Of course Apple sees Google as a threat... probably in more ways than one.
You have to remember, though, that the original consortium, Microsoft, RIM, Sony, Ericsson and EMC, was sans Apple and has much more to lose than Apple... recent studies have shown that some of those companies are losing market share to Android but Apple is not. Ericsson then went to Apple asking Apple to become a partner... Apple must have seen an opportunity to save some cash while it crushed Google's bid.
So the question now is... how serious is Google about Android?
[ on edit: where was Motorola in all of this? ]
Google is never serious about Android. They put it out there just because. It is a stopgap until they are fully ready with Chrome OS and web apps. Google don't own mobile space. They rule desktop (ads). Read articles by DED (www.roughlydrafted.com) for side reading. That's partly why they don't very much care about Java's patent infringements or at least, being hasty about it. The one who will be more to lose by that is Android phone manufacturers. Google will let them pickup the tab when it all ends (reasonable for being cheapskates with fees or not owning in-house OS).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi
I guess Apple does see Android as a threat.
This just confirms it that Apple was using desperate measures to stop Android from gaining a foothold by sueing its biggest hardware proponent, Samsung.
Hardly desperate measures by any mean. The auction was not the last or the one and only option. Perhaps you need to watch 'Desperate Housewives' for some insight of what desperate means. Apple suing Samsung and HTC because they are the one who infringed Apple's property and Google is just, well see above, they don't care. Also, these Android manufacturers were the one who producing questionable products in question.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patranus
And the vast majority of posters still don't get it.
This has nothing to do with the actual technology rather the position the patents put the owner in.
Google wanted the patents to protect itself, not control LTE.
Apple wanted the patents to only keep them away from Google.
If Google got control of the patents that would give them leverage over companies that have patent claims against Android.
While this is fairly irrelevant news in terms of what Apple is/has been doing, this is a major blow to Google.
Google couldn't care less. They're putting that out next as their latest pet project (which wouldn't last long given their past history). Owning important patents where uptake/stake is high can only mean two things:
As a revenue
As a defensive measures
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister Snitch
Theirs is a strange, privileged and self-referencing corporate culture.
They are fragmented. See how many projects they have at Mountain View. They want to be the Jack-of-all-trade but not one is significant enough. The sole purpose and the reason they are what they are is to gather data for paid-advertising. That's where the money comes from.
Google could have paid the 4.5 billion. They could have paid 10 billion, so why drop out? They needed the patents more than apple to cover android from what I understand. Or is google betting they won't be sued by anyone? Im a bit confused on why the accepted defeat.
Playing online poker is NOT illegal. Playing online poker is NOT illegal even in the Unites States.
What is illegal in the Unites States is the transfer of money between US financial institutions and online gambling businesses.
Therefore, you can play online poker all you want in the United States. You simply can't get your money in and out of there via a US financial institution.
PS: I play a lot of online poker. Even today. And from the US.
Well, sir, I'll be happy to knock on your door tomorrow to confiscate your electronics & seize your bank accounts for money laundering and financing of terrorists. Have a nice night.
</joke>
Really, with all the automated crawling that goes on by the US gov't these days I won't say such things unless you don't value your time and sanity.
Google could have paid the 4.5 billion. They could have paid 10 billion, so why drop out? They needed the patents more than apple to cover android from what I understand. Or is google betting they won't be sued by anyone? Im a bit confused on why the accepted defeat.
Google isn't going to make as much on Android as Apple will be making on iOS. Google gets money two ways from Android. The first is by licensing some apps to the carriers, such as maps. Those aren't free as is the OS itself to the manufacturers. But that's small beans. The second is in advertising. But both together are not huge cash flow machines. Google made a billion last year on these two sources. If there are two times as many Android devices, they could make twice that, and if Ads increase, as they are doing, they will make more.
But contrast that to Apple, which will sell a good $30 billion in iOS devices this year, likely twice as many next year, and increasing from there. Indeed, iOS device sales for Apple equal all of Googles sales for the year, from everything.
This is why Apple was so interested. I also wonder if those bids from Google, later on, were just their money, or that from Intel and whomever else was with them? Apple got theirs for $2 billion from what we read, and whether that was all they bid, or there's more we don't know about is something we MIGHT find out in the quartly report, as it just squeaked under the end of the quarter.
