Apple Lays Off 600+ Employees After Canceling Car Project

[JPack]

How would Bloomberg know, and why are you believing unsubstantiated chatter? Sounds more like conspiracy theories than fact, but we all have our threshold and many believe what they want regardless of actual evidence or verified reporting.

Blind faith, the evidence for those without evidence.

Because Mark Gurman has a proven track record? Read his Vision Pro articles from a few years about the history, development, Mike Rockwell, etc. and you'll see he's got very credible and accurate sources.

If you want Apple's CEO to go on live TV and confirm this story, then you're in the wrong place on the Internet.

 

[farmboy]

And btw who wanted this project? Tim Cook.

It needs to be said, Tim Cook is not a good CEO for Apple. He is going to continue to drag them down.

...

Jony Ive wanted this project, not Tim.

 

[steve09090]

Because Mark Gurman has a proven track record? Read his Vision Pro articles from a few years about the history, development, Mike Rockwell, etc. and you'll see he's got very credible and accurate sources.

If you want Apple's CEO to go on live TV and confirm this story, then you're in the wrong place on the Internet.

Thanks. I wasn’t after a confirmation even though you gave it. I guess I have a different threshold to you in believing what I read. When someone is right maybe 95+% of the time, I’d say there is a likelihood they could be right. But I don’t believe it until its verified 100%, or it might be wrong. When someone is right maybe 50-70% like Gurman, I put zero credibility in what they say.

Its common to say, where there is smoke there is fire, but having been a fire investigator, I can tell you that’s not always true.

 

[JPack]

Jony Ive wanted this project, not Tim.

Definitely not. Tim Cook was behind the car project all the way. He's the CEO.

"Board of Directors, we are spending $10 billion because Jony Ive wants to make a car." Seriously?

Tim Cook needed something for his legacy and to ensure revenue for the future. Steve Jobs gave iPhone and Mac. But that revenue stream won't last forever.

 

[newceoofapple]

Jony Ive wanted this project, not Tim.

Either way the Project is toast. Buh Bye

 

[dozoy]

I suspect most if not all of them will either find jobs in the growing EV industry, moved or later hired back into in Apple's rapidly expanding AI department or in Apple's R&D in robotics which has a close cross-pollination of skills and technologies with automotive.

You mean declining EV industry. Declining.

 

[Realityck]

Definitely not. Tim Cook was behind the car project all the way. He's the CEO.

"Board of Directors, we are spending $10 billion because Jony Ive wants to make a car." Seriously?

Tim Cook needed something for his legacy and to ensure revenue for the future. Steve Jobs gave iPhone and Mac. But that revenue stream won't last forever.

Making the next great thing is highly problematic these days. It should be about what kind of device or service is highly useful/desirable to utilize by consumers/businesses.

Neither the Apple Car, Vision Pro, or even various Home Automation products or as the now speculated Robot are Aces that you can cast to attract a majority of consumers.

I thought Apple was forever trying to invent/adapt some kind of AI enhanced automotive system that could be marketed to automotive manufactures they were able to partner with to achieve the concept of a Apple Car of sorts. But the long outlook of EV vehicles is not a cheery walk to riches, its instead a glass ceiling with a finite amount of consumers even wanting them, with the enormous environmental constraints of rare earths for batteries, and long term inadequacies with power grids able to handle a fairly sizable addition load of EV vehicles given population growth/expansion of housing relying on electricity. Yes currently its a losing battle with that.

So if there is going to be a next big thing it would be truly hands free usage of computing devices such as smart phones/tablets along with augment reality on the web that allows even more information to be displayed on those devices. Using underlying AI digital assistants could make the iPhone more handsfree then touching the screens all the time. Apples work with AR examples running on mobile devices such as the iPhone and IPad along with desktop computers could really spur on the WWW to evolve further. This is what should be Apple's next great thing from my perspective not technology trophies that aren't that appealing.

 

[chucker23n1]

Definitely not. Tim Cook was behind the car project all the way. He's the CEO.

"Board of Directors, we are spending $10 billion because Jony Ive wants to make a car." Seriously?

The CEO does not go to the board to ask for project budgets.

