or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by anantksundaram

I am afraid this post makes no sense. A company can buy when it wants once the repurchase program is in place.
Posted my question before I saw Post #18 above....
Doesn't this violate some/any Olympics rules on corporate sponsorship and/or fair play?!
His much does/did it generate as profits for Apple? I am guessing it's, indeed, trivial.I thought the $840M number was triple damages?.
Potentially dumb move, if true. Screams 'third world market'. While that may be true, the simple fact is, they do not like hearing it. I still do not believe this rumor.
Gee, thanks for enlightening me.
If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, I guess (the lousy) Apple Mail gets it due!
Were it so simple. At the end of the day, the only way to run a value-creating business is to do smart cost-benefit analysis. Anything else is irresponsible. It doesn't take long before a significant chunk of the same consumers to start viewing you as a crook. (Arguably, Microsoft suffered from some of that after their adverse antitrust ruling in the 1990s.)Apple has no business in social activism.
PED's take on this somewhat different: he focuses on the fact that court is leaning in the direction of putting in constraints on Bromwich, and that the odds might be in Apple's favor. http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2014/02/04/apple-cote-bromwich-appeal/ In any event, Apple would be better served by just jettisoning this trivial business. It is a complete distraction. After all, it contributes very little to the bottom line, takes too much of the top management's time,...
You may wish to read more that just AI for news. ;-)
New Posts  All Forums: