Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Everyone is Afraid of Apple

finance.yahoo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 87 posts

Re: Why Everyone is Afraid of Apple

#31

Post by laut »

robotrout wrote: post #2

if you wanted to buy the entire company it would cost you about $240 billion. To put that in context, for the same amount of money you could own Newmont Mining Corp. (NYSE: NEM - News), the world's largest gold-mining company, And E.I. Du Pont de Nemours & Co. And Kellogg Co., And Shrek studio DreamWorks Animation SKG Inc, And H&R Block Inc. (NYSE: HRB - News), And The New York Times Co. And Molson Coors Brewing, And…

Apple is very profitable. It made 3 billion last quarter, about twice Jet Blue's market cap. Apple has no debt and a lot of cash. Apple could essentially buy Starbucks with cash. Apple's current assets is more than 30B and Starbucks market cap is less than 20B.

Re: Why Everyone is Afraid of Apple

#32

Post by phreanix »

[deleted] wrote: post #8
karzeem wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple's P/E is just under 22, which is not terribly expensive for a company that just launched a new, multibillion dollar product line (the iPad) and who has the dominant product in a rapidly expanding market (smartphones). The writer puts it as "Would you rather own Apple or [long list of companies]?" That's a little misleading, because any of those companies could be overvalued or undervalued by the market, and bec…

[deleted]

Disagree. Depending on the specific market, Asian markets are predominantly brand based, not value based. The crowd gravitates to the trendy brand more than anything, and Apple has been effective in building their brand in asian markets.

I'm just saying monthly salary/income doesn't always serve as a barrier to an iPhone or iPad acquisition. I can see the 3G iPad dominating the market in certain countries.

Re: Why Everyone is Afraid of Apple

#33

Post by catch23 »

dutchflyboy wrote: post #30
wmeredith wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This also raised my eyebrow... Chen bought stolen property as defined under California law. Then published evidence of his doing so in a very public manner. Apple may have called the police, but they hardly "sent them in". I was with the article until that point.

Well, I might be wrong, but it's probably not the first time a gadget site gets a gadget before it's released. In many cases, that gadget should have been returned to the original owner, not to a journalist. But, again, as far as I know, no company has actually "sent the police in" (or even asked for any investigation) over such a matter. Apple did, it wasn't wrong of them (I mean, it's still a crime), but they were…

Can you provide other examples where a gadget site pays money to a 3rd party who happens to have an unreleased development model of a future product? I can't think of any...

Re: Why Everyone is Afraid of Apple

#34

Post by smokinn »

lurkinggrue wrote: post #27
smokinn wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it's rather that they take care of every detail. I refuse to buy an iPhone but I'm still not satisfied with the state of Android phones. There's the phones with the great cameras (but are underpowered). There's the phones with the great cpus (but wasted because of low ram) There's the phones with the good extra UI (wasted because they're underpowered) There's the good middle ground handicapped by a really old…

With Apple the shortcomings are sold as features and then later given to you as an innovation. I almost expected them to release the iPhone shuffle that had no screen and randomly called people.

True. A background API only being offered just now is a good example.

Re: Why Everyone is Afraid of Apple

#35

Post by rimantas »

InclinedPlane wrote: post #25

Apple is fundamentally a different kind of company than almost all other software or hardware companies. The prospect of J. Average Computer Company competing against J. Other Average Computer Company is straightforward, all that it takes to win against them is to keep doing what you're doing, only better, or more. The prospect of competing against Apple might be a bit more daunting, because potential it requires com…

Apple is fundamentally a different kind of company than almost all other software or hardware companies.

I was just reading this today (it's not fresh, I just got around to read it finaly): http://www.pragmaticmarketing.com/publications/magazine/6/4/...

Re: Why Everyone is Afraid of Apple

#36

Post by btmorex »

czhiddy wrote: post #9
vtail wrote: post #7

"Journalists are terrified of this company too. Why? Just ask Jason Chen - the editor at tech blog Gizmodo who got his hands on the next iPhone. Apple's response? They sent in the police, who smashed down Chen's front door, ransacked his house -- while he was out -- and carted off computers and files. When Chen returned home from dinner with his wife, they frisked him too." This is the kind of argument they are makin…

> Apple's response? They sent in the police ... This, like much of the article, is complete hyperbole (unless you actually believe Apple controls the police force).

