02-17-12 05:33 PM
86 1234
tools
  1. ayekon's Avatar
    That is why I say it's a big scam. The growth of economy is heavily influenced by several factors, including growth in stock market index. Last few decades, the growth has been driven by factors not normally present in healthy economy.
    Absolutely true... Investment of money that is non-existent is never a good idea... Band-aides do not stop an aneurysm...
    02-14-12 08:37 PM
  2. hootyhoo's Avatar

    With respect to Apple's share price, it is over inflated. The same goes for Google. I am surprised there haven't been any stock splits or other efforts to control the prices.
    With respect to Google, they follow the Warren Buffet belief.

    Google has said that they will never offer a stock split. Some believe that an expensive stock is over all more stable. When it is expensive, there will be fewer "newbs" jumping in and bailing out on a whim.

    Many people could buy a thousand shares of rim right now.

    Most people cannot buy a thousand shares of Google. The folks who can probably have a better understanding of their investing. Unlike some posters on another thread who THINK that rim looks like a bargain and a lot of them thought it looked cheep when it hit $30. I doubt that many of those folks would play with Google or apple stock like that.


    By the way, Berkshire Hathaway closed today at $118,475 per share.
    Last edited by hootyhoo; 02-14-12 at 08:43 PM.
    02-14-12 08:38 PM
  3. ADozenEggs@aol.com's Avatar
    RIM is low because people are greedy, and thus the same reason why Apple is up.

    They know that people LOVE Apple, but Apple is like most in the US. Apple is popular, but MUCH less popular in other countries. Specifically, I can presume that in countries where the culture revolves around family, you can say that BB is more popular because of the connections between family members. In America, most people couldn't get a flying bat turd about family, so you see them going towards phones other than BB.

    Now, Apple did release their pitiful version of BBM, but still...

    I have no clue. I'm talking out of my , but India and South America love BB, and they also have very, very close families. Two examples do not prove anything.
    America doesn't care about family and, in a leap of sheer genius, you somehow tie all of this to a choice in cell phone carriers???

    This post is an unadulterated piece of tr@sh.

    India and South America care more about family so BB is more popular there??? Not because their cheap phones. Right? Because EVERYONE is rockin' the Bold. No?

    Incoherent rambling of someone who's read the inside of a piece of Bubble Gum wrapper and believes he/she now possesses the secrets of the universe.

    I'd try to help you understand the impact of socio-economics on consumer spending, but I'd have better luck trying to get my dog to understand why she should use the toilet in the morning.
    Last edited by ADozenEggs@aol.com; 02-14-12 at 09:18 PM. Reason: Typo
    ayekon and kennyliu like this.
    02-14-12 08:42 PM
  4. ayekon's Avatar
    RIM did see going public as a fundraiser.. Lets please not forget this.. They do have working capitol..
    02-14-12 08:43 PM
  5. kennyliu's Avatar
    That is why I say it's a big scam. The growth of economy is heavily influenced by several factors, including growth in stock market index. Last few decades, the growth has been driven by factors not normally present in healthy economy.
    Are you sure we are talking about the same market efficiency hypothesis?

    As for the following:

    "The growth of economy is heavily influenced by several factors, including growth in stock market index."

    I have to say you just created your own theory of economic growth.
    02-14-12 09:10 PM
  6. ADozenEggs@aol.com's Avatar
    While I agree that the original comment is a logical fallacy ( hoc ergo propter hoc or correlation proves causation) I would have to disagree on preconceived notions.

    North America breeds individuals and individualist culture. The whole society is based on consumerism built into its core and that is reflected through everything, including family relations. There is a huge driving force in North America behind ensuring that each individual grows up thinking that they are best off functioning and living as an individual, avoiding sharing, giving, long term relationships, attachment, etc. Everything revolves around "me" and instant gratification. This is inherently at odds with what a family stands for and what community building is all about. Further to this, because of the high living standard there is little need to band together as a community and function as a unit to get things done. Simply put, if one's life is pretty good on one's own, then there is no need for that one to band with others to raise their living standard.

