or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › With more than $70B in cash, Apple could buy Nokia, RIM, HTC & Motorola
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

With more than $70B in cash, Apple could buy Nokia, RIM, HTC & Motorola - Page 7

post #241 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by boeyc15 View Post

Right back at ya.

I'm not the one cherry picking statistics or time frames or rejecting the vast body of economic theory.


Quote:
Originally Posted by boeyc15 View Post

Just curious... What mythical country operates the way you deem fit? Yemen?

This is always the priceless response. Usually it is Somalia. You must have missed the memo.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #242 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by addicted44 View Post

This boat sailed away LONG AGO.

The loss of profits is the least of Apple's concerns in moving jobs back.

The lack of infrastructure, the impossibility of scaling to the extent companies like Foxconn have in less than a decade, and the absolute lack of any institutional knowledge on how to manufacture products like these at the scale the Chinese do is an absolute killer.

What the Chinese firms have is not just cheap labor (initially that was indeed the case) but rather 30+ years of investment in infrastructure (both in terms of the manufacturing facilities themselves, as well as government provided infrastructure, like easy access to plentiful and stable power and water) and over 30 years of experience and knowledge in building products at this scale.

The only way Apple could pull this off is if they created a new product which they KNOW will not sell in the millions (kinda like the iPod Boombox), which they built in the US, and then spent the next 10-15 years trying to expand those facilities (and even then, reaching Foxconn like scales will be close to impossible).

Finally, over those 10-15 years, the Asian markets combined will probably be a much larger market for Apple, merely because of the large number of people there and the growing middle classes in China and India.

That boat has sailed folks. It is literally impossible for Apple to move production back to the US, even if they were willing to lose 10's of billions of dollars on it.

really ???


apple should buy
E.A.




9
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #243 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph L View Post

"Here in the states" we have somewhat more than "absolutely no manufacturing capability". In fact, we have the largest manufacturing economy in the whole entire world. Bigger than China. Bigger than Japan and Germany put together.

If measured in dollars and using official exchange rates perhaps, but not at PPP - which is how most 'real economy' comparisons are done. Then China would be bigger as industry is 46% of their 10 trillion dollar economy, versus around 22% of america's 14 trillion. Still more than Germany+Japan though, so as you say definitely a lot more than 'absolutely nothing'.
post #244 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

If measured in dollars and using official exchange rates perhaps, but not at PPP - which is how most 'real economy' comparisons are done. Then China would be bigger as industry is 46% of their 10 trillion dollar economy, versus around 22% of america's 14 trillion. Still more than Germany+Japan though, so as you say definitely a lot more than 'absolutely nothing'.

Is China that close in GDP? That means sometime this decade China surpasses the US.
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #245 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Riiight. You cherry picked some statistics that you think prove your point but didn't, apparently, note anything unique about the time frames you chose...and then you casually dismissed valuable economic theory and understanding.

There was nothing cherry picked. They were the latest statistics I found and were linked to a wikipedia article which linked to the sources. If you think that there had been a significant increase in living standards since 2004 show those stats.

As for economic theory it shouldn't br mistaken for right wing nut jobbery. The gold standard had been rubbished for decades, the libertarian obsession with the Fed role in printing money is talk show fodder. If Krugman appeared on here you would probably suggest "going back to" economic theory, as if it is all right wing nut jobbery. It isn't and plenty if left leaning economists have Nobel prizes to prove it.


Now give me some time and I'll do what you can't and work out the difference in real wages between 2004 and 2011
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #246 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

All that money yet, they cant build a freaking US production plant to provide jobs to AMERICAN workers.

Shame.

And the new Apple data center in North Carolina isn't creating higher paying jobs here? They could have opened a data center in Bangalore for a shitload less.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #247 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

They already have one - that's where they found the iPhone.


WINNING POST.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #248 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

And the new Apple data center in North Carolina isn't creating higher paying jobs here? They could have opened a data center in Bangalore for a shitload less.

Erm, not really no. Datacentres need to be near to their target markets, Apple will need to have some in the US, some in Europe, some in Asia. Same reason why Google has them spread all over the world.
post #249 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

Erm, not really no. Datacentres need to be near to their target markets, Apple will need to have some in the US, some in Europe, some in Asia. Same reason why Google has them spread all over the world.

