Apple Pay, the App and iTunes stores aren't hardware. You know I'm right, you just don't like the thought you won't be able to actually buy Apple's next big product.
In my opinion, those exist as a way to get people stuck with the iPhone ecosystem. The initiatives were pursued to add value to buying and using an iPhone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui
Since the demise of Saab, I believe Honda would be the only car company that builds a plane from nose to tail.
I was gonna say Rolls-Royce, but then I remembered they only make plane engines.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui
Apple need to be talking to FIAT!
I had a 1995 Fiat Tipo Sedicivalvole. I believe the Tipo and some other models of the era were built in a completely robot automated factory that only employed three people to oversee things.
One thing supporting this would be the fact that one of Jony Ive's favourite cars happens to be a Fiat.
Have you been to an auto plant recently? In now way shape or form are they inefficient. Just look at Ford, they just spend over $2 billion to retool the factory in Dearborn for the new aluminum body F-150. Apple will have to spend a fortune to turn that land into an auto plant. Apple is a great company, but no way they change the way cars are built.
My comments were more geared toward the inefficiencies related to current automobiles and how archaic they are. Read some of my later posts. Steering wheel, floor pedals, hundreds of pounds of wiring throughout the vehicle. Read my post about how Apple can change all that, and also how they could buy components that are completely assembled and ready to be connected together, Bluetooth control of motors, switches, etc. There are SO many ways Apple can change the way cars are built. 3D printing. Buying modules already containing motors, air bags, etc. Can receive these larger components and assembly could be as simple as they assemble the Mac Pro in the USA. I am just tired of people saying 'but no way they can change the way xxx are built' - I mean, really? Apple has changed SO MANY industries already. The automobile is ripe to improve dramatically. Take away the steering wheel and foot pedals and put in a small, ingenious way to steer and drive a car. Take away the controls and the instrument panel and the radio and the navigation displays and the mirrors and the window controls and the door lock controls and the thousands of feet of wiring associated with all of it, and replace it with an iPad Pro and an iPhone controlling it all. Can't you see the forest for the trees? The legacies of the internal combustion engine and the transmission and the starter and the steering wheel and the foot pedals and the shifter and the instrument cluster are holding GM, Ford, Chrysler, Toyota - all of them back. Apple can see past all of that. But, only if they want to, and I'm not totally convinced they want to yet.
For all we know, Apple has mastered 3D printing of liquid metal parts. There's the Apple Car body in a revolutionary way. Buying modular components that snap together with instantaneous wiring and connections established without wire connections. Vehicles are so much simpler when you replace the stuff that began 130 years ago in the first cars with the latest hardware technology and software.
Apple Pay, the App and iTunes stores aren't hardware. You know I'm right, you just don't like the thought you won't be able to actually buy Apple's next big product.
Apple's revenues from software and services* in the most recent quarter was $5.03B, on aggregate revenues of $49.6B.
I have no idea what you mean about not being "...able to buy Apple's next big product". Did you hit your head today by accident?
**Figures in this statistic include revenue from sales through the iTunes Store, the App Store, the Mac App Store, and the iBookstore, and revenue from sales of AppleCare, licensing and other services. (Source: Apple).
This is the kind of article I prefer to see here. I'd much rather read a good piece of investigative work than one more bit of speculative nonsense from DigiTimes, Gene Munster or Ming-Chi Kuo. In fact, if most of the commonly published analysts were never given a platform to manipulate Apple stock here again, it would be a good decision.
Are you kidding? This is such a bogus article. There is no real investigative work in the article. It is all sensational journalism. A company as secretive (and yes even in Tim's regime), some of the information is very much like Gene Muster's TV
Are you kidding? This is such a bogus article. There is no real investigative work in the article. It is all sensational journalism. A company as secretive (and yes even in Tim's regime), some of the information is very much like Gene Muster's TV
If any complaints are to be made, it would be only that there is a single source (unnamed) for the story, instead of multiple sources. A news organization will typically require at least several sources for fact-checking.
Also, the "40%" number you quote is the gross margin for Apple. Apple's profit margin is closer to 20% (and operating margin is ~28%). People confuse and mis-state these numbers all the time.
May I suggest Jaguar/Land Rover as Apple's potential partner? The company today is not what people think it is. The styling, quality, engineering, and marketing are quite remarkable compared to the JLR of yore.
My take on Jaguar/Rover, or at least the Jaguar part is that they turned their backs on their very rich design heritage and cranked out nondescript everycars that have no personality at all. From the early Jaguars to the XK and XJ lines, you could trace a design theme that is distinctly Jaguar, recognizably British. Then you get the current sedans which have no connection at all to that rich heritage. I guess they decided to stop competing directly with deep-tradition lux-performance marques like BMW and MB and chose to become a European Lexus. Seems that's what sells today to a design aesthetic heavily influenced by iPods and iPhones where everything must be made to look completely new every couple of years or people will assume the underlying tech is obsolete.