Google could have paid the 4.5 billion. They could have paid 10 billion, so why drop out? They needed the patents more than apple to cover android from what I understand. Or is google betting they won't be sued by anyone? Im a bit confused on why the accepted defeat.
Because they don't actually need those patents. Samsung needs them, Moto needs them, HTC needs them - but Google itself doesn't need them. Ultimately Google doesn't care about the profitability of the handset OEMs, and it doesn't care if OEMs can't compete with Apple for the high end of the market, all it cares about is ensuring that 50%+ of mobile handests come with Google services.
The handest OEMs thought Google was their boyfriend, but in fact it's their dealer, and practically their pimp. At this point there choice is to stay with Google or try to switch to MS, they don't have any other options - and MS is the bluebeard of tech - there's a room in Redmond with the bodies of their former industry partners.
What about the explanation that the company name is a play on a math term, so by putting math constants in their bids they're kind of identifying them as a Google bid.
The name Google is obviously an outright copy of Apple... a double letter and "le" at the end...
Because they don't actually need those patents. Samsung needs them, Moto needs them, HTC needs them - but Google itself doesn't need them. Ultimately Google doesn't care about the profitability of the handset OEMs, and it doesn't care if OEMs can't compete with Apple for the high end of the market, all it cares about is ensuring that 50%+ of mobile handests come with Google services.
The handest OEMs thought Google was their boyfriend, but in fact it's their dealer, and practically their pimp. At this point there choice is to stay with Google or try to switch to MS, they don't have any other options - and MS is the bluebeard of tech - there's a room in Redmond with the bodies of their former industry partners.
This was something I thought to be very strange. Sony was involved, and ended up being on the winning side. But except for Huawei, as part of the RPX group, none of those big companies seem to have bothered to show up. I would have expected them to be there. LG wasn't there either. Neither was Sharp.
I had read that it was between 1.5% and 2%. but that's still low. But it's also reliable. Even a 3% interest rate those days can result in a less stable investment.
Any thoughts on this? What currencies would these be stored in? USD? Other currencies?
Keep in mind some currencies still offer comparatively huge yields, like the Australian dollar which gives 4.75% on extremely liquid savings accounts alone, it goes higher for term deposits.
Any thoughts on this? What currencies would these be stored in? USD? Other currencies?
Keep in mind some currencies still offer comparatively huge yields, like the Australian dollar which gives 4.75% on extremely liquid savings accounts alone, it goes higher for term deposits.
The government isn't concerned about this at all. it's a matter of taxes. When money is earned offshore, the tax is paid there. But governments want to do double dipping, so some large companies that earn a large portion of their income offshore want some tax relief to bring that money here.
It's a complex question, but I agree with what they want to do. For the US, better the money is here then there.
The currencies would be whatever they would be expected to be wherever they are. They aren't in US dollars. I certainly don't know what the earnings are specifically. We just know what has been estimated.
Base on prearranged agreement of the new consortium
Apple contributes $2 billion
Microsoft and Sony together $1 billion
RIM $770 million
Ericsson $340 million
EMC $400 million
Apple ends up owning LTE and other key smartphone patents
RIM and Ericsson gets fully paid license to cellphone related patents but do not own it
Microsoft and Sony .. not sure but likely some indirect protection for makers of WP phone
EMC owns subset of patents unrelated to smartphones
I think we're missing something here, because the numbers don't make sense. Nortel made telecom and networking equipment, so Ericsson had the closest overlap with their business. Yet Ericsson is paying less than RIM and less even than Sony.
The presumption has been that Sony and Ericsson were in this auction together to support their joint venture, but that just doesn't seem to hold water - if that was the case they'd be paying the same, or Ericsson would be paying more.
Microsoft has a very deep cross licensing deal with Apple, so why did they even need to stay in once they saw that Apple was determined?
Why the heck are Sony and Microsoft being lumped together in this way? Why didn't it get reported as 500mil each?
Ok - I'm off to make a tin-foil hat, and drink a coffee - because there's something interesting up here.
The reason why you are confused is because you appear to misunderstand how these consortium works.
