04/13/2007, 10:45am, EDT
Friday, April 13th
Research analysts comment on Leopard delay
Similarly, American Technology Research senior analyst Shaw Wu sees the Leopard delay as a near-term setback, and says his firm has already accounted for slower Mac sales. Wu, however, believes that Apple's iPhone is not the sole reason for the company's delay of Leopard.
"While Apple cited a shift in resources to iPhone and more time for developers to beta test as reasons for the delay, our analysis indicates that if not for the 'secret' features, the core Leopard operating system would likely have shipped on time," the analyst said. "We believe the extra time Apple is allocating is for developers to test secret features that will likely be revealed at its WWDC 2007 conference starting on June 11, 2007."
Wu said he believes consensus sell-side estimates are still unsurprisingly aggressive and need to reset closer to his own, noting that he views the delay in Leopard and reset in sell-side estimates as short-term issues.
"We would take advantage of weakness to add to positions as we see upside potential to $118 based on 27x our calendar year 2008 earnings-per-share plus $13 in net cash. We believe Apple remains among the strongest fundamental stories with its vertically integrated end-to-end portfolio."
The analyst sees a worst case downside risk of $80-85 for Apple shares. American Technology Research maintained its 'Buy' rating with a price target of $118.
Piper Jaffray backs other analysts
Senior analyst Gene Munster of research firm Piper Jaffray today reinforced beliefs by both UBS and American Technology Research that Apple's delay of Leopard is only a temporary setback, and that the decision will only push income from Leopard sales back several months. Munster, like Wu, is not convinced that the delay is entirely related to the iPhone.
"The delay will shift an estimated $0.08 earnings-per-share or 2.6 percent (of calendar year 2007) from the June 2007 and September 2007 quarters into the December 2007 and March 2008 quarters ($0.04 from/to each quarter)," said Munster. "Apple reaffirmed the on-time arrival of the iPhone in June as part of the announcement, which we see as a positive that outweighs the delay of Leopard."
The analyst described Apple's track record for getting hardware out on time as hit or miss, but said his confidence in the iPhone shipping in June has risen from 70 percent to 90 percent. Munster also noted that while Apple is suggesting a late June launch of its iPhone, the company might deliver the device earlier at its Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC), which begins on June 11th.
"While we are not convinced the delay of Leopard is entirely related to getting the iPhone out on time, we view the shipment of the iPhone as critical, and the timing of Leopard as a non-event."
Piper Jaffray maintains its 'outperform' rating on Apple shares with a price target of $124.
Filed under: Investor
,
, 9
,
,
,
,
,

subscribe to comments
for this article
Think about it.
While i'm saddened by the news, let them do what they have to do to get yet another good product out the door! :)
That said, I also would prefer that Apple get all the kinks worked out of Time Machine before Leopard ships due to the potential of hosing everything up if Time Machine is buggy. I'll gladly wait if that's what it takes.
One of those secret features I'm hoping for: windows app integration. Forget running windows alongside or apart from Mac OS, a method to make those apps appear to run natively, even if using a background emulator, would make my day. Parallels is nice, and VPC works for the not-so-heavy stuff, but a built-in method that has little to no drain on the system would be a dream come true. Not to mention it would blur the line between the need of a PC or Mac.
This is not the reason for the delay. Apple wants you to run Mac applications, not Windows applications. To those that want Windows integration, why? Get Parallels today. Do you really want it to look like a Mac app? Wouldn't you rather have an app that *acts* like a Mac app, rather than one that simply looks at one - that's a step backwards in good UI.