or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › Steve Jobs: Apple will use $51B for big moves, not 'stupid' ones
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Steve Jobs: Apple will use $51B for big moves, not 'stupid' ones - Page 3

post #81 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerryb View Post

The last time Apple made a big purchase like these investors are suggesting brought Steve Jobs back to Apple along with the brilliant crew of Next. Since then purchases have been a small chip maker here, a specialized software company there, the jukebox company which iTunes is based on (sorry the name escapes me) none of which are household names.
Apple doesn't seem to subscribe to the mentality of companies like, Microsoft-Yahoo, HP-Palm, Time Warner-AOL, etc... who's mergers or acquisitions have not proven to be great successes. Rumors and suggestions that Apple buy Adobe would benefit nobody but Adobe stock holders. Apple seems to look for technologies that have something new and exciting to offer allowing Apple to realize a product fully. Buying a large expensive company like Facebook (which may have peaked in popularity by now) is not how Apple does business. Why buy when you can license or make a deal to integrate a technology that seems timely giving you a way to drop it when the world has moved on.

Good post.

A big acquisition would say a lot about where Apple wants to go.

There are a lot of reasons Apple might acquire a company:

* Acquiring suppliers to improve its supply chain and margins. I can't see Apple trying to buy Foxconn, Toshiba, etc., to shave a few percentage points down on tear-down costs. Apple already has great bargaining power with its suppliers.

* Taking out a competitor. Computers? No. iPhone? No. Software and OS? No. I'm not sure who Apple could buy that would improve their market share in any market that wouldn't run afoul of DOJ, FTC and European regulators.

* Improving access to content and distribution. I could see Apple buying a studio (Sony, CBS) to improve its access to content, buying a local cable provider (Comcast, Charter, TWC) to get better access to the living room, buying Netflix for its delivery patents or Tivo for its DVR patents (though neither of those would be a major acquisition).

Personally, I would like to see Apple buy a major publication or publishing group like the New York Times or Conde Nast and remake the news and magazine businesses for the iPad age.

I can't help but think that the planned acquisition has something to do with streaming content out of that giant server farm that Apple is building in North Carolina.
post #82 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

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.

The world can do with less faux indignation. The tarbaby has nothing to do with racism except be conveniently used politically against some candidates by opportunistic political enemies.

Simply it's a story of stupidity and counter-stupidity illustrating the need to think before you act in a way that's detrimental to your ends.
.
Reply
.
Reply
post #83 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarenDino View Post

Buy ADOBE !!!!

I am with you.
As a creative professional, I would love to see Apple taking over and finish this whole drama between the two companies. The last thing I want is Adobe dropping the Mac platform because this bickering.
MacPro 12 core
30" & 23" Apple Cinema HD Displays
PowerBook G4 550, MacBook Pro 2.2
Ipod 1G and 5G, Shuffle 2G, iPhone 3G
Reply
MacPro 12 core
30" & 23" Apple Cinema HD Displays
PowerBook G4 550, MacBook Pro 2.2
Ipod 1G and 5G, Shuffle 2G, iPhone 3G
Reply
post #84 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe hs View Post

Buy Microsoft.

This. Then stop licensing Windows. Mwa-ha-ha-ha-ha!

OK, just kiddin'. Buy Verizon.
post #85 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjtomlin View Post

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.

I just can't see this. Apple realistically know nothing about chip manufacturing, and it would cost them a fortune to develop the skills. Building a fab for an established company is a $4bn investment, and having to poach staff to get them started would cost even more than that.

All that to get something that you can buy spectacularly cheaply made somewhere else. The margins the likes of Samsungs foundry division and TSMC make are absolutely tiny. It's highly unlikely Apple would be able to do it much cheaper themselves and TSMC, and increasingly Samsung, are incredibly good at what they do.
post #86 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchell_pgh View Post

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.

Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign, Acrobat and After Effects (way better than Motion IMO). The other software Apple is better.
MacPro 12 core
30" & 23" Apple Cinema HD Displays
PowerBook G4 550, MacBook Pro 2.2
Ipod 1G and 5G, Shuffle 2G, iPhone 3G
Reply
MacPro 12 core
30" & 23" Apple Cinema HD Displays
PowerBook G4 550, MacBook Pro 2.2
Ipod 1G and 5G, Shuffle 2G, iPhone 3G
Reply
post #87 of 193
I've seen a lot of names being brandied about for acquisition targets but Jobs never said the word "acquisition" specifically. Apple has a very unique culture and ways of doing things and a large existing company would be very difficult to assimilate. I'm sure that's why Apple's been more focused on small companies with IP's, engineering talent, and niche expertise that they could absorb and fit in to what Apple is doing. "Strategic opportunities" may just be more capital investment in their own manufacturing or helping out in building out an infrastructure in the wireless communications field, etc.

I just can't imagine any large acquisition really helping out Apple in any discernible manner. A big acquisition means that Apple would also be taking on their bloat, headaches, and all sorts of inefficiencies that Apple would have to shed or clean up besides taking in whatever useful assets the acquired company may have. On top of that, even what looks good on paper as a good fit doesn't mean things will actually mesh in reality. A good acquisition has to be more about synergy and the whole greater being than the sum of multiple parts from two or more companies.

In regards to potential acquisitions, I've seen a lot of names being brandied about: Facebook, Sony, Nintendo, Adobe, Netflix, Hulu, Zygan, ARM and even Foxconn itself for complete manufacturing control, which is an interesting idea. Some have suggested that it may be a major studio, a cable company, a wireless carrier, etc. To me, Facebook just doesn't seem like a good fit and they'd be ridiculously expensive to acquire with no real ROI to speak of in the foreseeable future. Sony? Sony is not a very profitable company (and a very bloated one) and I'm not sure Apple just wants to put their logo on low-margin products like cameras, TV's, PSP's, home entertainment peripherals, and other toy gadgets.

Adobe? Apple is now competing with them on multiple fronts. Adobe is like Microsoft, i.e, a dinosaur with monolithic bloated PC apps when things are all going mobile. Nintendo? Apple is already making inroads in the gaming market without the costly consoles and all the development efforts that go into one and supporting its even more closed and narrow ecosystem. Netflix? Hulu? Yeah, they could add some value to iTunes and ATV, but Apple hardly needs to pay a premium for what they offer.

ARM is interesting but Apple would then compete head-to-head with Intel and other chip suppliers... Not sure Apple being its own ISP and competing with other cable, carrier, and ISP companies really makes sense... Don't think Apple wants to compete with AT&T and Verizon by snatching up someone like Sprint... Major network? Then Apple would have to compete with all the other networks that they're trying to convince to join in for Apple TV. An outright acquisition of Foxconn would have major political implications in the US when the country has 10% unemployment and there's a very negative view and growing weariness of China. Something like that would not go over well at all with the American public - employing 1 million Chinese workers of a country that many Americans consider to be a growing menace.

I can see Apple investing in a lot of the aforementioned companies and developing alliances to get some say on the development of new technologies, manufacturing, gaining access to key content, and building out the communications infrastructure, etc. but total control over something as broad as these fields would slow Apple down more than speed things up. The key to Apple's success has been razor sharp focus on what Apple is good at and Apple cannot afford to spread themselves too thin and lose that focus.
post #88 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerryb View Post

The last time Apple made a big purchase like these investors are suggesting brought Steve Jobs back to Apple along with the brilliant crew of Next. Since then purchases have been a small chip maker here, a specialized software company there, the jukebox company which iTunes is based on (sorry the name escapes me) none of which are household names.
Apple doesn't seem to subscribe to the mentality of companies like, Microsoft-Yahoo, HP-Palm, Time Warner-AOL, etc... who's mergers or acquisitions have not proven to be great successes. Rumors and suggestions that Apple buy Adobe would benefit nobody but Adobe stock holders. Apple seems to look for technologies that have something new and exciting to offer allowing Apple to realize a product fully. Buying a large expensive company like Facebook (which may have peaked in popularity by now) is not how Apple does business. Why buy when you can license or make a deal to integrate a technology that seems timely giving you a way to drop it when the world has moved on.

Bingo, you get it. Big mergers are rarely as successful in reality as they looked to be on paper, and often enough, they are huge failures that cost time, money and opportunity. Be careful what you wish for.

As for the Adobe acquisition fans, please have a look at their financials. Please? Tell us if they really look good -- before you suggest that Apple marry a boat anchor.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #89 of 193
Apple is not gonna buy Facebook. That would just be silly. I've always thought that Apple should buy Wacom, and use their technology to build easel-style pro Mac systems for illustrators, designers and artists. While I love Wacom tabletsI've owned a few over the yearsthe interface is fundamentally counterintuitive: unless you own a Cintiq, you are forced to draw on one surface, while looking at another. Painters paint with their canvas on an easel, designers work on drafting tables. With all this talk on these forums about touch-screen Macs, I say throw in a stylus, and there's something to be considered seriously.
"Don't be a dick!"Wil Wheaton
Reply
"Don't be a dick!"Wil Wheaton
Reply
post #90 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexkhan2000 View Post

I've seen a lot of names being brandied about for acquisition targets but Jobs never said the word "acquisition" specifically. Apple has a very unique culture and ways of doing things and a large existing company would be very difficult to assimilate. I'm sure that's why Apple's been more focused on small companies with IP's, engineering talent, and niche expertise that they could absorb and fit in to what Apple is doing. "Strategic opportunities" may just be more capital investment in their own manufacturing or helping out in building out an infrastructure in the wireless communications field, etc.

This is a very thoughtful and complete post on this subject. You've saved me a whole lot of typing!
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #91 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Totally correct: "The name Trinitron was derived from trinity, meaning the union of three, and tron from electron tube, after the way that the Trinitron combined the three separate electron guns of other CRT designs into one."

My first ever TV (That I bought) was a 13" Trinitron in a wood cabinet with a dish type antenna. I loved it to bits even if I did have to sit really close

my 17" trinitron monitor was like having a small refrigerator on my desk...but is was so "beautiful" compared to the 13" and 15" monitors of the day!

Best
post #92 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Ok, you convinced me ... Buy Adobe

Not saying they should. Just that there is a lot more to Adobe than Photoshop and Illustrator. Personally I would prefer they just make up.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #93 of 193
I recommend they buy DropBox! How expensive could that be? They could buy it and still have $51 Billion left over. They could buy it for a day's interest on $51 Billion!

Best
post #94 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by nyctree View Post

Buy Land
Build 21st Century Factory
Make Apple "Made in USA"
in 20 years, every other consumer electronics co. will come begging for apple to make their products

This is an interesting thought. One of the few.....
post #95 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by noirdesir View Post

You people you should think outside the box, let them buy ... a country.
Maybe the Cayman Islands would fit the bill.

Pitcairn Island!
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
post #96 of 193
Network company: is this part of the private terms of the deal with ATT? Verizon would be kickass just in time for LTE.

Facebook makes TONS of sense. TONS! There really should only be one social network, like one phonebook (it IS the new phonebook, btw). Imagine seamless, always-current contact information. Your contacts update it for you and give you permission to see it! You never have to update your addressbook, it's just a view into FB.

Think of battling google here. FB is EXACTLY the right delivery system for an alternative ad platform. Google would own random web searches (recall that wired article where the web is dying but the private app-based internet blooms?) and Apple would own the channelled app-based internet experience like publishing, music, social networking, etc. Guys, this is EXACTLY the right move to oppose Google!
iAd is powered by FB
Addressbook powered by FB
Tight integration between iTunes and FB

Just buy 20% of both Verizon and FB and that should do it
post #97 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

This is an interesting thought. One of the few.....

Most are being funny
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
post #98 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by julesburt View Post

I've put this question out there many times and never had a response (from someone who knows such stuff)...

But isn't it possible assuming Apple's worth say 300 Billion presently...that if the market should take a silly 6-18 month nose dive (not sure it would)...say to half it's value...then Apple's at 150B...then couldn't Steve/Apple potentially borrow 100B based on cash-flow levels and cash in hand and actually buy Apple back from the shareholders?

My internet prediction is that's what Steve is waiting for!

Sure, anything is possible. But what makes you think that Jobs is stupid enough to try and predict -- and bet $51B on -- stock market movements!?
post #99 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Most are being funny

I know. But I thought I should recognize an interesting one!
post #100 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiro View Post

The world can do with less faux indignation. The tarbaby has nothing to do with racism except be conveniently used politically against some candidates by opportunistic political enemies.

Simply it's a story of stupidity and counter-stupidity illustrating the need to think before you act in a way that's detrimental to your ends.

Exactly.
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
post #101 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

I know. But I thought I should recognize an interesting one!

True. And by the way ... I'd love to see manufacturing here in the US again for sure, even if mostly done by robots. At least we'd have made in the USA back on the boxes!
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
post #102 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by addicted44 View Post


I have, for example, almost completely stopped using FB. Yet, I keep a profile available, because its the best (often only) way to keep in touch with distant friends and family. The only time I log on is when I get a message, and want to reply. Despite disliking facebook tremendously, its really unlikely I will ever delete my profile (worst case, i use it only to get people's numbers, etc).

The questions is, what constitutes 'stopped using'?
When you want to deactivate your account, you first get the most shameless passive aggressive crap you've ever seen ("but your friends will MISS you!!"), and then if you log in again, your account gets completely re-activated.
At least that's how it was until recently. Doubt that its changed much.
post #103 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

True. And by the way ... I'd love to see manufacturing here in the US again for sure, even if mostly done by robots. At least we'd have made in the USA back on the boxes!

I did not agree with this view at all. Indeed, I thought that it was a very Luddite point of view.

But I am reconsidering my long-held views on this issue.

My concern, believe it or not, would be related to quality and precision, not cost.
post #104 of 193
To even suggest that Steve Jobs ever entertained acquisition of Facebook is preposterous -- no matter how relevant Facebook is to the ecosystem carefully developed and nurtured by Apple.

Very close collaboration is one thing. In fact, while Apple fans and Apple haters seem to have "black and white" concept of alliance", Steve Jobs never thought that way. He respected Bill Gates, and collaborated with him when it suited the development of the long term ecosystem, he had in mind.

First, there is the "projected market capitalization" of Facebook. The cash reserve of Apple would not be enough. Apple has into go into debt to acquire Facebook. A move that Steve Jobs is not likely to do, considering the history of Apple, once at the brink of bankruptcy ca 1997. That was a very traumatic experience for Steve Jobs, he has to make a deal with Bill Gates and sacrificed a lot in terms of intellectual property shared with Miscrosoft. I doubt Steve Jobs would have ever done such a deal had Apple been in better shape when he came back to Apple. It is likely that he might not even have sold its Apple ARM shares were it not for the need for cash. There are many other things that Steve Jobs had to let go, at the time.

The "cash horde" predisposition might be a consequence of that situation of Apple around 1997. I believe, since then Apple has strived to have no debt and started building its cash reserve.

Second. Social sites are not very stable. One classic example is Geocities -- acquired by Yahoo for more than $4 billion dollars during the height of the internet mania in late 1990's. Considering how young Facebook is, it is already involved in many very controversial issues -- privacy issues, harboring of pedophiles, all the sex scandals, the theft of personal information, etc. Aoart from this, there is no assurance that the taste of the incoming generation of youth wuold be the same as the Facebook culture. This happened with MySpace which actually too the ascendance from yet another social group.

