Apple, Analysts and Experts

I like to have a good old moan about Apple analysts because I often find them to be way off the mark (they are getting better admittedly).
It would often seem like very little research is done, but this is what people pay them for. No?
If I had no clue about Apple, and I was interested in investing, I would presume the analyst I entrusted my money with had done his homework. Surely?

I expect someone to have particular flair in his/her work in order to qualify as being called an 'expert' (which is a title I'm presuming these analysts would like to be known as). But what is an expert?
Because I do not consider myself as an expert in anything, I expect an expert in a subject to be someone who is at least as good at his job than myself. 
An expert to me traditionally conjured up notions of infallibility, but I have kind of learnt over the years that there are very few people who live up to the title of being an 'expert' in their chosen profession, and as I learn about each subject, I often find, the people I once revered as experts are often just common garden blaggers hidden behind cloaks of pretense.

I freely admit I know little when it comes to the finer details and number crunching essential in the wider profession of business analyst, but with Apple I think this is your average analysts downfall.
You see I feel that analysts (in general) are oblivious to the larger picture, and in particular they lack the understanding that Apple is not an ordinary company, that fits the 'standard model' they think every company should behave like.

The moral is, to be cautious, especially of those who call themselves experts!