Interestingly enough, if you’ve been following AAPL he is the analyst who is most often correct about all things AAPL. Nearly every product he predicts actually comes to pass and he has been consistently bullish on the stock.

Now you have cherry-picked certain “d’uh” obvious statements and questioned a couple other of his ideas by either plucking them out of context or just simply disagreeing with him.

Regarding the iPhone launching on multiple carriers in the same country, the part of his report you didn’t include described how dramatically the iPhone sales went up when it was offered on more than one carrier. Apparently Apple is looking at doing multiple carriers in China as well. This is a shift in strategy but if Apple wants major growth and market share gains they will need to get on multiple carriers.

Additionally, you can disagree with his idea that Apple is going to move towards subscription options for video programming. An “OPTION” — if you want to buy your programs and movies then go right ahead. But look at the popularity of Netflix — if Apple doesn’t let people rent videos monthly they will be left behind.

Finally, I wanted to say that Munster actually has connections and sources with Apple. You imagining him as a blowhard who is just making things up. He runs certain things by management and they can give him hints as to what might be happening. People are trading stock on this info — if, for instance, he hears a tablet might be coming, he wants confirmation of this from Apple. It works for Apple, it works for the analyst.

If you really want to hear some uninformed analysis, look to some of the other AAPL analysts out there — they really have no idea what they are talking about

But it raises an important point I think bolsters what I say in my article. If you are a reader who truly is out of the loop and likely to accept what you read in the tech press, surely Munster’s wildly-imaginative predictions (all too commonly reported in the press as “Apple’s Next Big Thing”) are unfairly misleading?

I don’t believe your false modesty, Ted, your comment betrays your intellect! But what about those who don’t have your knowledge and expertise in Apple matters? Or mine? Or, for that matter, the knowledge and expertise of 99% of the other TAB readers?

Analysts can do great work. But they can also deeply mislead the public and misrepresent Apple in the process. And I think that’s worth some discussion, hence my article above :-)

Just food for thought :-)

For many people, having their favorite shows available to download is reason enough to give up cable. But for many many others, there is a glaring omission that nobody has even come close to fixing yet.

I think you are likely correct. For one thing many people would probably like more customizability in their ‘basic’ channels. We don’t really get to pick and choose our basic channels. Drop Fox, pick up AMC or whatever. Ideally our cable provider would allow us ‘x’ number of channels and let us customize those, THEN charge us extra for premium channels as needed.

Moreover, there tends to be a lot of resentment to subscription models in general, of which cable television is one. (Not that there’s any getting around that for cable). But there is getting around that for the internet because there’s not that degree of bandwidth delivery infrastructure for most web services.

But the subscription models for movies might work in the same way that it works for NetFlix. ‘x’ dollars for ‘x’ movies a month.

Thusly, I disagree with the author of this article regarding movies in general when he states” For the record, I completely disagree with his assertion that customers only want to watch a movie “once or twice.”

I think that NetFlix and VideoBlockbuster’s competing subscription program bear me out. NetFlix is just about the ONLY subscription based model I know of that people rarely complain about and seems to have a high level of customer satisfaction and success. Commit to a ‘x’ number of videos a month and then return them. This has been a highly successful model.

I could see iTunes giving NetFlix a major run for it’s money, provided the technical hurdles are overcome, as the author astutely points out. One note here is that many people tend to like to watch movies together, rather than solo. My point here is that the technical hurdle is an important one, in my opinion. Subscribing to movies for your laptop or iPhone alone, which are generally solo viewing devices aren’t as likely to cut into the NetFlix market as viewing them via AppleTV.

I hope Apple can figure out a way to do this. I’d pay for such a service.

I would agree, with certain variations.

There are TV shows that I enjoy but I probably wouldn’t watch over-and-over again.

In regards to music, for example, I have my favorite music which I own. But I would be willing to “rent” music in order to determine whether it will become my favorite. I believe that it’s much the same with video–I might rent a movie, watch it, like it, and buy it. I might rent a movie, watch it, and decide that I didn’t like it–or like it that much.

So, yes, I believe there’s a place for a subscription service for music and video.

Seriously though; I made my point already. I don’t mind Analysts’ having their predictions disseminated far-and-wide but I DO mind if they are “predicting” what everyone else has been thinking and discussing endlessly for a long time already.

The alternative, though, is not wildly imaginative fiction.

I’d love to see Munster find a happy middleground between those two extremes. I am trying to draw attention to that with an article that entertains and inspires thought… and comments.

So far, it’s working ;-)

The “point” is to have some fun with Munster’s predictions, and to point-out that it’s something we ALL can do with just the same degrees of banality and wild-abandon Munster commits on a regular basis.

But what you say in your last sentence agrees with my original point so I guess I can only reiterate; it’s fun to “do a Munster” and share predictions. :-)