It's hyberbole, but on the other hand, it's ridiculous to think that Apple had nothing to do with it. If Apple remains silent, doesn't file any sort of police report, nothing would have happened.

That said, Apple has been a litigious, heavy-handed company for it's entire history so their actions aren't surprising.

Re: Why Everyone is Afraid of Apple

#37

Post by potatolicious »

randrews wrote: post #3
robotrout wrote: post #2

if you wanted to buy the entire company it would cost you about $240 billion. To put that in context, for the same amount of money you could own Newmont Mining Corp. (NYSE: NEM - News), the world's largest gold-mining company, And E.I. Du Pont de Nemours & Co. And Kellogg Co., And Shrek studio DreamWorks Animation SKG Inc, And H&R Block Inc. (NYSE: HRB - News), And The New York Times Co. And Molson Coors Brewing, And…

He actually goes on to list another dozen or so companies; Apple's valuation is all of those combined .

Some of those companies are failing (e.g, NYT), some are commodity suppliers highly subject to market fluctuations (e.g., Du Pont), and others are locked in eternal marketing struggle in a highly-competitive and arguably saturated marketplace (e.g., Burger King, Abercrombie & Fitch).

Not saying that Apple's valuation is correct, but there is a certain attraction to the company: it sells premium, high-margin products that have proven their ability to withstand general economic malaise, are non-commoditized, not easily substitutable goods, and have few realistic competitors (the MacBook Pro sits almost unchallenged in the premium laptop market, the iPhone is - for now - at the top of the smartphone game, etc).

Re: Why Everyone is Afraid of Apple

#38

Post by pyre »

catch23 wrote: post #33
dutchflyboy wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I might be wrong, but it's probably not the first time a gadget site gets a gadget before it's released. In many cases, that gadget should have been returned to the original owner, not to a journalist. But, again, as far as I know, no company has actually "sent the police in" (or even asked for any investigation) over such a matter. Apple did, it wasn't wrong of them (I mean, it's still a crime), but they were…

Can you provide other examples where a gadget site pays money to a 3rd party who happens to have an unreleased development model of a future product? I can't think of any...

Don't be disingenuous. The exchange of money here is the least of the transgressions. I would think that someone sending Gizmodo a 'lost' iPhone prototype without the exchange of money would have gotten them into hot water too if they didn't try to return it first (before publishing the internals).

In the past, most leaks have been information (specs,photos,etc) not the actual device.

Re: Why Everyone is Afraid of Apple

#39

Post by InclinedPlane »

rimantas wrote: post #35
InclinedPlane wrote: post #25

Apple is fundamentally a different kind of company than almost all other software or hardware companies. The prospect of J. Average Computer Company competing against J. Other Average Computer Company is straightforward, all that it takes to win against them is to keep doing what you're doing, only better, or more. The prospect of competing against Apple might be a bit more daunting, because potential it requires com…

Apple is fundamentally a different kind of company than almost all other software or hardware companies. I was just reading this today (it's not fresh, I just got around to read it finaly): http://www.pragmaticmarketing.com/publications/magazine/6/4/...

I don't think it's necessary to be exactly like Apple to compete successfully against them. However, there are so few companies in the software industry that manage to demonstrate Apple's rare combination of talents that there really is no other model for how to do it.

Also, the perception of Apple as being exceptional and unique is greatly aided by the generally dysfunctional state of the entire industry in general.

Re: Why Everyone is Afraid of Apple

#40

Post by tvon »

lurkinggrue wrote: post #27
smokinn wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it's rather that they take care of every detail. I refuse to buy an iPhone but I'm still not satisfied with the state of Android phones. There's the phones with the great cameras (but are underpowered). There's the phones with the great cpus (but wasted because of low ram) There's the phones with the good extra UI (wasted because they're underpowered) There's the good middle ground handicapped by a really old…

With Apple the shortcomings are sold as features and then later given to you as an innovation. I almost expected them to release the iPhone shuffle that had no screen and randomly called people.

To an extent. Most companies seem to aim for a product that does well on a feature-grid of checkboxes more than in actual use. Apple would (apparently) rather that they had half the checkboxes but that those things worked very, very well (or intuitively, or smoothly, or in a magical way, etc).

In other words, it's not as if an iPhone friendly multitasking setup was available and they just ripped it out so they could have a big reveal two years later. In their eyes at least, the "innovation" is that they did it in an "Apple way".

Post reply on HN