And why is that?

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #250 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

I'm not the one cherry picking statistics or time frames or rejecting the vast body of economic theory.

if trickle down economics haven't worked for the past 50 years (and before) why will they work now?

PC means personal computer.  

i have processing issues, mostly trying to get my ideas into speech and text.

if i say something confusing please tell me!

Reply

PC means personal computer.  

i have processing issues, mostly trying to get my ideas into speech and text.

if i say something confusing please tell me!

Reply
post #251 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

And why is that?

Bunch of reasons. Latency goes up with number of hops, transcontinental bandwidth is still relatively expensive compared to domestic/regional and tends to go over a smaller number of heavily used links - so there's a greater chance of a sudden loss. So you site your datacenters close to large traffic areas - and spread around so that you have contingency. They'll have datacenters on both coasts, and I know that iTunes in Europe hits different servers from the US though I'm not sure whether they own a center here in the UK or have something rented.

http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/a...ta-center-faq/

This is true for any firm that runs data-centers. Blizzard cover all their European WoW subscribers with servers in Paris for example.
post #252 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

WINNING POST.

Do I get any credit for the assist?

- Jasen.
post #253 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patranus View Post

... A common mistake by the "progressive" is that the "rich" gets "richer" at the expense of the other classes. This logic is fundamentally flawed. The "rich" create their wealth. ...

A common myth of the right wing. Wealth is accumulated, not created, and it starts very simply by paying workers less for their labor than its value in terms of production. To accept that fact doesn't require any sort of moral judgment, only the recognition of basic economic reality.
post #254 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

A common myth of the right wing. Wealth is accumulated, not created, and it starts very simply by paying workers less for their labor than its value in terms of production. To accept that fact doesn't require any sort of moral judgment, only the recognition of basic economic reality.

Sure they create their wealth. The Rich don't have to pay debts, you see. They hire a fancy lawyer to file "bankruptcy". All while they keep the cars, jets and houses. Rinse and repeat every few years (see Trump, Donald). An ingenious American innovation!
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
post #255 of 281
Now I wonder what their esimated ENTERPRISE VALUE of Apple (mobile) is. Based on this ridiculous logic in the article, my guess is that Samsung may also have enough means to buy the entire industry INCLUDING Apple. A half-baked story, tailor-made for Apple fans, lol.
post #256 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by techno View Post

Or they could manufacture their products in the US and create some jobs.

If you had an atmosphere that supported businesses. Right now all we have is a government that makes companies want to leave.
post #257 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Apple has created plenty of jobs in the US. Most of them are pretty high-paying, high-tech jobs. This fetish over manufacturing jobs baffles me.

Because less people are educated, they are getting lazy and think they deserve a job instead of working for one.
post #258 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

Actually, every successful Apple product creates more jobs overseas than it does in the US. Andy Grove wrote about this 1 year ago and challenged American companies to build in America: http://bit.ly/jB6Sbz

As soon as you get the socialists in government to stop taxiing businesses out of the country I am sure they will.
post #259 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post

In fact one of the biggest reasons for Apple's turnaround was the Tim Cook's decision to get out of manufacturing.

Apple has indeed created many jobs here in the United States although the majority of the growth in headcount these past few years have been in the retail sales division, not in engineering.

A job suited ideally to the uneducated or unwilling.
post #260 of 281
Right on...
post #261 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Apple has created plenty of jobs in the US. Most of them are pretty high-paying, high-tech jobs. This fetish over manufacturing jobs baffles me.

Silicon Valley high tech only provides several hundred thousand jobs... manufacturing has a much bigger multiplier...

But I guess for you all that counts are the digeratti elite... let those with less skills eat cake

back at you
post #262 of 281
There are many suggestions posted about which companies Apple should buy, but frankly, most of those companies do not bring any "forward" thinking into Apples's camp. Apple is now a mobile company. The iPhone and iPad are the big money makers now, and I'm sure Apple has more magical things in the pipeline that will also be mobile. iCloud is allowing our devices to sync pretty much anywhere in the world. The only problem is that the iDevices need to connect by either wifi or a cellular carrier. Now, if Apple owned or partnered with Hughes, Onstar, or another satellite company, Apple would no longer be tethered to carriers. Imagine using your iPad on a cruise ship, without having to pay pricey wifi fees, or taking your iDevice anywhere in the world without any roaming charges, or expensive data plans. I bet that once the satellite radio technology gets better, cheaper and has lower power consumption, Apple will dump the phone carriers and move in that direction.
post #263 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by djmikeo View Post

Now, if Apple owned or partnered with Hughes, Onstar, or another satellite company, Apple would no longer be tethered to carriers. Imagine using your iPad on a cruise ship, without having to pay pricey wifi fees, or taking your iDevice anywhere in the world without any roaming charges, or expensive data plans.


Erm - no. Satellite bandwidth will is and will remain more expensive than cellular bandwidth, because adding more capacity entails launching expensive kit into the heavens and not just building cheap cellular towers. The reason that cruise ship wifi charges are so high is that they're using satellite!

Sat phones are a great solution if you have to go out onto the ocean, or into other remote places that have no reliable cellular cover, but they won't be a replacement for cellular until somebody builds a space elevator.
post #264 of 281
Buy Microsoft

Now wouldn't that be the ultimate last laugh?
post #265 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary54 View Post

Buy Microsoft

Now wouldn't that be the ultimate last laugh?

Last I checked, $200 billion is more than $70 billion. And Apple was never in competition with them.

The real "last laugh" would be buying Dell, shutting it down, and giving the money back to the shareholders. Because that's well within Apple's funds to do.

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #266 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Last I checked, $200 billion is more than $70 billion. And Apple was never in competition with them.

The real "last laugh" would be buying Dell, shutting it down, and giving the money back to the shareholders. Because that's well within Apple's funds to do.

200 billion is more than 70 billion. But doesn't mean anything. Buying a company valued at 3 times the amount of cash? Happens all the time.

The Justice Dept wouldn't allow it in any case on monopoly grounds, no more than they would allow M$ buying Apple times past; but it sure makes for an amusing picture

Dell would work too
post #267 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary54 View Post

The Justice Dept wouldn't allow it in any case on monopoly grounds,

They would if Apple promised to float off the OS division as a different company and only keep the Application division. Oh god if they did that they could rebuild IE to use webkit and practically all internet browsers would become standardidzed on the same open-source core.

It would be like 1994 all over again!

Ok - I'll stop dreaming now
post #268 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by REC View Post

Actually the reason why we won't hit the catastrophic scenario is precisely because we are so entangled together. They need us as much as we need them. Globalization of the economy means developed (and developing) nations are far less likely to fight each other. If we go isolationist, as you suggest, it becomes much easier for confrontations to happen.

You mean like how China has cut off Japan's and the US's supply of rare earth metals which are essential to producing high tech electronics. We used to mine those minerals in the US until we decided to let China supply them for us due to environmental concerns. That is just one of many examples that is already becoming an issue.

What do you think will happen when China decides to make good on their threat to reclaim Taiwan or knock out one of our satellites with their crazy space ambitions?

Sure, we have a lot of industrialization but we have lost more than what we have left. It is not about jobs but the ability to defend ourselves. You need high tech electronics, steel, plastics and mining of natural resources and petroleum. All industries that are quite minimized in the US and would take a long time to ramp up to mass production scale. I am not an isolationist but rather a self sufficiency advocate. That is one reason I want to see solar energy technology advanced and also see the US economy return to a more sensible frugal and rational spending model and not based so much on consumerism. Oh, and get all of our troops back on our own soil.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #269 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

What do you think will happen when China decides to make good on their threat to reclaim Taiwan

Then we go to war, our debt to them is instantly annulled, and we win the war. Simple.

Quote:
or knock out one of our satellites with their crazy space ambitions?

Again, war unless it's an accident.

None of this has to do with the thread, though.

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #270 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Then we go to war, our debt to them is instantly annulled, and we win the war. Simple.

None of this has to do with the thread, though.


Of course! What was I thinking? War is always just simple. We can't even win a war against uneducated impoverished tribal fighters with homemade rifles.

