backtop


Print 98 comment(s) - last by djdjohnson.. on Mar 1 at 5:45 PM


  (Source: thetechjournal.com)
Cook is wondering what to do with the company's $97.6 billion

There's no doubt that Apple is a cash cow. Just last year, many reports started circulating that the tech giant had a larger bank account than the U.S. government, where Apple ended June 2011 with $76.2 billion and the government had $73.8 billion. Now, Apple CEO Tim Cook is saying that the company has more money than it needs.

At the annual shareholders' meeting on Thursday, which is the first since former Apple CEO Steve Jobs' death, Cook tried to determine whether Apple should stop hoarding cash the way Jobs has been for years, or if it's time to stick a hand in the $97.6 billion cookie jar and pay shareholders a dividend this year.

Apple used to pay shareholders a quarterly dividend, but stopped doing so in 1995 because of Apple's financial hardships. Apple even had to turn to Microsoft for a $150 million infusion around the time that Jobs came back as CEO in 1997.

After those dark times, Jobs held on to every cent that the company made. When the new millennium rolled around, Apple started seeing great success with Macs, Macbooks, iPods/iPod touch's, iPhones and iPads. Despite the large amount of cash coming in, Jobs continued pinching pennies.

Now, Jobs has been deceased since October 5, 2011, and Cook is looking to use some of the money that it has because he said "it's more than we need to run the company." The problem is figuring out what to do with the money.

Paying a dividend to shareholders would offer a long-term increase to Apple's stock price because it would lure new investors who only buy shares in companies with a dividend.

However, Apple shareholder Asif Khan of Sugar Land, Texas suggested that Cook not provide a quarterly dividend every three months because it might be misinterpreted by some investors that Apple is losing faith in its ability to continue pushing its stock price higher as the company keeps introducing popular products. Rather, Khan would prefer Apple to pay a one-time divided later this year before the federal tax rate limits dividends to 15 percent.

Apple's stock has soared 50 percent over the past year, producing about $160 billion in shareholder wealth and now has a market value of $480 billion. Shares of Apple rose less than 1 percent to $516.39 at closing yesterday.

Another suggestion of what to do with the cash was to buy Greece, which is currently experiencing a debt crisis, but Cook said Apple is not interested.

The cash cow is only likely to get larger with Apple planning several product and software launches this year. For instance, the iPad 3 is due to be announced at an event next week, and the OS X Mountain Lion operating system is due this year as well.

Source: Bloomberg



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Make more jobs!
By chilenoinusa on 2/24/2012 9:23:37 AM , Rating: 3
The best thing Apple can do with that money is to create new jobs in the US. Obviously everyone knows there are problems with the labor Apple uses (Foxconn). So instead of contracting other companies to create the Apple products, why not hire people here that can do the same? They have the money to pay the salary required from US. Also, I'm sure they would sell even more products if they are marked as "Made in US".




RE: Make more jobs!
By vortmax2 on 2/24/2012 11:03:32 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Also, I'm sure they would sell even more products if they are marked as "Made in US".


...instead of "Designed in California"...


RE: Make more jobs!
By The Raven on 2/24/2012 1:44:00 PM , Rating: 1
So they should donate it all to Ron Paul's campaign?


RE: Make more jobs!
By The Raven on 2/24/2012 1:56:00 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
So instead of contracting other companies to create the Apple products, why not hire people here that can do the same?

$87/wk there compared to minimum $280+ here in the US. And that is not counting payroll taxes and other regulation like worker's comp, etc. Apple would die if they did that.

So you are out of your mind, unless you are ok with allowing illegals to to take these jobs legally at prevailing wages like $1/hr or something like that. It certainly won't be the US high-school educated+ citizens here.
quote:
They have the money to pay the salary required from US.
In conclusion: no they don't. The US itself doesn't have that kind of money. Why don't you think these freedom-hating politicians in DC don't do that already? I mean they could easily tax all that cash away from Apple and therefore make them do it, capice?


