Andy Zaky

Loading...
Symbols:
Authors:
comments44
  • Positive ratings +5
  • Negative ratings 0
  • Net rating +5 or 100 %
Filter comments by:
Highest rated Latest comments
Or filter by symbol:

Latest Comments
44 Comments

    • Mon Nov 24th 04:18 AM
      |
      Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Stocks Will Continue to Erode In This Busted Economy
      Adding to my comment above, I could understand how this can be overlooked. Sites such as yahoo finance sometimes incorrectly state their variables. This can be result of lag time in updating the variables. Apple was trading at about 3.5 times their book value when they were trading closer to $110.00.
      View article »
    • Mon Nov 24th 04:15 AM
      |
      Rating: +1 0
      Commented on:
      Stocks Will Continue to Erode In This Busted Economy
      Just thought I would point out that your book value for Apple is incorrect. How can their "tangible book value" be 3.6 when Apple currently trades at only 3.007 times its cash position. Apple has 24.5 billion in cash, and no debt. Unless their real estate holdings have negative value, then your book value is understated. Apple is probably trading closer to 2.2 times its book value right now.
      View article »
    • Fri Nov 21st 05:11 AM
      |
      Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Smartphone Makers May Actually Strengthen Through the Recession
      Nice commentary. Short and to the point.
      View article »
    • Thu Nov 20th 07:50 AM
      |
      Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Exploiting the Downside of the Markets
      LOL. This article is late to the game man. The S&P500 is getting close to the previous bear market lows and the NASDAQ is approaches rock bottom prices that we haven't seen since the tech bubble collapse. The risk reward for shorting here is way off balance. There's maybe a case to short AMZN here with a P/E that is twice that of AAPL, GOOG and RIMM. But shorting AAPL and RIMM here is a dangerous game. GOOG might make for a good short as the market is laboring under the belief that on-line advertising has disappeared. How long this could be kept up is anyone's guess. GOOG and AMZN are maybe shorts if you're in for a very quick trade. But I wouldn't even think about shorting AAPL or RIMM. That's just stupid. AAPL has been steadily outperforming the market over the past few weeks and while the NASDAQ continues to make new lows, AAPL has yet to break its low set in the first week of October. RIMM has been on fire as of late. Shorting these stocks would have been advisable during the first week of October, but doing so now is a disaster waiting to happen. If history has taught us anything, bear markets end with inverted head and shoulders and when the market rebounds, it does it fast and furious.

      Here's how the S&P, NASDAQ and DJIA bottomed in the 2001-2003 bear market:

      stockcharts.com/h-sc/u...=$SPX&p=D&st=2...

      stockcharts.com/h-sc/u...=$INDU&p=D&st=...

      stockcharts.com/h-sc/u...=$COMPQ&p=D&st...

      Notice how each of them ended their respective downtrends with an inverted head & shoulders. Also, the 74' bear market ended in the same manner. Inverted head and shoulders.

      Now take a look at this bear market. I see a distincted left shoulder, and a head in progress.

      stockcharts.com/h-sc/u...=$COMPQ&p=D&yr...

      Shoulder at 1,542.45; head being made right now; and I imagine we see a massive rally in December as hedge funds try to cut their losses on the year. I could see the NASDAQ testing the neck line at 1700. Then sometime in January, I see the NASDAQ putting in a right shoulder. If the economic data starts look positive, this bear market will be over by March. And you want to short here? You're playing with fire.
      View article »
    • Mon Nov 17th 13:22 PM
      |
      Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Will Apple Beat 2009 Revenue Consensus?
      Man. You always give me great compliments and kind words. Thank you for that. It makes my day.


