- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Tim Cook took over Apple 5 years ago yesterday...
Posted on 8/26/16 at 1:48 pm to Dam Guide
Posted on 8/26/16 at 1:48 pm to Dam Guide
quote:We aren't talking about iTunes, we're talking about the role Apple may play in artists moving away from labels.
LoL, that's pretty bad you can't just say yes to the impact iTunes had on the music industry.
1
Posted on 8/26/16 at 2:02 pm to Korkstand
Ah, yeah should of read more, point for you 
Posted on 8/26/16 at 2:14 pm to Dam Guide
quote:
Cook is a filler, they need to be looking for someone to replace him. He has held the ship after losing someone like Jobs, but holding the ship won't keep the ship afloat forever.
I agree. I'm an Apple fan boy and I don't like anything he's done since taking over. He just makes the expected improvements to already existing products. He has done nothing to carry the company for the next 5 years.
Posted on 8/26/16 at 2:35 pm to dabigfella
quote:
I'm willing to bet apple will sell less iPhone 7 at launch than iPhone 6 at launch.
Can you give me the lottery numbers too?
That's a pretty easy call to make. The iPhone 6 was game changing for Apple because they caught up to the market in screen size. The iPhone 7 has some rumored "innovation", but both come with a cost: Possibly gaining noise cancelling ear buds at the expense of the old headphone jack, and gaining an extra lens for new camera features, but reportedly not a standard feature. The iPhone 7 should be pretty meh saleswise, but I think the iPhone 8 will be a hit assuming the rumored feature trajectory is true. quote:
My issues with cook don't rest on the iPhone
You can't just order up a paradigm shifts, you have to have both the right tech and the right time. I'm very lukewarm on the entire concept of wearables other than as a sensor transmitting data to your phone. I think projectables would be the next big thing, and there's no reason for iOS and Android to not remain dominant in what is essentially the same space.
I'm not saying Apple shouldn't be taking moonshots, but smartphones are the new PCs, it's going to take some pretty significant technology advancement to get to the next thing. We're going to be here a while.
Posted on 8/26/16 at 3:04 pm to TigerinATL
The general public will not get behind projectables to use on your arm anytime soon...
Posted on 8/26/16 at 3:39 pm to TigerinATL
I'm not talking paradigm shifts. Google isn't creating new segments repeatedly but what they're doing at Google is spreading the tentacles into many things and Apple is doing nothing but watching Google grow. Do you see how Google is investing not only in tech but space,medicine, etc. Apple is still investing in tech only, look at Google investing in genome editing like editas that's forward thinking and branching out beyond just cell phones which is what Apple basically is now a hardware co selling phones,computers,and iPads meanwhile Google is doing a million things at lightspeed in varying fields and all Apple does is follow Tim Cook as he twiddles his thumbs as a cash pile grows and grows as revenue drops. To each their own invest however you want I was just trying to clarify some things for our op who was slobbin on tims knob
Posted on 8/26/16 at 3:45 pm to dabigfella
Google is also taking some risk tying up that extra cash in long term projects that might not pay off though. It's a good thing now, it might look bad for them in 10 years. You just never know.
Google (Alphabet) is the smarter play for sure right now though. They are on top of the tech world present day (but Apple was there 7/8/9 years ago, Microsoft 20, IBM 30, etc.)
Google (Alphabet) is the smarter play for sure right now though. They are on top of the tech world present day (but Apple was there 7/8/9 years ago, Microsoft 20, IBM 30, etc.)
Posted on 8/26/16 at 3:48 pm to tlsu15
Yea but search and YouTube aren't going anywhere so they can tie up that money bc they will be printing it forever. We can't say the same about Apple, hardware is a commodity and its margins will fall people won't pay $800/phone forever they just won't and with the way these phone plans are today I have no desire to turn around and drop that kind of money an iPhone 7 when my iPhone 6 is just fine
Posted on 8/26/16 at 4:12 pm to dabigfella
great points by you in this thread, if you own AAPL stock in 2016 its time to just at yourself
at yourself Posted on 8/26/16 at 4:14 pm to rocket31
No surprise this thread is full of known apple haters
Posted on 8/26/16 at 4:26 pm to tlsu15
Did you miss the 2-3 times I said I use an iPhone 6. We're talking about Apple the company being poorly managed. I'm a huge fan of my overpriced iPhone, my overpriced MacBook Pro, and my extremely overpriced iMac 27. Im a huge fan of their high end products. Apple is like Mercedes, awesome high quality expensive products but even Mercedes eventually learned you have to sell c class,cla class,b class,gle/c whatever it is and countless other cheaper products to build the business. Apple kicks arse in that 15% segment of the high end market they own, my issue is them being content with that and doing nothing to try and do anything else
This post was edited on 8/26/16 at 4:59 pm
Posted on 8/26/16 at 4:33 pm to tlsu15
quote:I think the pattern with IBM, Microsoft, and now Apple is that they got big, then they got complacent. It took smaller, more agile, risk-taking companies to come in and knock them down a few rungs. These companies are still around obviously and still make a ton of money, and they survived by looking outside of their core business and branching out. I think Apple waited too long to try new things, and they will have to fall quite a bit before they rise again.