RE: Make more jobs!
By Solandri on 2/24/2012 2:45:44 PM , Rating: 1
I'm kinda curious where all the people saying Exxon should pay a windfall profits tax have gone. The $13.1 billion in profit Apple reported last quarter is the second-largest by a company ever, behind the $14.8 billion Exxon reported in 3Q2008.

And Exxon did it on $138 billion in revenue, a 10.7% profit margin. Apple did it with just $46.3 billion in revenue, a 28.2% profit margin.

Or are only oil companies allowed to have their profits described as "windfall"?


RE: Make more jobs!
By FITCamaro on 2/24/2012 2:59:16 PM , Rating: 1
Of course because hippies love Apple but oil companies are evil.


RE: Make more jobs!
By sigmatau on 2/24/2012 9:01:20 PM , Rating: 2
I think you are confusing discussions. Exxon was vilified, and rightfully so, for being so profitable AND taking tax subsidies as though they are some up and coming vital industry that is struggling.


RE: Make more jobs!
By weskurtz0081 on 2/25/2012 1:42:31 AM , Rating: 1
So, you are saying Exxon should be vilified for taking tax breaks (that's what subsidies basically are, tax breaks) but Apple shouldn't be? Is Apple in a "up and coming vital industry that is struggling"? Come on man, the oil companies were just the villain de jour that politicians used to channel the anger away from DC.

Not only does Exxon have a higher effective tax rate in the US than Apple, but they have MUCH lower margins and Apple receives some of the same "subsidies" that the Exxon receives in section 199 of the tax code... only Apple is able to get away with a 9% reduction while the EVIL OIL COMPANIES are capped at a max of 6%.

It's funny how many of those articles have been retracted, corrected, and proven to be flat out false since the outrage and blame shifting that took place in 2009. And, without those oil companies, the iPhone wouldn't be able to exist.


RE: Make more jobs!
By sigmatau on 2/25/2012 3:48:45 PM , Rating: 3
I was not aware that Apple received tax breaks in the amount of $10 billion a year like Exxon? If they do then yes. Apple should not receive any tax breaks really.

You must be a politician as you invented words that you claimed I typed. Nice stretch there buddy though. Good try!


RE: Make more jobs!
By weskurtz0081 on 2/26/2012 11:56:06 PM , Rating: 3
There are tons of different "subsidies" that all company get for manufacturing in the US, there are subsidies for capital equipment, their are foreign tax credits (for paying taxes to foreign countries), and then the ability to write off other types of business costs. All industries get all sorts of tax writes offs (AKA- subsidies), not just Exxon and Apple.

Keep in mind, Exxon pays a TON of taxes, for example in Q1/2011, when XOM made about $10Billion in profit, they paid about $8Billion in taxes (roughly 40% of the gross).

Just do a little research, that's all. Politicians singled out the oil companies and started misleading the public in order to avert the anger that was being aimed at them.

And, I don't think I claimed you typed any words that you didn't. Interesting though trying to shift the conversation away from the topic at hand.


RE: Make more jobs!
By Reclaimer77 on 2/24/2012 4:07:59 PM , Rating: 3
Idealist feel good fluff, that's what this post is. Parts from 30 different companies right there near Foxconn go into the iPhone/iPad. Meaning if Apple moved manufacturing to America, they would have to ship billions of components from China on a regular basis! What do you think that would do to the price of these things?

When you actually examine the facts, you come to the admittedly sad conclusion that there is nowhere else in the world Apple can make these products at the scale necessary to satisfy demand. Certainly not here in America. I doubt anyone would allow a factory of the scale necessary (500,000k+ employees) to be built in their backyard.


RE: Make more jobs!
By simsony on 2/25/2012 11:26:15 AM , Rating: 2
Not to mention what moving production to the US would do to their stock price.

If it was just about spending the money, they could move production, spend all the money, and when they run out, move back to China.

You have to invest the money not just spend it. The ROI of such a move would and will be negative.


RE: Make more jobs!
By augiem on 2/27/2012 3:08:57 AM , Rating: 1
Sure they can! They'd just have to charge $4000 / iPad. Just sayin...


RE: Make more jobs!
By teng029 on 2/25/2012 2:32:27 PM , Rating: 2
and this is based on what set of facts?


