Because they are both large-cap tech stocks that maxed their valuations (CSCO >$500B in 2000, AAPL $1T in 2018) after long bull markets (90s and 2010s), and their market penetration, pricing power and product commoditization led (and will lead?) to long-term sideways moves of the stock
The stories may be a lot more similar than you might think
Just a thought
.
Tagged. Jil is no longer blindly following WB 
Quoting old story in 2015-2016?
If there is no chance of recession in near future, AAPL will recover easily, but behind AMZN (may/may not be MSFT).
If there is recession, which most of the people expecting/guess, we do not know where every company go.
With huge cash pile, AAPL will go back to nice dividends and buybacks, but growth to the level of year 2018 is long way. It will be dividend aristocrats class stock then.
On any case, Apple recovery is lined up with 5G iPhone roll out which is almost 18-24 months.
This is my guess, let us wait and see.
Corresponding to Cycle degree wave II 
vs rent_and_vent/ manch is saying Cycle degree wave IV. Iām not good enough to tell, but pretty sure is of Cycle or even SuperCycle degree corrective wave. The big picture,
Not like certain some1 only link and donāt annotate 
- However, in China iOS is much less of a lock-in, thanks to the dominance of cross-platform Chinese-specific services, particularly WeChat (WeChat, while the most important factor, is not the only one: indeed, given that Android in China is specifically tuned to the Chinese market by Chinese OEMs, iOS is if anything a hindrance).
Did Ben read my comment in this forum recently?
To be sure, there are absolutely other issues in China, particularly the countryās significant economic slowdown as well as the possibility of anti-U.S. company sentiment thanks to the ongoing trade war.
We knew this and Ben is slightly incorrect. Economic slowdown is faster than expected thanks to the ongoing trade war too.
Appleās best customers, not just those who buy an iPhone every year, but also those whose only two alternatives are āmy current once-flagship iPhoneā or āthe new flagship iPhoneā are motivated first-and-foremost by having the best; price is a secondary concern.
Customers still prefer Appleās flagship iPhones, no matter how expensive they are.
Highlighted for those who keep quoting iPhone X series are too expensive.
Apple seems to have underestimated iPhone SE demand to a significant degree.
I am using a SE, need to say more?
The million dollar question. When will manch buy back his AAPLs, noting that he had sold AAPLs at $100?
Having sold aapl for $100, behavior finance would dictate I will only buy it back for less than $100.
Ben was the first guy who pointed out the WeChat theory of iPhone as fast as I know, sometime last year or two years ago.
He made another mistake which you didnāt point out. He said phone replacement will be faster than computer replacement and thus thatās a reason for optimism. Well, computer replacement is also getting longer and longer too. My parentsā went to infinity last year as they went all in on iPad and iPhones. No more laptops.
Good to know that they are using Apple products. For most folks, iPads are good enough since they are mostly browsing & reading, not much editing & writing. iPhones are for going out.
iPads are spectacularly cheap vs iPhones that are spectacularly expensive. The regular 9.7 inch iPad is a beast in terms of performance but only costs $300. I bought one Last month for no particular reason other than itās so cheap, why not?
I use iPad more often than MacPro since I browse/ read more often than blogging. Also can use while lying on the sofa/ bed or sitting in the bowl.
Not long ago Apple has quitted the display market (dropped cinematic display), and the networking market (dropped Airport). Is Apple quitting the console market (dropping AppleTV) soon?
Donāt bother calling me unless itās under $100. You should also point out in your chart the last time they issued warning in 2002.
How are they spending so much on R&D then? Surely, it canāt take that many engineers to refresh laptops and phones. Most of the components are industry standard designs, so itās mostly the industrial design and packaging of it all.
.
Are you implying Apple is over-designing? I thought so too. SJ intuitively point the direction for Jony to R&D thus saving $$$, now Jony seems to run wild (especially after Scott Forstall left). I also think Project Titan eats up tons of $$$ without anything to show - I think there wonāt be any Apple Cars (software only or whole widget).
At your service. The equivalent price is $130s (probably why so many analysts quote $135 as the bottom). $100 seems a little remote, canāt say never since anything can trumpā¦ Took 1 year to recover from the point of announcing revision, not the 18-24 months that Jil thought, and not the decade long as suggested by rent_n_vent (CSCO situation then is too dissimilar).
Daring Balls give a fair good view on the revised guidance issue.
Appleās Terrible No Good Very Bad Earnings Warning
Steve Jobs and Appleās Last Previous Earnings Warning
Is the usual end of S curve and long replacement cycle view but I think he puts it better than others. Definitely, not iPhone price is too high view.
Looking at the 2002 chart, seems better to scale in over the entire year rather than try to time to entry. The leap is fairly sharp in Apr 2003ā¦ almost immediately to the point of announcing revision. Say, you want to invest $120k, better to buy $10k every month then try to time the lowest price to buy $120k worth. No need to guess how low it will decline to.
Iām not sure they are over designing, but they appear to be over spending based on the lack of new products. R&D spend was $8B in 2015, and itās $14B in 2018. Thatās a 75% increase. Are there 75% more products? You listed a whole bunch of products that they no longer make. They added the watch and Air Pods. Everything else is new versions of existing products.
.
Is what I meant without SJ, overspending. One of the hallmark under SJ since his return is R&D cost is very low because he is very clear of where to go. So no need that much experimentation, exploration and going in circle activities.
I think they might be trying to kick start the iCar.
Maybeā¦ Project Titan was canned though, and I think theyād only hired a few hundred people for it. Even 500 people at $300k/yr would only be $150M/yr of spend. Thatās a very generous cost per employee even including benefits, stock, facilities, etc. ~70% of R&D cost is employee cost.
