or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by island hermit

 1. and 2. What do you think I've been saying? I don't like this deal. $3.2 billion for hardware just to get the streaming service is not in Apple's dna. Selling Beats hardware is not in Apple's dna. This whole deal is not in Apple's dna. Spending $3.2 billion is not in Apple's dna. The whole thing just seems wrong imo.
 1. How many acquisitions has Apple made in the last 3 years of companies that have large profits? 2. As I've said before, it doesn't matter how much it's making, this just isn't in Apple's DNA... imo.
 I for one would have mentioned at least one streaming service as a good acquisition and I'm sure a lot of people would have also added a streaming service to their acquisition list. Beats wouldn't have been one of them because of the added baggage of the hardware... whether it's making big bucks or not.
 I can't help but think of Lenny Bruce.
 Really? I'll need you to interpret this for me then:"Wolf estimates that the iPhone 5s accounted for 71 percent of March quarter sales, while the iPhone 5c took just 4 percent. That means the iPhone 4S would have taken the remaining 25 percent of sales for the three-month span."
 The 5C doesn't even show as one of the top 3 smartphones during January through March 2014.
 I can't tell what is causing the aversion to the 5C, the plastic or the colors... or both.(yes, I know, "if" there is an aversion... but I strongly believe there is) [- that wasn't meant for you RM]
 Sorry, I changed things a bit.
 1. It aint free. 2. I honestly think it would be split 50/50  70/30 in favor of the 4"  5  //  split 95/5 in favor of the 4"  5S 3. If it's a choice between the 4S and the 5C then it would be 40/60 in favor of the 3.5" 4S (sorry... revising numbers to reflect model)
 Yes, this report proves it.  /s (just in case)
New Posts  All Forums: