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

1235710

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 193
    hirohiro Posts: 2,663member
    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 82 of 193
    gugygugy Posts: 794member
    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.
  • Reply 83 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.
  • Reply 84 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.
  • Reply 85 of 193
    gugygugy Posts: 794member
    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.
  • Reply 86 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.
  • Reply 87 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.
  • Reply 88 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 tablets?I've owned a few over the years?the 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.
  • Reply 89 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!
  • Reply 90 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
  • Reply 91 of 193
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    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.
  • Reply 92 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
  • Reply 93 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.....
  • Reply 94 of 193
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,727member
    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!
  • Reply 95 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
  • Reply 96 of 193
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,727member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


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



    Most are being funny
  • Reply 97 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!?
  • Reply 98 of 193
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


    Most are being funny



    I know. But I thought I should recognize an interesting one!
  • Reply 99 of 193
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,727member
    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.
  • Reply 100 of 193
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,727member
    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!
Sign In or Register to comment.