tommikele

80s_Apple_Guy said:

The problem here is image. Every time Apple, the most valuable company in the world, bullies the little guy it looks bad. More than that it incentivizes governments to reign them in with regulations that will cause them significant harm. The EU is licking its chops to go after Apple. Every move that causes another company to become bitter at Apple is another tool the EU and yes, the US will use to justify regulating them. I’m not saying Apple is doing anything wrong, but they seem to quickly forget how they were the small underdog that almost faded away 

No it is't. This is universal method of retail sales employed by every large retailer and applied to non-perishable goods. 

This is not something that is a regulatory matter nor something the EU or Dept. of Commerce or even the courts have the authority to regulate. This is not anti trust, anti-competitive or any of the categories regulators are charged with oversight of. There is nothing illegal, immoral or anything along those lines that is applicable here.

wow321 said:

For a company with so much cash, squeezing little vendors doesn’t particularly sound so ethical.  I’m a big fan of Apple,  but these monopolies are becoming too large for their own good.  

You have a right to your opinion, but it is horribly uniformed, vague and purports to inflict your personal brand of business morality on others.

DAalseth said:

You see, this is the kind of crap that will get Apple in trouble. 

Why is that? And what is the trouble you speak of. And what "crap" is that? Trouble? Seriously, explain your comment.   Stop throwing vague "crap" (your word, not mine) like that out there. You want the government to stop this? You want a law passed?

Changing the payment terms to 60 is pretty lame. Going to a consignment model is not. It's been in use by many industries for decades and still is. Unsold inventory goes back to the manufacturer and they get paid for what they sell. It's part of the price they pay for having the sales outlet. The seller does not accept inventory risk.It's called smart business and cash management. Ever buy goods through Amazon and return something that came from a third party supplier? Every buy clothing in a retail store? I don't think you understand how common this is in retail sales of non-perishable goods? You think Walmart and Target pay suppliers for unsold inventory of non-perishable goods? You think any big retailer pays up front when they don't have to? It's the price you pay to do business with them. Worth the risk for most of them.

A day late and a dollar short and that's a nice way of putting it.

k2kw said:

I expect FB to prevail because Apple’s legal department is Less Successful than Rudy Guillianni. 

Not the slightest bit witty and creative, nor does it score any points in the sarcasm department. Sad is amore accurate description.