RE: Make more jobs!
By LordSojar on 2/26/2012 10:11:23 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
and this is based on what set of facts?


Where most economic "facts" here on DailyTech are pulled from... The YERPOYA. What is the YERPOYA you ask? Yearly Economic Review Pulled
Out of Your Ass


RE: Make more jobs!
By teko on 2/27/2012 2:36:51 PM , Rating: 1
RE: Make more Jobs

I don't think cloning is legal yet... But maybe Apple can change that!


Stop patent trolling and give it to charity?
By quiksilvr on 2/24/2012 8:54:58 AM , Rating: 4
How about NOT wasting millions of dollars and time on that and instead focus that money towards the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation or make your own charity foundation?

That way Apple users will feel more smug about the fact that with every Mac they buy they are "changing the world" or whatever.




RE: Stop patent trolling and give it to charity?
By messele on 2/24/12, Rating: 0
By Shig on 2/24/2012 11:17:11 AM , Rating: 2
I think their best bet would be to look at any and all oil usage at every level on their balance sheets and try to eliminate it.

Personally I don't like charity because it creates no incentive. If I had a lot of money to give away I'd donate it to the X-Prize Foundation. There you see your money given back multiple times from all the teams that compete over your 'prize'.

For example, there are already attachments that go onto the iPhone that turn it into a microscope, a simple blood analyzer, and an optometry tool. Build up incentives that can let the iPhone do pretty much everything. Most medical tools haven't been really updated that much in decades.


By Cape Consultant on 2/24/2012 12:29:44 PM , Rating: 1
I one hundred percent agree with this. Birth control would cure all disease because the people would not exist so they would not get sick :)

I love Bill Gates, but I wold choose a much different way of spending that money.

But he earned it, so he gets to spend it, not me :(


By The Raven on 2/24/2012 1:37:40 PM , Rating: 2
Here is a classic no-cost solution. They would just need to run a balls-to-the-wall ad campaign...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTLA5jB5jow


RE: Stop patent trolling and give it to charity?
By sigmatau on 2/24/2012 9:10:32 PM , Rating: 1
Go to Japan if you want to see a slowdown in reproduction rates. It just blows my mind that what I learned in 6th grade eludes adults.

I think you are a horrible judge of charities. That charity is doing more for humanity than any other for the money they spend. If they could cure cancer or AIDS, they would. But instead, they wanted to get the most bang for their buck and eradicate other horrible diseases that would save the most lives. Just because those lives are not your mother or yourself does not mean they are not worth saving. Arrogant twit.


RE: Stop patent trolling and give it to charity?
By messele on 2/25/2012 4:36:20 AM , Rating: 3
You should have spent more time in 6th grade learning to read thoroughly.

Let's recap - saving lives = a good thing (that's the bit where you are an idiot)

Preventing an avalanche of unsustainable new lives = a better cure in the long term.

If it's not malaria that will kill overpopulated, underdeveloped countries it's AIDS or it's some other disease, perhaps one that is yet to be diagnosed, let alone cured).

So here's a radical ideal. How about we take all the education and religion issues that are the root of the overpopulation / disease problem and tackle those? Who said that means not tackling a treatable disease for those that have it?

Saving lives is wonderful. Saving millions of lives without tackling the consequences or addressing the dirty little unthinkable truths is a recipe for disaster.

But it's ok. Carry on living in your insular bubble fantasising about what a wonderful disease-free long-lived world we could have.


RE: Stop patent trolling and give it to charity?
By sigmatau on 2/25/12, Rating: 0
By messele on 2/25/2012 4:09:28 PM , Rating: 3
Again we seem to be missing the bit where words are structured into cohenrant sentences. You cant skim over words just to suit what you've already planned on saying as a reply. Let's make it simple, third time lucky you might get it even if you don't agree with my point of view...

1/ Cure those that are already alive but ill.

2/ Cure future mass sickness by educating people that breeding lots of sick children in the hope that one may survive into adulthood is a bad idea since the odds are self defeating and if by chance they all survive then the population will increase causing massive disease and famine problem. One child = less drain on resources and less chance of mass disease.

