Apple's Q2: Analyzing the Analysts

[Originally posted April 23, 2009 on Fortune.com]

No analyst we know of correctly predicted Apple's (AAPL) second fiscal quarter results for 2009, in which the company proved that computer makers don't have to slash prices or build "junky" $400 netbooks to weather an economic storm. But some analysts did better than others.

Who did best?

Let's look at the numbers. The table below represents the estimates of all the Wall Street analysts whose numbers we could get our hands on, as well as those of three of the most prominent blogger analysts. (We could have included lots more bloggers; everybody these days seems to have an Apple earnings spreadsheet in their hard drive.)

In our chart, the actual results and the most accurate estimates are highlighted in green. The worst estimates are highlighted in red. There were several ties.

Bearish grunts from a pair of Apple bulls

[Originally posted April 21, 2009 on Fortune.com]

You know Apple (AAPL) is in for a bumpy quarter when both Gene Munster and Andy Zaky sound bearish notes in advance of the company's fiscal Q2 earnings report -- due out Wednesday after the markets close.

Munster, a senior research analyst at Piper Jaffray, is one of Apple's strongest supporters among the mainstream analysts. And Zaky, who writes a blog called Bullish Cross, is best known for his quarterly analyst smackdowns, in which bloggers who follow the stock challenge the pros to do a better job than they at predicting Apple's numbers.

Neither man has turned negative on Apple. Munster retains his "buy" rating and is sticking to his price target of $180 a share -- one of the highest in the industry. And Zaky, while acknowledging that the Street's consensus estimates for Q2 -- earnings of $1.09 a share on revenue of $7.94 billion -- are "more fairly stated" than they've been in recent quarters, still expects Apple to beat them.

Munster, however, issued a report to clients Tuesday in which he predicts that Apple will miss the Street's consensus on both revenue (by a hair) and earnings (by a mile). See chart: