Since84
Moderator
To infinity and beyond!
Posts: 3,933
|
Post by Since84 on May 22, 2019 2:08:14 GMT -8
|
|
benoir
fire starter
*
Posts: 1,318
|
Post by benoir on May 22, 2019 6:25:20 GMT -8
Like a library in here....
|
|
|
Post by firestorm on May 22, 2019 7:35:47 GMT -8
Like a library in here.... Time to make some noise in the library: TSLA is falling like a brick; should Apple revisit purchase of what I think is a great company? Talk amongst yourselves.
|
|
4aapl
Moderator
Posts: 3,622
|
Post by 4aapl on May 22, 2019 7:57:19 GMT -8
Like a library in here.... Time to make some noise in the library: TSLA is falling like a brick; should Apple revisit purchase of what I think is a great company? Talk amongst yourselves. <whispering>If that $10 per share bear case happened, Apple might be fighting against Buffet to see who could whip out $2B the quickest. Heck, at that price I'd cold call a couple Billionaires in search of financing. But at $35B + 20%, Apple has the means if there is a good reason.</whispering>
|
|
walterwhite
Member
"I am the one who knocks!"... Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 346
|
Post by walterwhite on May 22, 2019 8:09:15 GMT -8
Like a library in here....
what's there to say? nothing Apple does will matter in the short term with headlines like the one above (about 29% earnings cut in case of china ban)... there was another headline last night about citizen boycott in china already starting... could be overblown, but definitely a risk
stock is a prisoner of trade war... which Tarriff Man said was 'good' and 'easy to win'... so much winning
look, people even bringing up tesla out of boredom... i'd rather apple spend extra $50b or whatever on buybacks of its own stock than a risky car company that might have same problems in china as apple does - but yeah it's a shiny distraction from trade war worries...
cheers to the longs...
|
|
mark
fire starter
Posts: 1,552
|
Post by mark on May 22, 2019 8:16:22 GMT -8
Time to make some noise in the library: TSLA is falling like a brick; should Apple revisit purchase of what I think is a great company? Talk amongst yourselves. <whispering>If that $10 per share bear case happened, Apple might be fighting against Buffet to see who could whip out $2B the quickest. Heck, at that price I'd cold call a couple Billionaires in search of financing. But at $35B + 20%, Apple has the means if there is a good reason.</whispering> Where did you come up with $2B? Tesla has a relatively complicated capital structure. There's $13.6B in debt (which will doubtless rise over the next 6-9 months), then there's about $2-3B in "other obligations", then there's the equity, say 200M shares (diluted) at $10 each is another $2B, so that comes to a minimum of $17.6B. Now add the liability risk of the lawsuits, both in progress, and coming soon - the Solarcity lawsuit could cost $5-7B, and the company is almost sure to lose that one. And then there will be all sorts of other liabilities coming along - maybe those government grants that Tesla didn't fulfill their obligations, etc. And who knows what else might be hidden in the various recesses of the company .... Also, why on earth would Apple want to buy a business that is super-heavy on capital requirements, and very light on gross margin, and almost non-existent net margin? (this applies to all automakers)
|
|
walterwhite
Member
"I am the one who knocks!"... Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 346
|
Post by walterwhite on May 22, 2019 8:18:50 GMT -8
Time to make some noise in the library: TSLA is falling like a brick; should Apple revisit purchase of what I think is a great company? Talk amongst yourselves. <whispering>If that $10 per share bear case happened, Apple might be fighting against Buffet to see who could whip out $2B the quickest. Heck, at that price I'd cold call a couple Billionaires in search of financing. But at $35B + 20%, Apple has the means if there is a good reason.</whispering>
Please don't forget to add $10b+ in debt... so your $2b becomes $12B, 6 times more... and at current $35b market cap - that's $45b at least, more like $60b given usual premium of a buyout offer
$60b is 20x apple's largest-ever acquisition of beats. think about twenty different amazing companies (heck, some in the automotive space) apple could scoop up for same amount of money
i'd rather apple buy more of its own stock and let its shareholders decide whether they want to diversify and buy tsla, or stick with apple (i'd stick with apple)
|
|
|
Post by gtrplyr on May 22, 2019 8:44:54 GMT -8
If Tim was interested in Tesla at $240 in ‘13 before the model 3 then this is a no brainer. Buy Tesla ... now.
|
|
|
Post by firestorm on May 22, 2019 8:47:57 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by firestorm on May 22, 2019 9:34:31 GMT -8
|
|
walterwhite
Member
"I am the one who knocks!"... Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 346
|
Post by walterwhite on May 22, 2019 9:52:56 GMT -8
well great - let bezos buy tesla then!
I don't want apple anywhere near it
|
|
mark
fire starter
Posts: 1,552
|
Post by mark on May 22, 2019 11:42:36 GMT -8
Even if Apple wanted to get into the car business, and it might [someday], buying Tesla will result in their car business being "Tesla", not being "Apple".
If they want to get into the car business and make their cars "Apple", they will have to start the car business on their own.
It's a simple matter of corporate culture, and corporate "DNA".
|
|
benoir
fire starter
*
Posts: 1,318
|
Post by benoir on May 22, 2019 12:00:46 GMT -8
Even if Apple wanted to get into the car business, and it might [someday], buying Tesla will result in their car business being "Tesla", not being "Apple". If they want to get into the car business and make their cars "Apple", they will have to start the car business on their own. It's a simple matter of corporate culture, and corporate "DNA". Agree. If Apple does get into this business then it will be because they have figured out how to do it right (right in their own minds... ). It will have Apple DNA at its heart. If they do get into this space and it does end up being viable then this can only be good for Tesla. Apple could legitimate this space and competition would be healthy.
|
|
|
Post by mercel on May 22, 2019 12:41:13 GMT -8
well great - let bezos buy tesla then!
I don't want apple anywhere near it
I'd sell AAPL in a flash if they waded anywhere near Tesla. A tsunami of EVs are coming and TSLA is fading in part because people are finally waking up to that reality. Elon did a great job educating the market on EVs. Now the majors are positioning to capitalize, with cars that have fit and finish worthy of a $50k+ vehicle. As someone no less than Jim Lentz, CEO of Toyota, told a group last month - Tesla is a cult car company.
|
|
4aapl
Moderator
Posts: 3,622
|
Post by 4aapl on May 22, 2019 12:42:14 GMT -8
Even if Apple wanted to get into the car business, and it might [someday], buying Tesla will result in their car business being "Tesla", not being "Apple". If they want to get into the car business and make their cars "Apple", they will have to start the car business on their own. It's a simple matter of corporate culture, and corporate "DNA". I don't actually think Apple should buy Tesla, but... Part of the purchase cost if someone was to buy Tesla would be the branding. It's amazing how well our kids and others point out Teslas, for the past few years. There used to be none in town and a bunch in the bay area, but now there are quite a few. The marketing or high-end cache just really worked, and I think one of the analysts that said one upcoming problem is with Tesla becoming more mainstream is spot on, from a high end marketing type thing. But there are other, smaller, car manufacturers that Apple could buy. Fiskars is back (only ever known of one that a distant friend had, and heard there were problems with the first round). And an article yesterday about China said they had something like 100 electric car companies. Most anything (other than Tesla) would be obscure enough that it could be rebranded without a problem, but of course that's only worthwhile if they have talent or IP that Apple wants, and potentially a design that is already well along. I'd rather see Apple partner with the likes of Toyota for a great mix of automotive knowledge and technical add-ons, but it seems like the major players want to not hook up with the tech companies, whereas the ones that would be up for it aren't a good match. We'll see. To me it still seems that a car add-on unit would be best if it could integrate nicely, much like an Apple-TV vs a whole TV. But just because it worked in one area doesn't mean that it's best in another area, and it probably is best for Apple to make the whole vehicle (or fully integrated in a 3rd party vehicle...instead of a potentially hokey add-on). Still, the US market might not actually be the one to hit first, if there is low hanging fruit elsewhere, such as smaller, cheaper, lower range vehicles that might work well in big cities here, but especially in big cities elsewhere in the globe.
|
|
|
Post by tuffett on May 22, 2019 19:13:04 GMT -8
Apple TV is exactly why Apple needs to do the entire car and not just an add-on. How much profit has Apple TV made? Probably not a meaningful number at Apple’s scale. What’s the advantage of Apple TV over Chromecast or Roku?
