Tag Archives: apple

Google I/O: Do Rivals Facebook, Amazon, Apple Have Things To Fear?

Speculation that Alphabet ’s ( GOOGL ) Google will take the wraps off a new virtual reality platform, taking on Facebook ( FB ), HTC and other rivals, is heating up ahead of its developers conference next week. Google is also expected to disclose more wrinkles for Android N , the next major update of the mobile operating system, due for release this year. And it might have something to say about Android apps coming to the Chrome OS or about  combining the two operating systems . While Nest Labs, acquired by Google in 2014, seems to be struggling, some Web pundits say Google could provide an answer to Amazon.com ’s ( AMZN ) “Echo” home hub. Google and Amazon also seem to be on a collision course in online video , but YouTube has not grabbed the spotlight at the developer’s conference in the past few years. Whatever new products and technologies are coming to Google I/O, slated for May 18 to May 20, will likely be unveiled by CEO Sundar Pichai in his keynote address. Pichai’s keynote is scheduled for 10 a.m. PT on May 18. The Google I/O schedule is packed with virtual reality. There’s speculation Google might roll out its own VR headset, firing back at Facebook’s Oculus Rift. Another line of thinking has Google sticking with its low-cost Cardboard VR offering for now. Like Facebook, Google may also be charging into augmented reality. While virtual reality immerses a user in an imagined or replicated world (like videogames, for instance), augmented reality overlays digital imagery onto the real world. That’s where Google’s “Project Tango” comes in. One of the first products to come from that effort is a new smartphone built by Lenovo and due out this summer. Google’s annual developer’s conference arrives before Apple ‘s ( AAPL ) June developers meeting. It remains to be seen whether Apple or Google talks much about driverless cars . Click here for the Google I/O schedule .

Apple Suppliers Blame ‘Tepid’ iPhone 7 Demand On Lack Of Innovation

Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing ( TSM ) will grow 4% in 2016, missing projections for 5%-10% growth, as Apple ( AAPL ) cuts its iPhone 7 orders June through December, a source told the Nikkei Asian Review on Wednesday. Nikkei’s report comes on the heels of disappointing June-quarter guidance from Apple suppliers Skyworks Solutions ( SWKS ), Cirrus Logic ( CRUS ) and InvenSense ( INVN ). Tuesday, TSM reported Q1 sales that missed by $30 million and dipped 13% year over year. In afternoon trading on the stock market today , Taiwan Semi stock was down a fraction, near 23. June through December, TSM’s chip shipments will shrink to 70%-80% of year-earlier levels, sources told Nikkei. TSM is now projected for “tepid” 4% year-over-year sales growth and flat operating profits in 2016. In 2015, sales rose 7.5% to $25.95 billion. “Suppliers are saying that they are getting fewer orders for the second half of this year compared with the year-ago period,” a source told Nikkei. “The traditional peak season this year will not be able to compare to the past few years.” The report jibes with worries of a slowdown in smartphone sales. Last month, Apple missed its March-quarter Q2 sales for the first time in 13 years and guided its June-quarter sales down 15%-19% sequentially, which is the seasonal norm. The only Chinese smartphone makers showing healthy growth are Huawei and Oppo, the source said. Apple CEO Tim Cook has said his company plans to lower its channel inventories by $2 billion in the June quarter “in light of the macroeconomic environment.” Apple has tapped TSM as the sole source of its A10 processor for the iPhone 7, expected for release in September. Last year, TSM and South Korean rival Samsung both supplied the A9 processor for the iPhone 6S. About 16% of TSM’s sales stem from Apple. Nikkei estimates Apple will ship more than 200 million iPhones this year, down from 230 million in 2015. A source with a major Taiwanese supplier blamed the lack of innovation in the iPhone 7 for the weak demand, Nikkei reported.

One Size Fits All… If It’s Customized

Portfolio design comes in many flavors, but so do investors. Finding a sensible balance is job one in the pursuit of prudent financial advice. Yet for some folks the idea of keeping an open mind for customizing strategy to match an investor’s goals, risk tolerance and other factors reeks of treachery. There can only be one solution for everyone – all else is deceit. Or so some would have you believe. This biased worldview comes up a lot with the discussion of buy and hold, but the one-size-fits-all argument knows no bounds. The danger is that pre-emptively deciding how to manage assets for all investors is the equivalent of diagnosing illness and recommending treatment before meeting with the patient. Sound financial advice requires more nuance, of course, for two primary reasons: the future’s uncertain and the human species is afflicted with behavioral biases. In other words, a given investment strategy can be appropriate – or not – for different individuals. Consider the concept of buy and hold. By some accounts, it’s all you need to know. Stick your money in, say, the stock market and let the magic of time do the heavy lifting. Sensible? Perhaps. But it may be hazardous. The determining factor is the particulars of the investor for whom the advice is dispensed. Buy and hold – perhaps by focusing heavily if not exclusively on stocks via a handful of equity funds – may be eminently appropriate for a 25-year-old with a budding career, a saver’s mentality, and the behavioral discipline to focus on the long-run future. The same solution can be toxic, however for anyone with a time horizon of 10 years or less. Even for someone who’ll be investing for much longer, may run into trouble with buy and hold if he has a tendency to over-react to short-term events. In that case, buy and hold can be wildly inappropriate for an investor without the discipline to look through market crashes and bear markets. Ah, but that’s where a good financial advisor can help by keeping the client on the straight and narrow: Ignore the short-term volatility and stay focused on the long term. Fair enough, but it doesn’t always work. Some investors will bail at exactly the wrong time no matter how much hand-holding they receive. Deciding who’s vulnerable on that score can be tricky, but not impossible. Perhaps, then, a portfolio strategy with less risk – asset allocation – or the capacity to de-risk at times – some form of tactical – is more appropriate for certain individuals. The flip side of this equation is no less relevant. Forcing every client into a tactical asset allocation strategy simply because that’s your specialty (and/or it pays better for the advisor) is also misguided. Higher trading costs, taxable consequences and the inevitability of timing mistakes can and probably will take a bit out of total return over the long haul relative to buy and hold. The “price” of tactical can still be worthwhile for some folks, if the portfolio has a tamer risk profile. The point is that there’s no way to decide what’s appropriate without first understanding the client. Granted, a 25-year-old investor is more likely to benefit from buy and hold vs. a newly retired 65-year-old client. But there are exceptions and it’s essential to identify where those exceptions arise. The good news is that there’s an appropriate strategy for every client. The great strides in financial research and portfolio design capabilities via computers over the last several decades provide the raw material for building and maintaining portfolios that are suitable for any given client. Buy and hold may still be appropriate, but maybe not. The greatest strategy in the world is worthless if a client jump ships mid-way through the process. As such, the goal for managing money on behalf of individuals isn’t about identifying the strategy with the highest expected return or even the strongest risk-adjusted performance. Rather, the objective is to build a portfolio that’s likely to work for the client. That may or may not lead to a buy-and-hold strategy – or some variation thereof. Such talk is heresy in some corners. But matching portfolio design and management particulars to each client’s time horizon, goals, etc. – and behavioral traits – is the worst way to manage money… except when compared with the alternatives.