Apple doled out more than $3B to over 7,000 US suppliers in 2013

Posted:
in General Discussion edited August 2014
After announcing cooperation with the White House's "SupplierPay" initiative, Apple on Friday released domestic supply chain expenditure figures for the first time, saying it spent more than $3 billion with over 7,000 U.S. suppliers last year.

Mac Pro
Metal Impact, a small Illinois-based company, supplies Apple with aluminum casings for the Mac Pro.


The numbers, along with some backstory on the small company responsible for the Mac Pro's aluminum enclosure, were revealed in a statement provided to TechCrunch following SVP of Operations Jeff Williams' meeting with President Barack Obama over the "SupplierPay" initiative.

"Last year, Apple spent more than $3 billion with over 7,000 suppliers running small and diverse businesses, creating tens of thousands of U.S. jobs," Apple said.

The White House earlier on Friday released a statement of its own announcing the program meant to stimulate small business financing. Highlighted in that report were several case studies, including Apple and Metal Impact, which supplies aluminum enclosures for the Mac Pro.

Describing the Mac Pro, which is the first Apple product to be assembled in the U.S. in more than a decade, the company said it managed to create 18 new jobs at Metal Impact and drove millions of dollars in revenue to the Illinois-based firm.

"The first thing customers notice when they look at a Mac Pro is the revolutionary cylindrical aluminum enclosure which comes from Metal Impact, a small company in Elk Grove Village, Illinois," Apple said in its statement. "Alongside their team we created an entirely new process and supply chain, conducting more than 40 experiments with ten different alloys on multiple aluminum mills."

Aside from tapping Flextronics in Austin, Texas, to assemble the Mac Pro, Apple says it uses "dozens" of component and equipment suppliers from 23 states.

SupplierPay is an offshoot of QuickPay, a government program that requires the federal government to pay small contractors within 15 days of receiving an invoice. Both programs are meant to cut down on loan interest payments, which should ultimately free up capital for reinvestment. The private sector version is backed by 26 companies, including Apple.

"For the larger companies, joining SupplierPay demonstrates a recognition that a healthy supply chain is good for business," the White House said. "For the small business suppliers, benefiting from SupplierPay means having more capital to invest in new opportunities, new equipment, and new hiring."
«1345

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 90
    paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,666member
    Oh no! The White House and by implication, Obama, was mentioned in the article. Now an otherwise positive good news story has turned to shit. Everybody's being taken for a ride! The government is trying to screw you! Don't be fooled¡
  • Reply 2 of 90
    richard getzrichard getz Posts: 1,142member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by paxman View Post



    Oh no! The White House and by implication, Obama, was mentioned in the article. Now an otherwise positive good news story has turned to shit. Everybody's being taken for a ride! The government is trying to screw you! Don't be fooled¡

    I agree that most governments around the world, including this one (America), is trying to 'screw' it's people. That's kinda what the power hungry governments do. 

  • Reply 3 of 90
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,408member
    paxman wrote: »
    Oh no! The White House and by implication, Obama, was mentioned in the article. Now an otherwise positive good news story has turned to shit. Everybody's being taken for a ride! The government is trying to screw you! Don't be fooled¡

    I got the intended sarcasm, but for many of us your comment reads as true.
  • Reply 4 of 90
    drdaviddrdavid Posts: 58member
    I got the intended sarcasm, but for many of us your comment reads as true.

    And that's the problem really. It's a really simple,voluntary, initiative to get some cash flow for some suppliers and it will get some good press for Apple. It will. That such a simple thing could cause people to see a sarcastic rant like paxman gave as something other than gibberish is silly. This is exactly like the republicans in congress. I haven't heard a single credible thing wrong with this program except it will also give Obama some good press. And we sure can't have that now can we?
  • Reply 5 of 90
    y2any2an Posts: 86member
    Doled out? Bad reportage, AI. This was payment for work, not charity. Please end the sensational headlines.
  • Reply 6 of 90
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,254member
    drdavid wrote: »
    And that's the problem really. It's a really simple,voluntary, initiative to get some cash flow for some suppliers and it will get some good press for Apple. It will. That such a simple thing could cause people to see a sarcastic rant like paxman gave as something other than gibberish is silly. This is exactly like the republicans in congress. I haven't heard a single credible thing wrong with this program except it will also give Obama some good press. And we sure can't have that now can we?

    No, sadly we can't as long as so many get all their opinions and talking points from the biased ends of the news media (either end). The total lack of ability to have any intelligent dialog and compromise is a result, IMHO, of the gradual, yet ever increasing polarization of the masses' thinking brought about by media manipulation over the last 20 years. I heard an astounding radio interview the other day when a certain politician stated, 'he would never compromise on any issue whatever it is ... that isn't what he was elected to do.' I rest my case. :no:
  • Reply 7 of 90
    marvfoxmarvfox Posts: 2,275member

    To bad some of that money Apple doled up could have gone to the illegal children coming to the states.

  • Reply 8 of 90
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,254member
    y2an wrote: »
    Doled out? Bad reportage, AI. This was payment for work, not charity. Please end the sensational headlines.

    I could be wrong and I don't know where you are based, but I suspect in the UK you would be correct in that interpretation because of the old germanic verb's use in that context for many years. I suspect Americans simply use it in the older sense meaning to distribute as their usage dates back before the UK use changed to be associated with Government help.

    Many words from the English retain older meanings here in the USA whereas they have morphed into newer meanings in the UK. The US use of the old meanings of 'faucet, spigot and tap' in the relevant contexts as did the English back in the day, being the most obvious I can think of, whereas in the UK that's now gone and 'tap' now fulfills the meaning for faucet, spigot and tap.
  • Reply 9 of 90
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    So Apple did this without a government initiative?
  • Reply 10 of 90
    zoetmbzoetmb Posts: 2,580member

    $3 billion divided by 7000 vendors is only $428,571 average per vendor.  That's not really a lot of money, especially if one considers that the "top" vendors probably got most of the money which means that the bottom 3500 probably got only $100,000-$150,000 worth of business from Apple. 

  • Reply 11 of 90
    zoetmbzoetmb Posts: 2,580member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post



     I heard an astounding radio interview the other day when a certain politician stated, 'he would never compromise on any issue whatever it is ... that isn't what he was elected to do.' I rest my case. image

     

    Seems to me that politicians are elected to accomplish something, not just to pontificate, especially if they're a legislator.  And if you are a legislator and you're unwilling to compromise, it's unlikely that you can get a single bill passed, even in a situation where your own party dominates.   So that's a recipe for doing exactly nothing except for being a loudmouth and "rallying the troops".   And it's our own fault because people don't want their legislators to compromise, but then they also complain that Congress isn't accomplishing anything.   In our macho society, compromise is seen as weakness.    But in a way, it's good, because extremists like the Tea Party would be far more successful nationally if they were willing to compromise.    

     

    What bothers me about such politicians in the House and Senate (as well as citizens in general) is that they don't seem to understand the history of their own country because they don't seen to know that the two chambers were themselves a 1787 compromise between those who wanted representation by population (the larger states) and those who wanted each state to have equal representation (the smaller states).   If it weren't for that compromise, proposed by Connecticut delegate Roger Sherman, the U.S. may have never come into existence as a democracy.         

     

    Obama's approval rating has averaged 48% during his terms in office, which is lower than Nixon or Bush (although Bush had a 71% disapproval rating near the end of this term - Obama's highest disapproval was 55%, in 2011).  But according to Gallup, Congress' approval rating (taken in May) was far lower:   15% approval and 80% disapproval (and it was only 9% approval last November).    That's what the unwillingness to compromise gets you.    And yet, in the upcoming elections, my bet is that more politicians who are unwilling to compromise get elected, especially in the House, but even in the Senate.  

  • Reply 12 of 90
    mike1mike1 Posts: 2,599member



    Bad analysis. Simple math doesn't tell the whole story. For some small suppliers, half a million dollars is a tremendous amount of business and probably was welcome new business allowing them to add an employee or two.

  • Reply 13 of 90
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,408member
    drdavid wrote: »
    And that's the problem really. It's a really simple,voluntary, initiative to get some cash flow for some suppliers and it will get some good press for Apple. It will. That such a simple thing could cause people to see a sarcastic rant like paxman gave as something other than gibberish is silly. This is exactly like the republicans in congress. I haven't heard a single credible thing wrong with this program except it will also give Obama some good press. And we sure can't have that now can we?

