Apple Is the New Pimco • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple Is the New Pimco

#81

Post by willhinsa » Sat, Jun 06, 2015, 2:06 AM UTC

larrys wrote: post #28

chollida1 wrote: post #2

> Getting allocations of corporate bond deals is one of the easiest ways for managers to outperform benchmark bond indexes because they’re typically sold at a discount to market rates, according to Jason Shoup, the head of U.S. high-grade credit strategy at Citigroup Inc. The bonds aren’t added to the indexes investors are measured against until the end of each month. That can generate as much as 0.2 percentage point…

"Steve Cohen at SAC was famous for overpaying on commissions " After a real estate deal last year I bought the broker a gift and delivered it. He said "wow shouldn't I be buying you the gift?". No problem because the next time I was the person he called first when he got a fresh listing on a commercial investment property which I was able to buy at a much lower price per sf than if he had actually taken the effort to…

You'd go far as a lobbyist.

Re: Apple Is the New Pimco

#82

Post by misterbee » Sat, Jun 06, 2015, 2:08 AM UTC

larrys wrote: post #66

forrestthewoods wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No real estate broker gets the absolute best possible deal for a client. They get a small percentage of any deal. A slightly better deal might be worth thousands of dollars to the client but only a few hundred to the broker. It's not worth the broker's time to spend a full week looking for the absolute highest buyer. It's in the broker's interest to process more deals more quickly than to squeeze that last little bit…

Generally you are right. However I am paid to negotiate and buy things for people (not real estate). I have even had people tell me that they will pay me more if I can get them a better deal. I tell them that they don't have to do that. That I charge a fixed fee. [1] (And the fixed fee varies btw.) The truth is I get them a good deal because (as I mentioned in my other comment) this is a game for me that is fun and t…

That's great, for each of you there are 10 people who look like you but who rip off their clients. So what's a client to do?

Re: Apple Is the New Pimco

#83

Post by misterbee » Sat, Jun 06, 2015, 2:12 AM UTC

IkmoIkmo wrote: post #56

twoodfin wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stuck overseas in the sense that corporations aren't willing to pay American taxes... Why should Apple pay American taxes on the profits from a product manufactured in China and sold in Germany? (Albeit "Designed in California"!)

They pay taxes over there alright (e.g. VAT), which is fine, nobody complains. The issue is they don't pay corporate tax on it in the US, despite the fact Apple is US based and does virtually all of its work in the US, and then commissions factories it doesn't own in China to produce its parts. The end result is that it pays much fewer taxes than citizens do, or companies that don't have a dedicated fiscal team (most…

thought experiment: What if Apple spun out Apple Design as a US company and paid it contract rates to invent, much like it outsources factories to Chinese companies? then how are the holding-companies profits taxes?

Re: Apple Is the New Pimco

#84

Post by misterbee » Sat, Jun 06, 2015, 2:14 AM UTC

IkmoIkmo wrote: post #80

ryandrake wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not? If I, as a US Citizen, moved to China or Germany to work there, I still owe US taxes on my income there.

Which is globally considered completely ridiculous and only the US does it. The moment you move abroad and live there, and perform work there, you ought to be taxed there. After all, you live there. You enjoy the streets, the parks, the police, the infrastructure etc etc, paid for by taxes, to which you ought to contribute. But what Apple does is enjoy all of that in the US to which it contributes sub-standard taxes,…

Even worse, Apple etc do engineering work in EU, and then lie to regulators to say that "no innovation happens in Europe" to avoid local taxes.

Re: Apple Is the New Pimco

#85

Post by adventured » Sat, Jun 06, 2015, 2:21 AM UTC

tormeh wrote: post #41

charlesdm wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only an American could have written this answer. All other countries in the world use a non global taxation system. Two basic scenarios: 1. US entity owns a company in the UK. UK company earns $100, pays 20% tax on that, and is left with $80. Declares a dividend to the US parent, and the US then taxes the difference (35% US tax rate - 20% UK tax rate = another 15% to pay). We're left with $65 2. UK entity owns a comp…

You know, I think maybe this taxation system is a part of why US companies become so successful. It basically forces any US company that sells overseas to become a multinational.

The world's largest economy under a single unified market speaking the same language, has a lot more to do with it.

By the time companies come out of the US, they're typically already well on their way competitively and have scale.

It's the same reason China is so effective at producing giants like Alibaba, Xiaomi, and Baidu.

Re: Apple Is the New Pimco

#86

Post by prostoalex » Sat, Jun 06, 2015, 3:35 AM UTC

tdees40 wrote: post #32

adam419 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because Apple et al can put the extra capital to better use than the united states government.

Apple appears to be terrible at deploying capital. Most of it is just sitting around in cash. It's actually hard to imagine a worse allocator of capital.

This way they can attack big projects and commit suppliers to building out new factories, granting exclusivity on contracts, etc., as opposed to someone who's very efficient at deploying, but then has trouble getting liquidity when times get rough.

Re: Apple Is the New Pimco

#87

Post by larrys » Sat, Jun 06, 2015, 3:43 AM UTC

misterbee wrote: post #82

larrys wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generally you are right. However I am paid to negotiate and buy things for people (not real estate). I have even had people tell me that they will pay me more if I can get them a better deal. I tell them that they don't have to do that. That I charge a fixed fee. [1] (And the fixed fee varies btw.) The truth is I get them a good deal because (as I mentioned in my other comment) this is a game for me that is fun and t…

That's great, for each of you there are 10 people who look like you but who rip off their clients. So what's a client to do?

A tough question. So I would ask indirect questions that all revolved around "what do you like about your job?". And listen carefully to the answers.

If the answer sounds like some standard BS such as "well I really like helping people get into the home of their dreams at the lowest price!!!!" or something canned or manufactured "we win when you win!!! I like win win deals" and so on then perhaps that is just someone who is going through the motions and isn't really in to what they are doing.

Just like with computers. There is the guy who is in it strictly to make a buck, but would never tinker or experiment after hours, and the guy who really enjoys programming for the fun of it and was doing it as soon as they could or as soon as they were exposed to it.

Re: Apple Is the New Pimco

#88

Post by sytelus » Sat, Jun 06, 2015, 5:03 AM UTC

It boggles my mind that Apple isn't using all these money for something better. What prevents them from, say, hiring up or luring away all the great CS/hardware PhDs, build a giant lab for robotics, build new space exploration company, new sustainable for-profit tech company, start massive search engine efforts, start giant initiative for for-profit cancer research and so on and on and on.

There are endless challenges to work on and we have tons of great people who would wholeheartedly work on these if they were paid well. The only barrier is capital and leadership ambitions. Apple can really put the world 50 years ahead in tech if they chose to invest the money in these areas.

Re: Apple Is the New Pimco

#89

Post by mahyarm » Sat, Jun 06, 2015, 5:12 AM UTC

tanderson92 wrote: post #74

mahyarm wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Think of multinational corporations as multinational families, each one with their own singular citizenship. It makes no sense to tax the family members of other countries until they send money to the family member in your country. If the other family members decided it was a bad idea to send you money to your country because it will be taxed to death, can you blame them?

>Think of multinational corporations as multinational families, each one with their own singular citizenship. Why should I? Of course this is not actually what they are, or at least what they claim to be. That is, since money is fungible in a global economy they can in effect use untaxed funds to influence U.S. political campaigns while they claim they are a single person deserving of the same rights afforded by the…

What you describe is something any rich lower-taxed non-american can do to the usa effectively. That is a thing of money, not of corporations.

Re: Apple Is the New Pimco

#90

Post by coldtea » Sat, Jun 06, 2015, 5:37 AM UTC

sytelus wrote: post #88

It boggles my mind that Apple isn't using all these money for something better. What prevents them from, say, hiring up or luring away all the great CS/hardware PhDs, build a giant lab for robotics, build new space exploration company, new sustainable for-profit tech company, start massive search engine efforts, start giant initiative for for-profit cancer research and so on and on and on. There are endless challenge…

>It boggles my mind that Apple isn't using all these money for something better. What prevents them from, say, hiring up or luring away all the great CS/hardware PhDs, build a giant lab for robotics, build new space exploration company, new sustainable for-profit tech company, start massive search engine efforts, start giant initiative for for-profit cancer research and so on and on and on.

That they know that money isn't everything when it comes to engineering, and just "getting the best" and "throwing tons of money" at a problem doesn't necessarily result in a good outcome? Especially if it's something outside their core expertise.

Apple, for example, consistently failed with their social attemps (Ping?), and their online apps (mail, docs, etc) which are also-run. Microsoft poured a lot of money into Bing, and it's still something nobody would use willingly (except a couple outliers who would respond to this comment as if nobody means "no one at all" in casual conversation).

And then there's the canonical example, Chandler:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandler_(software) http://www.dreamingincode.com/

Or let's take another company who is "all over the place". For all of Google's efforts in PR-driven research, what has it given us that was a success? The Glass was a huge failure, their attempt at social (Google+) too, GAE is an also-run, Dart got top talent but never got anywhere, and same with several other attempts that linger on or have closed down. Judging from their revenue report, it's all about ads still. (Sure, there's the self-driving car, that might be marketable someday, but for that Apple is said to have a team working on it too)

They also know that the company made all these money by having focus.

Finding a new area to explore is OK. Being all over the place is a recipe for failure. And Apple they ain't gonna do it just because it's a geek's dream e.g. ("space exploration company").