These members are not equal partners. They don't pay the same going in... and they don't all have equal rights to all the patents at the end. Apple was able to keep bidding so it was the leader of the group. All the other members joined Apple once that group reached their limit. So Apple probably has the most power in dictating the terms.
Ericsson may have the most overlap with Nortel but it doesn't have the money to buy the patents on its own. So it must settle for what it can get base on how much it was willing to pay. It's unclear exactly what $340 million bought for Ericsson but base on information available it seems like it got Ericsson fully paid license to some of the patents. In other words, it doesn't own them but it has license to use them.
As for why they didn't report Sony and Microsoft as $500 million each...
It's because it may not have been $500 million each... could be $800 mil an $200 mil split. Could be $600 mil and $400 mil. We don't know.
The available information is limited because details of the arrangement was not meant to be public. So someone who was there is speaking to some journalist and giving some bullet point highlights.
You guys keep using the term "tapped out". I'm getting images of Jon Ives having Otellini in a headlock using just his legs, MMA style with the blood smears on the cage floor. Google of course is running around the outside of the cage in circles screaming "The mean prime third of an n-dimensional torus is pi to the power of negative light speed wooooo!"...
Comments
Of course Apple sees Google as a threat... probably in more ways than one.
You have to remember, though, that the original consortium, Microsoft, RIM, Sony, Ericsson and EMC, was sans Apple and has much more to lose than Apple... recent studies have shown that some of those companies are losing market share to Android but Apple is not. Ericsson then went to Apple asking Apple to become a partner... Apple must have seen an opportunity to save some cash while it crushed Google's bid.
So the question now is... how serious is Google about Android?
[ on edit: where was Motorola in all of this? ]
Google is never serious about Android. They put it out there just because. It is a stopgap until they are fully ready with Chrome OS and web apps. Google don't own mobile space. They rule desktop (ads). Read articles by DED (www.roughlydrafted.com) for side reading. That's partly why they don't very much care about Java's patent infringements or at least, being hasty about it. The one who will be more to lose by that is Android phone manufacturers. Google will let them pickup the tab when it all ends (reasonable for being cheapskates with fees or not owning in-house OS).
I guess Apple does see Android as a threat.
This just confirms it that Apple was using desperate measures to stop Android from gaining a foothold by sueing its biggest hardware proponent, Samsung.
Hardly desperate measures by any mean. The auction was not the last or the one and only option. Perhaps you need to watch 'Desperate Housewives' for some insight of what desperate means. Apple suing Samsung and HTC because they are the one who infringed Apple's property and Google is just, well see above, they don't care. Also, these Android manufacturers were the one who producing questionable products in question.
And the vast majority of posters still don't get it.
This has nothing to do with the actual technology rather the position the patents put the owner in.
Google wanted the patents to protect itself, not control LTE.
Apple wanted the patents to only keep them away from Google.
If Google got control of the patents that would give them leverage over companies that have patent claims against Android.
While this is fairly irrelevant news in terms of what Apple is/has been doing, this is a major blow to Google.
Google couldn't care less. They're putting that out next as their latest pet project (which wouldn't last long given their past history). Owning important patents where uptake/stake is high can only mean two things:
Theirs is a strange, privileged and self-referencing corporate culture.
They are fragmented. See how many projects they have at Mountain View. They want to be the Jack-of-all-trade but not one is significant enough. The sole purpose and the reason they are what they are is to gather data for paid-advertising. That's where the money comes from.
If they'd bid a google they'd have won :0
That's googol.
Google could have paid the 4.5 billion. They could have paid 10 billion...
Maybe they couldn't and they just don't want us to know that.
Let's set some facts straight....
Playing online poker is NOT illegal. Playing online poker is NOT illegal even in the Unites States.
What is illegal in the Unites States is the transfer of money between US financial institutions and online gambling businesses.
Therefore, you can play online poker all you want in the United States. You simply can't get your money in and out of there via a US financial institution.
PS: I play a lot of online poker. Even today. And from the US.
Well, sir, I'll be happy to knock on your door tomorrow to confiscate your electronics & seize your bank accounts for money laundering and financing of terrorists. Have a nice night.
</joke>
Really, with all the automated crawling that goes on by the US gov't these days I won't say such things unless you don't value your time and sanity.
