Apple 'Not Interested' in Outbidding AT&T to Acquire Time Warner

Discussion in ' News Discussion' started by MacRumors, Nov 2, 2016.

  1. MacRumors macrumors bot


    Apr 12, 2001

    Apple is "not interested" in buying media company Time Warner currently, according to "people familiar with the thinking at the company" who spoke today with CNBC. Two weeks ago, AT&T announced its interest to purchase Time Warner for $85.4 billion, but as noted today, the regulatory process taken in such acquisitions "could last for months," and at any time another company could swoop in with a better offer. As of now, that won't be Apple.


    The news comes from David Faber on CNBC's market coverage business show "Squawk on the Street:"
    On the same day of AT&T's deal, it was reported that Apple was closely "monitoring" the workings between AT&T and Time Warner, especially due to its potential impact in regards to television deals that Apple could make with both companies. Back in January, an initial rumor suggested Apple was looking to buy Time Warner itself, most likely to bolster its rumored cord-cutting streaming TV service, but negotiations eventually stalled and the two companies ceased discussing a potential partnership.

    Following the news coming out of AT&T's offer, last week investment banking firm Goldman Sachs reportedly began pushing Apple to put in a rival bid to beat AT&T's and acquire Time Warner for itself. Goldman Sachs was "left on the sidelines" as an advisor in AT&T's bid, but it's still unclear why the firm would heavily encourage Apple to enter an acquisition offer of its own.

    Sources were reported as saying that Goldman Sachs was "freaking out trying to convince Apple to come in." A connection between the banking firm and Apple lies in the latter company's 2009 hiring of Goldman Sachs banker Adrian Perica, who now heads up Apple's mergers and acquisitions practices.

    Networks like CNN, HBO, TBS, TNT, NBA TV, Cartoon Network, and Warner Bros. are all under Time Warner's umbrella, making it an enticing acquisition for multiple companies looking to bolster an existing, or upcoming, streaming package. Although AT&T appears to be the frontrunner, The Wall Street Journal originally reported that "a host of other contenders" were interested in Time Warner, including Google at one point.

    Article Link: Apple 'Not Interested' in Outbidding AT&T to Acquire Time Warner
  2. PinkyMacGodess macrumors 601


    Mar 7, 2007
    Midwest America.
    So they could save us from AT&T, and pass? Thanks Tim...
  3. Kaibelf macrumors 68020


    Apr 29, 2009
    Silicon Valley, CA
    Why should Apple spend something like $90 BILLION just because you have an issue with a phone company?
  4. iamgalt macrumors regular


    Jul 25, 2012
    One of the smartest decisions Tim has made since he took over. :)
  5. shk718 macrumors 65816

    Jun 26, 2007
    Why is TW up for sale, if they're such a great company?
  6. mattopotamus macrumors G5


    Jun 12, 2012
    Cable is not going anywhere anytime soon. There are still plenty of people who watch more than a few channels, and it is far more expensive to build your own package.

    Oddly enough, my xfinity box/remote is better than my ATV/siri remote.
  7. 2457282 Suspended

    Dec 6, 2012
    I don't see Apple getting into the telco, cable company, or even a content provider. However, Apple could buy these guys to force some changes and then sell them off again. Or maybe invest enough to get on the board and force the change that way. Just don't put Eddy on any board. We don't need rodney dangerfield resurrected.
  8. usersince86 macrumors 6502


    Oct 24, 2002
    Columbus, Ohio
    In related news, Apple is not interested in buying Tesla...
  9. pike908 macrumors member

    Jan 22, 2015
    Boulder, CO
    Tech companies would have to be silly (or desperate) to buy media companies. And the three biggest tech companies -- Google, Apple, and Microsoft -- all have unbelievable cash flow. Which is also why none of them want to buy Tesla or other cash burning companies. Because the cash burners are valued by Wall Street differently.
  10. CausticSoda macrumors 6502


    Feb 14, 2014
    Abu Dhabi
    That's probably because they can't sell dongles to get an increased return on that particular investment.
  11. mattan_lines macrumors member


    Feb 25, 2016
    Oh look, something Apple DOESN'T want to buy... But in my opinion, it's a good decision.
  12. Zwhaler macrumors 604


    Jun 10, 2006
    Good. If Apple bought time Warner before releasing new Mac Pros I would be sorry disappointed.
  13. dan110 macrumors 6502a


    Jul 13, 2013
    Foolish mistake. The money spent on the now defunct Apple Car could've went to this with money to spare. They should take their cash hoard and buy AT&T and be a parent owner. Then they can have all the access to programming on AppleTV etc without having to pay for annoying deals.
  14. Macsterguy macrumors 6502a