Third. Steve Jobs had a chance to acquire other companies, that would have been perfect fit for Apple also -- movie companies with vast library of films, television media, etc.; or music labels, but Steve Jobs did not acquire them for one reason or another.

Steve Jobs did sell Pixar to Disney, and became the largest stockholder of Disney. It gained access to all the properties of Disney that is part of the backbone of the iTunes movie and tv materials. He was able to achieve this, without Disney getting a bite of Apple. In that merger acquisition, Pixar did not have the same scope and potential as Steve Jobs envisioned Apple since he came back in 1997.

Also, if Apple will acquire Facebook, the founder of Facebook will become a major stockholder of Apple. From what I read about him, it would not be a cultural fit with Steve Jobs. He is also young and has the ego (perhaos more) than the Steve Jobs before 1985.

There are also the venture capital investors of Facebook that would require not 10x return on their investments, but hundred fold or even thousand fold return in their investment. This is part of the bloat in the projected value of Facebook.

Apple has been very selective in the companies it acquired, indeed also perfect fit and sometime core in the technologies being developed by Apple. They are usually small.

Finally. Many forget that Apple enters into log term deals with its suppliers; and in large quantities. The large screen monitor deal with LG alone was $500 million, and they are not even fully utilized in the products of Apple. If you consider all the parts that go into the iPhone, iPad, iPod touch, and Macs-- even at iSupply estimates -- would total tens of billions of dollars in a 5-year long term deals.

CGC
post #105 of 193
Buy Barnes & Noble. Seriously.

It'd give Apple the badly needed space (and large space) in prime retail locations.

And it'd be a good "put up" of Steve's vision to replace books with iPads.
post #106 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post

Perfectly sensible name if you ask me. Most CRT tubes have an elecTRON gun. Sony came up with a CRT that used three instead of one. TRI means three so TRIniTRON makes perfect sense

And don't forget the virtual people racing their bikes inside.
post #107 of 193
Remember eWorld? Good. Neither does anyone else.

Apple isn't getting into social networking (again). MS can chase that fool's gold.
post #108 of 193
There is no advantage to fb. what do you get?

Akamei will be bought. And other small companies: software side - the dropbox guys would be a good fit, and some smaller streaming service ( possibly even spotify): hardware side - chip side manufacturing and anything that buys IP.

They are not going to be or buy carriers.
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #109 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Pitcairn Island!

Sure, but does Steve even own a white cat?
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #110 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarenDino View Post

Buy ADOBE !!!!

I think at one point that was going to happen. It seems though that Apple's internal strategists have decided that Adobe will die off by itself... or at least is on such a decline that it would be wiser to buy later.

The tech world would cry foul at this point anyway if Apple bought them.

I always thought it would be interesting for Apple to buy a controlling interest in Tine Warner after the NBC merger happens. They might just do that.

Personally I see them continuing to buy up alot of the small innovative companies out there.
post #111 of 193
Maybe they should buy ARM Holdings and Imagination Technologies.

That would send the competition into a tizzy.

post #112 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by Porchland View Post

* Improving access to content and distribution. I could see Apple buying a studio (Sony, CBS) to improve its access to content, buying a local cable provider (Comcast, Charter, TWC) to get better access to the living room, buying Netflix for its delivery patents or Tivo for its DVR patents (though neither of those would be a major acquisition).


"Improving access" by killing Blu-ray and making movies and shows available only through iTunes?
post #113 of 193
nvidia might have enough interesting IP to acquire...

