Is Apple Watch a Needle Mover?

By Adam J. Crawford, Analyst

The investment community has been up in arms over a lack of innovation from Apple. After all, the company hasn’t launched a new product line in quite some time… that is, until now. Meet the company’s brand new smart device: Apple Watch. Investors hope the product will send Apple’s stock to new heights. Is that wishful thinking?

Apple brings its new product into a hotly contested space, with the likes of Sony, Nike, and Samsung all offering a competing smartwatch. But there’s a common theme with reviews for these gadgets: not enough features, not enough style. Apple aims to fill this void… and will charge a premium for doing so, of course.

Apple Watch will retail for $349, notably higher than most competing watches. Since Apple is notorious for putting the squeeze on retail margins (it reportedly allows retail as little as 3% on tablets), retailers would likely make 10% on the Apple Watch, placing Apple’s revenue per watch at around $315.

In 2013, Apple sold 150 million iPhones. It would be an extremely tall order to sell that many watches, especially at $350 a pop. So for a base-case scenario, let’s say that 30% of iPhone buyers will purchase an Apple Watch. For a bullish scenario, 50%. And for a bearish scenario, 10%. Using these adoption rates yields the following annual unit sales.

	Bear	Base	Bull
Percent of iPhone Sales	10%	30%	50%
Apple Watch Annual Units Opportunity (Millions)	15	45	75

At a projected price of $315, we get the following projected revenues.

	Bear	Base	Bull
Apple Watch Sales as a percent of iPhone Sales	10%	20%	50%
Annual Units Opportunity (Millions)	15	45	75
Price per Watch	$315	$315	$315
Revenue (Billions)	$4.7	$14.1	$23.6

Over the past four years, Apple’s profit margin has ranged from 19.2% to 26.7%. Let’s assume a 23% profit margin on the Apple Watch. With shares outstanding of 6 billion and at Apple’s current multiple of 15, here’s our calculation of the impact on share price for each volume scenario.

	Bear	Base	Bull
Revenue(Billions)	$4.7	$14.1	$23.6
Profit Margin	23%	23%	23%
Profit (Billions)	$1.1	$3.2	$5.4
Shares Outstanding (Billions)	6	6	6
EPS	$0.18	$0.53	$0.90
Multiple	15	15	15
Apple Watch Share Price	$2.70	$7.95	$13.50

Smartwatches will be a nice addition to Apple’s product line in that they will further institutionalize an already iconic brand. However, in looking at just the annual hardware sales, our projections suggest anywhere from a 3% to a 13% impact on share price. At the low end of the projections, the impact is anemic. At the high end, the impact is significant, but hardly seismic. There may be a host of reasons to buy Apple stock, but the Apple Watch by itself isn’t one of them.

The better investment option is to look at companies that supply Apple; this is one of the things we track at BIG TECH. One Apple chip supplier, Avago Technologies, yielded our subscribers over 100% return in just over 12 months, piggybacking on the rise of the iPhone.

For access to our unparalleled investment advice, simply sign up for a 90-day risk-free trial of BIG TECH. If you decide to keep your subscription, it will only cost $99 a year. If for any reason you’re unsatisfied, simply cancel for a full refund. No questions asked.

The article Is Apple Watch a Needle Mover? was originally published at caseyresearch.com.

Make sure you get our latest FREE eBook "Understanding Options"....Just Click Here

Apple’s Smartwatch May put Biotech on Silicon Valley Time

By Patrick Cox

Tech sites are buzzing right now about the new Apple smartwatch and iPhone. Having been a part of or close to the tech industry for a long time, the excitement that builds over new products doesn’t normally move me much. This time, though, it’s a little different because of reports that the phone and watch will be integrated to support healthcare apps.

The technological convergence was never just about bringing entertainment to mobile devices. Finally, we’re seeing the convergence expand into areas that directly impact health. The timing is perfect.

The history of medicine is as old as the history of humankind. Even prior to the rise of Egyptian and Indian civilizations, humans were treating medical ailments with varying success. If you haven’t looked at the research regarding Ötzi the Iceman, I recommend it. In 1991, the mummified and frozen body of a man who died approximately 5,300 years ago was found in the mountainous border between Austria and Italy.