    Jun 5, 2007
    I have TW internet with 405 Mbps download and 21Mbps up... I don't want AT&T to screw that up!
  15. jmgregory1 macrumors 68000


    Jun 24, 2010
    Chicago and a few other places around the world
    If Apple were to cross the line and take ownership of a telco / cable / internet provider, it would change everything about their business, likely negatively effecting their relationship with competitive providers. And I would bet the legal team recognizes that this could be a nightmare for Apple to even pull off in the first place, as it could appear like they would have the unfair ability to price products and services, compared to competitors in both the hardware and delivery sectors.
  16. Krevnik macrumors 68040


    Sep 8, 2003
    I'm still trying to figure out Wall Street's fascination with getting tech companies into the media creation game. Apple and others seem happy to try to provide a platform of technology to let media companies move into the future without getting into content themselves. But the other side doesn't seem to like that approach, and want control of the whole stack. About the only reason for these companies to buy a media company is to use them as a guinea pig for how future media distribution should work.

    It's a similar issue with carriers. Carriers want control over the devices on their network, but at least seem to get that people want a variety of devices to promote evolution and keep various parts of the market happy. Why can't media happen in a similar model? Media companies providing the media, and various devices/platforms providing evolution in the market, allowing users to find the approach that they like?
  17. dominiongamma macrumors 68000

    Oct 19, 2014
    Tempe, Arizona
    Apple has no right to complain how TV works if they aren't willing to spend money for TV.
  18. Carlanga macrumors 604


    Nov 5, 2009
    Anything is for sale at the right price.
    --- Post Merged, Nov 2, 2016 ---
    The amount might be too high. Apple likes to have money in the bank. AT&T doesn't care.
  19. BornAgainMac macrumors 603


    Feb 4, 2004
    Florida Resident
    Technically, Apple can just not buy anything and relax for a few decades until that money dries up.
  20. Carlanga macrumors 604


    Nov 5, 2009
    Don't worry, they will.
    --- Post Merged, Nov 2, 2016 ---
    More than decades w the money in the bank if they decide to 100% relax.
    --- Post Merged, Nov 2, 2016 ---
    The answer is simple. All these media companies that you refer to are the middle men. There aren't that many big middle men like before. Everything had middle men. Nowadays you can buy straight from the manufacturer. Apple and other streamers deal w the manufacturer directly. If streaming takes over regular tv then that means the middle man can't get their middle man money and will only be stuck w Internet and phone which requieres much more money than being the middle men for tv.
  21. thisisnotmyname macrumors 68000


    Oct 22, 2014
    known but velocity indeterminate
    So is Apple. Google APPL.
  22. newyorkone macrumors 6502


    Jun 10, 2009
    They should buy it for the access and control, but then spin it off as a separate media company along with Beats, Apple Music, iTunes. All the stuff that is making Apple lose focus in the hardware and software front, and failing to innovate should become a separate media focused company.
  23. thisisnotmyname macrumors 68000


    Oct 22, 2014
    known but velocity indeterminate
    Time Warner != Time Warner Cable.
  24. maflynn Moderator


    Staff Member

    May 3, 2009
    I think that makes sense, its a good move to pass, imo
  25. TurboPGT! Suspended

    Sep 25, 2015
    No, it isn't.

    And ditching cable is not just about saving money. It is about paying for what you want, and getting value for your dollar. There is no value for me in renting a cable box for an extortionist price, and paying for a laundry list of channels I never have any desire to watch.

    What I pay per month is also under my control. If I decide Netflix, or Hulu, or HBO, or _insert_ is no longer worth the $x.xx/mon...Its gone within 1 billing cycle.

    I did a trial of Sling TV just for a taste of what another $20/mon could get me in terms of additional content through AppleTV. You know what it got me? Commercials. Lots and lots of commercials. No thanks. My house takes in a very minimal amount of commercials, since all of our TV consumption is through Apps where that is kept to a minimum, or non-existent. Not exposing my children to the hours upon hours of commercials that play in most houses has had a wonderful effect on their personalities. They actually have original thoughts! Unlike most other children (and adults) that are told what to think and how to feel every single day.

    And, LOL, please...your xfinity box that you rent and the 19th century remote it ships with? My 3 and 5 year old can both use the Siri remote. And my wife and I carry versions of it in the AppleTV iPhone App everywhere we go. And my AppleTV has no issues integrating with CEC functions and passing through 5.1 sound. It is tops.

Share This Page

89 November 2, 2016