      On Nov 15 04:40 PM dr. anthony wrote:

      > Zaky is THE analyst to watch. He is always ahead of the curve and
      > brings to any problem: intelligence, scholarship and thoughtful
      > analysis. He is a pleasure to read and a real treasure to the investing
      > community.
      >
      > dr.a
      View article »
    • Mon Nov 17th 11:46 AM
      |
      Rating: +2 0
      Commented on:
      Reading Apple: iPhone Sales Slightly Off, MacBook OK
      Nice rundown of Munster's estimates. Notice, that even Munster's estimates are conservative. His estimates get moderately beat every single quarter, and I'm personally expecting some pretty big upside on the quarter. Here are my estimates published at bullishcross.com:

      Unit Sales:
      2.8 Million Macs
      8 Million iPhones
      22 Million iPods

      Earnings Estimates:
      $11.29 Billion in Revenue
      $1.96 in EPS

      This is probably the most realistic outlook investors are going to receive from any analyst. I'm brutally honest at a time where some want me to keep my mouth shut. ;)

      I simply cannot do that.
      View article »
    • Fri Nov 14th 08:41 AM
      |
      Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Will Apple Beat 2009 Revenue Consensus?
      Its current deferred revenue. So its recognized over 2009. There's two categories of deferred revenue. Current and noncurrent. Current is recognized in 2009 and noncurrent in 2010.
      View article »
    • Wed Nov 12th 05:42 AM
      |
      Rating: +1 0
      Commented on:
      Chinese Paper Reports Reduced Apple Notebook Orders
      Now go back and take a look at how accurate digitimes has been with their reporting on Apple. The media is not a source in and of itself. Digitimes is not a research group. And as a media source, it has had quite an unreliable track record.
      View article »
    • Wed Nov 12th 05:42 AM
      |
      Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Chinese Paper Reports Reduced Apple Notebook Orders
      Now go back and take a look at how accurate digitimes has been with their reporting on Apple. The media is not a source in and of itself. Digitimes is not a research group. And as a media source, it has had quite an unreliable track record.
      View article »
    • Mon Nov 10th 22:32 PM
      |
      Rating: +1 0
      Commented on:
      Will Apple's Q1 2009 Revenue Estimates Be a Blowout?
      Jumping from 6.9 million to 8 million in Q1 isn't that big of a jump. It's a 1.1 million unit increase. Remember, that all of these very same arguments were made in Q4 of last year. The same exact points. These points were also made in Q2. Yet, in both Q1 and Q2 of 2008, Apple sold more iPhones than they did in their debut quarter. Apple sold 1,119,000 iPhones in Q4 2007 (debut of the iPhone) while selling 2,315,000 in Q1 2008 and 1,703,000 in Q2 2008 - this despite Sacconaghi's missing iPhone debacle and all of the same arguments regarding channel fill. They have to replensh the channel if the demand is there. Plain and simple. Just because you fill the channel with inventory, doesn't mean the buck stops there. How fast the channel clears is the important part of the puzzle.

      I think people get too preoccupied with one part of a financial puzzle that they miss the important big picture. For example, the market is always preoccupied with Gorss Margin percentage. The market gets too overly concerned with the issue of whether Gross Margins will be sustainable in the future. Yet, gorss margins are only 1 part of the puzzle. If OpEx as a percentage of total revenue is droppin, and if overall contribution i.e. gross margin itself is rising, then who gives a shit abot gross margin percentage? It doesn't matter at that point. Yet, no one every talks in these terms. They just look at gross margin percentage and think that's the end all and be all of whether the company will be profitable. It makes no sense.

      I see the same thing going on with the iPhone. Channel fill is only one element of the equation. For all we know, Apple could sell 12 million iPhones this quarter because Apple might have to constantly replensh the channel due to high demand. Channel fill is not an indication of demand--its inventory turnover that one needs to look at.

      I am repsonding to your question because a lot people constantly seem to be raising the same concern regarding channel fill. Well Apple could very easily refill that channel twice over in Q1.

      My sales estimates for Q1 are based on the fact that it takes time to penetrate the market. No matter how popular a device may be, it still takes time to grow in large numbers. I think too many people believe that Apple blew their load all in one quarter due to pent up demand.

      However, that did not happen last year. The demand couldn't have been more pent up then with the original version of the iPhone. People had to wait six months from the time it was announced until it was released. And event then, Q1 sales more than doubled the debut quarter's sales. We'll see as the quarter progresses, but my intuition tells me that we've only scratched the surface of the 3G's potential penetration into the market place.