They are on top of the tech world present day (but Apple was there 7/8/9 years ago, Microsoft 20, IBM 30, etc.)
The difference with Google is they planned ahead, and are still planning ahead. Google, as one of the largest companies in the world, still takes risks like a startup trying to grow. They didn't wait until the cash cow keeled over. Instead, they've continued pouring the cash all over searching for the next cow while the first is still in its prime.
These things go in cycles because shareholders want two contradictory things: dividends and growth. You can't really have them both at the same time, so for a while the majority demands growth, then they get tired of waiting and demand cash. Once the company gets milked dry, they will want growth again. In some industries you can balance the two, but tech isn't one of them. You either put everything into growth or you get left behind.
Posted on 8/26/16 at 4:49 pm to Korkstand
Exactly korkstand and Google leadership was smart and saw the charade activists like einhorn and Icahn pulled with Apple so they changed the share structure and kept all the power in the b shares which they kept for themselves and then gave a and c class stock which gives shareholders voting power albeit not meaningful in anyway lol but now Google can run Google how they want under a new entity called alphabet while apple sinks under the guise of now being a value income stock while revenues decline
Posted on 8/26/16 at 4:59 pm to Korkstand
quote:
Google, as one of the largest companies in the world, still takes risks like a startup trying to grow.
If the question is Who is more likely to be a relevant company 100 years from now the answer is certainly Google. But I think the status quo will be here longer than many are thinking. It took 40+ years to go from Keyboard/Mouse to Touch UI. Even if we advance to projected displays like I posted earlier or like you see in Minority Report, that's still a Touch UI. It may not always be on a phone or tablet, but I think we're going to be running variants of Android and iOS for quite a while.
Posted on 8/26/16 at 5:11 pm to dabigfella
I find it highly ironic that you:
A.) Keep touting GOOG's investment in Uber
B.) Keep saying Apple hasn't invested in anything worthwhile
C.) Ignore that Uber has lost $1.2 billion dollars this year and $2 billion in two years in China alone.
D.) Apple invested $1 billion US in Didi Chuxing
E.) Didi Chuxing invested $1 billion in Uber
F.) Apple now has a stake in both Didi Chuxing (DC valued at $35 billion) and Uber
I'm sure folks are ignoring this. Just like they were ignoring that you kept talking about Google and not Alphabet, don't realize that AppleTV has been in homes collecting Petaflops of data re: voice, natural language and deep learning/Machine AI stuff from the newest version of Apple TV, has successfully launched a wearable line, didn't realize that Apple bought Beats for the Streaming Music Service and not the headphones, routinely acquires businesses that are meaningful to its business and interests, and are not even aware enough to realize that Apple owns not only a massive share in a company vastly larger than Uber but also by proxy now owns a part of Uber due to its investment in it.
Uber being a company you're sucking GOOG off for investing and owning.
But again, I don't mind your narrative as long as it's factual and accurate. The problem is that it's just absolutely chock full of holes. Apple invests in the company that just bought Uber China and beat them in one of the most important marketed in the world which in turn takes a chunk of ownership in Uber thanks to winning the war against it, and yet you tout Google for the loser and denigrate Apple by saying they don't do shite like that.
Did you really not know about Didi Chuxing? Are you going to say a $35 billion dollar dominant company in China is not important or impactful or meaningful to own a billion dollar investment in? Are you saying that Apple's ownership in Uber by virtue of Didi Chuxing's investment is now something awesome like you were when you were using it as an example to make your point about Google?
I'm guessing I know the answer to at least some of these questions...
A.) Keep touting GOOG's investment in Uber
B.) Keep saying Apple hasn't invested in anything worthwhile
C.) Ignore that Uber has lost $1.2 billion dollars this year and $2 billion in two years in China alone.
D.) Apple invested $1 billion US in Didi Chuxing
E.) Didi Chuxing invested $1 billion in Uber
F.) Apple now has a stake in both Didi Chuxing (DC valued at $35 billion) and Uber
I'm sure folks are ignoring this. Just like they were ignoring that you kept talking about Google and not Alphabet, don't realize that AppleTV has been in homes collecting Petaflops of data re: voice, natural language and deep learning/Machine AI stuff from the newest version of Apple TV, has successfully launched a wearable line, didn't realize that Apple bought Beats for the Streaming Music Service and not the headphones, routinely acquires businesses that are meaningful to its business and interests, and are not even aware enough to realize that Apple owns not only a massive share in a company vastly larger than Uber but also by proxy now owns a part of Uber due to its investment in it.
