[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by HansTWN

No doubt that they have the resources to turn it around and might have something up their sleeves -- but until they show their cards the market won't be convinced they do.

And what the market *really* wants to see is something *really* stupid. (For Apple. For 2013).

From NBCNews:
http://www.nbcnews.com/business/appl...tion-1C8106563

Somebody pass Apple the remote — Wall Street wants the channel changed.

Skittish investors sent Apple stock down 12 percent Thursday, one day after the computer giant’s quarterly revenue came in below estimates, and some analysts worried that weaker demand for its products was an indication that the company’s innovative prowess died with former CEO Steve Jobs.

In any other context, the idea of punishing a company that delivered an 18 percent year-over-year increase, bringing quarterly revenue to $54.5 billion, would be absurd, but Apple, in a way, is a victim of its own success. Investors now expect the company to come in and reinvent entire practices and product categories, as it did with listening to music and cell phones, and they expect the next candidate for an iMakeover to be the television.

The TV industry doesn’t necessarily need — or want — Apple, though. “The difficulty is that the vast majority of TV content is owned by a small handful of companies who’s primary business model is bundling and cable [and] satellite distribution,” Andy Hargreaves, an analyst at Pacific Crest Securities, said via email. “Those companies have little interest in contributing content to a service that could disrupt their primary business model.”

When Apple reinvented the way we listen to music, it presented the ailing record industry with a solution to flagging sales and rampant piracy. When it turned the smartphone from an executive tool to a go-everywhere gadget, mobile carriers came around to the realization that they could create a whole new revenue stream by selling data plans to casual users.

Today, Americans have more choice than ever when it comes to their TV-viewing habits: They can digitally record a show to watch later, access streaming content from sources like Hulu or Netflix, get premium sports or movie content via subscriptions stacked onto their cable bundle and so on.

Munster thinks Apple plans to go beyond the set-top box. “Our feeling is, and we feel strongly about this, is that it’s an actual television... given Apple’s DNA of design as a feature, plus the only way to truly fix the remote control problem is to put it all in one panel,” he said.

Trip Chowdhry, managing director of equity research at Global Equities Research, suggested Apple could make use of new display technology to develop TVs with “ultra” or “4HD” high-definition resolution.

The problem with the whole Apple HDTV scenario the analysts are hung up on is that it won't work today. Not in any way that would generate Apple-like profit margins.

The stuff the analysts vaguely conjure with their arm waving exists and it has a name; IPTV. Sony is working on it. So is Microsoft. So are others.

They are all stuck at the same spot: all the networks are too beholden to the cablecos and satcasters to rock the roat by allowing an alternative. Worse, they see IPTV as a backdoor to a-la-carte pricing for channels which means the death of many of the 500 channels on cable which are funded on availability not viewership. So XBOX LIVE DIAMOND and Sony's (unnamed?) Playstation service both exist only as ongoing projects until either or both can convince broadcasters to sign on.

The fancy TV features they dream of? TVs that understand English? Recognize you face and gestures? It already exists. Has for years. Works well, too. XBOX Kinect does it. So will the NextBox. Probably the PS4, too. More, Samsung and LG are halfway there and getting closer.

UltraHD TVs?
They're coming.
They'll be significant as limited high-end products at 70inches and bigger by 2015 or so.
Today? Expensive demos that sell by the hundreds. There is no content; not broadcast and not on disk. Their best feature is they can do passive 3D at fullHD resolution. And they can interpolate FullHD to make it a bit sharper. For US$8,000-30,000. Have I mentioned they're selling by the hundreds...?

Currently HDTVs is a business nobody makes money at because everybody makes comparable products. Home Theater/golden eyeball types go for Plasma or projectors, everybody else goes for the biggest LCD they can afford or fit in their viewing room. At the cheapest price they can find. At the smaller sizes they are interchangeable commodities and even the biggest sizes are affordable. Plus the things last. Big TVs are generally 5-10 year purchases, not 18 month buys that can be replaced every year or so. Oh, and pricing is so low, on even the bes displays, nobody is making money and everybody is throwing darts hoping to find a feature people will pay a premium for. So far, nothing is working; not 3D, not Internet connectivity. Most smart TV apps go unused. TVs are for passive viewing or gaming. And gaming is very very well covered. There is no shortage of innovation in the living room. Whate there is is a shortage of profits for anybody not named Microsoft, Sony, or Roku.

The reason Apple isn't doing an HDTV or doing much with their set-top box is that the time isn't right for them.
They need to wait for Microsoft or Sony or Samsung to scout out the terrain so the can figure out the "something" they can offer that will let them take over, like they did with MP3 players. But if they come out today they will get their heads handed to them. Because Microsoft and Sony are already out there with tens of millions of boxes, technology that works, and tens of millions of customers *already* committed to their ecosystems.

With an entirely new generation of hardware due this year.

The absolute earliest Apple could possibly make a reasonable play for the living room is late 2014 and 2015 is more likely. First they need for the existing *strong* players to show their hand and then they'll know if they can play the game. Because HDTV in 2013 isn't MP3s in 2001-2002; they won't be going against obscure startups. They'd be taking on the big names of the consumer electronics world, some of which are fighting for their lives.

If Apple panics and gives the analysts what they want *that* will be a sign of a broken company. They can continue to grow their business in 2013 the way they did in 2012: with incremental tweaks and reaching to new markets with the same products.

But staying out of the living room is just a sign of prudence and good management.