Personally Aston Martin may better fits Apple's design style.
No offense but, Aston Martin is "garage art." And they really stretch the phrase, "Timeless." They are so out of touch w/ 12 cylinder engines getting 10 miles per gallon.
I thought buying all of BMW would make more sense and it would be also rather cheap at $65 billion. But then I guess Apple executives aren't satisfied with BMW cars and how they drive. And it would be more difficult to blend in with Apple since it is an old stodgy company, not a massive startup like Apple is.
Apple will have to pay a premium on top of the $65B. And the Quant family has shareholder control, and I doubt very much that they would sell. Moreover, Apple would acquire way too many models and configurations and will have to spend too much time and effort rationalizing the lines (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, X, M, i,....).
There was a decent documentary on Netflix, "Apex", about Koenigsegg and its One + 1, Porsche and its 918, McLaren, and Ferrari supercars. Of those, all but the Ferrari were hybrids.
Considering how well hybrids have done in endurance racing, just the EV experience that Apple would gain from the buy would be a bargain.
This would make sense from the Apple perspective of turning micro-market luxury into an affordable mass-market product. They can make an Apple Car (and I'm not at all convinced that will be the name they'll use) with the style of a supercar but the safety and intelligence of an Apple product. Going to be interesting to watch this play out.
There was a decent documentary on Netflix, "Apex", about Koenigsegg and its One + 1, Porsche and its 918, McLaren, and Ferrari supercars. Of those, all but the Ferrari were hybrids.
Considering how well hybrids have done in endurance racing, just the EV experience that Apple would gain from the buy would be a bargain.
It's funny, I've been watching Top Gear since it started back up in 2002. The idea of an electric motor or battery power for a supercar simply wasn't in anyone's purview back then. A hybrid or EV was a joke, and yet now it seems like the only way to push the performance barrier moving forward.
At least it is less money than the Beats acquisition, but I can't see how Apple can make any money without mass production, automation and middle class affordability.
Less money or more money is irrelevant when you're talking about revenue and profits. It's clear Beats was a brilliant buy. If Apple is at fault for anything, it's not buying Beats years earlier when they saw the trend of Beats headphone sales in their very own stores.
How is it clear Beats was a brilliant buy? I don't believe for one second that Apple couldn't bring music to market without Beats.
McLaren sports cars only cost $350,000 - yet they are hand made. They are similar in cost to other cars in its class: Lamborghini, Ferrari, Aston Martin, etc.
What if:
Apple automates the manufacturing of McLarens to bring the cost down to $50,000 to $90,000?
Apple customizes the software to its user interface and design
Even adding autonomous driving as needed
Apple could even have manufacturing done in China to bring the price down to $30,000 in mass quantity - brutally competing against the rest of the car industry.
I thought buying all of BMW would make more sense and it would be also rather cheap at $65 billion. But then I guess Apple executives aren't satisfied with BMW cars and how they drive. And it would be more difficult to blend in with Apple since it is an old stodgy company, not a massive startup like Apple is.
That would kill the McLaren name. The whole point of owning one is to give bragging rights to the wealthy because they are hand made and not very many are made every year which is why they hold their value. McLaren's business model isn't to compete with the rest of the car industry, it's to make the best supercars, and now hypercars, in the world. Apple would have to create, or buy a different brand to get the price point down to what you're talking about.
This the reason why VW owns all of the different brands they do, so that they can hit different price points and customers. They wouldn't dream of making a $90,000 Lamborghini because it would devalue the brand.
I understand Apple is a luxury electronics brand, but this would be an odd purchase. Maybe they will do just like you say, but as a car enthusiast I would be pretty upset seeing McLaren sedans and SUVs on the highway.
I'm going to have to side with the people thinking this, if it were true and completed, would be an ingenious move. Some people talking about buying Tesla (I love Tesla BTW), or BMW (I also love BMW BTW) or [insert some other well established brand here].