    If you actually do some research into sociology, psychology, and psychiatry, you will find very hard research that shows these things to be facts, not opinions. I encourage you to do so. Maybe you will understand the world around you a bit better...of if you are too lazy to do that, tell me how many of your family members and your friends family members are around every week doing something as a community and how many of your neighbors do you actually know and socialize with on regular basis?

    Don't knock things you know nothing about. Even if you can single out experiences from other areas that show that there are issues of detachment and narcissistic type of individualism present, that still does nothing to refute very known facts about North America. If it makes you feel any better, UK, Germany, and a few other Northern European countries also have some of these issues, but not as bad as the cases present in North America.
    I am American

    And as not to needlessly highjack this thread any further, I will simply say that the individualism/collectivism conversation has been been taking place for quite some time. And for each "negative" derivative of individualism one can find an equally distasteful by-product of collectivism.
    Last edited by ADozenEggs@aol.com; 02-14-12 at 10:06 PM.
    02-14-12 09:59 PM
  7. CrackedBarry's Avatar
    RIM is low because people are greedy, and thus the same reason why Apple is up.

    They know that people LOVE Apple, but Apple is like most in the US. Apple is popular, but MUCH less popular in other countries.
    Actually, Apple is popular everywhere people can afford it. In markets where there isn't as much disposable income, such as India and South America, that's where you're less likely to see Apple products and more likely to see cheaper devices like BB, Nokia or cheaper Android devices...

    I have no clue. I'm talking out of my [/b], but India and South America love BB, and they also have very, very close families. Two examples do not prove anything.

    No clue, eh? Well, I'd never have guessed! But wait, South America and India have more in common than close families... They're both hugely corrupt! Could BB be so popular there because it enables corruption and makes it easier?!? Is it the prevalence of drug cartels in South America that makes BBs so popular? Can anybody else come up with some distasteful national stereotypes and link them to gadget preference? Quick in here, before the thread collapses under the sheer weight of its massive stupidity!
    02-14-12 11:16 PM
  8. nassib's Avatar
    Im from Ecuador, South America and down here people love BB and BBM. Ecuador is the 2nd country with most BB users in the world in relation with their population. In total we are 13 million and there are approximately 800 thousand BB users (take into account that it is a 3rd world country and 80% of the population is very very poor, dont even have phones.)
    02-14-12 11:36 PM
  9. CrackedBarry's Avatar
    And it's the cheapie curve models that are popular there, rather than the Bolds, no?
    02-14-12 11:47 PM
  10. Lead_Express's Avatar
    I didn't take the time to read through all the posts so forgive me if this was already mentioned...

    Stock prices reflect investor confidence. This week RIM was hit with two high profile peices of bad news: Halliburton was dumping them and so was NOAA, in favor of the iPhone. If I'm invested in this company and see news stories like that, it may entice me to sell at a loss instead of selling at an even bigger loss later. Right now, RIM is a volatile stock with almost zero stability and people are pulling there money. At the same time, speculator types are popping up to make a quick buck on a stock that's well below book value. When people say this is a "make or break" year for RIM, they're not kidding. Here's hoping that PlayBook 2 and BB10 phones will blow the pants off the competition.
    02-14-12 11:55 PM
  11. AWDragon200's Avatar
    RIM is low because people are greedy, and thus the same reason why Apple is up.

    They know that people LOVE Apple, but Apple is like most in the US. Apple is popular, but MUCH less popular in other countries. Specifically, I can presume that in countries where the culture revolves around family, you can say that BB is more popular because of the connections between family members. In America, most people couldn't get a flying bat turd about family, so you see them going towards phones other than BB.

    Now, Apple did release their pitiful version of BBM, but still...

