Forrester: Apple's new TV won't be a TV at all

Instead, their consumer product expert describes a wall-mounted panel he calls the iHub

Source: technobuffalo.com

FORTUNE -- James McQuivey, writing on his Forrester Research blog about Apple's (AAPL) widely anticipated entry into the full-fledged TV market, had me convinced.
Up to a point.
What he says about the current situation -- except for the use of the word "failed" -- struck me as smart and fair:

"The reason it has failed with the Apple TV so far is not that it hasn't tried. It's that the TV business is a tough nut to crack: Content is still controlled by monopolists unlikely to give Apple the keys to their content archives. And simply introducing a new display on which to watch that content as it is currently delivered by existing distributors won't offer consumers much that's new. Remember, unlike in the phone business where the iPhone penetrated quickly, the TV upgrade cycle takes 7 years. You can't jump in with a new version of the same thing everyone already has – even if it is elegant – and expect millions of people to buy it, especially at price points that Apple will have to maintain in order to keep its margins far away from those of LG and Samsung. Apple's only shot to sell such an expensive device quickly is if it does something very different. And that's what I hope Apple will do."

OK so far.
It's when McQuivey turns to the device he expects Apple to build -- he calls it the "iHub" -- that he loses me:

"Apple should sell the world's first non-TV TV. Instead of selling a replacement for the TV you just bought, Apple should convince millions of Apple fans that they need a new screen in their lives. Call it the iHub, a 32-inch screen with touch, gesture, voice, and iPad control that can be hung on the wall wherever the family congregates for planning, talking, or eating — in more and more US homes, that room is the dining room or eat-in kitchen. By pushing developers to create apps that serve as the hub of family life – complete with shared calendars, photo and video viewers, and FaceTime for chatting with grandma – this non-TV TV could take off, ultimately positioning Apple to replace your 60-inch set once it's ready to retire."

This bears a striking resemblance to what Jefferies Peter Misek called the "iPanel." And where there's analysts' smoke, I suppose there could be fire.
But a 32-inch panel affixed to a wall? Controlled by gestures and voices? Used by millions to chat with grandma?
I just don't see it. And call me crazy, but I'd rather put my faith in Sir Jony Ive, not some Forrester analyst, to design Apple's next big thing.

 

Wary Investors Give US Stocks Another Go

John Browne (2012.02.06 ) Investing

Recently, the stock market has been roaring, with the S&P 500 up a stunning 22% from October 3, 2011, which was the low of last year. In fact, the first month of 2012 has been one of the best Januaries on record for US stocks. On top of that, last Friday’s better-than-expected jobs report seems to provide further evidence that we’re turning a corner.
All this comes as a relief to the financial media, who had little to crow about in 2011. They are quickly making up for lost time. Many are highlighting the fact that major stock indexes are now approaching levels that will overcome all the losses that occurred since the financial crisis erupted in full view in September of 2008. Others are now claiming we’re really three years into a bull market, saying it began in March 2009 when US stocks finally hit bottom after losing more than half their value.
However, there are many reasons to question the bestowal of bona-fide “bull” status on this market. It’s hard to miss the artificial props in place to push up prices. Everyday investors haven’t been blind to these, and are thus highly skeptical of the market. So, both the supply and demand sides of the equation are standing on shaky foundations.
Few investors have forgotten the carnage of 2008 and 2009, when a panic of epic proportions came about with little warning from the experts. Then, as now, most professional economists and analysts predicted clear sailing for months and years ahead.
Even with the modestly better GDP and employment figures, there is now a much wider appreciation for the possibility of a financial meltdown than there was back in 2007. This is especially true given the unresolved problems in Europe and the possibility of debt contagion spreading across the West. These fears weigh down on equities, despite the continuing growth in corporate earnings.
Then again, investors likely regard corporate earnings themselves with increased scrutiny. Given the current low-interest rate environment, many are justifiably suspicious of the longer-term sustainability of those earnings. Indeed, corporate revenues have been enhanced significantly by massive layoffs and lower product quality. Meanwhile, fearing political uncertainty surrounding taxation and regulations, corporations continue to accumulate cash. Some companies have taken advantage of low rates to lock-in long-term debt capital.  While these may be wise decisions, such moves do little to set the stage for future growth.
Last week, the ECB decided to fall in line with the Fed in its efforts to avoid recession. It is now more widely accepted that if recession continues to deepen in Europe, money will be created on a massive scale. It will be circulated covertly by the ECB’s distribution network of banks to bail out governments, the banking system itself, and, most likely, major EU corporations.
It is also increasingly likely that problem countries within the eurozone will accept German ‘overseers’ to run their governments along more prudent lines. In Greece, the government finances, the economic budget, and the currency are now under the effective control of Germany.
On the surface at least, these measures render the eurozone’s problems less acute. This has lent support to US stock markets. But the fiscal centralization and torrent of new euros will have a long-term cost.
Meanwhile, in January, the Fed announced that it would keep US interest rates at historic lows until at least the end of 2014. This prospect has added to the enthusiasm for risk. However, by continuing to deny the existence of inflation, despite growing visible evidence, Bernanke is building a gargantuan new bubble that can’t be ignored.
Although stock markets offer the possibility of upside gain and inflation protection, it is hard for investors to shake their fears of economic uncertainty. Many long for the day when stock markets can rise on their own accord without massive support from central bankers, and when the fears of overzealous government regulators do not dominate risk analysis. They want stocks, they just don’t trust these stocks. It is in their interest not to let the present euphoria overcome their justified caution.
John Browne is a Senior Economic Consultant to Euro Pacific Capital. Opinions expressed are those of the writer, and may or may not reflect those held by Euro Pacific Capital, or its CEO, Peter Schiff.

J.P. Morgan: Jamie Dimon and the horse he fell off

Given his long record of success, Jamie Dimon will likely be back in the saddle in short order. And years from now, relatively few people will remember J.P. Morgan's trading

 blunder.

By Jack and Suzy Welch

FORTUNE -- If there's one person you probably don't envy right now, it's Jamie Dimon.
In the past week, the J.P. Morgan (JPM) CEO has been summoned to testify before Congress and learned that his company is facing investigations by an alphabet soup of federal agencies, from the CFTC to the FBI to the SEC. He's also had to spend a lot of time in the middle of a media feeding frenzy, offering mea culpas and referring to himself and members of his team as "stupid," "sloppy," and "dead wrong."
In short, Jamie Dimon has been knocked off the large, white horse he rode through the financial crisis.
Now, echoing the general consensus, nothing illegal appears to have occurred in the course of J.P. Morgan's $2 billion-plus trading loss. No taxpayer money was involved, and the investigations, it seems, are largely pro-regulation political grandstanding with a dose of schadenfreude thrown in. At least so far, nothing has happened that's actually going to seriously damage the bank's long-term value to shareholders. It's just that -- well, it's just that J.P. Morgan made a mistake.