As some have said, the larger and known established brands have a lot of -baggage-, good a bad, a lot regardless. Here, they would get somewhat comparable expertise at a very comparable bargain, if the numbers are anywhere close to what's been said.
Here, you've got a very well established, but "small" player. It's not typical Apple to do this, but they could leave McLaren semi-independent while taking what McLaren has learned over time and applying it to mid/mass market vehicle(s) of their own!
Designed by Apple in California; with the added engineering prowess of some of the best and fastest McLaren has ever offered.
There was a decent documentary on Netflix, "Apex", about Koenigsegg and its One + 1, Porsche and its 918, McLaren, and Ferrari supercars. Of those, all but the Ferrari were hybrids.
Considering how well hybrids have done in endurance racing, just the EV experience that Apple would gain from the buy would be a bargain.
It's funny, I've been watching Top Gear since it started back up in 2002. The idea of an electric motor or battery power for a supercar simply wasn't in anyone's purview back then. A hybrid or EV was a joke, and yet now it seems like the only way to push the performance barrier moving forward.
Spot on. (Big Top Gear fan here too. In fact, I finally succumbed to Amazon Prime only for that reason; awaiting the new version...)
At least it is less money than the Beats acquisition, but I can't see how Apple can make any money without mass production, automation and middle class affordability.
Less money or more money is irrelevant when you're talking about revenue and profits. It's clear Beats was a brilliant buy. If Apple is at fault for anything, it's not buying Beats years earlier when they saw the trend of Beats headphone sales in their very own stores.
How is it clear Beats was a brilliant buy? I don't believe for one second that Apple couldn't bring music to market without Beats.
What makes you think it was about AppleMusic only?
You're conveniently forgetting their core product. That alone is likely worth the price.
I still am expecting this to dilute Apple and waste resources.
LOL. Apple can't remain on the top of the commoditized smartphone market forever. It's a good thing for them to diversify a bit and carry the Apple philosophy into new (rapidly growing) markets. Electric and self driving vehicles are the next hockey stick.
I still am expecting this to dilute Apple and waste resources.
Why? What makes you think that this would be any different than the challenge of taking on the mobile phone industry? A massive, legacy business with entrenched players that paid little attention to their customers, with little innovation, huge manufacturing needs at a massive scale, and an after-sales-service network?
I can imagine a scaled up McLaren with a 'down market' division priced against the middle of the BMW, MB, Audi lines and the existing line of McLaren supercars continuing on as the halo division.
McLaren's expertise is not in the practical mass market cars. If Apple buys this company, I would expect Apple to discontinue any expenditures on the supercars. If McLaren would continue to produce them, it would be without any significant updates until eventually discontinued. I'm sure the McLaren engineers are extremely sharp, maybe even culturally compatible with Apple (no bozo explosion there), but I don't see what they'll bring to this particular table.
If I had the funds, I would be about in McLaren's target markets (not middle east oil, middle age crisis).
Now, if Apple really wants the engineers who can make something practical and superb, they should be going after Lotus Engineering. In addition to their own wonderful sports cars, they've done engineering work for many other companies. They designed the basis of the Tesla Roadster, for example - they have expertise in electric and hybrids.
At least it is less money than the Beats acquisition, but I can't see how Apple can make any money without mass production, automation and middle class affordability.
Less money or more money is irrelevant when you're talking about revenue and profits. It's clear Beats was a brilliant buy. If Apple is at fault for anything, it's not buying Beats years earlier when they saw the trend of Beats headphone sales in their very own stores.
How is it clear Beats was a brilliant buy? I don't believe for one second that Apple couldn't bring music to market without Beats.
Beats headphones are very popular and very profitable. As for Apple Music, I have no opinion as I've never used it (or any other streaming music) so I can't opine on that specific topic without more research.
is it possible apple is buying it for the looks? I mean apple knows EV is future. It could gut out the internal and get X number of suppliers to build EV .. much cheaper than starting from design up
It's a smart move it true. Tesla would have been a great fit too, especially as it would give Musk a little breathing room and maybe even have his brilliance and enthusiasm as an Apple board member.
