Apple to pay $450M fine after US Supreme Court rejects e-book antitrust appeal

24

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 71
    SpamSandwichspamsandwich Posts: 33,407member
    gatorguy said:
    jkichline said:
    You didn't expect the government to give up on that amount of money now did you? This verdict is a complete and utter sham in my book.
    "The government" isn't reaping the benefits, keeping the money for themselves. Read the ruling. It's right there in the AI article. Less than 5%, $20M, goes to certain US States and none appears to be going to the US Government itself.
    Um... What?

    http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientsum.php?id=D000023883

    This is why Apple needs to drastically and in a strategic way increase their lobbying in Washington. They cannot afford to sit on the sidelines. 

    As you can see here, Apple's spending is about half of Amazon's:  http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientsum.php?id=D000021754&year=2015

    Also... HELLO!... Remember Eric Schmidt now has his fingers in the pie at the Pentagon? I'm pretty damn sure he's going to be actively lobbying for Alphabet/Google and Android getting preferential treatment while there. AFAIK, he's still a large Alphabet/Google stockholder.

    http://recode.net/2016/03/02/alphabets-eric-schmidt-to-lead-pentagon-board-to-make-defense-department-tech-savvier/

    Thanks, Obama!
    edited March 2016
    latifbpjony0
     2Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 22 of 71
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,927member
    cropr said:
    sog35 said:
    The amount of jobs and small companies Amazon has ruined is mind blowing.

    Makes me sick that a company like Amazon can undercut the competition by selling goods below cost.
    Amazon stays afloat because they pay most of their executives with stock options instead of cash.  And Wall Street keeps inflating Amazon stock, so they are part of the scam also.

    How is selling goods below cost NOT anti-competitive?  How can other companies compete if Amazon is willing to take losses on every book they sell?
    I don't know for physical goods, but Amazon is not selling an e-book below cost, The production cost for an e-book is a few cents per item.   All other costs are a percentage of the selling price.  So any e-book sold  for $1 or more has a healthy margin. 
    Ebooks aren't sold in a vacuum. Shouldn't the author and publisher get paid as well? You think hardcovers are $20 mainly for material and shipping costs? 
    fotoformatmagman1979latifbpjony0
     4Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 23 of 71
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,679member
    sog35 said:

    gatorguy said:
    You honestly think any stock price dip today is solely due to SCOTUS not hearing the case??? You profess to be a professional investor, yet sometimes seem clueless about the market. Look at the rest of the tech stocks. 
    Amazon, Microsoft and Google are all down more than Apple today. Amazon down almost 3%.
    Amazon, Microsoft, and Google all have ridiculously high valuations. Apple doesn't.  

    Those 3 companies can go down on any random day because they are massively expensive and everyone knows they will go down hard eventually.
    Here's some homework. Go to Yahoo stocks and pull up a year-to-date chart on Apple. Then use the comparison tool and add both GOOG and MSFT to the chart. Do you see any relationship?
    staticx57
     1Like 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 24 of 71
    calicali Posts: 3,494member
    maclvr03 said:
    As much as I love Apple I remember as soon as iBooks came out all Kindle books that were $9.99 jumped to $12.99 plus. In favor of this ruling. 
    In favor of fu**ing over the artists and authors huh? You're one of those guys.
    fotoformatRayz2016magman1979latifbpjony0
     5Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 25 of 71
    sirlance99sirlance99 Posts: 1,301member
    sog35 said:

    Amazon, Microsoft and Google are all down more than Apple today. Amazon down almost 3%.
    Amazon, Microsoft, and Google all have ridiculously high valuations. Apple doesn't.  

    Those 3 companies can go down on any random day because they are massively expensive and everyone knows they will go down hard eventually.
    All three of them go down hard? What? You're crazy  as that won't happen any more than Apple going down hard. 
    singularity
     1Like 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 26 of 71
    icoco3icoco3 Posts: 1,474member
    cropr said:
    sog35 said:
    The amount of jobs and small companies Amazon has ruined is mind blowing.

    Makes me sick that a company like Amazon can undercut the competition by selling goods below cost.
    Amazon stays afloat because they pay most of their executives with stock options instead of cash.  And Wall Street keeps inflating Amazon stock, so they are part of the scam also.

