It’s Friday, So Let’s Play With Macalope

It is time to play “MacSemantics” this Friday

This one gets even sillier:

First as always, Macalope’s “piece”:

Mac graciously does a mea-culpa here: “Todd starts by rightly dinging the horny one for failing to note that he did say Jobs did not actually go so far as to literally say iPhone purchasers were suckers, even though Todd put it in quotes. So the Macalope will agree he shouldn’t have bothered making an issue of that particular point.”

Then we degenerate to more Macgames:

“[Commenter colonelpanic points out that Todd is calculating off a different base by going back to the iPhone’s original price, so his number don’t jibe with Gizmodo’s or the Macalope’s. Some of this may be confusion over the Macalope’s use of “original iPhone” to mean the original hardware at the May 2008 price. The Macalope has already conceded that the price drop from the iPhone’s launch price to the price as of three weeks ago was necessary to stay competitive, the point is that Steve Jobs effectively announced no real price drop at WWDC, contrary to Sullivan’s posts of last Monday. Todd’s trying to reset the goal posts to justify his contention that the iPhone 3G is “cheaper”. Sure, it’s cheaper than it was last July, but it’s not cheaper than it was three weeks ago.] “

Now, what was the post from your truly that started all this? Anyone remember?

Wasn’t it “$199 3G iphone……Job’s Admits Early iPhone Buyers “Suckers” ?. Didn’t I then go on to talk about those who “waited in line for days” for a phone? Didn’t I also then talk about “those of us who laughed when the phone was priced at $499”? Isn’t the genesis of all the my assertions since two months before the phone was even launched that a price drop of this magnitude was necessary?

Wasn’t the first sentence “How stupid do those folks who slept outside for days for a phone feel? They could have waited a year, got a better phone from apple (AAPL) for 1/3 the price….”

Now Mac, excuse us for thinking when you actually said “original price” that you actually meant the “original price”. Silly, silly us. We should know you meant “the price that makes whatever argument I am making correct”.

While your at it, we could just as easily give you GB$500 pounds and in that case after the exchange rate, if you force me to use dollars for the new phone and you use the pounds for your old one, you could make out even better. I mean, as long as we are just doing more “Apple twisting”.

It is nice of you to admit that when one bases his assertion off the original price like I have done since day one that, that person would be 100% correct.

The rest of his post is reduced to some mildly amusing pseudo insult I can only imagine was done to hide the fact he has already admitted on two occasion I was in fact, based on the metrics I used, correct?

Mac post basically says “Sure you are right if you go by what you said, but you are wrong if you go by what I wanted (wished, hoped, tried to make people think) you said”

OK…..Good to know

Perhaps maybe if Mac spent a little more (or any) time writing original stuff rather than just sitting there picking at the work of others, he could avoid this?

Just a thought…

Disclosure (“none” means no position):Sold Apple July $280 calls in Jan.

↑ Grab this Headline Animator

Visit the ValuePlays Bookstore for Great Investing Books