And a thread with 7 pages is always going to go off on a tangent but I don't think it is too far off when discussing Apple's possible investments to consider maybe not being so dependent on China.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #271 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by brookst View Post

it's a noble sentiment, but can you walk me through how that would work? Would apple accept a loss on every product sold where now they have a profit, and burn through their cash reserves that way? Or would they raise prices to some kind of breakeven point and lose sales and market share?

It seems like you're basically suggesting that they operate as a charity, accepting losses for social good. If that's what you're after, why all the complexity of moving production and losing money (and tanking the share price)? Why not just suggest they give money away outright?

exactly !
post #272 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radjin View Post

As soon as you get the socialists in government to stop taxiing businesses out of the country I am sure they will.

You have to be joking right? This is the most ridiculous comment I've read on here yet.

Socialists? Where in the world do people get this stuff? Fox news I guess.

You all do realize taxes are the lowest in 60 years right?

Here's a short 2 min video to illustrate what's going on and to show how the rich are now paying the lowest taxes in US history and the middle class is getting screwed. I think lot of people need to see this.

http://www.coffeepartyusa.com/econom...rofile_oneline
post #273 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by IQ78 View Post

exactly !

Exactly what? They have BILLIONS of dollars in cash while the rest the people in this country are loosing their jobs and their houses. Forclosures are going through the roof.

So what exactly are your points?
post #274 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

I'm not the one cherry picking statistics or time frames or rejecting the vast body of economic theory.




This is always the priceless response. Usually it is Somalia. You must have missed the memo.

I don't care what 'points' you seem to think you are illustrating.

The facts are in. The rich have gotten tremendously richer while the middle class has gotten poorer. The rich are paying the lowest taxes ever while millions of people are out of work and are loosing their houses. All while taxes are at the lowest in 60 years, despite whatever GOP lies they are telling.

Your Republicans big business tactacs are done. People aren't falling for this crap anymore.
post #275 of 281
deleted
post #276 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Then we go to war, our debt to them is instantly annulled, and we win the war. Simple.



Again, war unless it's an accident.

None of this has to do with the thread, though.

Well the thread had moved on. The appetite for a war which could go nuclear for a piece of land off China with little value to the US is not entirely proven, and I am less sanguine about the inevitable war. Not that China will invade for a while.

Also one of the things you missed in this thread was China's GDP - more than half the US and growing at 10% a year. It will outpace the US this decade and be about twice as big a decade later, four times as big a decade later, present trends continuing. When America realises it doesnt have to be - and can't be - a world policeman the average citizen in Nebraska will sigh in relief and feel as much responsibility for taiwan as a Brazillian does. Which is none at all: this was, until 1939 the default position of the average US citizen who had to be dragged into European wars.Had to be attacked first.
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #277 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd View Post

Well the thread had moved on. The appetite for a war which could go nuclear for a piece of land off China with little value to the US is not entirely proven, and I am less sanguine about the inevitable war. Not that China will invade for a while.

I actually had this exact argument once with an air force general! Only one star I admit, but beggars can't be choosers. Anyway, the point was made that while America could live without Taiwan, letting China roll over them would make Japan VERY nervous.

But it's really hard to say what the US would do as they have a policy of strategic ambiguity regarding Taiwan.
post #278 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

Actually, every successful Apple product creates more jobs overseas than it does in the US. Andy Grove wrote about this 1 year ago and challenged American companies to build in America: http://bit.ly/jB6Sbz

Ah, those Americans who only like CAPITALISM when it rolls their way. Guess what, what your proposing really looks like SOCIALISM. In a CAPITALIST society, investor run, the company has a duty to make as much money as possible. It HAS to delocalize in order to squeeze out more profit. It's not there to create US jobs, it's there to create US profits, as in "served in Wall Street".

You Americans have been serving that moral at gunpoint for decades. Eat it.

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

Reply
post #279 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoXoM View Post

Buy Spotify and Twitter and be done with it....

...and buy Messi from Barcelona and give him to Man Utd for free!

Who cares about those tennismen, they're overpaid anyway...

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

Reply
post #280 of 281
How about a nice big chunk of China Mobile, coupled with an exclusive contract?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › With more than $70B in cash, Apple could buy Nokia, RIM, HTC & Motorola