    I have no clue. I'm talking out of my , but India and South America love BB, and they also have very, very close families. Two examples do not prove anything.
    The bigger they grow the harder and faster they will crash. It won't happen today or tomorrow but who knows in 5+ years??
    02-15-12 12:00 AM
  12. AWDragon200's Avatar
    People keep repeating this, but no one ever responds to this:

    Apple sold 23 million iPhones outside of the US last quarter. RIM shipped 14 million including the US (so only about 10 million outside), and RIM expected that number to be even lower this quarter.

    So why do people still think Blackberry is more popular than iPhone outside of the US? I don't understand this at all. That used to be true maybe a year ago, but surely no one believes this now? The gap will be even bigger this next quarter with general availability of the 4S in China.

    If you completely omit the United States, the iPhone still outsells Blackberry in the rest of the world. That is a fact from recent results.
    Reports of iPhone 4s being a phenomenal success in China seems to point that majority of the international sales are concentrated in China. Do you have any data to show that iPhone is a best seller in Latin America, Africa and Europe? I saw a few reports saying that iPhone is selling poorly in India which is a growing market of over 1 billion population. Problem in developing markets is that iPhone upfront cost of hardware is too high and it is too data hungry. BB currently has 7x marketshare of iPhone in India.
    02-15-12 12:12 AM
  13. conix67's Avatar
    Reports of iPhone 4s being a phenomenal success in China seems to point that majority of the international sales are concentrated in China. Do you have any data to show that iPhone is a best seller in Latin America, Africa and Europe? I saw a few reports saying that iPhone is selling poorly in India which is a growing market of over 1 billion population. Problem in developing markets is that iPhone upfront cost of hardware is too high and it is too data hungry. BB currently has 7x marketshare of iPhone in India.
    You mean the market size is 1 billion (middle class) or population of India is 1 billion (30% of US?)?

    iPhone's cost does matter in many of the developing countries. If BB is selling because they are cheaper, quite possibly margin would be lower in these countries as well. What I was told, is the BIS and BBM are the main attraction point in some of these markets, along with price.

    Many other more developed countries in east Asia (Japan, Korea, China), where the size of market is relatively large, iPhone trumps BB.

    Does BB use less data than iPhone? I wasn't aware of that.
    02-15-12 12:22 AM
  14. app_Developer's Avatar
    Reports of iPhone 4s being a phenomenal success in China seems to point that majority of the international sales are concentrated in China. Do you have any data to show that iPhone is a best seller in Latin America, Africa and Europe? I saw a few reports saying that iPhone is selling poorly in India which is a growing market of over 1 billion population. Problem in developing markets is that iPhone upfront cost of hardware is too high and it is too data hungry. BB currently has 7x marketshare of iPhone in India.
    The 4S wasn't available in China for the last quarter reported, and so are not part of the 23 million. Those will be in this quarter.

    We can try and dissect the sales figure country by country, comparing data from different sources of varying quality. Or we can simply look at the overall fact, presented in the official filings, which is that the "it's only the US" excuse has now expired. For the last reported quarter, for each Blackberry phone sold outside of the US, Apple managed to sell two iPhones, excluding US sales entirely.

    Or would you prefer we amend that excuse now as "it's only the US and China". Or in other words, we're doing really well save for the largest economy in the world, and the soon to be largest economy in the world (and apparently a few other countries as well)

    Or from the perspective of an investor, we can say RIM is doing awesome in India. The only bad news being that RIM's competitor has a business model that harvests most of the industry's profits everywhere else. So if you are looking for profits as an investor, look to AAPL. But if you want volume sales in markets that want cheap phones with low ARPU and slim margins, then NOK and RIMM are where it's at!
    Last edited by app_Developer; 02-15-12 at 01:34 AM.
    02-15-12 12:54 AM
  15. SCrid2000's Avatar
    Don't Feed The TROLL!!!!!!!
    matthewgreyling likes this.
    02-15-12 01:10 AM
  16. sam_b77's Avatar
    1) Wrong, you can't have an efficient market without someone making instanteneous profits and attracting other investors, which in its turn, leads the market back to the equilibrium.

