difficult headwinds in March. He estimates that Apple will ship 54 million iPhones in the March quarter, which is well below Wall Street expectations of 60-million-plus units.”

“Investors and analysts have been spooked in recent days, after a number of key Apple suppliers cut estimates,” Hughes reports. “Specifically, Daryanani cited poor outlooks from Avago Technologies, Dialog Semiconductor, Analog Devices, and Jabil Circuit.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Echo chamber. “Actionable notes” morphing into “conventional wisdom.”


Even if a particular data point were factual it would be impossible to accurately interpret the data point as to what it meant for our overall business because the supply chain is very complex and we obviously have multiple sources for things, yields might vary, supply performance can vary. The beginning inventory positions can vary, I mean there is just an inordinate long list of things that would make any single data point not a great proxy for what’s going on. Apple CEO Tim Cook, January 23, 2013

Clear-eyed Apple investors can see the forest for the trees.

Piper Jaffray: Individual component suppliers are not indicative of the health of Apple’s overall iPhone business – December 16, 2015
Apple stock slumps on Dialog Semi warning – December 15, 2015


    1. Ok… Now which side of their anal-istic comments should their subscribers listen to. Sell becouse things ate not as rosy … Or keep becouse it wiil go up to 140. Oxymoronic .. That is equivalent of saying nothing.. In either scenario these anal-ists can resort to saying ” but i told u so “

  1. Looking at my own suppliers, the ones that we normally use are losing about 20% of our orders because we have invested in 3 other factories. The reason for this is the new trio will do the already established and well tested parts cheaper because they use older technology. The original suppliers are now getting ready for retooling for new product line.

    From outside that looks like we are cutting down orders, but in reality we have much bigger orders coming and need more capacity for 2 months before the new products will hit production. Then even more capacity. It’s very tricky to balance the supply issues because of the peaks. I’m pretty sure Apple has same problems, they need to find more suppliers for the old products because their product line is expanding with new products.

    1. Aah, the voice of reason! What are you doing here?

      Yes, there are many reasons for supplier slowdowns that have nothing to do with final production numbers going up or down. Your example is absolutely typical in hi-tech manufacturing. Thanks for your insight.

      These analysts are obviously outsiders with virtually no experience or insight into the business, but plenty of experience trying to manufacture “inside” knowledge from minimal data points, if any, and playing maven to their clueless clients.



  2. We go through this crap with these idiot analysts every single year. The supply chain on the current model iphone goes down in order to free up space for the new model. But yet Apple is doomed and people’s stock values plummet because some uneducated bafoon has diarrhea of the mouth.

Reader Feedback

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