Uber being a company you're sucking GOOG off for investing and owning.
But again, I don't mind your narrative as long as it's factual and accurate. The problem is that it's just absolutely chock full of holes. Apple invests in the company that just bought Uber China and beat them in one of the most important marketed in the world which in turn takes a chunk of ownership in Uber thanks to winning the war against it, and yet you tout Google for the loser and denigrate Apple by saying they don't do shite like that.
Did you really not know about Didi Chuxing? Are you going to say a $35 billion dollar dominant company in China is not important or impactful or meaningful to own a billion dollar investment in? Are you saying that Apple's ownership in Uber by virtue of Didi Chuxing's investment is now something awesome like you were when you were using it as an example to make your point about Google?
I'm guessing I know the answer to at least some of these questions...
This post was edited on 8/26/16 at 5:18 pm
Posted on 8/26/16 at 5:17 pm to GFunk
you know apple invested in didi just to appease the chinese government right? There was seriously headwinds happening in china and magically tim cook flew down to china made a didi investment and it all went away lol. Apple wasnt even looking to invest in that type of thing until the chinese government forced their hand. Look man I hope you and apple both thrive in the coming years, I wish you both nothing but the best, I have apple stock as I stated, my cost basis is sub $10 I havent sold bc im getting a 25% yield on cost and its not worth the tax headache. I think apple is solid, im not saying its gonna crash, Im just saying its not gonna grow at anywhere near the clip google is growing at with tim cook at the helm thats all. If apple gets new leadership, theyre an amazing brand with amazing products. Tim Cook did nothing more as CEO than you would've done as CEO. He walked into the most amazing product at the right time, he himself has added NOTHING to apple. GFunk would have put up similar numbers as the CEO of apple if you walked into that position at the same time.
PS was apples stake in uber at a $3B valuation or did apple get in at the $60B+ valuation. You're missing what Im saying that google is getting into things way way way earlier than apple. Thats like saying you bought apple stock at $110, congrats but I own it at $8.75 just because we have the same amount of shares means nothing.
Im saying you're mentioning 1 investment apple made. Google has stakes like that in countless companies. How much did google just clear on jet.com acquisition? 15 fold is what I read. The stakes are insane. Money in space X which will be significantly larger than didi and thats just 1 thing. They hit home runs all over the freaking place, slack is another that comes to mind, its just one after the other, and we really dont know what else is in their pipeline to come.
Apple is not on that level you can keep telling yourself they are but the market is saying otherwise with the multiples each is receiving....and that goes back to the markets belief in management of both which is what this thread is all about.
PS was apples stake in uber at a $3B valuation or did apple get in at the $60B+ valuation. You're missing what Im saying that google is getting into things way way way earlier than apple. Thats like saying you bought apple stock at $110, congrats but I own it at $8.75 just because we have the same amount of shares means nothing.
Im saying you're mentioning 1 investment apple made. Google has stakes like that in countless companies. How much did google just clear on jet.com acquisition? 15 fold is what I read. The stakes are insane. Money in space X which will be significantly larger than didi and thats just 1 thing. They hit home runs all over the freaking place, slack is another that comes to mind, its just one after the other, and we really dont know what else is in their pipeline to come.
Apple is not on that level you can keep telling yourself they are but the market is saying otherwise with the multiples each is receiving....and that goes back to the markets belief in management of both which is what this thread is all about.
This post was edited on 8/26/16 at 5:21 pm
Posted on 8/26/16 at 5:20 pm to dabigfella
I agree with you whole heartedly. I just don't agree with the points you made to get to the post you just made.
Also, who cares why they made the investment? Now that it's shown Apple has done EXACTLY what you say they don't do-and they own a company you lauded GOOG for having an ownership interest in-you're going to deflect and pivot away from being wrong and make excuses up about them having their hand forced?
It was a business decision. An EXCELLENT one as I"m sure you'd agree.
But the rest of your point I agree with 100%.
Also, who cares why they made the investment? Now that it's shown Apple has done EXACTLY what you say they don't do-and they own a company you lauded GOOG for having an ownership interest in-you're going to deflect and pivot away from being wrong and make excuses up about them having their hand forced?
It was a business decision. An EXCELLENT one as I"m sure you'd agree.
But the rest of your point I agree with 100%.
Posted on 8/26/16 at 6:03 pm to GFunk
Musk is a paper tiger and exists because of huge government loans and subsidies.
Posted on 8/26/16 at 6:19 pm to Strannix
you know musk was a billionaire before tesla right? So musk does not only exist because of government loans and subsidies. Anyways that aside, ford and gm also only exist because of government loans and subsidies, those 2 would have been bankrupt if the government didnt save them a few years ago.
Posted on 8/26/16 at 8:31 pm to dabigfella
Ford didn't take bailout money.
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News