Apple CEO Tim Cook on 5G: 'We're Excited About Our Pipeline'

[EugW]

You said in the first part that Apple waited "until it was clear that Intel couldn't execute"

Yes.

so you're basically saying Apple waited until the day after the trial began in April 2019 to settle.

Uh, no.

But then you said in the second part that Apple in 2018 "realized it was going to be nothing". So which is it? Was it clear to them in 2018 or 2019?

2018 as already posted.

If they knew in 2018, then why wait until April 2019 to settle? Once the trial starts, settlement cost likely exponentially increased for Apple.

So, you seriously think they can negotiate a multi-billion dollar settlement in a matter of days.

BTW, you should note that the licence agreement began April Fools' Day, two weeks before the press release and the trial start date.

If they knew at the last minute in April 2019, then my reasoning makes sense. They knew Intel was going to crap, so they made a deal with Qualcomm to devalue and acquire the division at a discount.

In other words, your argument doesn't make much sense.

Wrong. Samsung sells more units than Apple.

I guess you didn't bother reading the content of the article. Samsung was already accounted for.

Subtracting Huawei still yields more than 200 million units.

Their flagships are still responsible for a large volume. Combined with the other Apple competitors' flagships, it hits 200 million easily.

Fact is you and I don't know what these companies are cooking up. So to say that Apple is "confirmed" to be the driving force behind 200 million units for Qualcomm is factually false.

I like how you conveniently ignored the very important factor, already pointed out to you, that most of those products sold by those companies won't actually be 5G in 2020. Furthermore, the statement from Qualcomm said that the 5G chip sales will have two inflection points. To spell this out for you:

As mentioned, Samsung was already accounted for, and will represent inflection point #1. There is no other company besides Apple that can account for that second inflection point outside of Huawei, but as already stated, Huawei is using its own 5G chips, so that removes Huawei from the equation. If you add up all the other manufacturers, they have significant numbers, but they won't be forming a single inflection point, nor will they actually be producing only 5G phones, so you can't just simply add up all their unit sales and equate that to Qualcomm 5G modem sales. Qualcomm isn't the only manufacturer outside Huawei making these chips anyway.

 

[MacBH928]

Why are we all acting like this 5G rollout is just for cell phones. Unless we can open our minds a little, you won't see all the other things that this tech will be used for. Your future autonomous cars cannot do what is necessary on 4G. 5G will allow cars to communicate with each other in almost real time. Many, many, other uses for 5G. Stop thinking about just your cell phone, there's a big world of possibilities out there.

Thats fine, but this is not happening any time soon. I doubt it will happen in the next five years. In the current context-Apple-5G is used as a cellular transmitting system for mobile devices.

Unless they are talking about the next Apple Tag or whatever it is.

 

[farewelwilliams]

Yes.


Uh, no.


2018 as already posted.

Your statement "until it was clear that Intel couldn't execute" was in response to my 2019 timeline which implies that you're saying Apple realized in 2019 that Intel couldn't execute 5G.

But now that you corrected yourself to 2018 and now that you understand what a hostile takeover is, we can move on.

So, you seriously think they can negotiate a multi-billion dollar settlement in a matter of days.

Never said that.

But you're telling me the lawyers forgot to ask for a couple of extra weeks to finish the settlement? You do know that it takes several months for a case of this size to depose witnesses, compile evidence, and prep for a defense before the trial starts right? Not to mention the settlement costs likely exponentially increased for Apple once the trial started.

So why would Apple do that? You're the one that's making 0 sense here.

I like how you conveniently ignored the very important factor, already pointed out to you, that most of those products sold by those companies won't actually be 5G in 2020.

Show me. Show me exactly where the executives of these companies have confirmed that they won't be converting most of these products to 5G. You can't. Because you're guessing.

When you throw these Forbes links saying it's "confirmed" (when they haven't technically "confirmed" it) or when you say there's "0 chance", these are all not factually true. I have a problem with people making predictions based on how they feel and immediately take it as a fact. If it's your "guess", then say so. Don't say that it's been "confirmed".

I'm not going to read any further than that as I'm really good at detecting whenever is someone is trying to dig themselves out of a hole. So I don't see the point of continuing this conversation. Have a great day.

 

[PickUrPoison]

Yes, Qualcomm was very pleased to get $4.5 billion even though it wasn’t the $7 billion it asked for.

However, I don’t think Qualcomm ever expected to get anywhere close to $7 billion. I was actually surprised Apple had to pay as much as it did, and I think it reflects just how desperate Apple’s situation was.

Even the press release posted on Apple’s website sounded embarrassing for Apple as it specifically mentioned that Apple had to pay Qualcomm money.