    How is selling goods below cost NOT anti-competitive?  How can other companies compete if Amazon is willing to take losses on every book they sell?
    I don't know for physical goods, but Amazon is not selling an e-book below cost, The production cost for an e-book is a few cents per item.   All other costs are a percentage of the selling price.  So any e-book sold  for $1 or more has a healthy margin. 
    How much did Amazon pay the publisher/author for the rights to sell that ebook?
    fotoformatsteveh
     2Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 27 of 71
    Rayz2016rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    sog35 said:
    gatorguy said:
    You honestly think any stock price dip today is solely due to SCOTUS not hearing the case??? You profess to be a professional investor, yet sometimes seem clueless about the market. Look at the rest of the tech stocks. 
    The NASDAQ is down a mere .50%

    Apple is down double that.

    Sure other tech stocks like Amazon and Google are down big. But that's because they are grossly overvalued.  Apple isn't.  The stock is down because of the ebooks case.

    Why are you comparing Apple against all the fast food chains, shoe shops, clothes stores and everything else that affects the overall market? To get a notion of what's going on, just compare it with the companies in the same sector. 

    And saying Amazon, Microsoft and Google have ridiculously high valuations doesn't really carry a lot of weight coming from you.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 28 of 71
    tenlytenly Posts: 710member
    sog35 said:
    The amount of jobs and small companies Amazon has ruined is mind blowing.

    Makes me sick that a company like Amazon can undercut the competition by selling goods below cost.
    Amazon stays afloat because they pay most of their executives with stock options instead of cash.  And Wall Street keeps inflating Amazon stock, so they are part of the scam also.

    How is selling goods below cost NOT anti-competitive?  How can other companies compete if Amazon is willing to take losses on every book they sell?
    Is this situation not comparable to what Microsoft did in the 90's with web-browsers?  They sold Internet Explorer below cost (free) by bundling it into Windows  in a clear attempt to put Netscape and everyone else who were selling web browsers out of business.  But in that case, the government enacted restrictions against Microsoft to prevent the monopoly - so I don't get why in the Amazon e-books case they have done the opposite and they are PROTECTING Amazon's monopoly.
    latifbpjony0
     2Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 29 of 71
    cropr said:
    sog35 said:
    The amount of jobs and small companies Amazon has ruined is mind blowing.

    Makes me sick that a company like Amazon can undercut the competition by selling goods below cost.
    Amazon stays afloat because they pay most of their executives with stock options instead of cash.  And Wall Street keeps inflating Amazon stock, so they are part of the scam also.

    How is selling goods below cost NOT anti-competitive?  How can other companies compete if Amazon is willing to take losses on every book they sell?
    I don't know for physical goods, but Amazon is not selling an e-book below cost, The production cost for an e-book is a few cents per item.   All other costs are a percentage of the selling price.  So any e-book sold  for $1 or more has a healthy margin. 
    I know, like Adobe selling their CC for $50 a month! It only costs them $.10 to create the file and upload it to the internet. Talk about a healthy margin!

    /s
    jony0
     1Like 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 30 of 71
    Rayz2016rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    cropr said:
    sog35 said:
    The amount of jobs and small companies Amazon has ruined is mind blowing.

    Makes me sick that a company like Amazon can undercut the competition by selling goods below cost.
    Amazon stays afloat because they pay most of their executives with stock options instead of cash.  And Wall Street keeps inflating Amazon stock, so they are part of the scam also.

    How is selling goods below cost NOT anti-competitive?  How can other companies compete if Amazon is willing to take losses on every book they sell?
    I don't know for physical goods, but Amazon is not selling an e-book below cost, The production cost for an e-book is a few cents per item.   All other costs are a percentage of the selling price.  So any e-book sold  for $1 or more has a healthy margin. 

    And therein lies the problem. The Amazon model treats books like a pair of socks: they are a commodity item that can be rolled out on an out-sourced production line. There is no accounting for the time and creativity that went into the creation of the book. 

    Your argument is a bit like saying the Mona Lisa is only worth the price of the paint.
    hydrogenlatifbpjony0tenly
     4Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 31 of 71
    Rayz2016rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    Apple should sack its legal department (they've yet to score a significant win in as long as I can remember) and use the money to pay for lobbying.

    In the next few months  they will lose the battle with the FBI and Samsung will walk away without a paying a cent… all because Apple seems to have the naive view that they'll win because they believe they're in the right.

    This is America, Mr Cook! 'Right' belongs to whoever pays for it.
    latifbpjony0teejay2012SpamSandwichlostkiwi
     5Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 32 of 71
    Rayz2016rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    sog35 said:

    This is NOT about Apple buying bribes. This is about being treated FAIRLY.  Apple refusing to play the game is stupid and costing employees and stockholders BILLIONS in shareholder value.  Wake up Tim Cook and do your job.

    On this one small tiny point we seem to agree, though I haven't seen any evidence that shareholder value has been affected by this particular decision. Apple tends to account for these losses in their financials so this is little more than a hiccup. Though if they got their finger out and lobbied more then this loss may not have happened.

    edited March 2016
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 33 of 71
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 10,557member
    sog35 said:

    maclvr03 said:
    As much as I love Apple I remember as soon as iBooks came out all Kindle books that were $9.99 jumped to $12.99 plus. In favor of this ruling. 
    So you are in favor of a company like Amazon selling books below cost to stamp out competition?

    Try to look beyond the $3 you save per book and look at the bigger picture.  Look at how many jobs and companies were destroyed because Amazon sells items below cost.
    Exactly. Walmart does the same thing. It’s called predatory pricing. Walmart moves in, prices below cost until the competition dissolves (i.e. the small mom and pop grocery stores, hardware stores, small to mid-range appliance stores, etc.) Once they are gone Walmart has the freedom to price however they want to. Where’s the customer going to go? Amazon?
    edited March 2016
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 34 of 71
    anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 20,411member
    sog35 said:
    gatorguy said:
    You honestly think any stock price dip today is solely due to SCOTUS not hearing the case??? You profess to be a professional investor, yet sometimes seem clueless about the market. Look at the rest of the tech stocks. 
    The NASDAQ is down a mere .50%

    Apple is down double that.

    Sure other tech stocks like Amazon and Google are down big. But that's because they are grossly overvalued.  Apple isn't.  The stock is down because of the ebooks case.
    There was another analyst today who came out with a note expressing concern over drop in iPhone sales. That's the main reason. http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2016/03/07/apple-analysts-keep-warning-of-slowing-iphone-sales/
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 35 of 71
    singularitysingularity Posts: 1,328member
    sog35 said:
    cropr said:
    I don't know for physical goods, but Amazon is not selling an e-book below cost, The production cost for an e-book is a few cents per item.   All other costs are a percentage of the selling price.  So any e-book sold  for $1 or more has a healthy margin. 
    Huh? So books are written for free by random aliens?  The hell.  People spend YEARS writing books. I'm not talking about the cost of digitally.

    I'm saying is publishers probably charge Amazon $10 per book and Amazon sells it for $9.  How the HELL can others compete with that?  What other company is willing to lose money on every book they sell except Amazon?  That's how Amazon KILLS other companies and KILLS jobs for hard working decent Americans.  And Amazon stays afloat because Wall Street pumps up the stock price and pays Amazon executives with stock options. 

    Yet Apple is the one fined for anti-competitive activity? Da fuc.
    Probably= I don't know so I will make it up.
    So you are saying Amazon is selling below cost on every ebook? Id make a bet with you they are not but there's no pint in that.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 36 of 71
    bulldogsbulldogs Posts: 37member
    gatorguy said:
    "The government" isn't reaping the benefits, keeping the money for themselves. Read the ruling. It's right there in the AI article. Less than 5%, $20M, goes to certain US States and none appears to be going to the US Government itself.
    Um... What?

    http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientsum.php?id=D000023883

    This is why Apple needs to drastically and in a strategic way increase their lobbying in Washington. They cannot afford to sit on the sidelines. 

    As you can see here, Apple's spending is about half of Amazon's:  http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientsum.php?id=D000021754&year=2015

    Also... HELLO!... Remember Eric Schmidt now has his fingers in the pie at the Pentagon? I'm pretty damn sure he's going to be actively lobbying for Alphabet/Google and Android getting preferential treatment while there. AFAIK, he's still a large Alphabet/Google stockholder.

    http://recode.net/2016/03/02/alphabets-eric-schmidt-to-lead-pentagon-board-to-make-defense-department-tech-savvier/

    Thanks, Obama!
    Purposefully ignoring what he wrote is classic. He stated that the government didn't get any money from this verdict. He said nothing about respective lobbying levels.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 37 of 71
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,679member
    sog35 said:

    gatorguy said:
    sog35 said:

    Amazon, Microsoft, and Google all have ridiculously high valuations. Apple doesn't.  

