Apple Snatches Up Blockbuster Patent

[czerdrill]

Everyone said the same about microsoft but look at their stock now. $32!!!

Well to be fair, microsoft was never anywhere close to as successful as apple, profit wise or stock price wise. also microsofts highest stock price ever was like $59....can't really use stock price as an indication of its success

Apple has 72B dollars on hand....microsoft has nowhere remotely close to that. apple is going nowhere haha

 

[czerdrill]

If they are awarded this patent does that make all android devices illegal?

Yeah they'd have to find a workaround or pay a licensing fee to Apple...if it's not declared FRAND, then Apple can ask whatever price they want from Google/Android OEMs to use the tech.

 

[kodiak799]

Apple has 72B dollars on hand....microsoft has nowhere remotely close to that. apple is going nowhere haha

MS had $50B in cash 10 years ago, before paying out some massive dividends with changes to the tax code. They were, at one point, every bit the juggernaut Apple now appears to be. But my money is on Google being the new king in 10 years. But probably some company in China...maybe that's 20 years.

 

[kodiak799]

If they are awarded this patent does that make all android devices illegal?

Until Google removes the infringing multi-touch from Android. I don't know how many people rely on these gestures, but it's no more a deathblow to Android than if Apple has to at some point remove the drop down & notifications it ripped from Android.

 

[czerdrill]

MS had $50B in cash 10 years ago, before paying out some massive dividends with changes to the tax code. They were, at one point, every bit the juggernaut Apple now appears to be. But my money is on Google being the new king in 10 years. But probably some company in China...maybe that's 20 years.

Well, we're all desensitized to money given that the US is 14T in debt...but the difference between $72B and $50B is $22B...that's $22,000,000,000...really not remotely close! haha...that's 3 times the world population (give or take) difference...not really the same boat

 

[wvdroidman]

Well, we're all desensitized to money given that the US is 14T in debt...but the difference between $72B and $50B is $22B...that's $22,000,000,000...really not remotely close! haha...that's 3 times the world population (give or take) difference...not really the same boat

But in today's dollars how much is $50 billion from 10 years ago? Isn't bill gates still one of the richest people in in the world?:icon_ banana:

 

[czerdrill]

But in today's dollars how much is $50 billion from 10 years ago? Isn't bill gates still one of the richest people in in the world?:icon_ banana:

Well...given the economy a company that can get 7B profit/qtr is not really comparable to a company from 2002. That's why people are so amazed with Apple's success. They've overtaken gas companies, in this quarter, as more profitable.

An individual's success (Bill Gates) isn't really indicative of the company as a whole....Bill Gates "riches" are a conglomeration of his assets, not money on hand.

 

[kodiak799]

Well, we're all desensitized to money given that the US is 14T in debt...but the difference between $72B and $50B is $22B...that's $22,000,000,000...really not remotely close! haha...that's 3 times the world population (give or take) difference...not really the same boat

10 years ago? Adjusted for inflation that would be like $63B today. That's only a difference of like 2 days of US deficit spending

and Apple surpassed MS in market cap all the way back in May 2010. Still has a ways to go, though, to match MS peak market cap of $474B back in 1999 (if we adjust for inflation).

 

[czerdrill]

10 years ago? Adjusted for inflation that would be like $63B today. That's only a difference of like 2 days of US deficit spending

and Apple surpassed MS in market cap all the way back in May 2010. Still has a ways to go, though, to match MS peak market cap of $474B back in 1999 (if we adjust for inflation).

Think about it, though. Microsoft, back then controlled what was it 90% of the PC industry? Apple commands its profit off something like 26% marketshare across all its products. While, yes, Microsoft was ridiculously successful back in the day, it does not hold a candle to Apple's success (profit wise, inflation or not) today.

Apple has risen 600% from where they were 5 years ago, and 3000% higher (not a typo) than where they were 10 years ago. In response to the original argument that Apple would eventually "fizzle" out, no it simply will not happen anytime soon and most probably not in our lifetime.

