Apple is 'Not in Talks' to Settle Legal Dispute With Qualcomm and is 'Gearing Up For Trial'

[jav6454]

Qualcomm is a $92 billion company!
Apple’s most expensive acquisition by far was Beats for $3 billion.
And that had a clear vision & goal... a continuation of audio profits, greater reach for Apple Music, Jimmy Iovine to briefly spearhead, etc.
You are literally talking crazy!!!
Over 30x more than their largest acquisition ever for some modems? Lol.
That’s a small amount of what Qualcomm does... and Apple DEFINITELY doesn’t want to get into that business.
Even if Apple did follow your insane notion... they’d keep the patents w/ even the vaguest chance of being challenged, divest the rest at an enormous loss, and walk away.
Companies don’t get as big and successful as Apple by pissing away billions “because.... technically, they can”. Yeah, they can buy a billion Big Macs too. Just as likely & makes as much sense.
You are talking about spending 10’s of BILLIONS & then owning a company and having to run a company that they don’t want or need! For what?? To dodge a few million spent in legal fees & the “hassle” of having to go to court??

You apparently don’t know how one works. All you need is controlling stake. It doesn’t mean Apple needs to fork over $92B. It just means Apple needs to fork over ~$46B.

Yes you are right, it would be an expensive acquisition but one that could bring much needed engineering expertise which is several times not calculated. Qualcomm engineers can help bolster Apple’s own designs and bring into the A-series an integrated modem. Why would Apple sell off? Keep the company whole and as a separate entity and keep IP close by.

 

[macfacts]

LOL. Surely you are joking?
[doublepost=1541632597][/doublepost]
Please name all the restaurants where you can buy Big Macs from.

Then list all the stores where you can buy kindle books.

Hang on - what percentage of the smartphone market does Apple control? Hmm. Much much much less than half.

Amazon does not have a monopoly on the distribution of ebooks. Mcdonalds makes the big Mac, so they are the only ones selling it. Apple is not the only one making iOS apps, yet they have a monopoly on the distribution of them.

I never said apple has a monopoly on the smartphone market. However I am saying they have a monopoly on the distribution of iOS apps.

 

[Abazigal]

Because Apple already is a monopoly, it doesn't need to be even more so.

I do agree with you here. At its current size and sphere of influence, Apple definitely deserves more scrutiny and oversight.

That said, Apple has never been in the business of acquiring companies for the sake of boosting revenue. They tend to buy smaller companies who have technology which can benefit the entire ecosystem.

An acquisition of Qualcomm would never fly with the regulators. You are talking about cutting off processor support for just about every other android smartphone OEM out there!

 

[cmaier]

Amazon does not have a monopoly on the distribution of ebooks. Mcdonalds makes the big Mac, so they are the only ones selling it. Apple is not the only one making iOS apps, yet they have a monopoly on the distribution of them.

I never said apple has a monopoly on the smartphone market. However I am saying they have a monopoly on the distribution of iOS apps.

Amazon has a monopoly on its ebook store. Apple has a monopoly on its App Store. Apple is not the only mobile operating system. It is not a monopoly any more than it was a monopoly when you could only buy console games from the console makers.

 

[macfacts]

Amazon has a monopoly on its ebook store. Apple has a monopoly on its App Store. Apple is not the only mobile operating system. It is not a monopoly any more than it was a monopoly when you could only buy console games from the console makers.

When did console makers have a monopoly on the distribution of games for their platform? I can buy PS4 games from many different stores.

 

[yngrshr]

Yah, poorly worded, getting flooded and don't have time nor do I care to respond to EACH one.

Right, except about four or five people asked about that. I get your general idea, but that part just wasn’t accurate.

 

[KPandian1]

Yah, poorly worded, getting flooded and don't have time nor do I care to respond to EACH one.

You wrote that - own it, even it means admitting the error. You have theme - just like you did to write the above post.

 

[Mars56]

Is there any deal in which Apple hasn't let it go sour? Jesus.. Samsung spat took years to finish... How long is this one going to last?
[doublepost=1541604196][/doublepost]

Apple is not entitled to just buy any company you think it should.

Why do you think this way?

Apparently those companies still depend on Apple as a client .

 

[cmaier]

When did console makers have a monopoly on the distribution of games for their platform? I can buy PS4 games from many different stores.

