Apple's Middle Age • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple's Middle Age

#71

Post by KKKKkkkk1 » Mon, Feb 05, 2018, 4:24 PM UTC

adventured wrote: post #20

jballanc wrote: post #8

Any article that speculates on Apple's future viability in the market would be remiss not to mention Apple's unprecedented cash hoard. Currently, Apple is sitting on $126B in net tangible assets. With 100,000 full-time equivalent employees, that means that Apple could pay every one of their full-time equivalent employees (which, as a reminder, includes a large number of retail employees) an average yearly salary of $…

That's not actually how things unfold when a company gets into trouble. Your scenario is the perfect, idealized, never-happens outcome. We have dozens of historical examples at this point, from elite, massive corporations unraveling: what they basically never do, is the strictly rational idealized scenario. What actually happens is closer to chaos loaded with self-interest and stupidity by management and the board. T…

Well, in 2016 they spent > $10B on research. So clearly they're trying to catch up, it's just that they're not very good at it.

Re: Apple's Middle Age

#72

Post by simonh » Mon, Feb 05, 2018, 4:28 PM UTC

jlebrech wrote: post #3

People have a soft touch for companies that are on death's door, proof in point is when a startup is closing door. it's their biggest boost in marketing they ever had. and people complain they didn't already know about it.

s/touch/spot/

Re: Apple's Middle Age

#73

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Feb 05, 2018, 4:32 PM UTC

lazypenguin wrote: post #21

jballanc wrote: post #8

Any article that speculates on Apple's future viability in the market would be remiss not to mention Apple's unprecedented cash hoard. Currently, Apple is sitting on $126B in net tangible assets. With 100,000 full-time equivalent employees, that means that Apple could pay every one of their full-time equivalent employees (which, as a reminder, includes a large number of retail employees) an average yearly salary of $…

I generally agree with you but there is the case for negative revenue that could deplete those reserves at a rate faster than you have calculated.

[deleted]

Re: Apple's Middle Age

#74

Post by fauigerzigerk » Mon, Feb 05, 2018, 4:33 PM UTC

lazypenguin wrote: post #21

jballanc wrote: post #8

Any article that speculates on Apple's future viability in the market would be remiss not to mention Apple's unprecedented cash hoard. Currently, Apple is sitting on $126B in net tangible assets. With 100,000 full-time equivalent employees, that means that Apple could pay every one of their full-time equivalent employees (which, as a reminder, includes a large number of retail employees) an average yearly salary of $…

I generally agree with you but there is the case for negative revenue that could deplete those reserves at a rate faster than you have calculated.

How would that negative revenue come to pass? People returning their iPhones en masse for a refund?

Re: Apple's Middle Age

#75

Post by makecheck » Mon, Feb 05, 2018, 4:36 PM UTC

adventured wrote: post #20

jballanc wrote: post #8

Any article that speculates on Apple's future viability in the market would be remiss not to mention Apple's unprecedented cash hoard. Currently, Apple is sitting on $126B in net tangible assets. With 100,000 full-time equivalent employees, that means that Apple could pay every one of their full-time equivalent employees (which, as a reminder, includes a large number of retail employees) an average yearly salary of $…

That's not actually how things unfold when a company gets into trouble. Your scenario is the perfect, idealized, never-happens outcome. We have dozens of historical examples at this point, from elite, massive corporations unraveling: what they basically never do, is the strictly rational idealized scenario. What actually happens is closer to chaos loaded with self-interest and stupidity by management and the board. T…

If you look back just a few years, Apple has responded multiple times to saturated markets by introducing new product classes. We don’t have iPods anymore for instance, now we have watches (even though at one point you could have argued that the music player market was full too). If phones really do start to lose steam, Apple should have plenty of opportunity to create a new interesting product.

Re: Apple's Middle Age

#76

Post by bryanlarsen » Mon, Feb 05, 2018, 4:37 PM UTC

Shikadi wrote: post #65

bryanlarsen wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I was using Linux more than 10 years ago I didn't even format my disks when upgrading my machine, I just moved the boot drive from the old machine to the new one. OTOH, I've reformatted my 2012 Linux machine twice since I purchased it, which is twice more than I've formatted my Windows machine over the same period. Granted my Linux box is much more heavily used, but...

Sounds like you must be using Ubuntu :P

Got it in one.

Re: Apple's Middle Age

#77

Post by perseusprime11 » Mon, Feb 05, 2018, 4:38 PM UTC

fauigerzigerk wrote: post #74

lazypenguin wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I generally agree with you but there is the case for negative revenue that could deplete those reserves at a rate faster than you have calculated.

How would that negative revenue come to pass? People returning their iPhones en masse for a refund?

You end up spending lot more money than you make. To counter that, you invest $20 billion dollars in a game changing innovation but it fails leading to a write off. Then you go acquire a company that also becomes a dud. There are 100 different ways to go broke. Take a look at how GE messed up.

Re: Apple's Middle Age

#78

Post by sounds » Mon, Feb 05, 2018, 4:38 PM UTC

As Apple moves into its middle age, the rational move is to become more like the established vertically-integrated companies.

* Intel

* Samsung

* The British East India Company

If Apple leadership decides to accept this, they will begin to act like their peers:

* Recognize that the smartphone market will not grow like it has in the past. Create and then dominate standards using IP - barrier to competitors that simultaneously blocks a lot of regulatory burden.

* Recognize that Apple will not be the "innovator" that it was in the past. (Apple will still innovate, but not home runs every time.) Nurture the ecosystem around their product - allow small companies to find exciting new products, then acquire them.

* Recognize that their financials will need to adapt. Diversify their revenue stream beyond just one or two plays.

Apple still has the baggage of its own proprietary reinventions that they try to tightly control. iCloud. Lightning port. AirPlay. MacOS. The net negative impact comes as they gradually end up falling behind nimbler companies, like Amazon.

And yes, this will lead to the ultimate death of Apple as all behemoth conglomerates eventually choke on their own red tape and drown in their own largess. But Apple's days of youth are gone; no amount of dieting or exercise will bring them back.

I don't actually think Apple for the next 5 years will make the dramatic changes needed to realize these ideas. But perhaps a more interesting question is:

Is there any other avenue for a company who has reached middle age?

Re: Apple's Middle Age

#79

Post by narrowtux » Mon, Feb 05, 2018, 4:40 PM UTC

baxtr wrote: post #42

I really like stratechery, but I don’t get this post. Example Instead, I think the order goes like this: Customer owns an iPhone Customer subscribes to Apple Music because it is installed by default on their iPhone As an Apple Music subscriber, customer only has one choice in smart speakers: HomePod (and to make the decision to spend more money palatable, Apple pushes sound quality), from which Apple makes a profit W…

Also that line is a little inaccurate, since there's one more (that I know of) smart speaker system that offers apple music: Sonos.

Re: Apple's Middle Age

#80

Post by fauigerzigerk » Mon, Feb 05, 2018, 4:42 PM UTC

perseusprime11 wrote: post #77

fauigerzigerk wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would that negative revenue come to pass? People returning their iPhones en masse for a refund?

You end up spending lot more money than you make. To counter that, you invest $20 billion dollars in a game changing innovation but it fails leading to a write off. Then you go acquire a company that also becomes a dud. There are 100 different ways to go broke. Take a look at how GE messed up.

Absolutely, but that's not negative revenue.