Apple Stock to Go to $200? Vanity Fair Writer Loses Her Mind
Vanity Fair contributor Bethany McLean was on CNBC discussing Apple's "demise," saying the stock could go to $200 (from $444 today). While anything is possible (she did correctly call the demise of Enron), it's more likely that $200 is in Apple's rear-view mirror, absent a stock split or a complete mismanagement by the people in charge, namely CEO Tim Cook.
Here is McLean's interview in its entirety.
First, for McLean to question the opacity of Apple's earnings power is laughable. Apple has increasingly made itself more transparent, not less. Apple now breaks down not only product revenue, but geographic sales as well.
Even if you're going to go as far as to mention Braeburn Capital , Apple's asset-management arm, as opaque, that's a weak argument. Per its 10-Q, Apple had more than $42 billion in U.S. Treasuries, over $49 billion in corporate securities and around $6 billion in money market funds and CDs. That's not exactly playing games with the company cash. In its entirety, Apple had $137.1 billion in cash and cash equivalents at the end of the quarter.
McLean describes Apple as "
She then notes that hedge fund managers and young kids are increasingly buying the Samsung Galaxy S III. I guess she didn't see the independent numbers from Strategy Analytics . Not one, but two, Apple iPhones beat out the Galaxy S III in the most recent quarter.
To suggest a $200 share price would mean that Apple's revenue growth -- which was 17.6% in its most recent quarter, or 27% if you take out last year's extra week -- is about to collapse. While anything is possible, I can't imagine that happening, especially with Apple's loyal legions of fans and growing customer base around the world as it enters new countries.
Yes, the Galaxy S III has made inroads in North America, with the Android operating system owning 54.3% of the market, per comScore. Again, Apple comes out on top with mobile subscribers, with 36.3% of the market versus Samsung's 21%. To suggest Apple is "holding on to women in the developed world" is bizarre.