If Apple had been desperate Qualcomm could have driven a much harder bargain. They would have forced Apple to pay the money they’d been withholding—plus who knows how many billions to access Qualcomm’s chips, and also get access to the full portfolio of Qualcomm’s IP (not just the SEPs) to make their own baseband modem.

re: the press release, I have no idea why you think Apple mentioning they were paying Qualcomm a portion of the billions in royalties they’d been withholding for years is somehow embarrassing.

 

[EugW]

If Apple had been desperate Qualcomm could have driven a much harder bargain. They would have forced Apple to pay the money they’d been withholding—plus who knows how many billions to access Qualcomm’s chips, and also get access to the full portfolio of Qualcomm’s IP (not just the SEPs) to make their own baseband modem.

No, a $4.5 billion payout in 2019 was completely unexpected by investors, and is seen as a major win on Qualcomm’s part. In fact, after the announcement, Qualcomm’s stock jumped by something like 15%.

Remember, Apple was actually saying Qualcomm owed Apple $1 billion before the settlement.

re: the press release, I have no idea why you think Apple mentioning they were paying Qualcomm a portion of the billions in royalties they’d been withholding for years is somehow embarrassing.

Typically partnership press releases emphasize the companies’ accomplishments and potential synergies’ etc, and there is no mention of payments being made. That press release specifically makes a point that Apple had to pay Qualcomm, and my suspicion is that Qualcomm demanded as part of the agreement that that verbiage be included. The text in there is very un-Apple-like. I had never seen anything like it in Apple’s previous press releases, although I must admit I haven’t read every single one.

 

[PickUrPoison]

No, a $4.5 billion payout in 2019 was completely unexpected by investors, and is seen as a major win on Qualcomm’s part. In fact, after the announcement, Qualcomm’s stock jumped by something like 15%.

Remember, Apple was actually saying Qualcomm owed Apple $1 billion before the settlement.

The $4.5 billion payment was unexpected only from the standpoint that the settlement agreement itself was unexpected. Qualcomm’s stock popped as a “relief rally”, since Apple’s challenge to Qualcomm’s royalty requirements was an existential threat to Qualcomm’s extremely profitable business model.

It was Qualcomm themselves who pegged the amount of unpaid royalties at $7B in an October 2018 court filing, an amount that would have grown even higher in the subsequent six months leading up to the settlement.

Qualcomm says Apple $7 billion behind in royalty payments

Qualcomm Inc <QCOM.O> said in a court hearing on Friday that Apple Inc <AAPL.O> is $7 billion behind in patent royalty payments to the mobile chip firm, which for years supplied parts for the iPhone.

www.reuters.com

I don’t see Qualcomm settling a $7B bill for $4.5B as a win, major or otherwise. Wall Street certainly didn’t see this as an Apple loss, as its share price also moved up after the settlement announcement.

re: the $1 billion owed by Qualcomm, it wasn’t just Apple saying this; Qualcomm had lost a legal fight the month before the settlement.

U.S. judge rules Qualcomm owes Apple nearly $1 billion rebate payment

A U.S. federal judge has issued a preliminary ruling that Qualcomm Inc owes Apple Inc nearly $1 billion in patent royalty rebate payments, though the decision is unlikely to result in Qualcomm writing a check to Apple because of other developments in the dispute.

www.reuters.com

But this was separate and apart from the royalties dispute. The $1B was money due under the 2013 Business Cooperation and Patent Agreement. Qualcomm stopped paying rebates due Apple after Apple instructed their contract manufacturers to stop paying royalties to Qualcomm.

Typically partnership press releases emphasize the companies’ accomplishments and potential synergies’ etc, and there is no mention of payments being made. That press release specifically makes a point that Apple had to pay Qualcomm, and my suspicion is that Qualcomm demanded as part of the agreement that that verbiage be included. The text in there is very un-Apple-like. I had never seen anything like it in Apple’s previous press releases, although I must admit I haven’t read every single one.

This wasn’t so much a partnership press release as it was a settlement press release. It was a joint (and mutually agreeable) press release, published by both sides on their respective websites. The statement that “the settlement includes a payment from Apple to Qualcomm” is rather uninformative, and is itself hardly surprising, since Apple owed them $7 billion (according to Qualcomm).

I’m sure Qualcomm would have rather trumpeted a large multi billion dollar number, but the best they could get out of Apple was that “a payment” was part of the terms.

 

[EugW]

I don’t see Qualcomm settling a $7B bill for $4.5B as a win, major or otherwise. Wall Street certainly didn’t see this as an Apple loss, as its share price also moved up after the settlement announcement.

Wall Street saw this as a major win for Qualcomm. Nobody expected Qualcomm would get anything close to $7 billion. By the way, I was wrong about the stock going up 15%. Qualcomm's stock went up over 20%.