If you don't have mass births then aid workers have a chance to get to grips with the disease and mass deaths will eventually be stemmed. Is that so hard to understand?


RE: Stop patent trolling and give it to charity?
By HrilL on 2/24/12, Rating: 0
By teng029 on 2/25/2012 2:34:31 PM , Rating: 2
how about you do what you want with your money and leave others to do what they will with theirs?


Buy market share?
By zero2dash on 2/24/2012 12:39:47 PM , Rating: 1
Why not lower the prices on your products then? Maybe your market share will go up and you'll be more than a blip on the radar of the computer industry.

Oh wait, this is Apple we're talking about....the company that charges people for service packs.




RE: Buy market share?
By royalcrown on 2/24/2012 2:49:39 PM , Rating: 1
Actually they DON'T, they charge for dot releases with new features. Software updates are delivered through Itunes on Windows and OS X for free.

Not to mention that the dot releases cost 30 bucks or so, it's not so much (most times) for what is changed.


RE: Buy market share?
By TakinYourPoints on 2/24/2012 3:46:19 PM , Rating: 1
Then there's the fact that most OS X versions are substantial upgrades (I'd put 10.6 as the one exception as nearly everything was under-the-hood). The move from 10.3 to 10.4 was a bigger leap than the move from XP to Vista, and it cost less. To compare those upgrades to mere service packs is asinine.


RE: Buy market share?
By zero2dash on 2/24/2012 10:49:16 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, because no Microsoft service pack has ever offered new features for the same price of free.

Keep eating it up boys and girls, there's plenty to go around.

The fact is you can call it a dot upgrade but the fact remains it's still the same thing as a free service pack in Windows because it's the same thing. You're not going from OS X 10 to OS X 11, you're going 10.1, 10.2, 10.3 etc etc repeat ad nauseum. I went from 10.3 to 10.4 and 10.5. Still had to pay for those so called "upgrades". You might as well consider it OS X 10 SP7 at this point because that's what it is. "Oh they change the style of the Dock, surely that's an UPGRADE." Wrong.

10.3 to 10.4 was a bigger leap than XP to Vista? [rolleyes]


RE: Buy market share?
By messele on 2/25/2012 11:24:17 AM , Rating: 2
I think it was - or at least it was in terms of positive features as opposed to a bunch of pain in the arse security kludges that we all so loved so much with Vista that we tried to hang on to XP as long as possible. Vista to Win7 was a far bigger and more worthwhile upgrade but who's brave enough to admit that Vista was a pile of poop after all?

The Dock change comment pretty much writes off the rest of what you have to say since changes like that (while counted in the 100's listed with every upgrade) are insignificant compared to the dozen or two dozen that come with each point upgrade that represent excellent value for money.

I could provide an extensive list but I really cannot be bothered to preach to the terminally ignorant.


RE: Buy market share?
By TakinYourPoints on 2/25/2012 8:13:24 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The Dock change comment pretty much writes off the rest of what you have to say since changes like that (while counted in the 100's listed with every upgrade) are insignificant compared to the dozen or two dozen that come with each point upgrade that represent excellent value for money.


Nailed it. Now watch him write off substantial changes made to workspace management, systemwide indexing, move to a 64-bit operating system, and hundreds of other additions as things you'd get in a service pack. Ridiculous


RE: Buy market share?
By TakinYourPoints on 2/25/2012 8:07:48 PM , Rating: 2
It was absolutely a bigger upgrade. I've made Microsoft OS upgrades since MS-DOS 4.0 and Mac upgrades only since OS 10.2. I personally upgraded machines from both XP to Vista and 10.3 to 10.4, and featurewise the OS X upgrades have been far more substantial than a service pack. Spotlight systemwide indexing and search (which still works better than Windows Search in Windows 7) was by itself far beyond what you'd see in a mere service pack, and it was one of many additionas in that upgrade.

It seems that you are basing the value of the upgrade on something copmpletely superficial, the name, rather than looking at added functionality for end users and changes under the hood.

Your entire argument hinges on marketing names rather than features. Do you realize how stupid that sounds?


