Cook, other Apple execs open up on company's future in extensive '60 Minutes' feature

1235»

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 95
    AI Mods:  How's work going on bringing back that Block other users feature?
    edited December 2015 nolamacguyapplepieguyacgmph
  • Reply 82 of 95
    Tim didn't do AAPL any favors on 60 Minutes.  The safety nets were crazy, crazy.  PR shouldn't have let the piece run.  Next time PR needs to give T.C. talking points so he doesn't allow his innate openness and honesty to overcome good taste.  Here are a few:

    T.C. On Taxes:  "Don't hate the player!  Hate the game."
    T.C. On Cars:  "I love, love cars and so does everyone at Apple (Look into the camera, smile, wink).
    T.C. On iPhone.  "World population is about 7.3 billion. We see iPhone at 5 billion units before sales slow."
    T.C. On the future: "We are working on some stuff that will blow minds, but I can't be more specific."
     
    Boohay!!!




  • Reply 83 of 95
    - Cook said before the Apple Watch was even released they would not share sales data on a brand new product category. thats valuable info they wont give to competitors
    I never understood the reason behind this.

    If Apple officially annouced that they sold 3 million Apple Watches in a quarter... what good is that information to competitor?  Is Samsung really gonna try to race to sell that many Gear S2 too?

    Why wouldn't Samsung attempt to sell that many in the first place?
  • Reply 84 of 95
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,767member
    - Cook said before the Apple Watch was even released they would not share sales data on a brand new product category. thats valuable info they wont give to competitors
    I never understood the reason behind this.

    If Apple officially annouced that they sold 3 million Apple Watches in a quarter... what good is that information to competitor?  Is Samsung really gonna try to race to sell that many Gear S2 too?

    Why wouldn't Samsung attempt to sell that many in the first place?
    They essentially said that in the first quarter of sales (sold more than Ipad at that date), they said a bit more in the second quarter of sales call, all increase in other related to the watch (and considering Ipod and Apple Tv sales were tanking, people were already estimating sales at 5M from this info).

    Considering nobody else says ANYTHING about their actual sales, I think Apple is already more forthright than actually needed.
  • Reply 85 of 95
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,767member
    kamilton said:
    Tim didn't do AAPL any favors on 60 Minutes.  The safety nets were crazy, crazy.  PR shouldn't have let the piece run.  Next time PR needs to give T.C. talking points so he doesn't allow his innate openness and honesty to overcome good taste.  Here are a few:

    T.C. On Taxes:  "Don't hate the player!  Hate the game."
    T.C. On Cars:  "I love, love cars and so does everyone at Apple (Look into the camera, smile, wink).
    T.C. On iPhone.  "World population is about 7.3 billion. We see iPhone at 5 billion units before sales slow."
    T.C. On the future: "We are working on some stuff that will blow minds, but I can't be more specific."
     
    Boohay!!!




    Why not? It's not like 60 minutes is really a hard hitting news program these days even if It's still watched by many, that's basically inocuous free press; they'd be crazy not to take the chance go with it.

    The risk were zero and the upside at the first worst would be slightly positive.
  • Reply 86 of 95
    bugsnwbugsnw Posts: 717member
    I thought US corporations got a deduction on the foreign income taxes paid? I'm no accountant but the language is pretty clear (not that that means anything anymore).

    See Article:

    http://money.cnn.com/2014/08/14/news/economy/corporate-taxes-inversion/

    Point #4, 2nd paragraph. I'll try to paste it here as well. Please correct me if I'm wrong.


  • Reply 87 of 95
    foggyhill said:
    I never understood the reason behind this.

    If Apple officially annouced that they sold 3 million Apple Watches in a quarter... what good is that information to competitor?  Is Samsung really gonna try to race to sell that many Gear S2 too?

    Why wouldn't Samsung attempt to sell that many in the first place?
    They essentially said that in the first quarter of sales (sold more than Ipad at that date), they said a bit more in the second quarter of sales call, all increase in other related to the watch (and considering Ipod and Apple Tv sales were tanking, people were already estimating sales at 5M from this info).

    Considering nobody else says ANYTHING about their actual sales, I think Apple is already more forthright than actually needed.
    Gotcha.

    So Apple is being coy with their Apple Watch results... using clever, yet easy-to-decrypt language instead of just saying it.  They've given us a rough idea of the sales numbers... but not the actual numbers.  Fine.

    But that goes back to my original comment... their competitors can obviously decode this clever language too.  So Apple isn't really hiding this "valuable info" after all.
    edited December 2015
  • Reply 88 of 95
    davidwdavidw Posts: 2,047member
    bugsnw said:
    I thought US corporations got a deduction on the foreign income taxes paid? I'm no accountant but the language is pretty clear (not that that means anything anymore).

    See Article:

    http://money.cnn.com/2014/08/14/news/economy/corporate-taxes-inversion/

    Point #4, 2nd paragraph. I'll try to paste it here as well. Please correct me if I'm wrong.



    I believe, but not positive, this is how overseas profit tax is calculated. Simply put ………….

    Say that Apple earns $100,000,000 in overseas profit in one year. And that Apple pays about 10% foreign tax on it. That's $10,000,000 they paid in foreign taxes. That leaves $90,000,000 in overseas profit. If Apple brings in that $90,000,000, they will be taxed 35% (Fed) on that $90,000,000 because that is the overseas net profit. Net profit is the profit after paying taxes. They are not taxed 25% on that net profit. 

    Only if the US tax the $100,000,000, then Apple gets to deduction the 10% tax they already paid on that profit. which would max out the tax rate at 35%.

    Apple will end up paying more that just the US tax rate if the profit is first taxed overseas and then the remaining profit taxed again in the US at 35%. So Cook is right when he states that Apple will be taxed 40% (plus State tax) if they bring the overseas  net profit, they have sitting overseas, into the US. 

    added-

    When the US say "minus what foreign taxed already paid", they mean the money that was used to pay the foreign tax will be deducted from the foreign profit total, not that the percent of foreign taxes paid will be deducted from the 35% the US (Fed) will apply to it.
    edited December 2015
  • Reply 89 of 95
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,209member
    davidw said:
    bugsnw said:
    I thought US corporations got a deduction on the foreign income taxes paid? I'm no accountant but the language is pretty clear (not that that means anything anymore).

    See Article:

    http://money.cnn.com/2014/08/14/news/economy/corporate-taxes-inversion/

    Point #4, 2nd paragraph. I'll try to paste it here as well. Please correct me if I'm wrong.



    I believe, but not positive, this is how overseas profit tax is calculated. Simply put ………….

    Say that Apple earns $100,000,000 in overseas profit in one year. And that Apple pays about 10% foreign tax on it. That's $10,000,000 they paid in foreign taxes. That leaves $90,000,000 in overseas profit. If Apple brings in that $90,000,000, they will be taxed 35% (Fed) on that $90,000,000 because that is the overseas net profit. Net profit is the profit after paying taxes. They are not taxed 25% on that net profit. 

    Only if the US tax the $100,000,000, then Apple gets to deduction the 10% tax they already paid on that profit. which would max out the tax rate at 35%.

    Apple will end up paying more that just the US tax rate if the profit is first taxed overseas and then the remaining profit taxed again in the US at 35%. So Cook is right when he states that Apple will be taxed 40% (plus State tax) if they bring the overseas  net profit, they have sitting overseas, into the US. 

    added-

    When the US say "minus what foreign taxed already paid", they mean the money that was used to pay the foreign tax will be deducted from the foreign profit total, not that the percent of foreign taxes paid will be deducted from the 35% the US (Fed) will apply to it.
    David, you would be incorrect on how it works. 
  • Reply 90 of 95
    bobroo said:
    People damn well know what the product is called. They use the name "iWatch" as a dig against the product. Obviously this product will look like a failure if the bar someone sets is it has to be as popular and indispensable as the iPhone. Clearly some have intentionally set unrealistic expectations because they know Apple can't meet them and then they can crow about how the "iWatch" is a failure.
    A little clarification: I use the term iWatch because it means Apples' Watch and it is in the vernacular that Apple created, trademarked, and wants us to use. If I use the word "watch" in a sentence it does not designate Apples' watch and could mean any watch. 

    Also: I said that iWatch sales have not been to the expectations of Tim and Jony. NOT that the iWatch is a failure or otherwise a dig against Apple.

    If I wanted to bring up failure I would have mentioned the iNewton. 
    Gheesh, so testy about what the name of a Apple product is called.

    Let's talk about that new Star Wars movie........oh wait! here we go again......
  • Reply 91 of 95
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,767member
    foggyhill said:
    They essentially said that in the first quarter of sales (sold more than Ipad at that date), they said a bit more in the second quarter of sales call, all increase in other related to the watch (and considering Ipod and Apple Tv sales were tanking, people were already estimating sales at 5M from this info).