Google could have paid the 4.5 billion. They could have paid 10 billion, so why drop out? They needed the patents more than apple to cover android from what I understand. Or is google betting they won't be sued by anyone? Im a bit confused on why the accepted defeat.
Google isn't going to make as much on Android as Apple will be making on iOS. Google gets money two ways from Android. The first is by licensing some apps to the carriers, such as maps. Those aren't free as is the OS itself to the manufacturers. But that's small beans. The second is in advertising. But both together are not huge cash flow machines. Google made a billion last year on these two sources. If there are two times as many Android devices, they could make twice that, and if Ads increase, as they are doing, they will make more.
But contrast that to Apple, which will sell a good $30 billion in iOS devices this year, likely twice as many next year, and increasing from there. Indeed, iOS device sales for Apple equal all of Googles sales for the year, from everything.
This is why Apple was so interested. I also wonder if those bids from Google, later on, were just their money, or that from Intel and whomever else was with them? Apple got theirs for $2 billion from what we read, and whether that was all they bid, or there's more we don't know about is something we MIGHT find out in the quartly report, as it just squeaked under the end of the quarter.
Google could have paid the 4.5 billion. They could have paid 10 billion, so why drop out? They needed the patents more than apple to cover android from what I understand. Or is google betting they won't be sued by anyone? Im a bit confused on why the accepted defeat.
Because they don't actually need those patents. Samsung needs them, Moto needs them, HTC needs them - but Google itself doesn't need them. Ultimately Google doesn't care about the profitability of the handset OEMs, and it doesn't care if OEMs can't compete with Apple for the high end of the market, all it cares about is ensuring that 50%+ of mobile handests come with Google services.
The handest OEMs thought Google was their boyfriend, but in fact it's their dealer, and practically their pimp. At this point there choice is to stay with Google or try to switch to MS, they don't have any other options - and MS is the bluebeard of tech - there's a room in Redmond with the bodies of their former industry partners.
What about the explanation that the company name is a play on a math term, so by putting math constants in their bids they're kind of identifying them as a Google bid.
The name Google is obviously an outright copy of Apple... a double letter and "le" at the end...
Perhaps you need to watch 'Desperate Housewives' for some insight of what desperate means.
You seem to have some personal experience with that show. Is that your recommendation?
I guess its worth a try to get in touch with my feminine side.
Because they don't actually need those patents. Samsung needs them, Moto needs them, HTC needs them - but Google itself doesn't need them. Ultimately Google doesn't care about the profitability of the handset OEMs, and it doesn't care if OEMs can't compete with Apple for the high end of the market, all it cares about is ensuring that 50%+ of mobile handests come with Google services.
The handest OEMs thought Google was their boyfriend, but in fact it's their dealer, and practically their pimp. At this point there choice is to stay with Google or try to switch to MS, they don't have any other options - and MS is the bluebeard of tech - there's a room in Redmond with the bodies of their former industry partners.
This was something I thought to be very strange. Sony was involved, and ended up being on the winning side. But except for Huawei, as part of the RPX group, none of those big companies seem to have bothered to show up. I would have expected them to be there. LG wasn't there either. Neither was Sharp.
I had read that it was between 1.5% and 2%. but that's still low. But it's also reliable. Even a 3% interest rate those days can result in a less stable investment.
Mel, AppleInsider reported that some of this cash (how much exactly???) is also offshore, which apparently the US government is concerned about. ( http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...ash_to_us.html )
Any thoughts on this? What currencies would these be stored in? USD? Other currencies?
Keep in mind some currencies still offer comparatively huge yields, like the Australian dollar which gives 4.75% on extremely liquid savings accounts alone, it goes higher for term deposits.
[pedantic]The English plural forums is preferred to the Latin plural fora in normal English usage.[/pedantic]
Carry on.
Ok, but what is the plural form of platypus?
Ok, but what is the plural form of platypus?
Platypi, of course.
Mel, AppleInsider reported that some of this cash (how much exactly???) is also offshore, which apparently the US government is concerned about. ( http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...ash_to_us.html )
Any thoughts on this? What currencies would these be stored in? USD? Other currencies?
