Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

hrishidev

macrumors regular
Dec 3, 2007
107
4
Well, I think people are forgetting something

A company called Apple got some investment of $150 million from Microsoft &
stayed afloat for some time. Later on , because of its own innovations & strategies became most valued company in the World.


So please don't label Sharp as bad company, It might need some helping hand to come out of its financial trouble :)
 

vvswarup

macrumors 6502a
Jul 21, 2010
544
225
They will. Apple winning $1 billion by suing Samsung and loosing $2 billion because it had to prop Sharp to get the components they could easily get from Samsung. That makes perfect economic sense (and APPL trend proves it).

It also makes perfect economic sense for Apple, with $121 billion in the bank, to sit there and let Sharp fail, removing competition for Samsung, a major supplier of parts, allowing Samsung to take Apple to the cleaners in the future.

It makes even more sense to let manufacturing capacity get wiped out of the industry, especially when Apple frequently struggles to have enough product on hand to meet demand.
 

thejadedmonkey

macrumors G3
May 28, 2005
9,155
3,265
Pennsylvania
What do you mean by "had they played nice" when only referring to Apple? Or was the "they" all encompassing (Apple & Samsung)?

I may have mistaken your wording on that last post.

I meant apple when I said "they", I feel like they were a bit too heavy handed with their suits against Samsung. However, I also stated (It may not have been a reply to you) that it takes two to tango, and Samsung is also at fault.

Either way, the point I was trying to make was that had Apple and Samsung been able to come to a better (less bitter) understanding, Apple wouldn't be in the position where they need to prop up Sharp to avoid Samsung.
 

subsonix

macrumors 68040
Feb 2, 2008
3,551
79
It also makes perfect economic sense for Apple, with $121 billion in the bank, to sit there and let Sharp fail, removing competition for Samsung, a major supplier of parts, allowing Samsung to take Apple to the cleaners in the future.

Especially if it's actually spent on pre-orders as the article speculates on, then it's really just an advance payment.
 

runonthespot

macrumors member
Jan 28, 2009
31
0
The obvious reason Apple doesn't want to buy Sharp, is that it doesn't want to get in a bidding war with an equally deep pocketed Samsung... who know that without Sharp, Apple falls into their arms.
 

ConCat

macrumors 6502a
Someone mentioned "Sharp"'s HDTV market "dried up".

Not entirely true. "Pioneer", which was arguably one of the best plasma TV manufacturers, closed their "Elite" plasma division a few years ago. "Panasonic" and "Sharp" bought most of "Pioneer"'s tech, with "Sharp" securing the rights to "Kuru" technology.

"Sharp" has released an amazing LED LCD that rivals the blacks on plasma's (most videophiles prefer plasma display's for their deeper blacks that LED LCD's have difficulty in displaying due to the nature of the tech). I'd wager "bailing out" "Sharp" may be due to Apple's use of "Sharp" technology in the rumored television. Remember, Apple stores used "Pioneer" plasma's for their "AppleTV" displays (now "Sony" is their goto manufacturer). Since "Sharp" owns "Pioneer"'s "Kuru" tech and is making strides in that market, it's a rather safe wager.

http://elitelcdtv.com

Notice "Sharp" isn't branded any where on the product, however the company is the manufacturer.

Holy quotations batman!
 

hamkor04

macrumors 6502
Apr 10, 2011
359
0
Suing for good reason is hardly being mean. How would you like it if someone came along and stole your designs that you work on all year round.

How about Mexican company (ifone) and pissing at other patent holders faces?
 

mkjj

macrumors 6502a
Jun 2, 2003
807
21
Liverpool
Apple and Sharp go way back, Sharp made the original MessagePads and even made a Sharp designed one themselves using the Newton OS.

5117705218_ba068d6c9b.jpg
 

iphoneclassic

macrumors 6502
Oct 12, 2011
375
7
USA
LG has been primary source for LCDs for years now, even before Apple got into spats with Samsung. Also Apple now has Sharp, Japan Display, AUO, and CMI all supplying various displays.



Both Hynix and Elpida have been supplying RAM for years now. Ditto for Hynix and Toshiba for NAND Memory.



TI has nothing to do with Apple here. TI's OMAP division relies on others to make chips for them. It's more of the nature of the business though. You effectively have to make two versions of the chips if you're getting two fabs involved.

Basically I don't see anywhere Apple has "cornered" itself to a single primary source because of the fight with Samsung. In almost all areas they have been multi-sourcing for years.

You are naming all suppliers Apple ever used in the past or other players in the field. Apple's direction is towards single sourcing.