    Perhaps I could've been more clear in my comment. His statement seemed like a real opinion because of the dangers this president and Congress have delivered upon our country by actively dismantling our constitutionally protected freedoms and the gross expansion of the powers of the president. There is nothing funny about what's happening in Washington.
  • Reply 14 of 90
    mpantonempantone Posts: 1,530member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by y2an View Post



    Doled out? Bad reportage, AI. This was payment for work, not charity. Please end the sensational headlines.

    Sorry, you are wrong.

     

    AppleInsider is written in American English. Here is the definition of dole (the verb) per the Dictionary application on OS X Mavericks:

     

    "distribute shares of something"

     

    Note that the default dictionary for Macs in the USA is the New Oxford American Dictionary 3rd edition © 2010, 2012 by Oxford University Press. You can see this if you run Dictionary > Preferences ... and are running your Mac as US English as the primary language.

     

    The dictionary definition also shows the noun "dole" itself has a British informal usage of unemployment benefits.

     

    If you do not want to diddle with your Mac's default language settings, you can view the exact same definition right here:

     

    http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/dole?q=dole

     

    You should realize that different words may have different meanings and some connotations present as a noun may not be present in a verb, especially when there are regional colloquialisms involved.

     

    Now if AppleInsider were a British website and written in British English, you would have a case. Here, you do not.

     

    Could AppleInsider have done a better job in writing their headline? Absolutely. Many of their headlines are poorly authored. Clearly, they could have chosen other words that would have eliminated confusion, like replacing "doled out" with "distributed," "dispersed," or "paid."

     

    However, the fact of the matter is you accused them of implying something when you yourself did not bother to look up the definition of the word in question.

  • Reply 15 of 90
    zoetmbzoetmb Posts: 2,580member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mpantone View Post

     

    Sorry, you are wrong.

     

    AppleInsider is written in American English. Here is the definition of dole (the verb) per the Dictionary application on OS X Mavericks:

     

    "distribute shares of something"


    One could argue that "distribute shares" implies that the vendors are sharing a royalty, profit, dividend or stock distribution.   That's clearly not the case here.    They're not sharing anything.   They're getting paid based upon a contracted price and it wasn't as if Apple said that they're going to deal with only X number of vendors, which would also imply a share.    So I have to agree with those who think that "doles" was not the best word to use, although I don't see any need to get upset or defensive about it either way, as you seem to be.   At worst, it was slightly sloppy use of language. 

  • Reply 16 of 90
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mpantone View Post

     

    Sorry, you are wrong.

     

    AppleInsider is written in American English. Here is the definition of dole (the verb) per the Dictionary application on OS X Mavericks:

     

    "distribute shares of something"

     

    Note that the default dictionary for Macs in the USA is the New Oxford American Dictionary 3rd edition © 2010, 2012 by Oxford University Press. You can see this if you run Dictionary > Preferences ... and are running your Mac as US English as the primary language.

     

    The dictionary definition also shows the noun "dole" itself has a British informal usage of unemployment benefits.

     

    If you do not want to diddle with your Mac's default language settings, you can view the exact same definition right here:

     

    http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/dole?q=dole

     

    You should realize that different words may have different meanings and some connotations present as a noun may not be present in a verb, especially when there are regional colloquialisms involved.

     

    Now if AppleInsider were a British website and written in British English, you would have a case. Here, you do not.

     

    Could AppleInsider have done a better job in writing their headline? Absolutely. Many of their headlines are poorly authored. Clearly, they could have chosen other words that would have eliminated confusion, like replacing "doled out" with "distributed," "dispersed," or "paid."

     

    However, the fact of the matter is you accused them of implying something when you yourself did not bother to look up the definition of the word in question.


    true but  the noun version of this 'on the dole' is common lexicon (at least for me.) in this Fox News Hot Word Headline time we live in.

    Like using 'Welfare' instead of 'Aid to Families with Dependent Children' (the official term for it), it holds a certain negative connotation.

