iPhone 5C was supposed to be a lower cost iPhone and not a low cost iPhone. But if we try to trace back to the first of the articles that started detailing the iPhone as a low cost phone, I am sure it would have been from one of those so called "Analysts". These market analysts can only look at information as piece of data and cannot interpret it in any meaningful manner. We have seen this multiple times, for example with our favorite Piper Jaffray analyst Gene Munster who is obsessed with an Apple TV (not the hockey puck, but an actual TV) for a very long time. I am not saying that Apple will never release a real TV some time in the future, but Apple releasing a full fledged connected TV solution or Apple TV 2.0 makes more sense, at least in the immediate future. But coming back on the point at hand, I think it was the Wall Street analysts who created this pent up rumor mill for a low cost iPhone so much so that everyone on the internet accepted it without challenging it much and boy did Apple surprise us.
So the more I think and follow the Apple stock and the Wall Street's perception of the stock, the lesser I seem to understand the whole system. I agree that I am no expert in Investment and Finance, but it just feels fake to me. The whole analyst perception about a company seems to be based on what they know from historic companies' performance. For example just because Microsoft made money by selling 'good enough' software products at cheaper prices and made money on volume than profits, Apple does not have to follow the same path to be successful. In fact Apple has repeatedly shown everyone that they don't care about market share and what matters is the profit share. After all it was Apple who showed us that you can be the most valuable company in the world without having the majority market share in any of the categories you compete in (except the iPad). I like this comment on this article the most.