This is the kind of article I prefer to see here. I'd much rather read a good piece of investigative work than one more bit of speculative nonsense from DigiTimes, Gene Munster or Ming-Chi Kuo. In fact, if most of the commonly published analysts were never given a platform to manipulate Apple stock here again, it would be a good decision.
This is why I love this site. So wonderful to be able to construct one's own reality (with a group of like-minded people) and live in it. 2020, he we come! :D
What gave Tesla a head start was their ability to buy the mothballed NUMMI factory in California for a song. I don't think there are any more like that available. Starting from scratch in this business won't be easy, especially as Apple has not had a great deal of direct manufacturing experience in the past decade (everything has been outsourced to the Foxconns of the world). Yes, they will most definitely need a partnership.
May I suggest Jaguar/Land Rover as Apple's potential partner? The company today is not what people think it is. The styling, quality, engineering, and marketing are quite remarkable compared to the JLR of yore. (In fact, I am pretty much moving in the direction of a 2016 XF as my next car, although there is some hesitancy because I am not sure if it has CarPlay yet). Moreover, given its relatively small size (~450,000 cars), Apple will perhaps find a more willing and flexible partner in JLR.
I fully agree on the reality part.
Regarding a partner, what about Magna?
Actually, some people around here still have the idea that OEMs engineer and assemble the whole car, and/or engineering it is similar to a computer.
Btw, and as I layer out before, Tesla had a kind of head start using the plant as you said but also Toyota eg and others. Still, they needed 8 years from start to first car. Not talking any profitability here.
And profitability remains the main reason why I am skeptical about them building a full fledged car.
Average 7% margin plus 10 year average age out there in the field does not sound like Apple.
But as I also said before: hey, Apple, surprise me! Just one more time
You're going wireless on the car's central nervous system? Are you nuts?
I didn't say that. Wireless for door locks, window controls, radio, nav, etc. For essential functions it would be drive-by-wire, break-by-wire, etc. Just don't need foot pedals and steering wheels. But I'm sure Apple can come up with a revolutionary way of handling the driving/steering/braking controls. As for other items that are not essential function for driving/steering but very important (i.e. Seat position vs. window controls) there may be wireless as primary control but wired backup, but wired in a way that is not as cumbersome as current cars. Again, has anyone pulled an instrument panel lately?!?!? OMG, the AMOUNT and SIZE of the wiring is astronomical. Apple will find ways around that with back-up capability so as not to lose complete access to all functions. But my key item was removal of legacy automobile items that are essentially worthless now, like steering columns and foot pedals. So much is drive-by-wire anymore that these items add cost and weight and take up a lot of space.
My take on Jaguar/Rover, or at least the Jaguar part is that they turned their backs on their very rich design heritage and cranked out nondescript everycars that have no personality at all. From the early Jaguars to the XK and XJ lines, you could trace a design theme that is distinctly Jaguar, recognizably British. Then you get the current sedans which have no connection at all to that rich heritage. I guess they decided to stop competing directly with deep-tradition lux-performance marques like BMW and MB and chose to become a European Lexus. Seems that's what sells today to a design aesthetic heavily influenced by iPods and iPhones where everything must be made to look completely new every couple of years or people will assume the underlying tech is obsolete.
Possibly the "Ford-ification" phase of Jaguar dulled their design ethics for awhile. The latest XF and XE look terrific IMO.
Also, the "40%" number you quote is the gross margin for Apple. Apple's profit margin is closer to 20% (and operating margin is ~28%). People confuse and mis-state these numbers all the time.
Fair enough- still doesn't seem like a very green pasture to me.
This all feels like a bad idea to me. It's just a gut feeling, but it's such a low margin business,
Not every business needs to be high margin to be successful. The local grocery store is as low margin as any and yet the family that runs it are doing well and have enough money to donate millions regularly to the local catholic school system.
and seems so distant from core competencies and ecosystem market advantages that their computer products benefit from.
It will be most interesting to see where they build their plant. It would be idiotic to build in California but also stupid to try to import the car. There best bet is the south where BMW already has a plant.
I will be the first to celebrate if they prove me wrong, though.
As long as people have reasonable expectations there is a strong possibility of success.
Possibly the "Ford-ification" phase of Jaguar dulled their design ethics for awhile. The latest XF and XE look terrific IMO.