All major companies are working on their own self-driving technology. Why are people so quick to assume they will pay Apple anything of significance to license a similar solution from them in an industry with already brutal margins? No. Apple needs to build a car for them to be successful in this project and justify the absolutely massive R&D spend that continues to this day. Apple without hardware is really nothing special and they aren’t going to make back their investment.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2019 21:28:05 GMT -8
The Qualcomm decision is pretty huge. ipwatchdog.com, who never saw a patent defense they didn't think had absolute merit and strongly disapproved of the judgment, aptly called it a "brutal defeat". Judge Koh knows full well it's an important decision and it's 233 pages. The same people who said "Qualcomm always wins court cases" now is saying this will be overturned. I think it's not that likely though I suspect they will get injunctive relief on remedy pending appeal. Apple may or may not wish to renegotiate, but they certainly can if they want. This shows how misguided was the "Apple got rolled" crowd. Nokia and Ericsson were following Qualcomm in subverting the clear text of FRAND IPR contracts. So much for the "We've been doing this for years, so it must be legal" argument. Here's a good piece on the decision. www.patentprogress.org/2019/05/22/judge-koh-qualcomms-licensing-practices-destroyed-competition-harmed-consumers/
|
|
4aapl
Moderator
Posts: 3,622
|
Post by 4aapl on May 23, 2019 10:53:25 GMT -8
Apple TV is exactly why Apple needs to do the entire car and not just an add-on. How much profit has Apple TV made? Probably not a meaningful number at Apple’s scale. What’s the advantage of Apple TV over Chromecast or Roku? All major companies are working on their own self-driving technology. Why are people so quick to assume they will pay Apple anything of significance to license a similar solution from them in an industry with already brutal margins? No. Apple needs to build a car for them to be successful in this project and justify the absolutely massive R&D spend that continues to this day. Apple without hardware is really nothing special and they aren’t going to make back their investment. There are times that complete integration makes sense. There are times where an add-on makes sense. And in any circumstance, there are normally benefits and negatives to each way. Think about a "smart lightbulb". Personally, I don't have any, and don't see a huge draw, but I have read about a downside. You have to have the light switch turned on all the time, and then if someone comes over and switches it off, it now can't be enabled. The workaround would be rip out the switch, or to put in a smart switch, letting people control it that way too. But that's more work, and more cost. But you wouldn't expect the light bulb company to make the whole house, and expect that you would get rid of your current house and buy a new one, just for better integration. That's kinda the deal on a TV. For the most part it is easy to just add in a sending device (set-top box style Apple TV), and then Apple doesn't have to be limited to someone getting a whole new TV, and who prefers the specs (price, size, features, look, availability, etc) of the specific all-in-one unit that Apple could make. Because even if they made the whole thing, they would still focus on just a few products, and it would be much harder to get traction in the marketshare. If they needed .1% to 1%, it could work. If they wanted 10+%, it just wouldn't happen. Cars, due to their price, could be different. Maybe it's just fine to have a tiny marketshare. It works fine for most car companies. OTOH, what if like getting infotainment access into cars, Apple wanted to aim bigger, hitting many models instead of just one that would start as a boutique. That would be a whole different aim, but in general they would need a lot of buy-in, convincing GM or Mazda or whatever that those companies really weren't going to end up making their own self-driving cars that kicked butt so much that consumers flocked to them, and instead that they should allow a 3rd party add-on that could rock. A separate secure bus could be added, a way for Apple and other makers to "jack in" to the car. The problem in my eyes would be integrating the controls and sensors, making the design and UX smooth enough. But certain industries have been working on that for years, like integrating police lights into a vehicle, whether that's a whole block on top, or stealthily fit in behind the grill. It's possible. They probably won't go that way, instead building the whole unit, with it's large costs and all. But there are other options out there that shouldn't be immediately dismissed, even if it would take some cooperation which the auto industry sometimes seems even less likely than the music industry to give.
|
|
chinacat
Moderator
AAPL Long since 2006
Posts: 4,426
|
Post by chinacat on May 23, 2019 17:34:51 GMT -8
|
|