Are you kidding? Ever hear of Atari? ColecoVision? Every console maker ever fighting to prevent any games on their platform that aren’t published through them?

 

[Tech198]

You only "go in talks" because you become "aware"

If you know your right (and apparently Apple does), why would you reach an agreement? Seem Apple's made its decision by switching.

QualComm is just a 'loose end' now to Apple, waiting to be cut. But perhaps by "agreeing-to-disagree" they can 'patch' up and say "sorry" to one another..

Ain't gonna happen.

 

[bushman4]

Qualcomm is a loser in this no matter what. Even if Apple pays royalties to Qualcomm the amount of business they're losing is astronomical

 

[CarpalMac]

It's important to note that how Google treat partners is different from Apple. Google treat them more like family and give them the freedom to run independently like DeepMind, Waze, etc. while Apple treat partners more like slavery with complete control and only to be used and thrown under the bus like Qualcomm, Dialog Semiconductors, Imagination Technologies, Foxconn (resulting in suicides), GT Advanced and more.

I can totally believe that. I have a friend who works at a telecoms company and he says that Apple are now an absolute nightmare to work with. Since they have gotten so dominant in the market place they practically bully them.

It's remarkably similar how Marks & Spencers used to be with their suppliers back in the 90's. Like it, or lump it. M&S to their cost have now learned that this was not smart business as people stopped wanting to be involved with them.

 

[ksec]

Just to be clear, TSMC 7nm is essentially identical in terms of process to Intel 10nm. Same size gates, same gate spacing, etc. They just name their process nodes differently.

Yes, if Intel ship a 10nm Modem next year then it would be equal to TSMC 7nm Modem, the problem is that is not going to happen. Highly likely Intel 10nm modem will be for 5G in 2020. Assuming they are good enough for Apple.

Unless Intel shows any commitment into making Apple a happy customer ( Which they are showing any at the moment ), I am all for Apple working with Mediatek on Modem IP.

 

[I7guy]

I can totally believe that. I have a friend who works at a telecoms company and he says that Apple are now an absolute nightmare to work with. Since they have gotten so dominant in the market place they practically bully them.

It's remarkably similar how Marks & Spencers used to be with their suppliers back in the 90's. Like it, or lump it. M&S to their cost have now learned that this was not smart business as people stopped wanting to be involved with them.

Said another way, you really have to earn apple’s business. No company wants to potentially throw away millions or billions in revenue. For that type of money it shouldn’t be a cake walk.

 

[Justanotherfanboy]

You apparently don’t know how one works. All you need is controlling stake. It doesn’t mean Apple needs to fork over $92B. It just means Apple needs to fork over ~$46B.

Yes you are right, it would be an expensive acquisition but one that could bring much needed engineering expertise which is several times not calculated. Qualcomm engineers can help bolster Apple’s own designs and bring into the A-series an integrated modem. Why would Apple sell off? Keep the company whole and as a separate entity and keep IP close by.

Lol.
Yes, please! Please tell me “how it works”. Yes, you... the one who won’t let go of the PREPOSTEROUS notion of paying literally tens of thousands of times more than their legal bills could possibly end up at, to instead buy a company they neither want nor need!
Wow! Thanks for sharing that info about how hostile takeovers work, btw! Are you sure about that? I was under the impression that if you own a company, you can pretty much do anything (build a new campus, choose your own prices, have final say over every single hire, etc.), whereas, if you are merely a majority stockholder, you can’t show up & paint the factory a different color if you want or something, lol. You can’t just “take over” all decisions for the company. I was under the impression that you could merely force any decision that came up in stockholder meetings to go whatever way you want- by controlling the majority of the votes. Hey, I might be wrong! I’m no corporate takeover expert, like you apparently are.
I mean... the point is moot, because the idea is SO outlandish. I think I can say with relative certainty that Apple is not interested in adding to their plate, besides running their own trillion dollar company, running a 2nd hundred billion dollar company, and dealing with the enormity of that obligation... to own IP that they don’t even want to use anymore!
I think we’re going to have to just agree to disagree. I’m never going to be convinced by you that this is, on any level, anything but an unfathomably stupid idea, whether technically “possible”, or not. And you, I guess, won’t listen to reason.
I suppose, at this point, the most logical thing to do is wait & see if you’re right- and a multi billion dollar offer is made on this company, or whether I’m right, & they simply continue to work to minimize their contact with this shady company & instead move forward with their own chip designs.