The may look terrific but they don't look like Jaguars. Actually, if they look like anything, they look like early 2000s BMWs with a different grill slapped onto them. The shape of the side glass panel right behind the passenger's door window (how it curves back forward as it veers away from the C-pillar) is a BMW design cue from waaaaay back.
Just sad that the new ownership did not honor Jaguar's rich tradition. Used to be, like BMW and MB, or even Volvo, you could tell a Jag was a Jag without seeing the emblem or logo. You couldn't say that of Lexus, Infinity or Acura. Heck, if MINI was able to keep the Mini DNA, why not Jaguar?
Comments
Since the demise of Saab, I believe Honda would be the only car company that builds a plane from nose to tail.
Actually, Honda has partnered with General Electric in their jet development.
Apple Pay, the App and iTunes stores aren't hardware. You know I'm right, you just don't like the thought you won't be able to actually buy Apple's next big product.
In my opinion, those exist as a way to get people stuck with the iPhone ecosystem. The initiatives were pursued to add value to buying and using an iPhone.
Since the demise of Saab, I believe Honda would be the only car company that builds a plane from nose to tail.
I was gonna say Rolls-Royce, but then I remembered they only make plane engines.
Apple need to be talking to FIAT!
I had a 1995 Fiat Tipo Sedicivalvole. I believe the Tipo and some other models of the era were built in a completely robot automated factory that only employed three people to oversee things.
One thing supporting this would be the fact that one of Jony Ive's favourite cars happens to be a Fiat.
Have you been to an auto plant recently? In now way shape or form are they inefficient. Just look at Ford, they just spend over $2 billion to retool the factory in Dearborn for the new aluminum body F-150. Apple will have to spend a fortune to turn that land into an auto plant. Apple is a great company, but no way they change the way cars are built.
My comments were more geared toward the inefficiencies related to current automobiles and how archaic they are. Read some of my later posts. Steering wheel, floor pedals, hundreds of pounds of wiring throughout the vehicle. Read my post about how Apple can change all that, and also how they could buy components that are completely assembled and ready to be connected together, Bluetooth control of motors, switches, etc. There are SO many ways Apple can change the way cars are built. 3D printing. Buying modules already containing motors, air bags, etc. Can receive these larger components and assembly could be as simple as they assemble the Mac Pro in the USA. I am just tired of people saying 'but no way they can change the way xxx are built' - I mean, really? Apple has changed SO MANY industries already. The automobile is ripe to improve dramatically. Take away the steering wheel and foot pedals and put in a small, ingenious way to steer and drive a car. Take away the controls and the instrument panel and the radio and the navigation displays and the mirrors and the window controls and the door lock controls and the thousands of feet of wiring associated with all of it, and replace it with an iPad Pro and an iPhone controlling it all. Can't you see the forest for the trees? The legacies of the internal combustion engine and the transmission and the starter and the steering wheel and the foot pedals and the shifter and the instrument cluster are holding GM, Ford, Chrysler, Toyota - all of them back. Apple can see past all of that. But, only if they want to, and I'm not totally convinced they want to yet.
For all we know, Apple has mastered 3D printing of liquid metal parts. There's the Apple Car body in a revolutionary way. Buying modular components that snap together with instantaneous wiring and connections established without wire connections. Vehicles are so much simpler when you replace the stuff that began 130 years ago in the first cars with the latest hardware technology and software.
Actually, Honda has partnered with General Electric in their jet development.
So? The company that manufactures the engine is called GE Honda. Do you see a lack of the word Honda in that name?
Apple Pay, the App and iTunes stores aren't hardware. You know I'm right, you just don't like the thought you won't be able to actually buy Apple's next big product.
Apple's revenues from software and services* in the most recent quarter was $5.03B, on aggregate revenues of $49.6B.
I have no idea what you mean about not being "...able to buy Apple's next big product". Did you hit your head today by accident?
**Figures in this statistic include revenue from sales through the iTunes Store, the App Store, the Mac App Store, and the iBookstore, and revenue from sales of AppleCare, licensing and other services. (Source: Apple).
This is the kind of article I prefer to see here. I'd much rather read a good piece of investigative work than one more bit of speculative nonsense from DigiTimes, Gene Munster or Ming-Chi Kuo. In fact, if most of the commonly published analysts were never given a platform to manipulate Apple stock here again, it would be a good decision.
Are you kidding? This is such a bogus article. There is no real investigative work in the article. It is all sensational journalism. A company as secretive (and yes even in Tim's regime), some of the information is very much like Gene Muster's TV
If any complaints are to be made, it would be only that there is a single source (unnamed) for the story, instead of multiple sources. A news organization will typically require at least several sources for fact-checking.
That's where Apple comes in. A fifteen second charge = 30 minutes of runtime.
