4 ms·

I find asymco's analysis truly fascinating at times. First he casually, almost forgetfully offers the opinion that the US's second largest company in market ca

by trotsky 15y ago

I find asymco's analysis truly fascinating at times. First he casually, almost forgetfully offers the opinion that the US's second largest company in market cap should be trading at a 32 P/E. Then accepting this opinion as fact, he presents a "common argument" against it which I've never actually heard discussed before and proceeds to deconstruct it as not being significant enough to provide the downward pressure on AAPL that he suggests is a simple fact of nature. The purpose of all of this, the best I can tell, is to worm the idea that AAPL is undervalued by 50% into the subconscious of the reader, and not actually about the effect of google's products on apple's stock value. Quite a fascinating to see it done so well. I'd assume it's quite effective - I found myself feeling like I agreed with some of his premises simply because of how they were presented.

nextparadigms 15y ago
I've seen many misleading charts from him that seemed very believable and indeed many people believed him. He's very good at twisting the data to show what he wants and "make sense". The most infamous one I remember is when he used LG, Samsung and a few other companies profit and revenue data to show that they are losing or not making much money from Android, when he never actually showed the profit and revenue data for the phones themselves. He took the whole profit of the companies, and even though it was still early 2010, when these companies didn't even start using Android on a very big scale, he managed to make it look like the companies are doing so poorly because of Android, when in fact Android had nothing to do with it and it couldn't since it wasn't used much by them at the time. Many, many people bought his "analysis" and took for granted that when manufacturers use Android their phone business performance is bad, which is completely false. Of course, he conveniently omitted HTC who at the time was selling mainly Android phones and they were doing very well because of it.
- cooldeal 15y ago
  A cursory glance at his articles shows that he's a completely biased Apple fanboy. Not really going to expect any objectivity from him. All he does is praise Apple and poke fun at Android and other competitors. Like Gruber, he has cultivated an audience and tells them what they want to hear to drive page hits and revenue. It seems to be a highly successful business model, atleast for Gruber. That's the real reason they write what they write, regardless of what they actually think.

by trotsky 15y ago

nextparadigms 15y ago

I've seen many misleading charts from him that seemed very believable and indeed many people believed him. He's very good at twisting the data to show what he wants and "make sense". The most infamous one I remember is when he used LG, Samsung and a few other companies profit and revenue data to show that they are losing or not making much money from Android, when he never actually showed the profit and revenue data for the phones themselves. He took the whole profit of the companies, and even though it was still early 2010, when these companies didn't even start using Android on a very big scale, he managed to make it look like the companies are doing so poorly because of Android, when in fact Android had nothing to do with it and it couldn't since it wasn't used much by them at the time. Many, many people bought his "analysis" and took for granted that when manufacturers use Android their phone business performance is bad, which is completely false. Of course, he conveniently omitted HTC who at the time was selling mainly Android phones and they were doing very well because of it.

cooldeal 15y ago
A cursory glance at his articles shows that he's a completely biased Apple fanboy. Not really going to expect any objectivity from him. All he does is praise Apple and poke fun at Android and other competitors. Like Gruber, he has cultivated an audience and tells them what they want to hear to drive page hits and revenue. It seems to be a highly successful business model, atleast for Gruber. That's the real reason they write what they write, regardless of what they actually think.