Why does everyone think they need to buy a huge company to spend some of that money?
Why not start building? They just spent $1B on that data center in North Carolina. I could see Apple spending a few billion on a chip foundry and manufacturing their own silicon like the A4.
Perhaps rather then buy a company, Apple could roll out its own LTE communications company and rid itself its reliance on the current AT&T et al. camp here in the US.
Apple is now essentially a mobile communications company. What better way to serve its customers and to control the user experience than by providing the network bandwidth themselves?
Many of us half suspected this idea was a possibility and that Apple would bid on the frequencies made available when HD went prime time leaving the old TV bands up for grabs.
Buy the Beatles music rights! I don't know why, buy do it, get them on itunes on let's get on with it.
- AT&T?
_ Adobe
- Developers & make some kick-ass software
- Dell (get rid of them once and for-all.
I agree with those who say - they will likely buy companies that will help lower their bottom line or companies that are just a bit of a pain in the ass to have around.
Why does everyone think they need to buy a huge company to spend some of that money?
Why not start building? They just spent $1B on that data center in North Carolina. I could see Apple spending a few billion on a chip foundry and manufacturing their own silicon like the A4.
That scenario would far better fit Steve's MO to date.
Plus they're not really in the social networking business, and I bet Facebook in a few years could look a lot like AOL after Time Warner got stuck with it. Facebook will become old hat and less fashionable than it is now, and when it's not cool it's powers will fade.
FB has an enormous amount of potential but nobody has really figured out how to tap those reserves... and I certainly don't have the answer.
A few big companies have limped in but nobody has placed a value bet.
Buy the Beatles music rights! I don't know why, buy do it, get them on itunes on let's get on with it.
- AT&T?
_ Adobe
- Developers & make some kick-ass software
- Dell (get rid of them once and for-all.
I agree with those who say - they will likely buy companies that will help lower their bottom line or companies that are just a bit of a pain in the ass to have around.
Skip
Yes DELL ... just give to the shareholders their money back
... Apart from the struggle over Flash I don't see why they would want to or need to get stuck in that tarbaby unless to make my life easier out of charity.
While not originally anything to do with racism, the word "tarbaby" has a lot of bad racial overtones in large parts of the USA. Just sayin.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banalltv
... It would be easier to build their own stuff that covers a lot of the Adobe bases with it - like a more fully-feaured iWeb or something, or add stuff to Aperture that you can draw with - and give it to us cheap. That would help squeeze Adobe in the Flash wars but it's more direct to fight Flash by making deals and encouraging HTML5 adoption..
...
The problem I have is that if we are honest (and I know I will get pilloried for even saying this out loud), Apple is really not that good at application software. They've had some hits but they've had a lot of misses as well. Apple makes excellent OS level software, but once you get into the apps, they are not really that good.
Apple would do better to get companies interested in making application software for the Mac that works well and is better suited to the Mac than buying Adobe and trying to do it all themselves. They already make all the iLife software themselves, and all the iWork software as well. If they made all the pro level creative software, there wouldn't be a reason for anyone to make software for them at all.
FB has an enormous amount of potential but nobody has really figured out how to tap those reserves... and I certainly don't have the answer.
A few big companies have limped in but nobody has placed a value bet.
It's back to iTunes if there is any truth. I can't see any other use except for an expanded iTunes market and as i already said a decent interface for FB with Apple at the helm. It's a stretch though. More likely Steve is trying to get some mutually beneficial agreement. But these are strange times ...
How about buying Apple someof its own stock....especially on a pullback? Sales grew at the rate of 70% and PE is around 16. Other than that, Apple is better off just buying key technologies like speciality software like the multi touch it bough a few years ago, or the chip tech used in A4. These small purchases are less of a gamble, do not pollute the balance sheet, etc.
A company like Facebook would add too much good will and intangible to its balance sheet. There is no synergy with Apple. Anyway, if Apple wants a website like Facebook, why not build its own and a better one? Sounds ridiculous paying $Bs for something that has minimal assets, and questionable economics.
Too much money gives anybody hubris. Apple has avoided that... just hope it does not change.
Remember Steve's feelings when he closed the printer and camera divisions at Apple when he returned a iCEO. Why make something many others make and most better? Steve only does magic remember nothing mundane
yes but apple can take the "mundane" and make it "magical." Remember, they weren't the first mp3 player, or first smartphone, or first tablet computer. They cut the cameras and printers because they were just like the rest. If Apple makes a TV, it will only be because they feel its better than all other TVs on the market.
Facebook would seem to be a strange buy to me. Social network users are incredibly flickle, and I think Facebook is a short term thing. MySpace seemed worth paying a lot of money for to News International a couple of years ago, then everyone moved to Facebook and it seemed like a lousy buy.
