spheric
About
- Username
- spheric
- Joined
- Visits
- 290
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 4,415
- Badges
- 1
- Posts
- 2,803
Reactions
-
New Vietnam trade deal means Apple will pay at least five times more in tariffs
I was wondering what the hell made this happen…
I've found the reason:
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna208169
Of course, somebody is building a 1.5 billion dollar golf course…in Vietnam.Jesus Christ.
-
Apple stock bloodbath continues after China applies retaliatory tariffs
Oh, he’s played way more golf than Obama.Stabitha_Christie said:
We know how much Obama played golf because the administration was transparent. We don't don show much Trump paid golf because the administration is not transparent. Also, in his first term he spent 102 million on golf. At the time was just 12 million under what Obama spent on golf for his two terms. So far in this term he has spend another 18 million. So he may or may not have played as much golf as Obama but he has spent more on golf and the personally profits from the money the government spends on his golfing. But he is totally about trying to cut government spending.22july2013 said:
Obama played golf 333 times during his 8 years, which is more than Trump. Trump's golf tally is harder to count, because one of his homes is on a golf course, and he's not always playing golf when he's at that home.lwr32 said:
And how often was Obama on the golf course?
-
Apple stock bloodbath continues after China applies retaliatory tariffs
That’s 333 ROUNDS of golf.22july2013 said:
Obama played golf 333 times during his 8 years, which is more than Trump. Trump's golf tally is harder to count, because one of his homes is on a golf course, and he's not always playing golf when he's at that home.Tr*mp spent 293 days playing golf during his first term — in half the time.You do the math (or, more likely, ignore it).
-
EU's dominant music service wants Apple to be penalized for dominance
davidw said:
You're right, it's about "abuse" of dominance.
Antitrust is not about abusing market dominance. It is about unfairly abusing market position.There is no requirement to be a monopoly, nor to be the single "dominant" company in a market.One simply needs to be big enough to be able to abuse market clout.We're used to Apple Insider's editorialising-posing-as-"reporting" being unaware of this fact, but they're a lost cause.It is a point worth considering if you're going to argue about antitrust, though. -
Apple cut too much by removing MagSafe from the iPhone 16e
Rumour has it, the magnets interfere with Apple's new C1 modem chip.