One interesting thought is that it might resolve the dispute with Intel allowing Apple to move forward with decent nvidia based integrated GPUs so long as the Dells and HPs of the world are stuck with Intel IGPs. My thought is that Intel probably still wants Apple as an intel exclusive enough to allow this and it eliminates nvidia as a long term problem without worrying about looking like or being a bully.
post #114 of 193
I would like to see this one but, I don't think so. It's a too much larger company, a lot of things to deal with, too much work for Jobs, too much distraction for Apple, and finally that could be a big disaster. But I really like the idea

I think it's about time that Apple releases its own Creative Suite and release Mac users of Adobe's dependence. Buy Pixelmator, a very promising product and very Appleish one too, and start from there.

Then buy Vector Designer and lineform and convert them in Canvas or something like that that could create Web designs too. After that buy MacRabbit with Espresso, CSSEdit, and Panic, Inc. with Coda and Transmit and create the best apps for Web Development, including an easy animator that converts animations in JavaScript to kill Flash FOR-E-VER.

Finally Buy QuarkExpress and re-create it and re-launch it and you are done.

At last, group all that in a suite and call it: iDesign or iDo, or something we like to hear.

And the price? $299.

After that Adobe should die in 5 to 8 years, and Microsoft will be creating apps for Macs and iOS, 'cause there's where they belong.
lvidal.-
Reply
lvidal.-
Reply
post #115 of 193
What's scary about the modern Apple to its competitors is that Apple made nearly as much in profit for FY2010 ($14b) as they did in revenue for all of FY2005. That's serious growth and Apple now has serious power.

Wall Street really wants Apple to do something with the money which is currently earning <1%. I can't say I blame them, but it's not like Apple hasn't made them all rich in the last decade. If you drop a multi-billion investment on something, you want it to really pay off. Ironically, the largest single investment that Apple ever did in an acquisition paid off ridiculously....buying NeXT in 1996 and casting the die for what came after. $400 million turned into $300 billion in future company value in just 15 years. In the end, it was the smartest thing that Dr. Gil Amelio and the Apple board at that time ever did, even if Steve took over and fired them all. These days Apple spends more money prepaying for Flash memory, LCD screens and building data centers (and doesn't miss the money). Very different times.

Clearly nothing Apple could do now will get that kind of growth...but what could they buy that would see multiples? Who has something that Apple truly wants? A tech company? Software? Content? Remember back in the middle of the last decade when Apple nearly bought Universal Music? Back then they would have had to spend every last dollar on that deal (which would have been a disaster anyway). These days, they could buy them easily in cash...but why buy a flagging business?
post #116 of 193
While these suggestions seem to have all sorts of ideas for money we don't actually have any control or responsibility for, I vote for:
A) Verizon or equal ( get control of a wireless carrier)
B) Comcast or equal ( get control of a broadcast entity)
C) Create or take over the next generation internet infrastructure , internet 2 or whatever.

Bottom line, don't by a company, as so much as an infrastructure with a future.

Just a thought.
post #117 of 193
He did not say Apple was going to use $51 Billion to make smart buys. That is a brain dead head line.

He said there are a few prospects that Apple are following.
post #118 of 193
Their work on unreal engine for iOS looks really promising. Apple could use the expertise of their engineers to develop some really top notch APIs for iOS and OSX. I think Epic Games or some other company with a top notch gaming engine would make a lot of sense for an acquisition.
post #119 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgc0202 View Post

To even suggest that Steve Jobs ever entertained acquisition of Facebook is preposterous -- no matter how relevant Facebook is to the ecosystem carefully developed and nurtured by Apple.

Very close collaboration is one thing. In fact, while Apple fans and Apple haters seem to have "black and white" concept of alliance", Steve Jobs never thought that way. He respected Bill Gates, and collaborated with him when it suited the development of the long term ecosystem, he had in mind.