They're showing no indication of slowing down, and some analysts are predicting four figure share prices! (A little ambitious, yes, but no company is even in the same discussion).

The main point to draw from this is, no, Apple is going nowhere anytime soon...

 

[kodiak799]

They're showing no indication of slowing down, and some analysts are predicting four figure share prices! (A little ambitious, yes, but no company is even in the same discussion).

See Berkshire Hathaway. Share price ultimately means nothing (because most companies typically split above a certain level, historically at least, to keep prices in a sweet spot). Apple isn't the first company to chart those sort of gains, even after being on the verge of bankruptcy. Agree they aren't going anywhere soon, but they likely won't continue to be the dominant market player. Of course, as you point out, they don't really dominate any of their markets, aside from tablets and maybe mp3 sales (if you exclude Pandora, Spotify, etc..). It's a great business, no doubt. But the last time they lost Steve Jobs they went into a nosedive.

They've done a remarkable job of maintaining margins, but tech hardware ultimately becomes commoditized. There's still a huge business there in software and digital media but the hardware margins will start dropping. Already seeing that on the Android side of tablets. Smartphones only remain at the prices they are because of the carrier subsidy or they'd start dropping like a rock, but that's a model with no indications of changing.

 

[alboboy10]

The only way apple will fail is if they dig their own hole and jump in it. Not gonna lie though, this patent/lawyer stuff going on may be them digging their own hole.

They have so much money though that they won't go anywhere. The government doesn't even want them to go anywhere cause of all the money they bring in just with taxes from sales alone.

 

[czerdrill]

See Berkshire Hathaway. Share price ultimately means nothing (because most companies typically split above a certain level, historically at least, to keep prices in a sweet spot). Apple isn't the first company to chart those sort of gains, even after being on the verge of bankruptcy. Agree they aren't going anywhere soon, but they likely won't continue to be the dominant market player. Of course, as you point out, they don't really dominate any of their markets, aside from tablets and maybe mp3 sales (if you exclude Pandora, Spotify, etc..). It's a great business, no doubt. But the last time they lost Steve Jobs they went into a nosedive.

They've done a remarkable job of maintaining margins, but tech hardware ultimately becomes commoditized. There's still a huge business there in software and digital media but the hardware margins will start dropping. Already seeing that on the Android side of tablets. Smartphones only remain at the prices they are because of the carrier subsidy or they'd start dropping like a rock, but that's a model with no indications of changing.

No I know share price doesn't necessarily indicate success (I even said the same thing earlier in the discussion of Microsoft share price in this very thread). It was just a little bullet point that was being made, and not the sole reason why Apple is not going to go bankrupt. The point being made again was simply that Apple isn't going to just fizzle out. Dominant market player or not (although I don't see any tech company, hardware or software taking that away from them) is irrelevant. We're not going to wake up tomorrow, or in one year, or in 5 years and probably not even in 20 years, and read about Apple declaring bankruptcy and closing up shop.

To be fair, Apple was in quite the nosedive before Jobs left haha. In fact, that's why Sculley decided to oust Jobs, because he thought he wasn't fit to run the company (of course he was wrong) and assumed he was the reason they weren't competing in the PC market. So while the loss of Jobs helped exacerbate the nosedive, it wasn't the only reason and definitely not the major reason.

TLDR: Apple will be fine. Profit-wise, sales wise and revenue wise. No company is any threat to make them "fizzle" out anytime soon. They are worth more then Google and Microsoft, combined.

 

[kodiak799]

TLDR: Apple will be fine. Profit-wise, sales wise and revenue wise. No company is any threat to make them "fizzle" out anytime soon. They are worth more then Google and Microsoft, combined.

Soon? No, but nobody knows 10 years from now or more. There's a long history of bellweather companies failing to innovate and falling on very hard times, including Apple. You can't underestimate the impact Jobs had in leading that company, and not just in product development. The big money in phones and tablets is already coming under pressure. They will need to continue to innovate to maintain their perch, and right now the only place they appear to be innovating is in the courtroom, which in itself could be very telling.

