Apple spent $60 billion with 9,000 American manufacturers in 2018 alone

Comments

• Reply 1 of 19

  anantksundaram Posts: 20,404member

  January 28, 2019 4:18PM

  I am sorry, but I am not seeing the "$60 billion" number quoted anywhere in the text of the article? Who said it, where, when? Cite?
  
  Also, while I am not belittling the massive addition of jobs in the US, it is important to note that most of Apple's job creation here is in retail, which are low-skill, low-paying jobs.
  

  edited January 2019
• Reply 2 of 19

  carnegie Posts: 1,078member

  January 28, 2019 4:38PM

  anantksundaram said:

  I am sorry, but I am not seeing the "$60 billion" number quoted anywhere in the text of the article? Who said it, where, when? Cite?
  
  Also, while I am not belittling the massive addition of jobs in the US, it is important to note that most of Apple's job creation here is in retail, which are low-skill, low-paying jobs.
  

  It's from Apple's press release issued today.
  
  I'd also note that, even with many of its 132,000 employees (as of the end of its FY2018) being retail employees, Apple's median employee total compensation was over $55,000 in FY2018. That's median, not mean, so the number isn't inflated by very-highly compensated employees at the top.

  
• Reply 3 of 19

  Latko Posts: 398member

  January 28, 2019 4:39PM

  anantksundaram said:

  I am sorry, but I am not seeing the "$60 billion" number quoted anywhere in the text of the article? Who said it, where, when? Cite?
  
  Also, while I am not belittling the massive addition of jobs in the US, it is important to note that most of Apple's job creation here is in retail, which are low-skill, low-paying jobs.
  

  I do neither (but what difference does it make ?) The point here is that Apple PR wants to impress the public with numbers, big numbers, like all multi-billion moloch multi-nationals do. And that only works for a certain amount of time. At some point, people will say “Duh. What’s in it for me ?” And after that moment, it will only contribute to the “too big, slow, incumbent, too expensive for what it brings” etc. etc. image. How people identify Apple, is determined by people. Not by Tim’s norms an priorities. Because, sadly, he’s not Steve. And his decisions are always overrated by himelf. Spending billions on Corning, on Samsung OLED, on Sapphire initiatives - it all leads to the notion that they lack screen making capabilities and therefore have to do over-expensive purchasing at the competition that they declared thermonuclear war on. The public aren’t fools.

  edited January 2019
• Reply 4 of 19

  Mike Wuerthele Posts: 6,861administrator

  January 28, 2019 4:55PM

  anantksundaram said:

  I am sorry, but I am not seeing the "$60 billion" number quoted anywhere in the text of the article? Who said it, where, when? Cite?
  
  Also, while I am not belittling the massive addition of jobs in the US, it is important to note that most of Apple's job creation here is in retail, which are low-skill, low-paying jobs.
  

  Third paragraph below the image. Been there since the first draft.

  
• Reply 5 of 19

  tbornot Posts: 116member

  January 28, 2019 4:57PM

  Note that in China, Apple is not dinged for paying their workers below minimum wage, they are dinged for SLAVERY.  I know the difference might appear subtle, but it’s tremendous in its evilness.
• Reply 6 of 19

  anantksundaram Posts: 20,404member

  January 28, 2019 5:00PM

  Mike Wuerthele said:

  anantksundaram said:

  I am sorry, but I am not seeing the "$60 billion" number quoted anywhere in the text of the article? Who said it, where, when? Cite?
  
  Also, while I am not belittling the massive addition of jobs in the US, it is important to note that most of Apple's job creation here is in retail, which are low-skill, low-paying jobs.
  

  Third paragraph below the image. Been there since the first draft.

  OK. That's a bit weird, since I even re-read. And did a text search for "60" on the page, and it pulled up only two references: the headline number, and the 60 in "600,000".
• Reply 7 of 19

  anantksundaram Posts: 20,404member

  January 28, 2019 5:10PM

  carnegie said:

  anantksundaram said:

  I am sorry, but I am not seeing the "$60 billion" number quoted anywhere in the text of the article? Who said it, where, when? Cite?
  
  Also, while I am not belittling the massive addition of jobs in the US, it is important to note that most of Apple's job creation here is in retail, which are low-skill, low-paying jobs.
  

  It's from Apple's press release issued today.
  
  I'd also note that, even with many of its 132,000 employees (as of the end of its FY2018) being retail employees, Apple's median employee total compensation was over $55,000 in FY2018. That's median, not mean, so the number isn't inflated by very-highly compensated employees at the top.

  Thanks for the cite.
  
  The $55K number is less impressive than it sounds. The median pay at Facebook is $240K; Google $197K; Netflix $183K. In fact, Apple's median pay is similar to that of GM's.

  edited January 2019
• Reply 8 of 19

  ClarityToSee Posts: 34unconfirmed, member

  January 28, 2019 5:13PM

  It doesn’t matter if Apple spends another $60 Billion in 2019 on top of $60 Billion dollars already spent in 2018 on American Manufacturers. Because they are not doing out of altruism but rather out of necessity. They wouldn’t have an iPhone if American Manufacturers don’t sell to Apple much like ZTE found out the hard way. 
  Secondly, the reason Americans don’t see this $60Billion dollars impact their economy in a positive manner is because even Apple’s suppliers and manufacturers don’t manufacture at home. They outsource to Asia and Mexico. Hence what Trump said was absolutely true “Apple benefits China more than it benefits US” regardless of how many numbers are being thrown around.

  
• Reply 9 of 19

  carnegie Posts: 1,078member

  January 28, 2019 5:17PM

  anantksundaram said:

  carnegie said:

  anantksundaram said:

  I am sorry, but I am not seeing the "$60 billion" number quoted anywhere in the text of the article? Who said it, where, when? Cite?
  
  Also, while I am not belittling the massive addition of jobs in the US, it is important to note that most of Apple's job creation here is in retail, which are low-skill, low-paying jobs.
  

  It's from Apple's press release issued today.
  
  I'd also note that, even with many of its 132,000 employees (as of the end of its FY2018) being retail employees, Apple's median employee total compensation was over $55,000 in FY2018. That's median, not mean, so the number isn't inflated by very-highly compensated employees at the top.

  Thanks for the cite.
  
  The $55K number is less impressive than it sounds. The median pay at Facebook is $240K; Google $197K; Netflix $183K. In fact, Apple's median pay is similar to that of GM's.

  You're welcome.
  
  To the degree it might be impressive, it would be because Apple has so many retail employees.

  edited January 2019
• Reply 10 of 19

  StrangeDays Posts: 12,876member

  January 28, 2019 5:27PM

  anantksundaram said:

  Mike Wuerthele said:

  anantksundaram said:

  I am sorry, but I am not seeing the "$60 billion" number quoted anywhere in the text of the article? Who said it, where, when? Cite?
  
  Also, while I am not belittling the massive addition of jobs in the US, it is important to note that most of Apple's job creation here is in retail, which are low-skill, low-paying jobs.
  

  Third paragraph below the image. Been there since the first draft.

  OK. That's a bit weird, since I even re-read. And did a text search for "60" on the page, and it pulled up only two references: the headline number, and the 60 in "600,000".

  It's another case of important, top-level info being stuffed "below the fold", rather than in the lede. This is a bit odd. 

  
• Reply 11 of 19

  jungmark Posts: 6,926member

  January 28, 2019 5:30PM

  Latko said:

  anantksundaram said:

  I am sorry, but I am not seeing the "$60 billion" number quoted anywhere in the text of the article? Who said it, where, when? Cite?
  
  Also, while I am not belittling the massive addition of jobs in the US, it is important to note that most of Apple's job creation here is in retail, which are low-skill, low-paying jobs.
  

  I do neither (but what difference does it make ?) The point here is that Apple PR wants to impress the public with numbers, big numbers, like all multi-billion moloch multi-nationals do. And that only works for a certain amount of time. At some point, people will say “Duh. What’s in it for me ?” And after that moment, it will only contribute to the “too big, slow, incumbent, too expensive for what it brings” etc. etc. image. How people identify Apple, is determined by people. Not by Tim’s norms an priorities. Because, sadly, he’s not Steve. And his decisions are always overrated by himelf. Spending billions on Corning, on Samsung OLED, on Sapphire initiatives - it all leads to the notion that they lack screen making capabilities and therefore have to do over-expensive purchasing at the competition that they declared thermonuclear war on. The public aren’t fools.

  Nonsense. Who thought Apple made every component in its products? No one did. Apple gets great deals on components due to the quantity it needs. 

  
• Reply 12 of 19

  Hi.Jack Posts: 13member

  January 28, 2019 5:48PM

  I watched Ashton Kuschner”s version of the Steve Jobs movie last night. The corporate culture is killing Apple yet again. In 1984/5 the Mackingtosh was sold at $2500 (~6000 in today”s money).
  When blame was assigned for the low sales volumes of the Mac, Jobs blamed the overpricing of what was supposed to be a $1000 machine for the mass market.
  
  FF to 2018 with iPXs and XR, and the moneyspinner iP is suffering exactly the same. Only this time round, there is no sexy comeback.
  
  Trump’s policy and my shared view is exactly the same. You sell locally at inflated prices and employ but empowered burger flippers. The cheaper manufacturing only expunge greater profits, not lower prices.
  
  And on and on ....
  
  I bought 15+ devices amongst my family in the last 3 years. I don”t own the stock. But Apple has run it’s course in my wallet, because my cc sings every few days with no value added subscriptions.
  
  Android is on the next list, simp,y because Apple”s business practises has become too obvious.

  
• Reply 13 of 19

  maestro64 Posts: 5,043member

  January 28, 2019 5:53PM

  anantksundaram said:

  carnegie said:

  anantksundaram said:

  I am sorry, but I am not seeing the "$60 billion" number quoted anywhere in the text of the article? Who said it, where, when? Cite?
  
  Also, while I am not belittling the massive addition of jobs in the US, it is important to note that most of Apple's job creation here is in retail, which are low-skill, low-paying jobs.
  

  It's from Apple's press release issued today.
  
  I'd also note that, even with many of its 132,000 employees (as of the end of its FY2018) being retail employees, Apple's median employee total compensation was over $55,000 in FY2018. That's median, not mean, so the number isn't inflated by very-highly compensated employees at the top.

  Thanks for the cite.
  
  The $55K number is less impressive than it sounds. The median pay at Facebook is $240K; Google $197K; Netflix $183K. In fact, Apple's median pay is similar to that of GM's.

  Boy you missed his point, this means Apple employs people up and down the income spectrum as such they actually represent what America looks like verse the one's you sited which is a bunch of people who can not relate to people who use their products. If you work with a bunch of people who make $200K per year i highly double you can understand the other 70% of the people who live in this country.  Making $200K a year means you can pretty much doe what you like and do not have to worry about money.
  

  
• Reply 14 of 19

  Mike Wuerthele Posts: 6,861administrator

  January 28, 2019 5:57PM

  StrangeDays said:

  anantksundaram said:

  Mike Wuerthele said:

  anantksundaram said:

  I am sorry, but I am not seeing the "$60 billion" number quoted anywhere in the text of the article? Who said it, where, when? Cite?
  
  Also, while I am not belittling the massive addition of jobs in the US, it is important to note that most of Apple's job creation here is in retail, which are low-skill, low-paying jobs.
  

  Third paragraph below the image. Been there since the first draft.

  OK. That's a bit weird, since I even re-read. And did a text search for "60" on the page, and it pulled up only two references: the headline number, and the 60 in "600,000".

  It's another case of important, top-level info being stuffed "below the fold", rather than in the lede. This is a bit odd. 

  It's in the headline. It doesn't need to be in the headline and the lede. And, it's not like it was 10 paragraphs down.

  edited January 2019
• Reply 15 of 19

  maestro64 Posts: 5,043member

  January 28, 2019 6:03PM

  jungmark said:

  Latko said:

  anantksundaram said:

  I am sorry, but I am not seeing the "$60 billion" number quoted anywhere in the text of the article? Who said it, where, when? Cite?
  
  Also, while I am not belittling the massive addition of jobs in the US, it is important to note that most of Apple's job creation here is in retail, which are low-skill, low-paying jobs.
  

  I do neither (but what difference does it make ?) The point here is that Apple PR wants to impress the public with numbers, big numbers, like all multi-billion moloch multi-nationals do. And that only works for a certain amount of time. At some point, people will say “Duh. What’s in it for me ?” And after that moment, it will only contribute to the “too big, slow, incumbent, too expensive for what it brings” etc. etc. image. How people identify Apple, is determined by people. Not by Tim’s norms an priorities. Because, sadly, he’s not Steve. And his decisions are always overrated by himelf. Spending billions on Corning, on Samsung OLED, on Sapphire initiatives - it all leads to the notion that they lack screen making capabilities and therefore have to do over-expensive purchasing at the competition that they declared thermonuclear war on. The public aren’t fools.

  Nonsense. Who thought Apple made every component in its products? No one did. Apple gets great deals on components due to the quantity it needs. 

  
  At first I had no idea what his point was, but I think you hit on it. Some how he thinks only companies which are totally vertically integrated are successful like may TCL TV. If you never worked in high Tech, no US company is vertically integrated, the last big ones were Ford, GE and IBM, and the reason they are not, because you can not pivot and turn when technology changes if you have all technologies under one roof. 
  
  The other things most people fail to understand about Apple and many technologies companies, Just because Apple does not control the manufacturing of a technology does not mean they do not control the design and IP of the product. People think Apple calls up Samsung and said send over your next great display, when in reality Apple is providing design spec to companies like Samsung and tells them how to build the display they want. It like the VCSEL wafers made by Finisar, Apple and Finisar work on this together to develop the technology for Apple, this is why no one has knocked off the faceID at this point. Its in the tech that Apple controls.
  

  
• Reply 16 of 19

  SpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member

  January 28, 2019 9:09PM

  tbornot said:

  Note that in China, Apple is not dinged for paying their workers below minimum wage, they are dinged for SLAVERY.  I know the difference might appear subtle, but it’s tremendous in its evilness.

  Chinese workers are constantly jumping ship from one company to another for better pay, even if it means they work in conditions that Western workers would never tolerate. I’ve been there and saw this for myself. There is no slavery. That’s uninformed nonsense.

  
• Reply 17 of 19

  radarthekat Posts: 3,842moderator

  January 28, 2019 10:25PM

  tbornot said:

  Note that in China, Apple is not dinged for paying their workers below minimum wage, they are dinged for SLAVERY.  I know the difference might appear subtle, but it’s tremendous in its evilness.

  You’re talking about Apple retail employees in China? Please cite your source that shows Apple pays them below minimum wage?  As far as I know, Apple has no other employees in China, except a relative few in executive positions who coordinate with the companies that manufacture components for Apple and coordinate with Apple’s product manufacturing partners.  

  
• Reply 18 of 19

  cornchip Posts: 1,949member

  January 28, 2019 11:14PM

  anantksundaram said:

  carnegie said:

  anantksundaram said:

  I am sorry, but I am not seeing the "$60 billion" number quoted anywhere in the text of the article? Who said it, where, when? Cite?
  
  Also, while I am not belittling the massive addition of jobs in the US, it is important to note that most of Apple's job creation here is in retail, which are low-skill, low-paying jobs.
  

  It's from Apple's press release issued today.
  
  I'd also note that, even with many of its 132,000 employees (as of the end of its FY2018) being retail employees, Apple's median employee total compensation was over $55,000 in FY2018. That's median, not mean, so the number isn't inflated by very-highly compensated employees at the top.

  Thanks for the cite.
  
  The $55K number is less impressive than it sounds. The median pay at Facebook is $240K; Google $197K; Netflix $183K. In fact, Apple's median pay is similar to that of GM's.

  
  Fwiw, I’d love to make 55k yr, & I’m a 2-college-degreed, skilled employee with a decade of experience. Would be well over 10K what I’m making now.

  
• Reply 19 of 19

  genovelle Posts: 1,480member

  January 28, 2019 11:25PM

  tbornot said:

  Note that in China, Apple is not dinged for paying their workers below minimum wage, they are dinged for SLAVERY.  I know the difference might appear subtle, but it’s tremendous in its evilness.

  Are your favorite companies dinged? I’m assuming Samsung and other Android makers are your preferred tech. Well they all build in China. Apple actually raised the standards and the pay there. It amounts to willingness. They can compete with other companies because the cost start of the same but by providing volume for just a few items the economy of scale kicks in to provide an advantage. I doubt seriously you would be willing to pay for an Apple quality phone built solely in the US. The cost of the Mac Pro should give you a hint of the price.