Apple wants TSMC to dedicate one fab location.
 

SactoGuy18

macrumors 601
Sep 11, 2006
4,311
1,475
Sacramento, CA USA
I think Apple wants Sharp's display technology for another reason: Sharp will provide the big display panels for the much-rumored Apple television set, one that Apple may have already prototyped using older display technology to demonstrate the software and interface of such a future set.

Imagine a beautiful IGZO-based AMOLED panel in the 55" to 65" range that will be used on a real Apple television set, one that integrates control of a DVR, Blu-ray player and online video sources from a singular control interface based on iOS.....
 

TallManNY

macrumors 601
Nov 5, 2007
4,727
1,580
Just playing the other side here but why didn't the reporter of this story go the extra step to check Sharps annual or quarterly reports for a loan or cash in flow not related to sales for the same amount? If Apple invested or loaned Sharp cash it has to show.

And no wonder so many people are broke in this world. Stop with the Apple should just buy x company. That is not how things work. Just because you have cash in the bank does not mean you need to spend every penny on any company you complete with or do business with.

It isn't described as a loan, it is described as a prepayment for goods to be delivered later. So it is really income. But Sharp would not recognize it as income in the quarter it received it because it hasn't delivered the goods yet and doesn't have them on hand to deliver if it wanted (at least that would be the tax result in the US). I'm not sure how the money should show up on their financials based on accounting rules. But it isn't a loan and it might not be required to show up separately in cash flow though it might be baked into the total number in a way that can't be figured out.

----------

I think Apple wants Sharp's display technology for another reason: Sharp will provide the big display panels for the much-rumored Apple television set, one that Apple may have already prototyped using older display technology to demonstrate the software and interface of such a future set.

Imagine a beautiful IGZO-based AMOLED panel in the 55" to 65" range that will be used on a real Apple television set, one that integrates control of a DVR, Blu-ray player and online video sources from a singular control interface based on iOS.....

Yes, I can imagine that. Once a TV of that quality is available from any manufacturer, I can plug my AppleTV into it and basically have that. I don't DVR because my shows are all available in the cloud for instant download. Please do not mention Blu-ray being on an Apple product. That technology is clearly dead to Apple.
 

the8thark

macrumors 601
Apr 18, 2011
4,628
1,735
Well, I think people are forgetting something

A company called Apple got some investment of $150 million from Microsoft &
stayed afloat for some time. Later on , because of its own innovations & strategies became most valued company in the World.

I thought MS only helped Apple out to get MS itself in a better light vs the "being a monopoly" lawsuits MS was facing at the time.
 

xofruitcake

macrumors 6502a
Mar 15, 2012
632
9
I'm not sure how the money should show up on their financials based on accounting rules. But it isn't a loan and it might not be required to show up separately in cash flow though it might be baked into the total number in a way that can't be figured out..

Probably under current liability -> deferred revenue. It is a very common occurance when a company receive payment in advance of goods delivered. e.g. insurance company collect premium once every 6 month or a year in advance, so they have a lot of deferred revenue. Apple has some of deferred revenue as well. As Sharp start to deliver product to Apple, the amount they deliver each quarter will show up in the income statement and the amount in deferred revenue will be reduce by the exact same number.

The risk here is that if Sharp fold, the $2B prepayment for product is very low in the claim priority and more than likely Apple will be out most of the 2B. But if Sharp can maintain their operation, the 2B prepayment is money good. The key is whether Sharp really get the IGZO production problem fix. If they do, Apple demand for the product will be hugh and Sharp will probably make it.

http://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/viewer?a...sion_number=0001193125-12-444068&xbrl_type=v#
 

gnasher729

Suspended
Nov 25, 2005
17,980
5,565
The obvious reason Apple doesn't want to buy Sharp, is that it doesn't want to get in a bidding war with an equally deep pocketed Samsung... who know that without Sharp, Apple falls into their arms.

Are you saying that Samsung would buy competitors, in order to become a monopoly in the LCD display market, and in order to then abuse their monopoly to destroy competition in the tablet and phone market?

----------

Well, I think people are forgetting something

A company called Apple got some investment of $150 million from Microsoft &
stayed afloat for some time. Later on , because of its own innovations & strategies became most valued company in the World.

Actually, that's not what happened. A company named Microsoft unfortunately got caught redhanded with copies of Apple's Quicktime code inside Windows. Some serious negotiations went on, and Microsoft signed a deal to hand over $150 million, plus ship versions of Microsoft Office and Explorer for Mac for the next 5 years.

(Now it is most likely that it wasn't actually Microsoft who stole the code, but a company that they hired to write video codecs for them, but legally it makes no difference).