Apple has a 40% profit margin on iPhones. Daimler is the most profitable of the three luxury German makes and has an 8% margin.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/in-luxury-race-profits-get-dented-1426208841
Citation needed.
Apple has a 40% profit margin on iPhones. Daimler is the most profitable of the three luxury German makes and has an 8% margin.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/in-luxury-race-profits-get-dented-1426208841
Porsche has an operating margin between 15%-20%: http://blogs.wsj.com/corporate-intelligence/2015/03/13/minding-the-margins-at-bmw-audi-mercedes-and-porsche/
Also, the "40%" number you quote is the gross margin for Apple. Apple's profit margin is closer to 20% (and operating margin is ~28%). People confuse and mis-state these numbers all the time.
May I suggest Jaguar/Land Rover as Apple's potential partner? The company today is not what people think it is. The styling, quality, engineering, and marketing are quite remarkable compared to the JLR of yore.
My take on Jaguar/Rover, or at least the Jaguar part is that they turned their backs on their very rich design heritage and cranked out nondescript everycars that have no personality at all. From the early Jaguars to the XK and XJ lines, you could trace a design theme that is distinctly Jaguar, recognizably British. Then you get the current sedans which have no connection at all to that rich heritage. I guess they decided to stop competing directly with deep-tradition lux-performance marques like BMW and MB and chose to become a European Lexus. Seems that's what sells today to a design aesthetic heavily influenced by iPods and iPhones where everything must be made to look completely new every couple of years or people will assume the underlying tech is obsolete.
Originally Posted by RonMG
Bluetooth control of motors, switches, etc.
You're going wireless on the car's central nervous system? Are you nuts?
I fully agree on the reality part.
Regarding a partner, what about Magna?
Actually, some people around here still have the idea that OEMs engineer and assemble the whole car, and/or engineering it is similar to a computer.
Btw, and as I layer out before, Tesla had a kind of head start using the plant as you said but also Toyota eg and others. Still, they needed 8 years from start to first car. Not talking any profitability here.
And profitability remains the main reason why I am skeptical about them building a full fledged car.
Average 7% margin plus 10 year average age out there in the field does not sound like Apple.
But as I also said before: hey, Apple, surprise me! Just one more time
You're going wireless on the car's central nervous system? Are you nuts?
I didn't say that. Wireless for door locks, window controls, radio, nav, etc. For essential functions it would be drive-by-wire, break-by-wire, etc. Just don't need foot pedals and steering wheels. But I'm sure Apple can come up with a revolutionary way of handling the driving/steering/braking controls. As for other items that are not essential function for driving/steering but very important (i.e. Seat position vs. window controls) there may be wireless as primary control but wired backup, but wired in a way that is not as cumbersome as current cars. Again, has anyone pulled an instrument panel lately?!?!? OMG, the AMOUNT and SIZE of the wiring is astronomical. Apple will find ways around that with back-up capability so as not to lose complete access to all functions. But my key item was removal of legacy automobile items that are essentially worthless now, like steering columns and foot pedals. So much is drive-by-wire anymore that these items add cost and weight and take up a lot of space.
My take on Jaguar/Rover, or at least the Jaguar part is that they turned their backs on their very rich design heritage and cranked out nondescript everycars that have no personality at all. From the early Jaguars to the XK and XJ lines, you could trace a design theme that is distinctly Jaguar, recognizably British. Then you get the current sedans which have no connection at all to that rich heritage. I guess they decided to stop competing directly with deep-tradition lux-performance marques like BMW and MB and chose to become a European Lexus. Seems that's what sells today to a design aesthetic heavily influenced by iPods and iPhones where everything must be made to look completely new every couple of years or people will assume the underlying tech is obsolete.
Possibly the "Ford-ification" phase of Jaguar dulled their design ethics for awhile. The latest XF and XE look terrific IMO.
Fair enough- still doesn't seem like a very green pasture to me.
They still use switches and dials from Ford, like the light switch taken form the Mondeo?
As long as people have reasonable expectations there is a strong possibility of success.
Possibly the "Ford-ification" phase of Jaguar dulled their design ethics for awhile. The latest XF and XE look terrific IMO.
The may look terrific but they don't look like Jaguars. Actually, if they look like anything, they look like early 2000s BMWs with a different grill slapped onto them. The shape of the side glass panel right behind the passenger's door window (how it curves back forward as it veers away from the C-pillar) is a BMW design cue from waaaaay back.
Just sad that the new ownership did not honor Jaguar's rich tradition. Used to be, like BMW and MB, or even Volvo, you could tell a Jag was a Jag without seeing the emblem or logo. You couldn't say that of Lexus, Infinity or Acura. Heck, if MINI was able to keep the Mini DNA, why not Jaguar?