I could see the same happening to Facebook.
Facebook may be the next MySpace, but even if that's true, it's an exaggeration to think that it "only has a couple of years." For starters, MySpace hasn't been cool for at least ten years, but it's still hanging around and still has tons of users.
Secondly, MySpace exploded when the average Schmo discovered the Internet and road the wave of consumer desktop expansion. Facebook started on the desktop but is basically riding the new mobile platform expansion. It will be at least ten years before anything comes along to even challenge it, possibly a lot longer.
While not originally anything to do with racism, the word "tarbaby" has a lot of bad racial overtones in large parts of the USA. Just sayin.
Woop. My bad. Sorry.
It always struck me as a brilliant metaphor for getting stuck worse and worse in something you should have just not gotten involved in in the first place.
How about buying Apple someof its own stock....especially on a pullback?.
This is what people don't understand - Apple is already serving its shareholders VERY well as measured by stock price. They don't need to artificially boost stock price by repurchasing shares. Shares outstanding is already under a billion - look at MSFT - they have WAYYYY more shares outstanding. Apple's is low enough as it is.
As long as the price keeps rising, there's not gonna be any legitimate pressure to repurchase or pay a dividend. Not that apple would listen, anyway, lol.
is the stock not rising fast enough to meet investor's expectations? Dividends are for cash-cow companies lacking growth potential. Case in point - Microsoft.
yes but apple can take the "mundane" and make it "magical." Remember, they weren't the first mp3 player, or first smartphone, or first tablet computer. They cut the cameras and printers because they were just like the rest. If Apple makes a TV, it will only be because they feel its better than all other TVs on the market.
Which was what my first sentence said (that you didn't quote). "I wondered about this too. However, if Apple does TV then it will not be like any TV we have ever seen. That is for sure."
is the stock not rising fast enough to meet investor's expectations? Dividends are for cash-cow companies lacking growth potential. Case in point - Microsoft.
I agree. However much I'd love a revenue stream I'd rather Apple stayed very healthy for the long haul.
It always struck me as a brilliant metaphor for getting stuck worse and worse in something you should have just not gotten involved in in the first place.
And it should still be read that way still IMHO. Sometimes political correctness goes overboard. If tar happened to be green there would be no such issue. The fact is you are correct it is a brilliant metaphor and a great story.
Comments
I like the idea of buying Adobe, but I'm not sure that's what Apple needs. They have a number of competing products.
iPhoto/Aperture
vs.
Lightroom
Final Cut Pro
vs.
Adobe Premiere
After Effects
vs.
Motion
Etc. etc. etc. Considering Adobe is still ingesting Macromedia... I'm not sure if now is the time to strike.
Yes when you really think about it only Photoshop and perhaps Illustrator are required. Apple could develop their own for a lot less.
Why not start building? They just spent $1B on that data center in North Carolina. I could see Apple spending a few billion on a chip foundry and manufacturing their own silicon like the A4.
Perhaps rather then buy a company, Apple could roll out its own LTE communications company and rid itself its reliance on the current AT&T et al. camp here in the US.
Apple is now essentially a mobile communications company. What better way to serve its customers and to control the user experience than by providing the network bandwidth themselves?
Many of us half suspected this idea was a possibility and that Apple would bid on the frequencies made available when HD went prime time leaving the old TV bands up for grabs.
- AT&T?
_ Adobe
- Developers & make some kick-ass software
- Dell (get rid of them once and for-all.
I agree with those who say - they will likely buy companies that will help lower their bottom line or companies that are just a bit of a pain in the ass to have around.
Skip
Why does everyone think they need to buy a huge company to spend some of that money?
Why not start building? They just spent $1B on that data center in North Carolina. I could see Apple spending a few billion on a chip foundry and manufacturing their own silicon like the A4.
That scenario would far better fit Steve's MO to date.
Plus they're not really in the social networking business, and I bet Facebook in a few years could look a lot like AOL after Time Warner got stuck with it. Facebook will become old hat and less fashionable than it is now, and when it's not cool it's powers will fade.
FB has an enormous amount of potential but nobody has really figured out how to tap those reserves... and I certainly don't have the answer.
A few big companies have limped in but nobody has placed a value bet.
Buy the Beatles music rights! I don't know why, buy do it, get them on itunes on let's get on with it.
- AT&T?
_ Adobe
- Developers & make some kick-ass software
- Dell (get rid of them once and for-all.
I agree with those who say - they will likely buy companies that will help lower their bottom line or companies that are just a bit of a pain in the ass to have around.
Skip
Yes DELL ... just give to the shareholders their money back
... Apart from the struggle over Flash I don't see why they would want to or need to get stuck in that tarbaby unless to make my life easier out of charity.
