I suppose we don't dare ask the analysts about their personal track records and that of their employers. Personally, I think that Apple's performance exceeds that of the analysts' employers in terms of public service, economic performance, integrity, and goods delivered. It must be frustrating to Apple to outshine their (analysts) judges and still have to live with their verdicts.
Wow, Apple is really doing a very good job. Will it help USA economy? This company is much richer than many other countries! BTW, I would expect the company to continue to do well if they can really launch the iPhone5, iPAD3 and iTV in time.
The analysts see the reason as a means to play the stock up or down depending upon which side of the trade their firm is on. I know they are supposed to be independent, but they are employed by brokerage and banking firms who have a stake in the movement of the stock price.
"the lavender fan" has it spot on. In addition to the "numbers" the analysts expect, they typically have so called "whisper" numbers as well. So the question can become, which numbers were missed?
Either way, they couldn't run a company for a nanosecond and should not have the sway over investors that they have. I blame the investors for that.
4 million in 3 days, that's something which every OEM would love to kill for.
I wonder what the analysts sees in the difference between 28.27 billion and 29.45 billion for a quarter to downgrade the stock. It says "But analysts, generally speaking, were looking for more" - Just a load of BS.
Drones are, in essence, flying autonomous vehicles. Pros and cons surrounding drones today might well foreshadow the debate over the development of self-driving cars. In the context of a strongly regulated aviation industry, "self-flying" drones pose a fresh challenge. How safe is it to fly drones in different environments? Should drones be required for visual line of sight – as are piloted airplanes? Join EE Times' Junko Yoshida as she moderates a panel of drone experts.