Analysts have two opposite opinions of RIM
Analyst Shaw Wu, whose name should be familiar to our readers, told his clients at Sterne Agee that he is downgrading RIM to "Neutral" from "Buy". A"Neutral" rating is akin to a "Hold" in Wall Street talk and basically is a subtle way to tell his clients to sell their holdings in the Canadian manufacturer.
On the other hand, Scotia Capital analyst Gus Papageorgiou says that RIM is "absurdly oversold" and that its products offer unique features that will help the company stay in business for some time. Perhaps Mr. Papageorgiou caught our report on the BlackBerry PlayBook getting sold out at Best Buy.
hit a 7 year low on Friday at $15.98 and things might get worse before getting better. While there is hope that the new BBX powered RIM Superphones could start a new successful chapter for RIM, the company still has to make it past this holiday season with competition from the Apple iPhone and Apple iPad, and a number of Android smartphones with large screens and dual-core processors. Until the new BBX models are introduced, BlackBerry models remain woefully outspec'd.
Wu says that RIM's margins are threatened by the competition and he doubts that the company can meet the average estimate of next quarter's earnings produced by analysts. The latest fiscal quarter for RIM ended Saturday and the company is expected to ship between 13.5 and 14.5 million smartphones in the period. Analysts expect RIM to make $1.22 a share for the just concluded quarter, on sales of $5.31 billion. The company itself ios forecasting earnings between $1.20 and $1.40 a share on revenue of $5.3 to $5.6 billion. Analyst Papageorgiou, who as we said is telling clients that RIM is under priced, is one of the most optimistic analysts, forecasting $1.34 a share.
RIM will report earnings on December 15th.
1. Droid_X_Doug posted on 29 Nov 2011, 03:00 0
There is a reason the market has sold RIM stock. Could it be that the market expects bad news on Dec 15th?
2. ardent1 posted on 29 Nov 2011, 08:16 0
@Droid_X_Doug, you stated: \"$39 Billion is what DT wanted to approve the merger. Otherwise, it would have been a hostile takeover.\" in reference to the ATT merger of Tmobile USA.
You also bragged about your expertise in \"business speak\". Inquiring minds still want to know how ATT can acquire Tmobile USA via \"a hostile takeover\" when (a) the target is a private concern and (b) the target doesn\'t have publicly traded stock. As you know, Tmobile USA is a privately held, wholly-owned subsidiary of DT (source:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-Mobile_USA)
So yeah, I am challenging you on your \"hostile takeover\" claim. Just kindly explain how ATT would go about a hostile takeover of Tmobile USA.
Droid_X_Doug, do you even know what a hostile takeover is?