Difficult to separate rumours from analysis

Apple always lives in the spotlight of the stock exchange and the general public; thus more and more stock analysis companies publish their opinions and join the game of predicting future of Apple. Thus, a new analysis wants Apple to offer an entry-level iPhone this Spring, or at the latest by June. But there is a problem. in theory, this kind of analysis is supposed to envisage in the manner of predicting the weather, the direction that the wind will blow. But if one adds a pinch of rumours and some fragments of information such as the emergence of a iPhone 3.1, you no longer seek the direction of the wind, but try to predict the shape of the boat which will be blown by this wind; and there one plunges in with a rumour that is believed to be more credible because it associated with the word analysis.
But initially the rumours are not like this. A rumour is information not checked and without proof to support it.
But anyway - talk about Apple sells newspapers, and for some this is the most important thing.
PS: since we are speaking about rumours, a member of our forums very strongly thinks that the new iMac and mini Mac will be released on March 3. Note, to announce this every Tuesday and someone will end up being correct :)