While not originally anything to do with racism, the word "tarbaby" has a lot of bad racial overtones in large parts of the USA. Just sayin.
... It would be easier to build their own stuff that covers a lot of the Adobe bases with it - like a more fully-feaured iWeb or something, or add stuff to Aperture that you can draw with - and give it to us cheap. That would help squeeze Adobe in the Flash wars but it's more direct to fight Flash by making deals and encouraging HTML5 adoption..
...
The problem I have is that if we are honest (and I know I will get pilloried for even saying this out loud), Apple is really not that good at application software. They've had some hits but they've had a lot of misses as well. Apple makes excellent OS level software, but once you get into the apps, they are not really that good.
Apple would do better to get companies interested in making application software for the Mac that works well and is better suited to the Mac than buying Adobe and trying to do it all themselves. They already make all the iLife software themselves, and all the iWork software as well. If they made all the pro level creative software, there wouldn't be a reason for anyone to make software for them at all.
FB has an enormous amount of potential but nobody has really figured out how to tap those reserves... and I certainly don't have the answer.
A few big companies have limped in but nobody has placed a value bet.
It's back to iTunes if there is any truth. I can't see any other use except for an expanded iTunes market and as i already said a decent interface for FB with Apple at the helm. It's a stretch though. More likely Steve is trying to get some mutually beneficial agreement. But these are strange times ...
A company like Facebook would add too much good will and intangible to its balance sheet. There is no synergy with Apple. Anyway, if Apple wants a website like Facebook, why not build its own and a better one? Sounds ridiculous paying $Bs for something that has minimal assets, and questionable economics.
Too much money gives anybody hubris. Apple has avoided that... just hope it does not change.
Remember Steve's feelings when he closed the printer and camera divisions at Apple when he returned a iCEO. Why make something many others make and most better? Steve only does magic remember nothing mundane
yes but apple can take the "mundane" and make it "magical." Remember, they weren't the first mp3 player, or first smartphone, or first tablet computer. They cut the cameras and printers because they were just like the rest. If Apple makes a TV, it will only be because they feel its better than all other TVs on the market.
Facebook would seem to be a strange buy to me. Social network users are incredibly flickle, and I think Facebook is a short term thing. MySpace seemed worth paying a lot of money for to News International a couple of years ago, then everyone moved to Facebook and it seemed like a lousy buy.
I could see the same happening to Facebook.
Facebook may be the next MySpace, but even if that's true, it's an exaggeration to think that it "only has a couple of years." For starters, MySpace hasn't been cool for at least ten years, but it's still hanging around and still has tons of users.
Secondly, MySpace exploded when the average Schmo discovered the Internet and road the wave of consumer desktop expansion. Facebook started on the desktop but is basically riding the new mobile platform expansion. It will be at least ten years before anything comes along to even challenge it, possibly a lot longer.
While not originally anything to do with racism, the word "tarbaby" has a lot of bad racial overtones in large parts of the USA. Just sayin.
Woop. My bad. Sorry.
It always struck me as a brilliant metaphor for getting stuck worse and worse in something you should have just not gotten involved in in the first place.
How about buying Apple someof its own stock....especially on a pullback?.
This is what people don't understand - Apple is already serving its shareholders VERY well as measured by stock price. They don't need to artificially boost stock price by repurchasing shares. Shares outstanding is already under a billion - look at MSFT - they have WAYYYY more shares outstanding. Apple's is low enough as it is.
As long as the price keeps rising, there's not gonna be any legitimate pressure to repurchase or pay a dividend. Not that apple would listen, anyway, lol.
How about - pay a dividend.
is the stock not rising fast enough to meet investor's expectations? Dividends are for cash-cow companies lacking growth potential. Case in point - Microsoft.
yes but apple can take the "mundane" and make it "magical." Remember, they weren't the first mp3 player, or first smartphone, or first tablet computer. They cut the cameras and printers because they were just like the rest. If Apple makes a TV, it will only be because they feel its better than all other TVs on the market.
Which was what my first sentence said (that you didn't quote). "I wondered about this too. However, if Apple does TV then it will not be like any TV we have ever seen. That is for sure."
is the stock not rising fast enough to meet investor's expectations? Dividends are for cash-cow companies lacking growth potential. Case in point - Microsoft.
I agree. However much I'd love a revenue stream I'd rather Apple stayed very healthy for the long haul.
Woop. My bad. Sorry.
It always struck me as a brilliant metaphor for getting stuck worse and worse in something you should have just not gotten involved in in the first place.
And it should still be read that way still IMHO. Sometimes political correctness goes overboard. If tar happened to be green there would be no such issue. The fact is you are correct it is a brilliant metaphor and a great story.