 

[steve09090]

Definitely not. Tim Cook was behind the car project all the way. He's the CEO.

"Board of Directors, we are spending $10 billion because Jony Ive wants to make a car." Seriously?

Tim Cook needed something for his legacy and to ensure revenue for the future. Steve Jobs gave iPhone and Mac. But that revenue stream won't last forever.

So when you say "definitely" you must have some definitive way of knowing otherwise you are talking unfounded, unsubstantiated bull dust. If it is an opinion, then say it’s an opinion based on your feelings. Or name your source.

It’s funny that YOU mentioned revenue stream and you think Cook "needs" a legacy (like YOU would know…). I think the Apple market value might show that he has that legacy already. If he were to leave today (and that’s unlikely considering how well he is doing) his legacy is surely that he took Apple from a Market Cap of $306B in August 2011 when he took over, to its current level of $2.62T which is 8.5 times greater than it was then. Because you know all about revenue streams, that’s an 850% increase! BTW inflation between 2011 and 2024 in the U.S. is 38%, so we can round that down to 800% actual market value increase if it makes you happy.

Apple is in good hands.

 

[JPack]

So when you say "definitely" you must have some definitive way of knowing otherwise you are talking unfounded, unsubstantiated bull dust. If it is an opinion, then say it’s an opinion based on your feelings. Or name your source.

It’s funny that YOU mentioned revenue stream and you think Cook "needs" a legacy (like YOU would know…). I think the Apple market value might show that he has that legacy already. If he were to leave today (and that’s unlikely considering how well he is doing) his legacy is surely that he took Apple from a Market Cap of $306B in August 2011 when he took over, to its current level of $2.62T which is 8.5 times greater than it was then. Because you know all about revenue streams, that’s an 850% increase! BTW inflation between 2011 and 2024 in the U.S. is 38%, so we can round that down to 800% actual market value increase if it makes you happy.

Apple is in good hands.

Nobody looks at market cap when considering the legacy of a leader because that value can be wiped out in a matter of days. What's the market cap when Steve Jobs left? Who cares. He's known for the products he introduced and reshaping Apple.

A decade after Tim Cook steps down, will Apple still rely on iPhone for over 50% of revenue mix? Replacement cycles are becoming longer and longer. Not only is Cook looking for other revenue streams, the board is too.

 

[JPack]

The CEO does not go to the board to ask for project budgets.

The CEO can be removed by the board. The board can overrule Cook's decisions. The board has the ultimate authority while CEO runs day to day ops. When Apple spends $10 billion, Tim Cook is definitely going to the board to ask for that money. It's nuts that you don't have basic understanding of corporate governance.

 

[Abazigal]

The CEO can be removed by the board. The board can overrule Cook's decisions. The board has the ultimate authority while CEO runs day to day ops. When Apple spends $10 billion, Tim Cook is definitely going to the board to ask for that money. It's nuts that you don't have basic understanding of corporate governance.

I am not convinced the CEO needs to get approval for every single expense. He runs the company, and the onus is on the board to do their own monitoring and step in when they deem necessary. Also, 10 billion is like what - half the sum that Google pay Apple every year?

It's not like we are talking about 100 billion here or some other sum that could potentially bankrupt the company. At the end of the day, Apple is still a money printing machine, and I don't think the board members are going to lose sleep over a few billions spent on R&D. Neither will Tim Cook receive any sort of sanctions (that will come in the form lower share price resulting in less money from him exercising his stock options).

It's just the nature of running a business. You make some great calls, you sometimes make some poor ones. Just look at Google!

 

[steve09090]

Nobody looks at market cap when considering the legacy of a leader because that value can be wiped out in a matter of days. What's the market cap when Steve Jobs left? Who cares. He's known for the products he introduced and reshaping Apple.

You mentioned Steve Jobs is remembered for reshaping the company. Exploding Apple into at least 8 times the value isn't reshaping the company? I think a lot of people will think about Market Cap when they look at Apple. Just because you perceive value as some kind of tech gadget does not mean people can have a more holistic look at a companies success. There is more to life than fidget spinners, despite your view on tech, but I acknowledge your right to appreciate them. We are what we are.