    Considering nobody else says ANYTHING about their actual sales, I think Apple is already more forthright than actually needed.
    Gotcha.

    So Apple is being coy with their Apple Watch results... using clever, yet easy-to-decrypt language instead of just saying it.  They've given us a rough idea of the sales numbers... but not the actual numbers.  Fine.

    But that goes back to my original comment... their competitors can obviously decode this clever language too.  So Apple isn't really hiding this "valuable info" after all.
    I think they were giving themselves wiggle room in reporting before their whole distribution network is fully set.
    That's the same reason they said in advance they wouldn't be reporting; they knew they would be both supply constrained and channel constrained.
    During those first two quarters, distribution internationally and even within the US wasn't fully deployed, giving a full number then would give "wrong ideas" to wall street on how the watch sales would go in the future (and even how successfull the watch truly is).

    By letting hints out, they could say sales are going well, without having definite expectations set for the future.

    Funny enough, when Wall Street make up their own numbers for nearly nothing, they're often more positive than extrapolation from actual numbers...
    See, well the entire competition....

    If sales, as expected now, are gangbuster in the holiday quarter, then Apple will probably report them as the other categories revenues will explode and they won't be able to "mask" them anyway.




    edited December 2015
  • Reply 92 of 95
    foggyhill said:
    Gotcha.

    So Apple is being coy with their Apple Watch results... using clever, yet easy-to-decrypt language instead of just saying it.  They've given us a rough idea of the sales numbers... but not the actual numbers.  Fine.

    But that goes back to my original comment... their competitors can obviously decode this clever language too.  So Apple isn't really hiding this "valuable info" after all.
    I think they were giving themselves wiggle room in reporting before their whole distribution network is fully set.
    That's the same reason they said in advance they wouldn't be reporting; they knew they would be both supply constrained and channel constrained.
    During those first two quarters, distribution internationally and even within the US wasn't fully deployed, giving a full number then would give "wrong ideas" to wall street on how the watch sales would go in the future (and even how successfull the watch truly is).

    By letting hints out, they could say sales are going well, without having definite expectations set for the future.

    Funny enough, when Wall Street make up their own numbers for nearly nothing, they're often more positive than extrapolation from actual numbers...
    See, well the entire competition....

    If sales, as expected now, are gangbuster in the holiday quarter, then Apple will probably report them as the other categories revenues will explode and they won't be able to "mask" them anyway.




    Btw, industry analyst Ben Bajarin just tweeted that he's hearing Apple Watch and Fitbit are "killing it" at retail this holiday season. I'm not convinced Apple will report sales figures unless it takes over Mac or iPad in terms of revenue. But it is frustrating that the general meme around the product is #bigfail when the reality is probably completely different.
  • Reply 93 of 95
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,209member
    sog35 said:
    Apple pays the 2nd highest tax rate for Mega tech companies at 26%

    Highest tax rate is Facebook at 40% (reason is close to 100% of facebooks profits is USA based)

    Near the bottom is Google at 19% and Cisco at 19%.
    Even Microsoft is 20.7% and IBM 21%.

    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/facebook-pays-highest-effective-tax-201246112.html

    FRIKEN RIDICULOUS APPLE GETS THE HEAT WHILE THEY PAY THE MOST TAXES OUT OF THE MEGA TECH COMPANIES AND ONE OF THE HIGHEST TAX RATES.

    In the spotlight is Google at 19%. 
    What makes it worse is that almost 50% of Google's revenue is from the USA. USA/State tax rates are close to 40%. That means Google must be paying close to 0% tax rate on revenue outside of the USA.  While Apple's USA revenue share is less than 30%. That means Apple pays about 15-20% tax on foreign revenue and 40% on USA revenue.

    The real tax cheater is Google not Apple.
    Sog, you're not noticing the differences in accounting methods. Apple uses reserve accounting, meaning they include estimated tax liabilities in that tax rate calculation, taxes that would be due IF they were to ever repatriate all their "overseas" profits. Google at least and perhaps all or most of the others do not include that in their reported tax rates. If you back out those estimated tax obligations which of course Apple will never pay anyway as all their profits aren't ever coming back (in reality they have but that's a different discussion) and put all of them on equal footing then Apple's actual tax rate has been estimated at as little as 14% over the past several years. That's lower even than the others you mentioned. 
    edited December 2015
  • Reply 94 of 95
    The real tax cheater is Google not Apple. I agree.
Sign In or Register to comment.