 

[czerdrill]

Soon? No, but nobody knows 10 years from now or more. There's a long history of bellweather companies failing to innovate and falling on very hard times, including Apple. You can't underestimate the impact Jobs had in leading that company, and not just in product development. The big money in phones and tablets is already coming under pressure. They will need to continue to innovate to maintain their perch, and right now the only place they appear to be innovating is in the courtroom, which in itself could be very telling.

I don't understand the "they need to innovate" thing. For one, if as you claim they're not innovating (which they probably aren't) and its a requirement to "maintain their perch" why isn't their perch (also known as their bottom line) not being affected in anyway? The "sheep" theory is not (and never was) a valid one...(not saying you said that, just saying that's one of the reasons people will say they're successful)

Innovation is cool, but its not a requirement with every iteration of your product. In other words, Apple doesn't have to blow your mind with every iPhone or iPad release. Same with Android. Is every Android version bringing about some staggering innovations? Not really but there hasn't been much issue with Android's success.

Apple would have to screw up to the point of unimaginable disbelief to go anywhere in 10 years. You're right I don't know and no one knows, but the scenario of a company like Apple going belly up in 10 years defies all logic haha...it's not going to happen, and we can talk in 10 years when they're just as successful, if not more then they are today!

Im not underestimating Jobs' influence, I was just saying that Apple's fall back in the day, wasn't solely because Jobs left...they were already on a freefall while he was there. Mac sales were paltry and the company was imploding. Steve Jobs' horrible attitude just made him the fall guy and even if he stayed Apple would have suffered for quite some time. He is absolutely responsible for their recent successes, though.

 

[kodiak799]

I don't understand the "they need to innovate" thing. For one, if as you claim they're not innovating (which they probably aren't) and its a requirement to "maintain their perch" why isn't their perch (also known as their bottom line) not being affected in anyway? The "sheep" theory is not (and never was) a valid one...(not saying you said that, just saying that's one of the reasons people will say they're successful)

Innovation is cool, but its not a requirement with every iteration of your product. In other words, Apple doesn't have to blow your mind with every iPhone or iPad release. Same with Android. Is every Android version bringing about some staggering innovations? Not really but there hasn't been much issue with Android's success.

Apple would have to screw up to the point of unimaginable disbelief to go anywhere in 10 years. You're right I don't know and no one knows, but the scenario of a company like Apple going belly up in 10 years defies all logic haha...it's not going to happen, and we can talk in 10 years when they're just as successful, if not more then they are today!

Im not underestimating Jobs' influence, I was just saying that Apple's fall back in the day, wasn't solely because Jobs left...they were already on a freefall while he was there. Mac sales were paltry and the company was imploding. Steve Jobs' horrible attitude just made him the fall guy and even if he stayed Apple would have suffered for quite some time. He is absolutely responsible for their recent successes, though.

Because they are still rolling off the pipeline and innovation from tablets and smartphones. Smartphone prices are being arbitrarily propped-up by the carriers. Who knows how long that lasts but no one seems to care. But smartphones and tablet are still in the growth phase, and will probably be for another few years. But then supply takes over and starts to eat into margins. There's very little margin in PC's, aside from software and processors, and smartphones/tablets will go the same way. Apple has been able to maintain a premium with their marketing/branding in PC's, but I don't see it in tablets because Android has many more choices and substitutes. If it's not about sheeple, as you point out, Android is a serious threat to the bottom line in the long-run on multiple fronts.

I don't think they are going anywhere because of the money they rake in from ITunes with apps and mp3's, movies, etc. Of course, both Google and Amazon are going after a chunk of that business pretty aggressively, not to mention VZW potentially buying Netflix. It's very hard to stay on top, and if history is any guide Apple won't stay there for long.

Just saying MS was a top dog at one point, too, but has been just a dog for most of the past decade because they didn't innovate and didn't have anything productive to do with their cash (not to mention a series of failed new ventures).