A decade after Tim Cook steps down, will Apple still rely on iPhone for over 50% of revenue mix? Replacement cycles are becoming longer and longer. Not only is Cook looking for other revenue streams, the board is too.

Based on what? Troll posts are no basis for making an informed opinion. I will not base my opinion on what yours, just on facts. I don't mind if you don't present them well, but it'd be nice to see one, once in a while from you.

The CEO can be removed by the board. The board can overrule Cook's decisions. The board has the ultimate authority while CEO runs day to day ops. When Apple spends $10 billion, Tim Cook is definitely going to the board to ask for that money. It's nuts that you don't have basic understanding of corporate governance.

Do you think Arthur Levinson runs Apple? 😂😂😂

The board set a direction and ensure governance and oversight. They don’t make the day to day decisions. The CEO runs the company. Tim Cook is the ONLY Apple person on the board.

Have a look at this if you want to understand the differences. This

 

[garranhado]

Apple in general lost the innovation after Jobs…
Apple Software lost quality after Scott…

 

[0339327]

Nice cherry picked sentence. In the following sentence the epa says overall evs are cleaner. But no matter, people are gonna believe what they want.

The point is that the jury is still out on this. Even if it turns out EVs are better, it is only marginally and over the long-term. I'm not saying that all EVs are bad. I'm saying I don't like them and there is no compelling reason for me to change on this.

I tried a EV and hated every minute of it. In our business, we regularly drive 20K - 30K miles annually. A vehicle with a range of only 200 miles or so doesn't help when you're in the car for several hours and no, stopping for 40 minutes is not an option. It is a disruption.

ICE may feel less green, but the modern ICE is so robust, lasts for years and years, has millions of mechanics who can work on it, has thousands of suppliers who have parts for it and can be filled up and ready to go in under five minutes.

 

[Beautyspin]

Speculation. Go search the CEDD and find out there is nothing available about layoffs, which are routinely published. German, a former 9to5Mac blogger hired by Bloomberg isn't knee deep into the information as everyone here wants to believe.

Bloomberg routinely speculates on what may or may not be happening in the world of finance as that is Bloomberg's stock in trade.

Wake me when the news starts actually citing reports on the breakdown. Instead, it's a constant barrage of driving narratives.

When the Department of Labor and Statistics publicly states month job numbers they follow it with an actual report.

Maybe there is some substance to the rumors. Apple is not doing so well lately. Watches banned, Car scrapped, Vision Pro failed, iPhone sales tanked in China, Appstore revenue affected in the EU, Apple pay may start losing market share, iMessage to have RCS, et al. Nothing going right for Apple.

 

[steve09090]

Maybe there is some substance to the rumors. Apple is not doing so well lately. Watches banned, Car scrapped, Vision Pro failed, iPhone sales tanked in China, Appstore revenue affected in the EU, Apple pay may start losing market share, iMessage to have RCS, et al. Nothing going right for Apple.

The watch isn’t banned.
They never had a car in the first place (just research into a car) which they stopped.
Vision Pro hasn’t failed (that’s a troll comment at best).
iPhone sales fell 3% from 19% to 16% in China. Still the best selling phone in the world.
Sure AppStore revenue will be affected in a relatively small region of sales. But that’s a win for users and win for developers isn't it? Plus this can only improve iPhone sales, so win-win and a final win for Apple.
Apple Pay? No idea where you’re getting your info from. But that might happen in some areas only.
iMessage/RCS. Won’t affect Apple users at all. It’s Android users who will benefit.

Basically, you’re stretching your claims at best and false claims at worst. Not unusual for people without facts to do, but there you go.

 

[I7guy]

The point is that the jury is still out on this. Even if it turns out EVs are better, it is only marginally and over the long-term. I'm not saying that all EVs are bad. I'm saying I don't like them and there is no compelling reason for me to change on this.

Don’t think there is any debate that EVs overall pollute less than ICE. That doesn’t mean an EV is the right choice for everyone. Annual/daily mileage, weather conditions, towing, infrastructure etc plays a factor into the individual decision to get an EV.

I tried a EV and hated every minute of it. In our business, we regularly drive 20K - 30K miles annually. A vehicle with a range of only 200 miles or so doesn't help when you're in the car for several hours and no, stopping for 40 minutes is not an option. It is a disruption.