Keep in mind some currencies still offer comparatively huge yields, like the Australian dollar which gives 4.75% on extremely liquid savings accounts alone, it goes higher for term deposits.
The government isn't concerned about this at all. it's a matter of taxes. When money is earned offshore, the tax is paid there. But governments want to do double dipping, so some large companies that earn a large portion of their income offshore want some tax relief to bring that money here.
It's a complex question, but I agree with what they want to do. For the US, better the money is here then there.
The currencies would be whatever they would be expected to be wherever they are. They aren't in US dollars. I certainly don't know what the earnings are specifically. We just know what has been estimated.
Platypi, of course.
I do like Platypussies though.
One might rightfully look Google-eyed upon any effort to block the deal. That would be a Google-plex-flop.
5 Bidders in total, consisting of 2 consortium and 3 single company bidders
1) Consortium One: RPX which represents 20 small, mostly asian companies
2) Consortium Two: Microsoft, RIM, Sony, EMC, Ericsson
3) Apple (Rockstar)
4) Google (Ranger) --> likely in reference to stalking horse bid?
5) Intel
Google starting bid was $900 million
Intel bids $1.5 billion
RPX dropped out after first round of bidding.( 4 bidders left)
Tuesday Microsoft, RIM etc consortium reached its limit and tapped out, stopped bidding
Intel reached its limit and tapped out at unknown amount, stay as observer for possible alliance.
Only Google and Apple left bidding
24 hour negotiation took place for alliance forming
Google convinced Intel to join, bidding reached over $3 billion
Apple's(Rockstar) joined by Microsoft, RIM consortium
Google/Intel tapped out at around $4billion
Apple's Rockstar (now including Microsoft, RIM, Sony, Ericsson, EMC consortium) continued bidding until $4.5 billion.
Apple (Rockstar) wins
Base on prearranged agreement of the new consortium
Apple contributes $2 billion
Microsoft and Sony together $1 billion
RIM $770 million
Ericsson $340 million
EMC $400 million
Apple ends up owning LTE and other key smartphone patents
RIM and Ericsson gets fully paid license to cellphone related patents but do not own it
Microsoft and Sony .. not sure but likely some indirect protection for makers of WP phone
EMC owns subset of patents unrelated to smartphones
Apple (Rockstar) wins
Base on prearranged agreement of the new consortium
Apple contributes $2 billion
Microsoft and Sony together $1 billion
RIM $770 million
Ericsson $340 million
EMC $400 million
Apple ends up owning LTE and other key smartphone patents
RIM and Ericsson gets fully paid license to cellphone related patents but do not own it
Microsoft and Sony .. not sure but likely some indirect protection for makers of WP phone
EMC owns subset of patents unrelated to smartphones
I think we're missing something here, because the numbers don't make sense. Nortel made telecom and networking equipment, so Ericsson had the closest overlap with their business. Yet Ericsson is paying less than RIM and less even than Sony.
The presumption has been that Sony and Ericsson were in this auction together to support their joint venture, but that just doesn't seem to hold water - if that was the case they'd be paying the same, or Ericsson would be paying more.
Microsoft has a very deep cross licensing deal with Apple, so why did they even need to stay in once they saw that Apple was determined?
Why the heck are Sony and Microsoft being lumped together in this way? Why didn't it get reported as 500mil each?
Ok - I'm off to make a tin-foil hat, and drink a coffee - because there's something interesting up here.
These members are not equal partners. They don't pay the same going in... and they don't all have equal rights to all the patents at the end. Apple was able to keep bidding so it was the leader of the group. All the other members joined Apple once that group reached their limit. So Apple probably has the most power in dictating the terms.
Ericsson may have the most overlap with Nortel but it doesn't have the money to buy the patents on its own. So it must settle for what it can get base on how much it was willing to pay. It's unclear exactly what $340 million bought for Ericsson but base on information available it seems like it got Ericsson fully paid license to some of the patents. In other words, it doesn't own them but it has license to use them.
As for why they didn't report Sony and Microsoft as $500 million each...
It's because it may not have been $500 million each... could be $800 mil an $200 mil split. Could be $600 mil and $400 mil. We don't know.
The available information is limited because details of the arrangement was not meant to be public. So someone who was there is speaking to some journalist and giving some bullet point highlights.