I'd like to see Apple buy Adobe... and dismantle it.
'Tis a consummation devoutly to be wished.
The moment Adobe (means "made of mud") was allowed to acquire Macromedia it was doomed to be the new Microsoft (means "tiny and flaccid"), stifling innovation, suffocating entire industries under bloatware conceived by marketeers who wouldn't know elegant engineering if it sat in their laps and writhed, secure in the knowledge it can charge a fortune for crap because corporate IT simply can't imagine than anything could cost that much per user and still be crap.
We hates them, Precious? We hates the nasty, tricksy software giants and one day we'll throttle them, oh yesss we will!
The InterDigital acquisition by Apple is expected. The second prong of taking the majority stake or outright purchase of ARM would be the second wave and watch Google demand the acquisition to be blocked.
I've mentioned both before on more than one occasion and more than one sight, but if Apple decides to pull the real trigger it's a 3 Prong Beast:
InterDigital -- ARM -- Imagination Technologies.
Apple already has a sizable investment in both ARM and ImgTec.
If this was a 'buy some IP approach', Apple should have bought Palm, which rumour has it, they considered.
Palm was almost dead, (read dead cheap by comparison). And the patent war wasn't yet in full swing. Because it had declined and shrunk, it was a small acquisition, with large IP.
Well, at least we can clearly see now that Apple's strategy in countering Google's stupid bid numbers in the Nortel auction was to force Google to overbid for Motorola.
Another analyst who doesn't understand how Apple works. Any acquisition will be for things that help it make better stuff, not for legal reasons. The company sticks to its knitting.
Actually there is a big difference between patents and nuclear weapons. Governments can build more weapons whilst patents are in short supply. You can bet anyone with a decent portfolio is now thinking how much can they get for it. And if a block of patents does come on the market, can Google or Apple afford to let the other company get them? I'm predicting lots of very high priced sales of patents in the near future.
MAB. Good one. But a lousy alternative to MAD.
You make some good points. There's an new article about how Kodak's arsenal is worth more (in today's market) than their market cap. That makes them a target for a hostile takeover (another violence-tinged euphemism).
Apple has so much cash that they are likely to win this war. But spending money for this stuff is not the most productive use of capital, from a societal macroeconomic standpoint. Will these companies spend themselves to death on weapons, like the old Soviet Union did in the Reagan era?
I've seen the situation described in business publications as a bull market in IP. We'd all be better off with a bull market in skilled labor, or production facilities, or machine tools, or anything that leads to greater wealth, instead of something used only to destroy other sources of wealth.
Maybe the patent system needs some sort of compulsory licensing system, like music copyrights? I don't know, but I am disturbed to think that the current situation leads to moribund companies like Kodak sucking capital from productive companies like Apple and Google. We're all better off if the capital stays with those companies, rather than flowing towards the walking wounded.
People need to realize that a lot of the cash Apple has is parked overseas and will have to pay heavy tax if used for buying companies in US. Now let's not try to be naive to think that Apple would be willing to pay this tax just because they want to buy some dying competitors.
Apple knows they can't eliminate Android even if they get more patents. The DOJ won't allow it. In the end all these lawsuits are just used to slowdown the competitors (lower their budget on R&D/infrastructure because resources moved to legal). It's a dream to think Samsung/HTC would end up not selling Android phones. Even if they have to pay $5-10 royalties for each phone they'd do it, it's still profitable for a $500 phone.
It's a dream to think Samsung/HTC would end up not selling Android phones. Even if they have to pay $5-10 royalties for each phone they'd do it, it's still profitable for a $500 phone.
Only it's not a $500 phone, because Samsung and HTC can't command the same margins Apple can. Not with Verizon being forced to offer 2-for-1 deals in order to move Android phones out the door. It's more like a $350 phone that costs $300 to manufacture, market and support.
And it's not $5-$10 in royalties, either. It'll end up being more like $35 by the time Apple, MS, Oracle and HP are done extracting their pound of flesh from Google for "borrowing" so much IP to use in Android. And at $35, it'll probably be cheaper and easier for Samsung and HTC to just use Windows Phone. Either way, their margins just shrank to $15 a phone. Sux for them.
And access to Windows Phone assumes Microsoft feels like dealing with Asian manufacturers anymore. Now that they have a compliant, reliant Nokia groveling at their feet, kind of a Euro-based Foxconn, why would Microsoft feel compelled to deal with a bunch potential rivals like Samsung? Let 'em suffer with Google as a "partner" - at least until Google finishes absorbing Motorola, launches its own Chrome phone that's relatively free from all the IP issues Android faces, and stabs all of its former Android "partners" in the back.
Google will pull a Schmidt on Samsung, LG and HTC the same way it did on Apple. It's just a matter of time. They were fools for getting into bed with Google to begin with.
Maybe apple should buy Oracle. Then they would Own JAVA
Oracle is an $140 Billion corporation. The only thing that will become of Apple and Oracle is extending enterprise software services offered on OS X/iOS.
Don't forget the Canadian government. If they wouldn't let BHP Billiton buy Potash of Saskatchewan, I don't think they will let Apple buy RIM.
That was blocked because of concerns over jobs and the control of a strategic asset (the Potash mines). As long as Apple (or any other suitor) promised to retain a reasonable level of employment and talent in Canada they would probably be allowed the sale.