    2) See above. You don't have to take one or the other. There are always actors new info is known to first.

    3) As far as I remember, nobody has debunked the hypothesis to the extent that that debunking is accepted by the mainstream Finance people.. There are theories that COMPLEMENT the hypothesis. Also, AFAIK, Finance can loosely be described as a branch of Economics. No?

    As for traders/practitioners, if what you are saying is right, then there should be many more traders (not a couple outliers) who consistently make economic/excess profit, right? But it's mostly a zero-sum game. Traders gain if other traders lose.

    So practitioners/managers can live in their illusions, which, I have to say, are convenient for them as they make money by attracting investors.

    Before you answer, note that I am not talking about the STRONG form market efficiency.

    At the same time, I am not saying that there is no place for some inefficiency due to certain irrationality of market actors. But we are talking about the company whose shares have been low for a long time. So if it was undervalued significantly, it would have been devoured by other companies by now. It may very well be undervalued now, but not to the extent that it makes the board or other companies bother about going over all the legal and transaction hoopla to sell or significantly change it's operation structure.
    Well on the price of RIMM I'm not disputing you at all. Of course the market is valuing the stock depending upon it's future returns. Nothing positive has come out and hence the market is holding to its valuation.

    My reply was more to the point of the Efficient Markets in general. Thing is markets are NOT efficient and since the market bases its views on quantifiable aspects but largely ignores factors which are not as easily quantifiable.

    Here's an example, if the markets are considered to be efficient then prior to the 2007 blowout, the Hedge Funds which were betting against the Bond Market should have been able to rein in the bond value much before the market blew up. Assuming that markets are completely efficient then no external controls and regulations should be needed (something Alan Greenspan agreed with as per his policies). Now the information regarding the Poisoned Debt was available in the market, hence the bets against the debt but the market as a whole failed to process the information and led to the meltdown.

    While I'm not suggesting that I know some information about RIM which is not known to the market, there can be a case for the market being irrational towards RIM simply based on the markets historical data. Whether the market is correct or not is not known at the moment and cannot be known unless the future arrives.

    Would I invest in RIM right now, probably not from a purely trader's point of view. Do I feel like gambling, then yes I would. Since the market is an amalgamation of both investors and gamblers, you can never know for sure what is going on and hence you cannot pronounce the death sentence for a company based solely on the stock price.

    Again there is a lot of information which is not in the public domain and the market has no information to. So unless the information comes out (newer models, newer tech and potential) the market values the stock at where its at. In that respect you are absolutely correct and anyone else saying that they have the insider information, can go ahead and purchase stock on the accuracy of the information.
    kennyliu likes this.
    02-15-12 09:29 AM
  17. Canuck671's Avatar
    Newton anyone?
    02-15-12 09:32 AM
  18. sam_b77's Avatar
    1. Yes it is, so was your post
    2. Thank you for letting me know. Unfortunately just because somebody tags their location here that does not mean much.
    3. I believe that since I now know that you are from India. I can also say that most Indian families are like this because I interact with them every day. You see, observation Culturally, you are like that. It is therefore typical of your culture. There is nothing bad about that, it's just what it is.
    4. Don't be offended that I said you know nothing about the topic. You brought it upon yourself as a result of making a broad statement about preconceived notions. There are no preconceived notions on these matters. They are well studied and well known. Fact that North American society is largely a "set" of individuals is a fact. It is also a fact that they have very low emphasis on family ties throughout their life. See, unlike you I actually explained the cause behind that (they are not born with it just to be crystal clear), as opposed to just saying, and I paraphrase "I know, and you should be quiet because you don't know what I do or don't know".
    5. Defending your argument by repeating the same thing that established your original argument does not make your argument stronger. Also, I did not imply that you are ignorant to the ways of the world, just on the particular topic. Besides, I do not even understand why this bothers you so much. Cultural differences do exist and are very strongly delineated. This was even discussed by very famous psychologists and is effectively defined as a "personality" of a society. If you want more reading, there is actually a good definition for "culture" to be found here http://nptel.iitm.ac.in/courses/1101...le%207l-35.pdf. Just do a search for "personality of a society".
    6. Nobody was being insulted, unless some Americans do not like being told that they are not perfect (which some may not like). I do not understand why you are making this a personal issue for yourself. I've had some very unpleasant experiences with cultural tolerances, nationalism, and racism myself but I'm not afraid to talk about it.
    7. Actually, no he was not. He simply stated that Americans (I would correct him on that and say North Americans) are generally not family or communally inclined which is the de-facto truth. There is no grey area there. His premise and conclusion did not follow though.
    8. Not everything in life is so "indeterminate" as you think. Individuals exist everywhere, and gradients do too, but a particular culture as a whole is a mirror reflection of the general belief and value system of a given group. That also is a fact. There is nothing there to be interpreted. Family ties are much more than just a lack of resources.

