Thursday, February 3, 2022: $172.90 -2.94 (-1.67%)
Feb 4, 2022 9:51:37 GMT -8
ono and Dave like this
Post by 4aapl on Feb 4, 2022 9:51:37 GMT -8
Roughly Drafted also had an article more specific to Office, calling it the main reason of the settlement (the above was about Quicktime).
www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/RDM.Tech.Q1.07/592FE887-5CA1-4F30-BD62-407362B533B9.html
The interesting part here, that I don't remember hearing about before, is speculating on an undisclosed settlement in addition to that $150M investment, to settle patent issues including around Quicktime (that included Canyon, Microsoft, and Intel):
There Is One More Thing
What wasn't widely reported about the July 1997 agreement was the subtle mention of other payments Microsoft agreed to make in addition to investing a paltry $150 million in stock. That amount was never publicly disclosed, but Apple's financial records suggest it was substantial.
Despite losing $850 million the year before, over a billion dollars in 1997--of which around 600 million was related to buying NeXT, and suffering a billion dollar drop in revenues between 1997-1998, Apple mysteriously managed to maintain its investments and actually accumulated cash.
It wasn't until 1998 that Apple began selling off its shares in ARM, and those sales took place over several years. Prior to that, how did Apple manage to spend nearly two billion dollars more than it earned across two years, lose 14% of its income, and still manage to sit on the same $1.2 billion in cash without pawning anything?
In 1999, David Every wrote in an article on Mackido that Microsoft was rumored to have paid Apple between $500 million and $2 billion over several years as part of the deal.
What wasn't widely reported about the July 1997 agreement was the subtle mention of other payments Microsoft agreed to make in addition to investing a paltry $150 million in stock. That amount was never publicly disclosed, but Apple's financial records suggest it was substantial.
Despite losing $850 million the year before, over a billion dollars in 1997--of which around 600 million was related to buying NeXT, and suffering a billion dollar drop in revenues between 1997-1998, Apple mysteriously managed to maintain its investments and actually accumulated cash.
It wasn't until 1998 that Apple began selling off its shares in ARM, and those sales took place over several years. Prior to that, how did Apple manage to spend nearly two billion dollars more than it earned across two years, lose 14% of its income, and still manage to sit on the same $1.2 billion in cash without pawning anything?
In 1999, David Every wrote in an article on Mackido that Microsoft was rumored to have paid Apple between $500 million and $2 billion over several years as part of the deal.
Interesting!
Either way, a big point at the time was MSFT saying it was going to keep supporting/developing Office for the next 5 years. That was the statement of confidence needed, like the head of the European Central Bank saying they were going to do "whatever it takes".
"Within our mandate," Draghi said, "the ECB is ready to do whatever it takes to preserve the euro." Pause. "And believe me, it will be enough." (page 184, "Money", about supporting the euro while Greece was in trouble).
FWIW, the Fed did the same thing during the financial crisis. Lenders of last resort need to be there to lend if needed, but sometimes reminding people of the huge bat that they are holding, and that they are ready to use it, is all that is needed to stop a bank run or the recent equivalent.
Anyways, $150m always did seem a little trivial, though the Office promise helped. But it's good to hear there was probably some more cash behind the scenes.