Social Feed

What troubles me about MS is the subscription model that they are trying to force on consumers. I will never "rent" an operating system for $99 a year. I will keep my Win 7 for as long as it works and then move to Linux. I also don't think that consumers will agree to "rent" Office or any other MS products. For what I've read, many corporations are skeptical about the new MS business model. Many have not even moved to Win 7 yet. How will they react to Win 8 or Office 360 subscriptions with frequent updates and feature changes? I am currently facing this with Quickbooks. I am forced to upgrade every two years when Quicken stops support and then have to learn the "new" and supposed "improved" user interface.

Don:

The reason that Apple stock has gone down has far more to do with their lack of innovative products than anything else.

iPhone5:
16:9 or 16:10 (I'm not looking at the resolution right now to say what the AR is).
A little thinner.
A new docking connector.

iPad (whatever they call the current generation):
A little thinner
A new docking connector.

Until they have another something that introduces a paradigm shift, (last was really the iPhone, although one could argue the iPad and not get much argument from me) they aren't going to go up tremendously in value for any concrete reason. There were smart phones, but Apple changed the game. Tablets they implemented better than anyone else at the time.

Neither of these are true anymore.

Voyager6- I agree. I hate the subscription model. Had to get it for my new iMAC though. The rest of my computers have an older copy of win2000 Office and it works fine.

John- I'll stick to my own strategy on when to buy and sell Apple. If you have skin in the game, good luck. The system I use is quite complex. It ain't rocket science. A lot is based on investor psychology, Fibbonacci sequence and other technical analysis of trading patterns, and financials. Whether a product is 16:9 or 16:10 or a new docking connector may be important to an engineer but it doesn't have any impact on the stock price. The picture is much bigger than you are seeing. For example, how do you fit the stock buyback plan with bond float into the stock valuation? What is the impact of the dividend? And finally, who is buying or selling and how much? These metrics are far more important. Rocket science is a small part while applying number ranges to crystal ball gazing is equally important.

Don:

Investment strategy is nice, but once again irrelevant to the matter at hand. The stock valuation is much more likely to remain stagnant without another truly great product which they have shown no signs of releasing.

They lag on software and hardware features on their premiere devices (iPhone and iPad) while sales of their almost forgotten PC business maintains flat to slow sales erosion. Without these, the polish is going to slowly diminish on Apple. They will remain a powerhouse, but they will no longer be leading the direction of the industry.

First of all, I don't believe Apple has just given up on exciting product development, like HP, MS, Dell, IBM etc. Neither has Microsoft as evidenced with Surface RT and Pro. You are no different than all the Negative Nancy's throughout history. Bold negative predictions that are representative of companies like Blackberry, Dell, HP, TIVO, and many others who have failed to bring new innovation to the Market. If you plot the pattern of new exciting products under Steve Jobs rein the company is right on schedule to introduce the next big paradigm in innovation in 2014. What that will be and will it be a winner in sales is another question. Cloud computing is not big right now but it is a paradigm. Plus, Tim Cook has a more logical business mind and has been able to maximize investor return, something Steve Jobs not only didn't care about, he actually spoke out against it.

But, I do agree that business leaders can become apathetic and lack creativity which can lead to slow erosion, like Blackberry. When that day comes I will simply close out my position on Apple and move on to the next big thing. Who knows it might be Tesla, or Netflix or Amazon. While these are way over sold today, they do represent some paradigm shifting innovation worth keeping on a watch list. I'm also currently in Facebook too it finally is taking off. Zynga, not so good, yet. I'll give them a complete year before backing out and taking my losses. Can't win them all. But they are innovating games in social media. Actually, I will do fine if FB buys them. The point here is nothing is forever and diversity is the key to success. As an investor, I am no fanboy of one company over another. As a user/consumer I buy what works for my needs.

I believe Microsoft is a very stable company with a good pile of cash. A safe investment and one with enough beta that you can trade it and make some money. I can't see it holding for the long haul without better leadership. I really like my Surface Pro and I like the stock on a trade. I hate the subscription plans and will probably search for alternatives. Depending on who is selected to lead the company will determine if I invest again and trade around a core position , or just trade it when the opportunity arises to make a quick buck. It doesn't matter to me who leads the company because it won't change how I like my Surface Pro or windows 7 or MS Office. I hope you understand how I view the topic of Ballmer leaving. For me it has little to do with the products they make that do my job and more about the stock. But that is just me.