    Welfare takes those children out of the picture.

     

    And even the meaning 'distribute shares of something' (profits/fractional sharing of holdings)  doesn't quite jive with "gotten paid for services/goods received"

     

    So, to the letter of the semantics police code, yes, the word 'dole' CAN be used here in the US specific definitions, but in the spirit of conveying meaning appropriate to the action, there are better words than that 'doled out'

     

    'Acquired Goods and Services worth'

    'Paid-out'

    'Spent'

    'disbursed' (2nd meaning, M-W)

    'Injected into the U.S. Economy'

  • Reply 17 of 90
    bigpicsbigpics Posts: 1,397member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by zoetmb View Post

     

    $3 billion divided by 7000 vendors is only $428,571 average per vendor.  That's not really a lot of money, especially if one considers that the "top" vendors probably got most of the money which means that the bottom 3500 probably got only $100,000-$150,000 worth of business from Apple. 


     

    Exactly.  Political/corporate PR and window dressing.  Our gov't.  can claim to be doing something supportive of small business (while their overall policies are doing much more to crush it). 



    And given the "corporatism" and pandering to big contributors rampant in both parties, while the left and right do so in different ways, "the little guys" are still caught in the middle...



    And Apple's experiences - going back to Greenpeace and later the Foxconn worker suicide stories (among many others where Apple gets more negative attention for things done by many companies) have led them to have much more sensitivity to their image.



    I'm not saying they're insincere about this, and think that they really have become interested in environmentalism, working conditions at their suppliers and thinking local, still, there's a PR component and this really is just a drop in the bucket.

     

    Quote:


    Originally Posted by mike1 View Post

     

    Bad analysis. Simple math doesn't tell the whole story. For some small suppliers, half a million dollars is a tremendous amount of business and probably was welcome new business allowing them to add an employee or two.


     

    Nothing inherently wrong about this, and yeah, hopefully some benefit in ways that matter.  And with lots of luck (given all the counter-trends from the same smiling parties), perhaps the "butterfly wing effect" will revive the US SMB tech sector in the areas mostly lost to Asian suppliers.



    Still, just stuff that should have been being done all along without all the chest-pounding and "look how cool we are" bits by both the gov't and participating corps.  

  • Reply 18 of 90
    drdaviddrdavid Posts: 58member
    zoetmb wrote: »
    One could argue that "distribute shares" implies that the vendors are sharing a royalty, profit, dividend or stock distribution.   That's clearly not the case here.    They're not sharing anything.   They're getting paid based upon a contracted price and it wasn't as if Apple said that they're going to deal with only X number of vendors, which would also imply a share.    So I have to agree with those who think that "doles" was not the best word to use, although I don't see any need to get upset or defensive about it either way, as you seem to be.   At worst, it was slightly sloppy use of language. 

    What your inferring isn't implied. The term doled out is common in the US and refers generally to being paid what's due. It has no connotation of government money.
  • Reply 19 of 90
    richard getzrichard getz Posts: 1,142member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post





    No, sadly we can't as long as so many get all their opinions and talking points from the biased ends of the news media (either end). The total lack of ability to have any intelligent dialog and compromise is a result, IMHO, of the gradual, yet ever increasing polarization of the masses' thinking brought about by media manipulation over the last 20 years. I heard an astounding radio interview the other day when a certain politician stated, 'he would never compromise on any issue whatever it is ... that isn't what he was elected to do.' I rest my case. image

     

    I agree until the last statement as some politicians are sent not to compromise, but to block. In some cases this is acceptable on both ends as there are some issues where no compromise exists. 

  • Reply 20 of 90
    mpantonempantone Posts: 1,530member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TheOtherGeoff View Post

     

    So, to the letter of the semantics police code, yes, the word 'dole' CAN be used here in the US specific definitions, but in the spirit of conveying meaning appropriate to the action, there are better words than that 'doled out'


    Let's reiterate that AppleInsider is a US website written in American English

     

    As I mentioned earlier, yes, AI could have chosen different words, resulting in a better headline and less confusing prose. They did not, so we are stuck with poor but correct writing.

     

    Remember, true journalism died in the Nineties.

Sign In or Register to comment.