Reports published earlier today from financial analysts claiming that this year’s release of Apple’s iPad 2 and iPhone 5 devices could be delayed have been dismissed as false in numerous reports from different sources that quickly followed these claims. Reuters was first to deny the rumors in a Tweet pictured above, but a very short statement from them soon followed:
A report that the next version of Apple Inc’s iPad tablet computer will be delayed is not true, according to a source familiar with the matter.
The Loop’s Jim Dalrymple was the next to set the record straight and said that not only would the second-generation iPad be on time, but he also disputed suggestions that Apple was facing problems while developing the iPhone 5:
From what I’ve heard this morning, both products are on schedule and will ship when they are supposed to. Only Apple knows exactly when that will be, but the products are not delayed.
The annual refresh of these devices would suggest an April release for the iPad 2, while the iPhone 5 is expected to be announced in June. However, two separate statements from financial analysts earlier today claimed that neither product is ready for these release dates, and that both would be delayed. It was suggested that the iPhone 5’s release could be as late as September, while the iPad 2 would hit in June.
The first report to make the rounds was in response to a note from Vincent & Alison Chen with Yuanta Securities Co. in Taiwan, who claimed that the reason for the iPad 2’s delay was due to design changes with the device. The second report came after a note from FBR Capital Markets analyst Craig Berger said the iPhone 5 would be late because Apple needed more time to “enhance its next-generation instant communications on the phone.”
Neither of these claims seem to have any substance, and I think at this point it’s safe to expect these devices will be released on time without any major issues. What’s interesting about these claims, however, is a point that 9to5 Mac has made:
…both of these “late” reports were from investment bankers – ahead of the opening of trading – who could potentially benefit from market manipulation. Something smells fishy.