First, there is the "projected market capitalization" of Facebook. The cash reserve of Apple would not be enough. Apple has into go into debt to acquire Facebook. A move that Steve Jobs is not likely to do, considering the history of Apple, once at the brink of bankruptcy ca 1997. That was a very traumatic experience for Steve Jobs, he has to make a deal with Bill Gates and sacrificed a lot in terms of intellectual property shared with Miscrosoft. I doubt Steve Jobs would have ever done such a deal had Apple been in better shape when he came back to Apple. It is likely that he might not even have sold its Apple ARM shares were it not for the need for cash. There are many other things that Steve Jobs had to let go, at the time.

The "cash horde" predisposition might be a consequence of that situation of Apple around 1997. I believe, since then Apple has strived to have no debt and started building its cash reserve.

Second. Social sites are not very stable. One classic example is Geocities -- acquired by Yahoo for more than $4 billion dollars during the height of the internet mania in late 1990's. Considering how young Facebook is, it is already involved in many very controversial issues -- privacy issues, harboring of pedophiles, all the sex scandals, the theft of personal information, etc. Aoart from this, there is no assurance that the taste of the incoming generation of youth wuold be the same as the Facebook culture. This happened with MySpace which actually too the ascendance from yet another social group.

Third. Steve Jobs had a chance to acquire other companies, that would have been perfect fit for Apple also -- movie companies with vast library of films, television media, etc.; or music labels, but Steve Jobs did not acquire them for one reason or another.

Steve Jobs did sell Pixar to Disney, and became the largest stockholder of Disney. It gained access to all the properties of Disney that is part of the backbone of the iTunes movie and tv materials. He was able to achieve this, without Disney getting a bite of Apple. In that merger acquisition, Pixar did not have the same scope and potential as Steve Jobs envisioned Apple since he came back in 1997.

Also, if Apple will acquire Facebook, the founder of Facebook will become a major stockholder of Apple. From what I read about him, it would not be a cultural fit with Steve Jobs. He is also young and has the ego (perhaos more) than the Steve Jobs before 1985.

There are also the venture capital investors of Facebook that would require not 10x return on their investments, but hundred fold or even thousand fold return in their investment. This is part of the bloat in the projected value of Facebook.

Apple has been very selective in the companies it acquired, indeed also perfect fit and sometime core in the technologies being developed by Apple. They are usually small.

Finally. Many forget that Apple enters into log term deals with its suppliers; and in large quantities. The large screen monitor deal with LG alone was $500 million, and they are not even fully utilized in the products of Apple. If you consider all the parts that go into the iPhone, iPad, iPod touch, and Macs-- even at iSupply estimates -- would total tens of billions of dollars in a 5-year long term deals.

CGC

This is probably the best explanation of why Apple shouldn't go after social sites like Facebook. It sounds fun for bloggers to speculate on but makes no sense to Apple, its board or investors. AOL looked like at one point (1995) that it would own the Internet and outlive Apple. Fast forward 15 years and AOL is a shadow of its former self, a victim of its own outdated business model (it is trying to change by buying into the blogging world). Geocities is dead, having been overpaid for by Yahoo. And Yahoo of course still generate cash but they are fighting for their long term survival by possible talking about teaming up with AOL of all people. My how times change.

You mention Apple's long term deal with suppliers. This is one of the reasons why Apple can achieve economies of scale that nobody else can do. If you look at their competitors in the smartphone space like Motorola or HTC, neither company can buy bulk quantities of components at Apple's prices. Then Apple sells iPhones at what everyone else is doing and people wonder why their margins are so good. Or in the case of the iPad, they just price it really aggressively to crowd out any other early entries to the market. Everybody had to step back and rethink how they were going to compete at $499. Even Steve said so during the concall. In one fell swoop, Apple froze the market by a good 6 months, all because Apple gets flash memory, screens and batteries cheaper than everyone else (along with everything else). Steve Jobs may be the genius visionary, but a much of Apple's supply chain success belongs to COO Tim Cook who may go down as the best ops manager in the history of business.
post #120 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by lvidal View Post

iDo

iLikethename, iDo.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AAPL Investors
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › Steve Jobs: Apple will use $51B for big moves, not 'stupid' ones