I love driving my Tesla. I have no issues in driving 200 or so miles between charges. My Tesla has an estimated range of 290 miles.

ICE may feel less green, but the modern ICE is so robust, lasts for years and years, has millions of mechanics who can work on it, has thousands of suppliers who have parts for it and can be filled up and ready to go in under five minutes.

The above is a generalization. Sure cars like a Corolla or accord or Camry can last for years but also require major service. And if you’re discussing premium German cars, well good luck. There’s no doubt filling up at a gas station is more convenient than a supercharger. But a supercharger, especially Tesla, is a good experience.

I travel 40 miles round trip. Plug in when I get home. “Fillups” cost me not even $1 day. No time wasted at a gas station.

YMMV.

 

[JPack]

I am not convinced the CEO needs to get approval for every single expense. He runs the company, and the onus is on the board to do their own monitoring and step in when they deem necessary. Also, 10 billion is like what - half the sum that Google pay Apple every year?

It's not like we are talking about 100 billion here or some other sum that could potentially bankrupt the company. At the end of the day, Apple is still a money printing machine, and I don't think the board members are going to lose sleep over a few billions spent on R&D. Neither will Tim Cook receive any sort of sanctions (that will come in the form lower share price resulting in less money from him exercising his stock options).

It's just the nature of running a business. You make some great calls, you sometimes make some poor ones. Just look at Google!

You're completely forgetting the labor resources that such a project requires. And the fact it requires the attention of Tim Cook. An extra billion a year is not an everyday expense.

Apple Car siphoned staff from Johny Srouji, Craig Federighi, Eddie Cue, and John Giannandrea's teams. This means less attention to Apple Silicon, iOS, macOS, and ML/AI. Reports indicate Srouji's team made a processor equal to 4 x M2 Ultras for the Apple Car.

It's not just, "we've got plenty of money, let's play." It has real world consequences because talent is not unlimited. If money solved everything, Apple would have their own 5G baseband by now. They wouldn't have fallen behind in generative AI.

At the end of the day, Tim Cook reports to the Board.

 

[Beautyspin]

The watch isn’t banned.
They never had a car in the first place (just research into a car) which they stopped.
Vision Pro hasn’t failed (that’s a troll comment at best).
iPhone sales fell 3% from 19% to 16% in China. Still the best selling phone in the world.
Sure AppStore revenue will be affected in a relatively small region of sales. But that’s a win for users and win for developers isn't it? Plus this can only improve iPhone sales, so win-win and a final win for Apple.
Apple Pay? No idea where you’re getting your info from. But that might happen in some areas only.
iMessage/RCS. Won’t affect Apple users at all. It’s Android users who will benefit.

Basically, you’re stretching your claims at best and false claims at worst. Not unusual for people without facts to do, but there you go.

Apple Watch ban news hub: Everything you need to know - 9to5Mac

The Apple Watch Series 9 and Apple Watch Ultra 2 are embroiled in an ongoing ITC situation, which briefly barred...

9to5mac.com

Samsung returns to top, to up ante against troubled Apple - KED Global

Samsung Electronics Co. snatched the crown from its archrival Apple Inc. as the top global smartphone seller last month thanks to brisk sales of its new AI-pow

www.kedglobal.com

iPhone sales fell 24% in China, not 3%

Has China lost its taste for the iPhone?

Apple has deep ties in the country, its second-largest market. But there are signs that Chinese consumers are becoming a harder sell.

www.seattletimes.com

Vision Pro

Has Apple Vision Pro Already Flopped?

Apple's (NASDAQ: AAPL) Vision Pro has been out for a couple of months, and the hype around the product seems to have died out completely. People are talking about returning devices, and new content is less than inspiring.

www.nasdaq.com

Apple has opened NFC to developers. There will be an exodus shortly from Apple wallet/pay

RCS will not solve the green bubbles issue. It will benefit Apple users because currently, their messaging with android users is insecure. Apple wants to increase the security of RCS and adopt it.

 

[Abazigal]

You're completely forgetting the labor resources that such a project requires. And the fact it requires the attention of Tim Cook. An extra billion a year is not an everyday expense.