RE: Buy market share?
By djdjohnson on 3/1/2012 5:45:29 PM , Rating: 2
XP to Vista was almost a bigger upgrade than System 1 to OS X. The UI for the Mac has hardly changed since it came out in 1984. Sure, they've added the dock and color to the interface, but it's still the same basic UI.

At least in XP to Vista they reworked a ton of stuff. And the internals in Vista are incredibly different than they were in XP. Microsoft nearly doubled the number of APIs and features available to developers in Vista. You can't say anything like that about 10.anything to 10.anything else. It's more-or-less the same as when it shipped more than 10 years ago.


More money than they need? How about...
By DaveLessnau on 2/24/2012 8:20:51 AM , Rating: 2
1. Buy more politicians.
2. Send it to me.




RE: More money than they need? How about...
By shplatt on 2/24/2012 10:42:55 AM , Rating: 3
1. Profit
2. ???
3. Buy more politicians.
4. Send them to me.

Fixed it.


By Rott3nHIppi3 on 2/24/2012 2:46:11 PM , Rating: 2
No.. you got it backwards. The Underwear Gnomes don't get profit till after ?

1. Buy more politicians
2. ????
3. Profit


By The Raven on 2/24/2012 2:49:16 PM , Rating: 2
Are these options...?
...or steps?

Step 1. Buy Nancy Pelosi
Step 2. Send it to me


Buy Foxconn
By sviola on 2/24/2012 9:29:21 AM , Rating: 4
They should buy Foxconn and improve work condition for the employees.




RE: Buy Foxconn
By siberus on 2/24/2012 9:47:17 AM , Rating: 2
But then they couldn't treat them like sh*t :o


RE: Buy Foxconn
By Rott3nHIppi3 on 2/24/2012 2:49:19 PM , Rating: 2
And then they'd probably Unionize!


Doesn't matter
By FITCamaro on 2/24/2012 8:58:17 AM , Rating: 2
The iSheeple will continue to give them more every 9 months with each new product release.




RE: Doesn't matter
By xti on 2/24/2012 10:00:12 AM , Rating: 2
its i-chump change anyways.


RE: Doesn't matter
By corduroygt on 2/24/2012 11:41:33 AM , Rating: 2
Don't you have a Macbook Pro?


hmm
By Jahooba on 2/24/12, Rating: 0
RE: hmm
By michael2k on 2/24/2012 10:03:07 AM , Rating: 2
That's a bad idea. Giving away the iPhone 5 free on contract means selling it for $375 or so, and pushing the 4S to $300 and the 4 to $200.

Essentially they would make almost no money and their share price would fall as everyone sells AAPL.

Also, it's illegal to flood the market for a year to crush competitors.


RE: hmm
By tng on 2/24/2012 6:30:40 PM , Rating: 2
While the idea is good, yeah there are laws against piracy pricing. Also there would be a customer backlash against them from many people who bought the 4 and 4S who didn't get their phone for free, I would think.


RE: hmm
By Taft12 on 2/26/2012 10:51:38 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Essentially they would make almost no money


You seem to be forgetting Apple's cut of app store sales...


Paying a dividend would devalue the company
By bobdelt on 2/24/2012 9:38:00 AM , Rating: 2
And force investors to pay a tax on the dividend, instead of deferring the tax until the stock is sold. Every time a dividend is paid, the stock prices drops by that same amount (why wouldnt it, the balance sheet just shrank) - any difference is due to market activity. A lot of people chase dividends, buying stocks before ex-date, stupidest thing you can do, you immediately get hit with the tax, and the stock drops right after.

Analysts are calling for apple to do something with the cash because they feel like they can invest it better than apple. Apple is doing much with it.

Please stop the financial reporting. It's terrible stuff every time. Like when you reported AT&T was "doubling down" on the TMO deal, doubling the cash they're going to spend to push the deal through, and then they folded a week later. Excellent reporting.

What happened to this site? It use to be good.




By TakinYourPoints on 2/24/2012 3:43:17 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Please stop the financial reporting. It's terrible stuff every time. Like when you reported AT&T was "doubling down" on the TMO deal, doubling the cash they're going to spend to push the deal through, and then they folded a week later. Excellent reporting.