Qualcomm stock soars 23% on news it settled billion-dollar dispute with Apple

Apple and chip maker Qualcomm end bitter legal fight over technology that enables iPhones to connect to the internet

www.cbsnews.com

As for Apple's stock, it was flat. It didn't move much at all. So Wall Street definitely didn't see this as a win for Apple, but it didn't see this as a big Apple loss either. It kind of balanced out, probably because everyone already knew Intel was failing at 5G. This deal fixed all of that, and iPhones would not have to wait until 2021 to get 5G.

This wasn’t so much a partnership press release as it was a settlement press release. It was a joint (and mutually agreeable) press release, published by both sides on their respective websites. The statement that “the settlement includes a payment from Apple to Qualcomm” is rather uninformative, and is itself hardly surprising, since Apple owed them $7 billion (according to Qualcomm).

I’m sure Qualcomm would have rather trumpeted a large multi billion dollar number, but the best they could get out of Apple was that “a payment” was part of the terms.

It's not a surprising fact, but it's rather uncharacteristic to be in an Apple press release. That Apple was forced to put this in the press release and post it on its own website is rather telling in of itself.

---

But in the end, what I'm most interested in is what is going to happen to the iPad Pros. The iPhones we know are guaranteed to get 5G in the fall, but we are not as sure about the iPad Pros.

 

[PickUrPoison]

Wall Street saw this as a major win for Qualcomm. Nobody expected Qualcomm would get anything close to $7 billion. By the way, I was wrong about the stock going up 15%. Qualcomm's stock went up over 20%.

Qualcomm stock soars 23% on news it settled billion-dollar dispute with Apple

Apple and chip maker Qualcomm end bitter legal fight over technology that enables iPhones to connect to the internet

www.cbsnews.com

As for Apple's stock, it was flat. It didn't move much at all. So Wall Street definitely didn't see this as a win for Apple, but it didn't see this as a big Apple loss either. It kind of balanced out, probably because everyone already knew Intel was failing at 5G. This deal fixed all of that, and iPhones would not have to wait until 2021 to get 5G.


It's not a surprising fact, but it's rather uncharacteristic to be in an Apple press release. That Apple was forced to put this in the press release and post it on its own website is rather telling in of itself.

---

But in the end, what I'm most interested in is what is going to happen to the iPad Pros. The iPhones we know are guaranteed to get 5G in the fall, but we are not as sure about the iPad Pros.

If you’re looking to stock price movement to tell you who had the bigger “win”, I think that’s a mistake. Qualcomm’s legal troubles had been hanging over its head for quite some time. The market penalizes uncertainty, including legal jeopardy and threats to one’s business model. Independent of who got the better of whom, the market responded to the resolution of a major problem as one might expect.

With the end of worldwide litigation with Apple (and their contract manufacturers), the re-signing of Apple as a chip customer and a long term licensing deal, I don’t think it’s much of a surprise Qualcomm’s stock had a very nice rally, up 50% over the next couple weeks.

But a month later that bump was basically burned off and the stock was back on trend.

re: the press release, it wasn’t Apple’s release, it was a joint release. If there’s anything telling about it, it’s that Apple forced Qualcomm to accept wording that made no mention at all of the magnitude of the settlement amount.

If Qualcomm had been calling the shots, you can bet the release they posted on their website would have proudly and prominently featured the settlement payment. Apple was apparently not up for that.

re: iPad Pro, with all the contradictory rumors, there’s less clarity than ever about what Apple’s actual plans might be. It seems like the most reliable rumors are mainly about iPhone anymore, similar to a few years ago. Still fun to follow the various ups and downs, ins and outs—and speculate about how things might play out though 🙂

 

[Elyzien]

Sarcasm or serious? Can't tell!

Both

 

[MandiMac]

Both

Ehm. You do know that the 5G frequencies are, in fact, nothing new and TV/radio/radar already have been using far lower AND higher frequencies for decades? Not to mention the 5 GHz networks that are almost everywhere by now. Nothing to see here.

 

[PostApple2016BrainWash]

Tim Cook isn't exactly sure what he's talking about but the fact is Apple wouldn't be selling iWatch if JonyIve didn't come up with the idea.

 

[tranceking26]

Tbh I'm not excited yet, it's going to take years to implement where I live. Quite often we don't even get 4G!

 

[Hyperchaotic]

How fast do you really need a page to load? :-D
5G might be future but for now 4G is totally fine. In few years we might revisit this conversation but until then its just specs chasing, nothing more.

Top speeds are not interesting. Ignore mmWave 5G; Sub-6 5G can offer a lot of improvement in congested areas. Even 700MHz 5G offers improvements due to spectrum efficiency and better protocols and channel management. Again it may not improve "top speeds" but it'll allow more subscribers on a tower without dropping to minimal speeds - and congestion is arguably the biggest problem currently is many urban locations and it's getting worse.
Towers will no doubt also support several bands simultaneously with different penetration/bandwidth, like they currently do with LTE.

Congestion may not be a problem for you today, but it is for a lot of people.