Comments
The more Apple's cash pile grows the more I can't help feel that Steve has his eye on something really big.
Of course, he could just like the feeling he gets from the thought of such a huge pile of cash...
$12 billion
This is a fine start?
Its not an official Google blog post, but since this is only a rumor yet, I will settle for hypocritical fandroid rants.
They patented a rectangle...
nuff said.
I'd like to see Apple buy Adobe... and dismantle it.
'Tis a consummation devoutly to be wished.
The moment Adobe (means "made of mud") was allowed to acquire Macromedia it was doomed to be the new Microsoft (means "tiny and flaccid"), stifling innovation, suffocating entire industries under bloatware conceived by marketeers who wouldn't know elegant engineering if it sat in their laps and writhed, secure in the knowledge it can charge a fortune for crap because corporate IT simply can't imagine than anything could cost that much per user and still be crap.
We hates them, Precious? We hates the nasty, tricksy software giants and one day we'll throttle them, oh yesss we will!
I've mentioned both before on more than one occasion and more than one sight, but if Apple decides to pull the real trigger it's a 3 Prong Beast:
InterDigital -- ARM -- Imagination Technologies.
Apple already has a sizable investment in both ARM and ImgTec.
Palm was almost dead, (read dead cheap by comparison). And the patent war wasn't yet in full swing. Because it had declined and shrunk, it was a small acquisition, with large IP.
Mutually Assured Bankruptcy.
Actually there is a big difference between patents and nuclear weapons. Governments can build more weapons whilst patents are in short supply. You can bet anyone with a decent portfolio is now thinking how much can they get for it. And if a block of patents does come on the market, can Google or Apple afford to let the other company get them? I'm predicting lots of very high priced sales of patents in the near future.
MAB. Good one. But a lousy alternative to MAD.
You make some good points. There's an new article about how Kodak's arsenal is worth more (in today's market) than their market cap. That makes them a target for a hostile takeover (another violence-tinged euphemism).
Apple has so much cash that they are likely to win this war. But spending money for this stuff is not the most productive use of capital, from a societal macroeconomic standpoint. Will these companies spend themselves to death on weapons, like the old Soviet Union did in the Reagan era?
I've seen the situation described in business publications as a bull market in IP. We'd all be better off with a bull market in skilled labor, or production facilities, or machine tools, or anything that leads to greater wealth, instead of something used only to destroy other sources of wealth.
Maybe the patent system needs some sort of compulsory licensing system, like music copyrights? I don't know, but I am disturbed to think that the current situation leads to moribund companies like Kodak sucking capital from productive companies like Apple and Google. We're all better off if the capital stays with those companies, rather than flowing towards the walking wounded.
The moment Adobe (means "made of mud") ... Microsoft (means "tiny and flaccid"),
So to continue, does Apple mean the Forbidden Fruit?
Apple knows they can't eliminate Android even if they get more patents. The DOJ won't allow it. In the end all these lawsuits are just used to slowdown the competitors (lower their budget on R&D/infrastructure because resources moved to legal). It's a dream to think Samsung/HTC would end up not selling Android phones. Even if they have to pay $5-10 royalties for each phone they'd do it, it's still profitable for a $500 phone.
It's a dream to think Samsung/HTC would end up not selling Android phones. Even if they have to pay $5-10 royalties for each phone they'd do it, it's still profitable for a $500 phone.
Only it's not a $500 phone, because Samsung and HTC can't command the same margins Apple can. Not with Verizon being forced to offer 2-for-1 deals in order to move Android phones out the door. It's more like a $350 phone that costs $300 to manufacture, market and support.
And it's not $5-$10 in royalties, either. It'll end up being more like $35 by the time Apple, MS, Oracle and HP are done extracting their pound of flesh from Google for "borrowing" so much IP to use in Android. And at $35, it'll probably be cheaper and easier for Samsung and HTC to just use Windows Phone. Either way, their margins just shrank to $15 a phone. Sux for them.
And access to Windows Phone assumes Microsoft feels like dealing with Asian manufacturers anymore. Now that they have a compliant, reliant Nokia groveling at their feet, kind of a Euro-based Foxconn, why would Microsoft feel compelled to deal with a bunch potential rivals like Samsung? Let 'em suffer with Google as a "partner" - at least until Google finishes absorbing Motorola, launches its own Chrome phone that's relatively free from all the IP issues Android faces, and stabs all of its former Android "partners" in the back.
Google will pull a Schmidt on Samsung, LG and HTC the same way it did on Apple. It's just a matter of time. They were fools for getting into bed with Google to begin with.
Maybe apple should buy Oracle. Then they would Own JAVA
Oracle is an $140 Billion corporation. The only thing that will become of Apple and Oracle is extending enterprise software services offered on OS X/iOS.
But the question is can apple afford Qualcomm?
Qualcomm is currently valued at > $85 Billion. Another no go and Apple has a very solid relationship with Qualcomm.
Don't forget the Canadian government. If they wouldn't let BHP Billiton buy Potash of Saskatchewan, I don't think they will let Apple buy RIM.
That was blocked because of concerns over jobs and the control of a strategic asset (the Potash mines). As long as Apple (or any other suitor) promised to retain a reasonable level of employment and talent in Canada they would probably be allowed the sale.