    Those 3 companies can go down on any random day because they are massively expensive and everyone knows they will go down hard eventually.
    Here's some homework. Go to Yahoo stocks and pull up a year-to-date chart on Apple. Then use the comparison tool and add both GOOG and MSFT to the chart. Do you see any relationship?
    Look at last years chart for Google vs Apple.  Who cares what the YTD chart shows.
    You do apparently since you've decided that the eBooks case is solely responsible for today's stock price dip. The chart comparison I pointed you to should tell you differently. If one goes up or down then barring anything unusual and specific to one of them the other two will do the same (tho by different percentages). That's obvious to even a non-investor like me. IMO Apple is down today because the segment is down, not because SCOTUS won't hear an appeal. 
    edited March 2016
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 38 of 71
    Rayz2016rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    cali said:
    maclvr03 said:
    As much as I love Apple I remember as soon as iBooks came out all Kindle books that were $9.99 jumped to $12.99 plus. In favor of this ruling. 
    In favor of fu**ing over the artists and authors huh? You're one of those guys.
    Yes, apparently the price of seeing a movie shouldn't have anything to do with how much it cost to make. It should be based on how much it cost to stamp the BluRay disk. 


     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 39 of 71
    Rayz2016rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    gatorguy said:
    sog35 said:

    Look at last years chart for Google vs Apple.  Who cares what the YTD chart shows.
    You do apparently since you've decided that the eBooks case is solely responsible for today's stock price dip. The chart comparison I pointed you to should tell you differently. If one goes up or down then barring anything unusual and specific to one of them the other two will do the same (tho by different percentages). That's obvious to even a non-investor like me. IMO Apple is down today because the segment is down, not because SCOTUS won't hear an appeal. 

    You're wasting your time.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 40 of 71
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,679member
    sog35 said:

    sog35 said:
    Huh? So books are written for free by random aliens?  The hell.  People spend YEARS writing books. I'm not talking about the cost of digitally.

    I'm saying is publishers probably charge Amazon $10 per book and Amazon sells it for $9.  How the HELL can others compete with that?  What other company is willing to lose money on every book they sell except Amazon?  That's how Amazon KILLS other companies and KILLS jobs for hard working decent Americans.  And Amazon stays afloat because Wall Street pumps up the stock price and pays Amazon executives with stock options. 

    Yet Apple is the one fined for anti-competitive activity? Da fuc.
    Probably= I don't know so I will make it up.
    So you are saying Amazon is selling below cost on every ebook? Id make a bet with you they are not but there's no pint in that.
    Amazon had $100 billion in total sales last year and didn't make a cent of profit. 
    Isn't obvious they are sellling stuff below cost?
    You may not understand what you're looking at.

    "Third party sales of products through Amazon’s own platform are now 40% of unit sales, and the fees charged to these vendors are now 20% of Amazon’s revenue.

    This means, in passing, that for close to half of the units sold on Amazon.com, Amazon does not set the price, it just takes a margin. This alone should point to the weakness of the idea that Amazon’s growth is based on selling at cost or at a loss.

    The tricky thing about these third party (‘3P’) sales is that Amazon only recognizes revenue from the services it provides to those companies, not the value of the goods sold. So if you buy a pair of shoes on Amazon from a third party, Amazon might collect payment through your Amazon account and ship them from its warehouse using its shipping partners - but only show the shipping and payment fees it charged to the shoe vendor as revenue. It does not disclose the gross revenue (‘GMV’). Given that (as it does disclose) third party sales tend to have a higher unit value, this means that the total value of goods that pass though Amazon with Amazon taking a percentage is perhaps double the revenue that Amazon actually reports. So, the revenue line is not really telling you what's going on, and this is also one reason why gross margin is pretty misleading too."

    http://ben-evans.com/benedictevans/2014/9/4/why-amazon-has-no-profits-and-why-it-works

    singularity
     1Like 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.