    Anyway, you actually seem like you are pretty bright, but maybe a bit naive in wanting to have this utter sense of equality and political correctness around everything. There is no need for that. People need to see things for what they are if they are ever to progress. I will leave it up to you to define "progress" in this case as I do not have one definition or one path that would define it precisely.

    I'm hardly naive. I'm a businessman. Naivety would be a serious handicap. Again you hijacked my post to the poster I was replying to. While you are obviously knowledgable about this topic, this is not the place to talk about it. I would meet you for a beer and talk frankly and freely about this matter and I'm hardly politically correct.

    But sweeping statements which the poster made makes for a tit for tat post. You can just read some of the posts about India above my post to get an idea on what I'm talking about. It quickly descends into an insult war.

    Anyway I guess you get my point on my post. Nothing to do with being politically correct or defending North Americans, just about being CIVIL.
    02-15-12 09:43 AM
  19. kennyliu's Avatar
    Well on the price of RIMM I'm not disputing you at all. Of course the market is valuing the stock depending upon it's future returns. Nothing positive has come out and hence the market is holding to its valuation.

    My reply was more to the point of the Efficient Markets in general. Thing is markets are NOT efficient and since the market bases its views on quantifiable aspects but largely ignores factors which are not as easily quantifiable.

    Here's an example, if the markets are considered to be efficient then prior to the 2007 blowout, the Hedge Funds which were betting against the Bond Market should have been able to rein in the bond value much before the market blew up. Assuming that markets are completely efficient then no external controls and regulations should be needed (something Alan Greenspan agreed with as per his policies). Now the information regarding the Poisoned Debt was available in the market, hence the bets against the debt but the market as a whole failed to process the information and led to the meltdown.

    While I'm not suggesting that I know some information about RIM which is not known to the market, there can be a case for the market being irrational towards RIM simply based on the markets historical data. Whether the market is correct or not is not known at the moment and cannot be known unless the future arrives.

    Would I invest in RIM right now, probably not from a purely trader's point of view. Do I feel like gambling, then yes I would. Since the market is an amalgamation of both investors and gamblers, you can never know for sure what is going on and hence you cannot pronounce the death sentence for a company based solely on the stock price.