      On Nov 10 10:06 PM howmany wrote:

      > nice job...but where is the defense of those huge iPhone numbers.
      > Given the 2million channel fill last q, pent up demand due the emptying
      > of first gen iPhones from the channel, and the usual apple early
      > adopters, the terrible consumer environment, and the reduced rollout
      > to new countries, the fact that the new countries are smaller, leads
      > me to suggest a sequential drop to very moderate increase in iPhones
      > is in order. How do you justify your number overcoming these factors?
      View article »
    • Thu Oct 30th 19:57 PM
      |
      Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Is Apple More Undervalued Than Other Tech Sector Stocks?
      To Grouch:

      Actually it will. That is current deferred revenue. Current in that it will be recognized within 1 of the date of the statement of deferred revenue. It will be recognized from September 28, 2008 to September 27, 2009.
      View article »
    • Thu Oct 30th 19:57 PM
      |
      Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Is Apple More Undervalued Than Other Tech Sector Stocks?
      To Grouch:

      Actually it will. That is current deferred revenue. Current in that it will be recognized within 1 of the date of the statement of deferred revenue. It will be recognized from September 28, 2008 to September 27, 2009.
      View article »
    • Mon Oct 27th 10:10 AM
      |
      Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      iPod Sales Only 14.2% of Apple's Q4 Total Revenue
      @jakw

      So I guess you believe Apple is going to lose that 14.2% of sales? Even if iPod sales contracted, they wouldn't go to zero as you seem to imply by such a post.

      Call Apple a fad all you like. How do you explain that Apple has a larger cash position than almost every other tech company including MSFT? How do you explain the fact that Apple's earnings on a non-GAAP basis put it in the 20 twenty most profitable companies in America? Hmmm. Do you think perhaps this bullshit "fad argument" that you bears seem to advocated is far run its course yet? Or are you a monkey whose hand is stuck between two bars because he doesn't release that if he just let go of the banana, his hand would become loose?
      View article »
    • Sat Oct 25th 05:18 AM
      |
      Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Apple's 'Real' Earnings: Up Almost 125%
      To Channon:

      I think Oppenhiemer is just being extremely conservative this quarter. He changed his guidance statement from "we offer guidance that we think Apple has a reasonable chance of making" to "we are going to be very prudent with our guidance." They used the term "prudent" which has never been part of the guidance language in the past. Thus, I think you need to take what Apple says with a huge grain of salt.

      Also, with regard to your $0.20/quarter argument, it doesn't quite work that way. EPS depends on so many factors in any given quarter. Everything from the tax rate, to OI&E to overall gross margins and especially operating expenses plays into EPS. So while the weight of the iPhone deferred revenue might be worth $0.20 in one quarter, it could very well be worth $0.30 or $0.10 in another quarter. Its best to think of adjusted earnings as what Apple would have earned in Q4 had they not implemented the subscription method of accounts. And its best to think of iPhone deferred revenue in terms of revenue. When know how much deferred revenue will contribute to the top line in any given quarter, but know very little on how much it will contribute to the bottom line in any given quarter. OpEx, OI&E and the Tax rate along with overall gross margins being affected by higher or lower total revenue determines how much of an EPS contribution deferred revenue will have on any given quarter.

      -Andy
      View article »
    • Sat Oct 25th 05:18 AM
      |
      Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Apple's 'Real' Earnings: Up Almost 125%
      To Channon:

      I think Oppenhiemer is just being extremely conservative this quarter. He changed his guidance statement from "we offer guidance that we think Apple has a reasonable chance of making" to "we are going to be very prudent with our guidance." They used the term "prudent" which has never been part of the guidance language in the past. Thus, I think you need to take what Apple says with a huge grain of salt.

      Also, with regard to your $0.20/quarter argument, it doesn't quite work that way. EPS depends on so many factors in any given quarter. Everything from the tax rate, to OI&E to overall gross margins and especially operating expenses plays into EPS. So while the weight of the iPhone deferred revenue might be worth $0.20 in one quarter, it could very well be worth $0.30 or $0.10 in another quarter. Its best to think of adjusted earnings as what Apple would have earned in Q4 had they not implemented the subscription method of accounts. And its best to think of iPhone deferred revenue in terms of revenue. When know how much deferred revenue will contribute to the top line in any given quarter, but know very little on how much it will contribute to the bottom line in any given quarter. OpEx, OI&E and the Tax rate along with overall gross margins being affected by higher or lower total revenue determines how much of an EPS contribution deferred revenue will have on any given quarter.

      -Andy
      View article »