But Tesla may not be for sale or too expensive. Either way it would be good to have an electric duopoly akin to Android and iOS to make the whole of the consumer experience better.
...yet as cool as cars are, I don't know why Apple wants the headaches of the car industry. Tesla isn't making money and the major entrenched players almost all went broke in 2008.
Apple has a great gig selling tiny little gadgets in tiny little boxes at high margins easily shipped via Fed X. Vehicle manufacturing requires mountains of raw materials and headaches with far lower margins. And not too many can fit in Fed X delivery van.
Apple should instead keep focusing on medical and fitness technologies that pair well with their existing products and could also sell in tiny boxes with high margins.
There was a decent documentary on Netflix, "Apex", about Koenigsegg and its One + 1, Porsche and its 918, McLaren, and Ferrari supercars. Of those, all but the Ferrari were hybrids.
Considering how well hybrids have done in endurance racing, just the EV experience that Apple would gain from the buy would be a bargain.
It's funny, I've been watching Top Gear since it started back up in 2002. The idea of an electric motor or battery power for a supercar simply wasn't in anyone's purview back then. A hybrid or EV was a joke, and yet now it seems like the only way to push the performance barrier moving forward.
I think all those YouTube videos of supposedly fast ICE cars being left in the dust when drag racing against an electric powered four-door family car has something to do with it. My favorite one is where a Tesla Model X, towing a trailer carrying an Alfa Romeo 4c, outraces an Alfa Romeo 4c.
Comments
No offense but, Aston Martin is "garage art." And they really stretch the phrase, "Timeless." They are so out of touch w/ 12 cylinder engines getting 10 miles per gallon.
Considering how well hybrids have done in endurance racing, just the EV experience that Apple would gain from the buy would be a bargain.
This the reason why VW owns all of the different brands they do, so that they can hit different price points and customers. They wouldn't dream of making a $90,000 Lamborghini because it would devalue the brand.
I understand Apple is a luxury electronics brand, but this would be an odd purchase. Maybe they will do just like you say, but as a car enthusiast I would be pretty upset seeing McLaren sedans and SUVs on the highway.
As some have said, the larger and known established brands have a lot of -baggage-, good a bad, a lot regardless. Here, they would get somewhat comparable expertise at a very comparable bargain, if the numbers are anywhere close to what's been said.
Here, you've got a very well established, but "small" player. It's not typical Apple to do this, but they could leave McLaren semi-independent while taking what McLaren has learned over time and applying it to mid/mass market vehicle(s) of their own!
Designed by Apple in California; with the added engineering prowess of some of the best and fastest McLaren has ever offered.
What makes you think it was about AppleMusic only?
You're conveniently forgetting their core product. That alone is likely worth the price.
Why? What makes you think that this would be any different than the challenge of taking on the mobile phone industry? A massive, legacy business with entrenched players that paid little attention to their customers, with little innovation, huge manufacturing needs at a massive scale, and an after-sales-service network?
If I had the funds, I would be about in McLaren's target markets (not middle east oil, middle age crisis).
Now, if Apple really wants the engineers who can make something practical and superb, they should be going after Lotus Engineering. In addition to their own wonderful sports cars, they've done engineering work for many other companies. They designed the basis of the Tesla Roadster, for example - they have expertise in electric and hybrids.
But Tesla may not be for sale or too expensive. Either way it would be good to have an electric duopoly akin to Android and iOS to make the whole of the consumer experience better.
...yet as cool as cars are, I don't know why Apple wants the headaches of the car industry. Tesla isn't making money and the major entrenched players almost all went broke in 2008.
Apple has a great gig selling tiny little gadgets in tiny little boxes at high margins easily shipped via Fed X. Vehicle manufacturing requires mountains of raw materials and headaches with far lower margins.
And not too many can fit in Fed X delivery van.
Apple should instead keep focusing on medical and fitness technologies that pair well with their existing products and could also sell in tiny boxes with high margins.