Apple Car siphoned staff from Johny Srouji, Craig Federighi, Eddie Cue, and John Giannandrea's teams. This means less attention to Apple Silicon, iOS, macOS, and ML/AI. Reports indicate Srouji's team made a processor equal to 4 x M2 Ultras for the Apple Car.

It's not just, "we've got plenty of money, let's play." It has real world consequences because talent is not unlimited. If money solved everything, Apple would have their own 5G baseband by now. They wouldn't have fallen behind in generative AI.

At the end of the day, Tim Cook reports to the Board.

I agree with everything you said, and yet the same time, my response is - so what?

Sure, with the benefit of hindsight, it's easy to point a finger at Apple and go "I told you so". And with the benefit of hindsight, I would have bought the winning lottery ticket and been retired already. Let's not forget that Apple also released the Apple Watch in 2015, AirPods in 2016, the HomePod in 2018, kickstarted the Mac transition to Apple Silicon in 2020, and released the Vision Pro earlier this year. To fixate on one project that Apple cancelled before it was released just sounds to me like critics attempting to paint Apple as a rudderless company unsure of what to do after the iPhone.

Which I disagree with. This is just part and parcel of R&D. Not every endeavour bears fruit, and Apple could well have canned numerous other projects that were simply never reported. I don't think this is any implication that Apple has gotten complacent and is content to simply bank on the iPhone.

Where I think a lot of the criticism gets wrong is that Apple was banking on autonomous driving becoming a reality, which would in turn allow them to rethink the design of a car. It's not enough for Apple to simply release their own electric vehicle and call it a day. Coming out with a truly autonomous car (i.e. no steering wheel or rethinking a self-driving car as a room on wheels) was a worthy goal that ultimately didn't pan out, and that's just the way the cookie crumbles.

Apple should not be faulted for having doubts about a human-driven car being enough to rethink the auto industry.

I don't think the board is too bothered about this project cancellation either. If they want to nitpick over every error made, then I say - tell them to run the company themselves and see if they can do a better job.

 

[steve09090]

Apple Watch ban news hub: Everything you need to know - 9to5Mac

The Apple Watch Series 9 and Apple Watch Ultra 2 are embroiled in an ongoing ITC situation, which briefly barred...

9to5mac.com

Samsung returns to top, to up ante against troubled Apple - KED Global

Samsung Electronics Co. snatched the crown from its archrival Apple Inc. as the top global smartphone seller last month thanks to brisk sales of its new AI-pow

www.kedglobal.com

iPhone sales fell 24% in China, not 3%

Has China lost its taste for the iPhone?

Apple has deep ties in the country, its second-largest market. But there are signs that Chinese consumers are becoming a harder sell.

www.seattletimes.com

Vision Pro

Has Apple Vision Pro Already Flopped?

Apple's (NASDAQ: AAPL) Vision Pro has been out for a couple of months, and the hype around the product seems to have died out completely. People are talking about returning devices, and new content is less than inspiring.

www.nasdaq.com

Apple has opened NFC to developers. There will be an exodus shortly from Apple wallet/pay

RCS will not solve the green bubbles issue. It will benefit Apple users because currently, their messaging with android users is insecure. Apple wants to increase the security of RCS and adopt it.

You really need to pay attention to details. Your shotgun approach is all over the place.

The watch is not banned. Blood oxygen is banned. Details are important.
From your article…

Can I still buy an Apple Watch with blood oxygen features from other retailers? ​

Yes, for the time being, you can still buy an Apple Watch Series 9 and Apple Watch Ultra 2 from third-party retailers like Best Buy and Amazon, and they will still have the blood oxygen app and features. ​

​

The ITC’s decision only impacts Apple’s ability to sell the Series 9 and Ultra 2 via its online store and retail stores.​

The iPhone 14 is the top selling phone in the last 12 months in the world. Prove me wrong. I never once said that Apple sold more phones than Samsungs line up of 3,000 different phones including their burners (and I’m not talking about their batteries). Maybe read before you fly off the handle with incorrect points.