----------

Say somebody breaks into your house and steals all of your gadgets and gets caught. If you pursue legal action against them you are being nice following the socially accepted way to resolve the issue. If you wack them over the head and dispose of their bodies in a swamp you aren't being so nice. Either path can be effective in dealing with a thief but one can get you into more trouble.

I know someone who was told, by a police officer, not to take any physical actions for the next six months... with the clear meaning that if anything happened within six months, the burglary victim would be a suspect, and after six months, they wouldn't.

----------

Honestly, Apple is hurting for it's childish behaviour with Samsung. Samsung has been the best and most reliable supplier and stopping relations with them was the dumbest idea ever.

I wouldn't call Samsung "reliable", they have for example been convicted for illegal price gouging several times in the last year, they have been convicted for stealing patents, they have without any doubt copied designs of their biggest customer.

So Apple is paying money, which they have plenty of, to make sure that someone they trust will be supplying the best LCD screens. Very sensible thing to do.
 

Rocketman

macrumors 603
Dediu has much more on the spending and his analysis at Asymco.
Here is the chart of over/under capex vs projected. It is in tick-tock mode.

Rocketman

Now's the time for a stock buy-back. They can even buy their own stock in foreign jurisdictions where the cash is, and the taxes are lower.
 

Attachments

  • Screen-Shot-2012-11-07-at-11-7-1.24.40-PM.png
    Screen-Shot-2012-11-07-at-11-7-1.24.40-PM.png
    15.8 KB · Views: 49

TallManNY

macrumors 601
Nov 5, 2007
4,727
1,580
Probably under current liability -> deferred revenue. It is a very common occurance when a company receive payment in advance of goods delivered. e.g. insurance company collect premium once every 6 month or a year in advance, so they have a lot of deferred revenue. Apple has some of deferred revenue as well. As Sharp start to deliver product to Apple, the amount they deliver each quarter will show up in the income statement and the amount in deferred revenue will be reduce by the exact same number.

The risk here is that if Sharp fold, the $2B prepayment for product is very low in the claim priority and more than likely Apple will be out most of the 2B. But if Sharp can maintain their operation, the 2B prepayment is money good. The key is whether Sharp really get the IGZO production problem fix. If they do, Apple demand for the product will be hugh and Sharp will probably make it.

http://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/viewer?a...sion_number=0001193125-12-444068&xbrl_type=v#

Thanks. Yeah, that makes sense. I wonder if this prepayment could be applied to a variety of items beyond just the screens. Sharp can probably make something that Apple can use, so as long as it stays in business, it can repay this payment even if the screens don't work out.
 

xofruitcake

macrumors 6502a
Mar 15, 2012
632
9
Thanks. Yeah, that makes sense. I wonder if this prepayment could be applied to a variety of items beyond just the screens. Sharp can probably make something that Apple can use, so as long as it stays in business, it can repay this payment even if the screens don't work out.

no, I don't think so.. It is screen or nothing. Apple horizontal business model trade maximum efficiency (ala Samsung model of vertical integration) for maximum flexibility. If technology change, Apple can find the best vendors for a particular piece of components, so they are constantly ahead in the technology race. The downside is that the cost will be higher and Apple has less control in the vendor's priority (e.g. TSMC doesn't want to dedicate a fab line to Apple product and there is nothing that Apple can do). And Sharp only do screen really well (otherwise, they won't be close to bk now..). So it is either LCD panel or bust for Apple. The risk is not too bad given Apple big cash stake. The reward is going to be fast technology on LCD and Apple desperately need that since they are locked into fixed resolution in Ipad and Iphone to protect apps ecosystems. So they need screen that has lower resolution than Andorid device but looks better.. it is a neat trick if they can pull it off (ala Iphone 5 vs Samsung S3) but it is going to be a constant race until everyone is retina and there is no point of improving resolution anymore...
 

TMay

macrumors 68000
Dec 24, 2001
1,520
1
Carson City, NV
You can sugar coat what they are doing all you want. They still paid 2B out of pocket which they may or may not ever see again.



If Sharp can stay in business long enough. Who knows.

----------



Apple isn't infallible. Companies make poor purchasing or business deals all the time. Time will tell.

Seriously.

Tim Cook is the acknowledged master of the supply chain, and you don't think that he at Apple and the other investors have a stipulation in the contracts to take over the operation in the case of a Sharp default?

More to the point, Apple would be investing in production only if the process for manufacturing IGZO displays has met successful pilot production goals.

Your have thought processes that never fail to amaze, but to sugar coat it, you always exceed expectations.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.