    Again there is a lot of information which is not in the public domain and the market has no information to. So unless the information comes out (newer models, newer tech and potential) the market values the stock at where its at. In that respect you are absolutely correct and anyone else saying that they have the insider information, can go ahead and purchase stock on the accuracy of the information.
    Thanks. Very good answer. I see we don't quite disagree. The only thing I would say is that the meltdown does not completely rule out that markets are generally efficient (again not the strong form efficiency, i.e. there is still place for for some non-public info not reflected in the price), less market failures and harmful government intervention. What you are saying is that market actors did not account for systemic risks, which, in their turn, were heightened by ineffective government policies (e.g. overstimulation of certain markets or lack of financial market regulation).
    Last edited by kennyliu; 02-15-12 at 01:18 PM.
    02-15-12 01:02 PM
  20. CrackedBarry's Avatar
    Reports of iPhone 4s being a phenomenal success in China seems to point that majority of the international sales are concentrated in China. Do you have any data to show that iPhone is a best seller in Latin America, Africa and Europe? I saw a few reports saying that iPhone is selling poorly in India which is a growing market of over 1 billion population. Problem in developing markets is that iPhone upfront cost of hardware is too high and it is too data hungry. BB currently has 7x marketshare of iPhone in India.
    I recently saw reports that the iPhone 4s is also selling poor in Nigeria, Kenya and Bangladesh! All countries with a huge market!

    I wonder however, if maybe, just maaaaybe that might have more to do with the average income in those countries, and how expensive the 4s is compared to that income? Could that perhaps also be the case in India, where even the average income of the growing middle class is far lower than it would be inindustrialized countries? It's really not rocket science... If you have a disposable income of 200$ a month, you're much more likely to choose a curve for 150$ over an iPhone for 5-600$.

    As for the iPhones success in other parts of the world, it's really no secret that it has been a smashing success evereywhere it has been launched. It's has been the top selling phone in all European countries at one time time or another, same goes for Australia, Asian countries with a high GNP, and even China. I mean, it's not even up for debate, so this whole "iPhone is only popular In the US" argument only gets more ridiculous every time it's aired...

    And of course, it's not really the iPhone thats a problem for RIM, it's Android. Yes, the corporate market that used to belong to RIM is pretty much split three ways these days, but in the consumer market Android is a much bigger threat than the iPhone, since it not only sells in much higher numbers, but also attacks from the bottom as well as from the top of the price range.
    02-15-12 01:18 PM
  21. cbreze's Avatar
    RIM is low because people are greedy,
    RIM is low because people have lost faith. People lose faith in any company when they fail to meet expectations. RIM has been failing to meet folks expectations for quite awhile now and stocks will reflect this. BB10 may give it a boost, but it will depend on RIM to maintain any possible momentum from 10 moving forward.
    02-15-12 01:21 PM
  22. southlander's Avatar
    So when RIMM was trading at $140+ a share back in the day did that mean they owned the future of mobile devices? No (obviously). The stock was overpriced. Now it is most likely under-priced. But who really knows. No one.
    02-15-12 01:52 PM
  23. BlendIcier's Avatar
    What do you think the stock market knows, pick a specific metric and test the predictability out. It's not worth arguing if it's solely a question of faith
    02-15-12 02:01 PM
  24. CrackedBarry's Avatar
    The stock market doesn't "know" anything that all the experts and analysts don't already know, even though their opinion is frowned upon in here.

    They're looking at where will RIM be in two years. Earnings right now aren't important if the company is going to drive over a cliff in a year or two. And right now, it's a very volatile situation. They might be taken over by that time, they might survive as a small handset producer, or they might be as good as dead, burning through their cash reserves in a never ending spiral of layoffs and missed estimates. Or they might have completed their turn around successfully, who knows.

    But it's by no means a sure thing, thats what the stock price represents. Apple is worth as much as it is, because they earn tremendous money, and Wall Street has a pretty good feeling about where that company will be in 2-3 years. RIM less so...
    kennyliu likes this.
    02-15-12 02:18 PM
  25. Stewartj1's Avatar
    It keep falling during recent trading sessions. looks like bad news has leaked out. At the mean Apple's stock price has passed 500$ milestone with the ipad3 expectation.
    At this moment, RIM is at $14.88 up 2.13% over yesterday.

    Also, share price isnt a good comparison as no two companies have the same number of shares so even if the companies were of equal value the share prices would still be different.
    02-15-12 02:48 PM
86 1234
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD