/linked/2016/11/15/dignan-harman

Comments

To Be Fair:
>Apple makes the iPhone because they love making personal computers.

That's such a pile of bullshit. If they do it because they love it, why not reduce profit margins to zero?
2:57 am — Wednesday, 16 November 2016
webOS & BB10 forever:
Well, there's still time for Apple to buy BlackBerry, especially since the latter will be revitalized by more enterprise and government business for its software solutions, particularly in light of the coming Trump administration. BlackBerry owns QNX, which is found in many cars. Through QNX ownership or a nice partnership, Apple can still control the brains of the car itself, and not the sound system.
6:28 am — Wednesday, 16 November 2016
anonymous:
> If they do it because they love it, why not reduce profit margins to zero?


Because then they wouldn't have an the resources to make more of them. It's a pretty easy thing to understand, if you try your own hand at business. Even if you do it as a hobby and are an enthusiast, you'll quickly realize that without profits you can't really do anything.


Apple regularly does things that no other company can do (or which isn't really viable for them to do), because Apple has the profits to do it. Unibody CNC milled aluminum cases are one such thing. Going retina was another. Having OS updates (unlike Android) is also among the things that are only possible because of those profits.
11:12 am — Wednesday, 16 November 2016
To Be Fair:
>Because then they wouldn't have an the resources to make more of them.

Nonsense. Apple has enough money and resources in reserve that it could afford to keep making products basically infinitely on zero profit margin.

There's certainly no need to have such high profit margins if they're just doing to for the love of it.

And if it is all about the love of "personal computing" then why the stupid fashion shit like Beats, or the useless vanity of the Apple Watch?
11:59 am — Wednesday, 16 November 2016
anonymous:
@To Be Fair


Sorry, but you don't know anything about what you're talking about. It's sad that most people don't, unless they have some personal business experience.


You're probably one of those people, who thinks that most of the price of a mac, iphone or ipad are pure profits. It's not.
3:31 pm — Wednesday, 16 November 2016
elbowroom:
@webOS & BB10 forever

Apple took a quicker approach. They opened up an office in Ottawa, Canada where QNX is and started poaching QNX employees.

http://ottawacitizen.com/business/local-business/qnx-founder-dan-dodge-now-working-at-apple-inc-reports
7:50 pm — Wednesday, 16 November 2016
elbowroom:
@To Be Fair

Apple Watch is essentially a tiny personal computer that's currently limited as an accessory. Eventually the Watch, or another wearable, will become smarter, and more capable
7:52 pm — Wednesday, 16 November 2016
To Be Fair:
>Sorry, but you don't know anything about what you're talking about. It's sad that most people don't, unless they have some personal business experience.

OK, so tell me where I'm wrong. tell me why does Apple needs to make any more profits (above operating costs) if they just wanted to make products for the love of it.

Tell me why Apple executives need salaries of hundreds of millions of dollars if they're doing it for the love of it.

>You're probably one of those people, who thinks that most of the price of a mac, iphone or ipad are pure profits. It's not.

Nope. Where did I suggest anything like that?

I know they cost money to make. I'm not suggesting they should be free. I'm not suggesting they shouldn't include the costs of facilities and resources in the product.

But if, as Gruber claims, it's all about the love - why is there all this extra profit that's not being re-invested in making products?
10:00 pm — Wednesday, 16 November 2016
To Be Fair:
>Apple Watch is essentially a tiny personal computer that's currently limited as an accessory. Eventually the Watch, or another wearable, will become smarter, and more capable

Yeah, so what? It's still basically a "fashion" item.

Also, if they love personal computing so much, then why neglect the Mac?
10:02 pm — Wednesday, 16 November 2016
anonymous:
Apple didn't buy it because it's not popular with basketball americans. Apple only buys "urban" brands.
10:28 pm — Wednesday, 16 November 2016
fuckin' name:
> OK, so tell me where I'm wrong. tell me why does Apple needs to make any more profits (above operating costs) if they just wanted to make products for the love of it.


For one thing they need to make profits to pay out dividends to the shareholders. But the main reason is that profits, and I repeat myself, enabled them to do crazy shit, that wouldn't be feasible or even possible otherwise.


Buying tens of thousands CNC milling machines every year to produce mass-market aluminium unibody devices wasn't really a thing before Apple did it, which it could both justify and afford only because they have profits. Using high-resolution ("retina") displays in mass-market devices wasn't really a thing before Apple did it, nor was using IPS displays. Hell, even using a decent amount of flash memory wasn't really a viable thing to do before Apple started doing with iPods and Macs. Having a custom OS isn't really that viable for a hardware manufacturer, unless those costs can be offset by having profits. Having custom (while also being best in class at the same time) CPUs isn't a thing thats viable for a hardware manufacturer. Using insanely fast (up to 6x faster than what's currently used in regular PCs) PCI-e based flash storage in mass-market devices also isn't a thing that others can do. Etc, etc, etc.


Is that really so hard to process?


>Tell me why Apple executives need salaries of hundreds of millions of dollars if they're doing it for the love of it.


Apple's executives don't have salaries of hundreds of millions. They have tens of millions in time-restricted share-based bonuses that are mostly used to retain talent, which is a common practice not just in their industry.


>I know they cost money to make. I'm not suggesting they should be free. I'm not suggesting they shouldn't include the costs of facilities and resources in the product.


And support, and software development, and updates, and design, and testing, and a pretty outstanding generous (when compared to the industry average) warranty policy, and R&D, and additional manufacturing expenses, etc, etc, etc. All of this costs a shit load of money and this is what eats up most of that margin that you are so worried about.


> why is there all this extra profit that's not being re-invested in making products?


And why do you think that it isn't being re-invested? Apple's CAPEX and R&D costs grow each year, they acquire new talent and tech to improve their products, they invest in making more custom components (e.g. CPUs, flash controllers, etc), software, services, etc. Hell, the only reason why you think that Apple makes big profits is that most of their competitors suck ass a usually in the state of going down the crapper, if there isn't a local boom in their market (e.g. Nokia circa 2007-2010), and making their product more and more crap.
11:24 pm — Wednesday, 16 November 2016
To Be Fair:
>For one thing they need to make profits to pay out dividends to the shareholders.

They have enough money to make the company private.

And I don't think shareholders have been informed that Apple is just operating for the love of making personal computers.

>But the main reason is that profits, and I repeat myself, enabled them to do crazy shit, that wouldn't be feasible or even possible otherwise.

They have over $200 billion in the bank. What "crazy shit" is that not capable of buying?

>Buying tens of thousands CNC milling machines every year to produce mass-market aluminium unibody devices wasn't really a thing before Apple did it, which it could both justify and afford only because they have profits.

So, build those costs into the margin of the products, and stop there.

>Apple's executives don't have salaries of hundreds of millions. They have tens of millions in time-restricted share-based bonuses that are mostly used to retain talent, which is a common practice not just in their industry.

That's basically a matter of semantics. Whether its salaries or shares, obviously people are making a shit-load of money beyond what's needed for the "love of personal computers."

Why do they need money to "retain talent" if it's just about the love of personal computers, and there isn't some other kind of motive, like personal financial gain?

>And support, and software development, and updates, and design, and testing, and a pretty outstanding generous (when compared to the industry average) warranty policy, and R&D, and additional manufacturing expenses, etc, etc, etc.

So, build that into the cost and stop there. I'm not saying they shouldn't pay for that.

>All of this costs a shit load of money and this is what eats up most of that margin that you are so worried about.

I'm not worried about it. It's Gruber who's claiming they only care about the love of personal computing, not me.

>And why do you think that it isn't being re-invested?

Because Jony Ive is obviously getting money to buy Bentleighs from somewhere. He's not re-investing his income into Apple.

Obviously, there are people making a personal profit from Apple who aren't reinvesting it in the company.

12:32 am — Thursday, 17 November 2016
Leave a Comment
To leave a comment, install the Safari extension!