I'd say it extends well past just financial reporting.

quote:
What happened to this site? It use to be good.


I really have to dig deep to remember that. :)


My 2cents
By wordsworm on 2/24/2012 10:02:18 PM , Rating: 2
There are two types of folks who give to charity: first, there are those who give and like to draw attention to themselves for it. What they do is great, and I'm not being critical. But then there's the second kind: the folks who give to charity quietly. I'm not saying that one is better than the other. But, I can't help but wonder if maybe Steve Jobs was the latter kind. We don't really know.

Now, what they should do with all that money... hard to say. Enter the commercial space race anyone?




RE: My 2cents
By messele on 2/25/2012 4:15:46 PM , Rating: 2
Well it is known that Jobs via Apple did fund large charity projects in California, possibly in the US at large, but not much is known or spoken of it. I think a hospital in Palo Alto was one example they were involved in.

I'm sure he could live with that, if you take my meaning.


send your bank details
By alu on 2/24/2012 9:46:39 AM , Rating: 3
Title and headline sound like the beginning of a Nigerian letter.




Lower the Inflated Prices of Its Products?
By Arsynic on 2/24/2012 10:07:31 AM , Rating: 1
No way! Why should they? iTards will pay anything for anything with their logo on it.




By Miskonius on 2/24/2012 10:42:28 AM , Rating: 2
I agree, Apple should invest that money in marketing and create more iTards...


Create more jobs
By jvillaro on 2/24/2012 12:54:44 PM , Rating: 2
How about creating more jobs in America (in the US or countries of the continent)?
Will it increase the cost of the products? It shouldn't, they already have a huge profit margin, they could take a "hit" and win less per device but still come out with a plus profit.




RE: Create more jobs
By fourdegrees11 on 2/24/2012 3:29:10 PM , Rating: 1
I agree. They have more cash then they know what to do with, obviously they can take a hit on profit margins. Take that huge pile of cash and build US factories to produce their products. They could even buy other US companies like TI and manufacture the majority of the product in house, while expanding their business to OEM sales for other companies. With high tech robotic manufacturing they wouldn't even need to hire a massive labor force, but the PR gain would be massive.


By happyfirst on 2/24/2012 9:00:15 AM , Rating: 2
Do not offer a dividend. Shareholders are already rewarded since your stock just goes up.

How about spending that money to get jobs back over here into the U.S.?




incorrect
By Fraggeren on 2/24/2012 9:10:57 AM , Rating: 2
"Paying a dividend to shareholders would offer a long-term increase to Apple's stock price because it would lure new investors who only buy shares in companies with a dividend."

This is not how it works. Money the company pays in dividend goes out of the company and the company should be valued that less, just look at MSFT as an example, if they didn't pay dividend the shareprice would be that much higher. It's all about valuation, but it's true some older folks only invest in dividend stocks because they're more likely to be mature.




THIS
By nafhan on 2/24/2012 9:18:43 AM , Rating: 2
This is actually what intrigues me most about Apple as a company. What are they going to do with their money? They could absolutely continue operating on just what's coming in - they don't need it, and sitting on it seems... wasteful. It'll be very interesting to find out.




Bailout California
By Lord 666 on 2/24/2012 9:35:23 AM , Rating: 2
Probably the most logical... Grant their home state money it does not go bankrupt.




By Gungel on 2/24/2012 9:40:12 AM , Rating: 2
70589510921

Thank you Apple.




Here's a novel idea...
By murray13 on 2/24/2012 10:09:41 AM , Rating: 2
How about not charging so much for your products.




By masamasa on 2/24/2012 11:01:05 AM , Rating: 2
...they have more arrogance than they need.




What even is this...
By Newspapercrane on 2/24/2012 11:46:03 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Another suggestion of what to do with the cash was to buy Greece, which is currently experiencing a debt crisis, but Cook said Apple is not interested.