Top 7 Best-Selling Smartphones Last Year Were All iPhones

Apple's iPhone models dominated the top 10 best-selling smartphones in 2023, with only Samsung's mid-range devices making the list, according...

www.macrumors.com

iPhone sales dropped compared to the same time month on month 24%. I was talking about total sales. 19-16 %. That is.. hmmm carry the 1, a 3 % difference! Did I mention details? Please read what I said before trying your hardest to refute facts. It is not that difficult.

As far as your opinion on AVP flopping. That is a completely stupid single paragraph article basing itself on Metas stupid glasses. It says nothing, a bit like these comments you feel obliged to share.

Anyway. If you can’t be bothered looking at the details, reading what is said and using a decent article to prove this mundane attempt at hating on Apple, then I don’t want to continue replying to what appears to be a caricature of an argument. I’ll rephrase that. It’s pointless talking to someone who is constantly on here with their only purpose to hate on Apple. Facts please as I am not interested in people making up stuff.

 

[JPack]

I agree with everything you said, and yet the same time, my response is - so what?

Sure, with the benefit of hindsight, it's easy to point a finger at Apple and go "I told you so". And with the benefit of hindsight, I would have bought the winning lottery ticket and been retired already. Let's not forget that Apple also released the Apple Watch in 2015, AirPods in 2016, the HomePod in 2018, kickstarted the Mac transition to Apple Silicon in 2020, and released the Vision Pro earlier this year. To fixate on one project that Apple cancelled before it was released just sounds to me like critics attempting to paint Apple as a rudderless company unsure of what to do after the iPhone.

Which I disagree with. This is just part and parcel of R&D. Not every endeavour bears fruit, and Apple could well have canned numerous other projects that were simply never reported. I don't think this is any implication that Apple has gotten complacent and is content to simply bank on the iPhone.

Where I think a lot of the criticism gets wrong is that Apple was banking on autonomous driving becoming a reality, which would in turn allow them to rethink the design of a car. It's not enough for Apple to simply release their own electric vehicle and call it a day. Coming out with a truly autonomous car (i.e. no steering wheel or rethinking a self-driving car as a room on wheels) was a worthy goal that ultimately didn't pan out, and that's just the way the cookie crumbles.

Apple should not be faulted for having doubts about a human-driven car being enough to rethink the auto industry.

I don't think the board is too bothered about this project cancellation either. If they want to nitpick over every error made, then I say - tell them to run the company themselves and see if they can do a better job.

My original response was to someone who suggested Jony Ive was the reason for the Apple Car project, not Tim Cook. My position is that it's ridiculous. To marshal such resources for Apple Car would have needed Tim Cook's full and unambiguous backing along with the board.

The Apple Car had the potential to be a game-changer, but leadership moonshot goals from the outset killed its progress. With a more measured approach focused on Level 2 autonomy first and progressing to Level 3, 4, and 5 naturally. Apple could have competed with current EVs and carved out a niche for itself in the market based on hardware and software quality. By the time they adjusted their goals last year and settled on Level 2, the window of opportunity had closed.

 

[steve09090]

My original response was to someone who suggested Jony Ive was the reason for the Apple Car project, not Tim Cook. My position is that it's ridiculous. To marshal such resources for Apple Car would have needed Tim Cook's full and unambiguous backing along with the board.

The Apple Car had the potential to be a game-changer, but leadership moonshot goals from the outset killed its progress. With a more measured approach focused on Level 2 autonomy first and progressing to Level 3, 4, and 5 naturally. Apple could have competed with current EVs and carved out a niche for itself in the market based on hardware and software quality. By the time they adjusted their goals last year and settled on Level 2, the window of opportunity had closed.

That’s very interesting. Can you provide any details to their ambition on the different levels of autonomy please? I have not seen that reported anywhere. Just unsubstantiated BS on here. Love to see it, thanks. 👍

 

[JPack]

That’s very interesting. Can you provide any details to their ambition on the different levels of autonomy please? I have not seen that reported anywhere. Just unsubstantiated BS on here. Love to see it, thanks. 👍

You obviously don't believe in Mark Gurman or Bloomberg's reporting. This thread is about the 614 staff that separated from Apple, based on his reporting. Given that, I'm not sure why you're still reading this thread.