The objects on his body have inspired extensive research and surprise, but several things stand out to me. One is that his weapons and clothing, especially his shoes, required skills and materials that couldn’t have been available to every individual at the time. They were, therefore, constructed by skilled specialists and traded across considerable distances.

Clearly, commerce and trade were not only common among prehistoric humans, the practice of voluntary trade clearly gave practitioners enormous advantages in the struggle to survive and raise their families. Trading is not something outside of human nature, as antibusiness forces want us to believe. It is ingrained in our DNA.

The most interesting item found on Ötzi, in my opinion, was a fungus, the Piptoporus betulinus mushroom that grows on birch trees. Like the penicillin fungus, it has antibiotic and anti-inflammatory properties and was probably traded and used by ancient Europeans to treat stomach ulcers and parasites, which Ötzi suffered from. In the Americas, native populations were also developing effective medicines such as anti-inflammatory tobacco poultices for insect bites and other injuries.

Obviously, the body of medical knowledge accumulated by our species since then has grown in volume and sophistication. In truth, it’s actually overwhelming. This collective information is an enormous resource for doctors and healthcare professionals of all types. Dozens of online libraries, catalogs, and databases are available for help in diagnosis and treatment design.

This rich volume of knowledge, however, has a downside. No individual can possibly know everything about modern medicine. While the specific, pertinent pieces of information needed for a given diagnosis or treatment are almost guaranteed to be out there somewhere, sifting through it all can be menacing. Even if time were not a factor when a patient is suffering, finding the one detail that makes the difference can be difficult. In the hospital scenario, this is a particular problem because time so often is precious.

Healthcare professionals are integral members of our society, and while not all are fantastic, a large majority do tremendous work and are incredibly knowledgeable. Even the most well-trained, experienced doctor still has the flaw of being human, however. Expecting physicians to hold the entirety of human medical knowledge in their working memory and to be able to recall the most obscure details at a moment’s notice is to expect the impossible. This only represents one of the many challenges a physician may face, but this one perfectly matches the skillset of computers.

Mobile AIs with diagnostic capacities and access to all databases will help doctors narrow down the choices significantly by giving them access to information wherever they are. Another technology that will eventually have a huge impact on the healthcare field is virtual reality. Immersive visual technologies like Oculus Rift plus a haptic feedback technology that delivers feelings to the user will allow surgeons to practice rare, dangerous, and difficult surgeries to maximize the safety of the procedure.

Not only would technologies like Google Glass allow doctors to find information on the fly, it would enable expedited communication between doctors, not only in the same hospital but hundreds of miles away as well. Stories like that of South Dakotan Tom Soukup illustrate the transformation of the healthcare system toward one where all medical knowledge is made available to doctors and of use to the consumer.

In Mr. Soukup’s case, he was badly injured by a cow on a ranch outside of the small town of Wagner, South Dakota. The closest hospital’s doctor, however, didn’t have expertise in the kind of surgery that Soukup needed. If it had been a different era, Soukup’s story might have been found in an obituary, but that is not the case.

The doctor in Wagner’s hospital got on a video conference with experts in a Sioux Falls hospital, who were able to direct Soukup’s doctor, most likely saving his life. On the international scale, the ability to get the opinion and guidance of any expert in the world at a moment’s notice has the potential to break down borders between the healthcare communities of all different countries. In time, patients will have access to the very best medical wisdom no matter where they’re located.

The iPhone-smartwatch combination may not seem to be a great step toward the realization of this goal, but time runs at a faster pace in the world of computer technologies than it does elsewhere. With Apple’s entrance into mobile health, we’re going to see a new breed of entrepreneur pushing the envelope of biotech progress.

For too long, medicine has been held back by the glacial pace of last century’s regulatory model. IT executives have a very different attitude, and they’re getting better at influencing policy makers. Biotech progress is already surpassing Moore’s law in many areas, but the arrival of Apple into this area is going to accelerate the industry, compressing time further. This may be the most significant aspect of the company’s newly launched smartwatch.

Sincerely,

Patrick Cox

To learn more about the new research driving Patrick's investigations at his Transformational Technology Alert letter for Mauldin Economics, click here.

The article TransTech Digest: Apple’s Smartwatch May put Biotech on Silicon Valley Time was originally published at mauldineconomics.com.