I don't even know what to think about this...




an idea
By bbcdude on 2/24/2012 11:56:20 AM , Rating: 2
how about pay the shareholders. Like any normal company




so they are
By kattanna on 2/24/2012 12:11:59 PM , Rating: 2
"spending it wrong'?




Apple.
By AlbertUK on 2/24/2012 12:29:15 PM , Rating: 2
Apple should be congratulated on the amazing business achievements that they have made and also their total domination of the smartphone market with the Apple iPatch . Rival companies that make smartphones like IKEA , Boeing , Toyota , Ben&Jerry's etc can only look on with envy wishing that they too could achieve such wonderful results and products loved throughout the world .




By Rott3nHIppi3 on 2/24/2012 3:01:53 PM , Rating: 2
..... invest that extra capital into companies that will reduce our CO2 footprint; companies like Solyndra, Amonix, Beacon Power, National Renewable Energy Lab, Think, and Green Vehicle.

NO, NO wait..... BAD IDEA. BAD IDEA!!!




This is actually their problem
By Ramtech on 2/24/2012 3:55:26 PM , Rating: 2
Jobs ego didn't tolerated another leading type like him so Apple now is lacking viable successor to throne with Jobs-like vision

They are like animals which lost their mother they don't know what do: Apple is basically continuing and repeating what Jobs taught them but they are unable create anything new because Jobs didn't taught them more.




Isn't it obvious
By TSS on 2/24/2012 6:52:34 PM , Rating: 2
Use the money to sue more people!




iCar
By piomaj on 2/24/2012 7:58:22 PM , Rating: 2
What don't they make an iCar. Seriously, branching out is not such a bad idea with that much money.




iCult
By piomaj on 2/24/2012 8:02:24 PM , Rating: 2
Make they should make iCult an official religion and build places of worship. Futuristic and high-tech iChurches for ipeople. Religious organizations are exempt from taxes is the US, right?




Solution
By Warwulf on 2/25/2012 8:56:42 AM , Rating: 2
Why not blow every penny of that $97B on frivolous lawsuits against Android?

It's what Steve Jobs would have wanted.




Easy
By IGx89 on 2/24/12, Rating: -1
RE: Easy
By Shadowself on 2/24/2012 9:07:07 AM , Rating: 3
Apple already does that for certain charities, e.g., donations to education institutions among others.


RE: Easy
By nafhan on 2/24/2012 9:15:22 AM , Rating: 2
Not at a level where they will make a notable dent in that much money.


RE: Easy
By mcnabney on 2/24/2012 9:21:55 AM , Rating: 2
My employer - Verizon - has done it for any 501(3)(c) charity. Dollar for dollar. I think the annual limit is 15% of your salary.

One of the many differences between businesses that are part of their community and a business that hoardes cash like a cult.


RE: Easy
By michael2k on 2/24/2012 9:59:48 AM , Rating: 2
Are you really blaming Apple for customers throwing cash at them?

Or are you just criticizing them for their dollar matching policy? Because according to what I've read, it's similar to Verizon:
http://www.macrumors.com/2011/11/10/apple-and-empl...

$10k and any 501(3)(c) charity. The big difference is likely that Apple has only 60k employees to Verizon's 193k employees. In any case, last year was Apple's first to do the dollar match, so you can blame Jobs if you want but Cook doesn't appear to be nearly as stingy.


RE: Easy
By MrBlastman on 2/24/2012 10:47:12 AM , Rating: 2
I can't think of a better charity or community to invest in that their own--the American community. They should take all their cash, build factories here and use those empty floors to employ Americans to build their products.


RE: Easy
By Iaiken on 2/24/2012 11:44:00 AM , Rating: 3
You mean like they used to back when the higher cost of an Apple product was because of it's US origin?


RE: Easy
By MrBlastman on 2/24/2012 1:25:04 PM , Rating: 2
As opposed to what? No reason at all? :P Yes. I've stated in other articles the cost would only increase by 25-30% on the baseline, internal side of things causing the consumer to absorb maybe half... i.e. a 10-15% price increase at most.

I don't support or condone Apple, but if they were to make a move like this, it certainly would make me look at them more favorably. The products would finally have a reason to command a premium.


RE: Easy
By Pirks on 2/24/2012 1:36:07 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
They should take all their cash, build factories here and use those empty floors to employ Americans to build their products
Reclaimer where are thou? Blastman here needs your enlightenment about this topic. Please :)


RE: Easy
By Reclaimer77 on 2/24/2012 4:01:31 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Reclaimer where are thou? Blastman here needs your enlightenment about this topic. Please :)


Meah nobody listens to me anyway about that lol. Me and Blast have already discussed it, he knows the deal.

America just isn't able to produce on this scale anymore. We lost the ability to compete. It's not Apple's job to fix unemployment or all of our manufacturing woes.


RE: Easy
By seamonkey79 on 2/24/2012 5:55:14 PM , Rating: 3
...and everyone knows that the best way to fix something is to not try to fix it at all, that way it'll just be fixed one day.


RE: Easy
By tng on 2/24/2012 6:19:14 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
It's not Apple's job to fix unemployment or all of our manufacturing woes.
No, but you got to start somewhere. I think that Apple has put themselves out there with the image they have created and are paying the price with the whole Foxcon thing. Imagine the image boost if they announced that they were moving at least some of the assembly back to the US.


RE: Easy
By sigmatau on 2/24/2012 8:56:04 PM , Rating: 3
Samsung must be a smarter than Apple. They figured out how to supply CPUs for Apple's iphone by manufacturing them in the United States.

Who would have thought that one of the most expensive, if not the most expensive, component of the iphone is made in the US by a foreign company.


RE: Easy
By messele on 2/25/2012 11:14:26 AM , Rating: 2
Indeed. All those tiny Americans shrunken down wiring all of those billions of transistors on microchips. That truly is America's saviour.

Or it could be that the process of manufacturing a microchip is 1,000's of times less labour intensive than final assembly of an electronics product and therefore those jobs that are required are much more technically demanding and therefore much better paid.

Some job's are necessarily better performed in the West, some are provably better performed in the counties with a vast excess of labour.


RE: Easy
By sigmatau on 2/25/2012 3:55:30 PM , Rating: 2
Sorry nutso. I don't know what "1,000's of times less labour" means. I actually took math classes in school.


RE: Easy
By messele on 2/25/2012 4:25:39 PM , Rating: 2
Go sit on the play mat and I'll explain in simple words just for you.

Take the amount of manual labour (hours and minutes) that go into building a mobile phone. Call this variable 'A' if you wish.

Now take the amount of labour that goes into building a microchip at a fab plant. This is going to be variable 'B'

Mathematically (A/B) >= 1,000

Does that make sense now or do I need to call Bert and Ernie to explain the finer points of why labour intensive jobs are not suited to high wage economies?


RE: Easy
By simsony on 2/25/2012 11:39:38 AM , Rating: 2
Higher cost countries need to do higher skilled manufacturing. CPU manufacturing needs skilled labour, more of that in the US than China, for now.

If it was just about spending the money, they could move assembly to the US, spend all the money, and when they run out, move back to China.

You have to invest the money not just spend it. The ROI of such a move would and will be negative. No one spends $50 for something they can get for $2. Of course, the low price should be ethical, and Apple can do some work there no doubt.


RE: Easy
By protomech on 2/24/2012 1:57:20 PM , Rating: 2
Apple already matches charitable gifts (relatively new program).

http://philanthropy.com/blogs/philanthropytoday/ne...

They could move production back to the US, drop prices, extend standard warranties, etc.


RE: Easy
By Flunk on 2/24/2012 9:58:50 AM , Rating: 2
That's not protecting shareholder's intrests, do you know anything about business?

I say they invest in Oil companies. Let that money work.


RE: Easy
By messele on 2/24/2012 10:30:21 AM , Rating: 2
Actually Apple do that already at 1:1. There's a cap on the amount per individual employee but such a scheme is in place.

Next highly researched criticism?


DT Comments Section
By tayb on 2/24/12, Rating: -1
"What would I do? I'd shut it down and give the money back to the shareholders." -- Michael Dell, after being asked what to do with Apple Computer in 1997














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki