Apple should buy Kodak

Discussion in 'iPhone' started by PracticalMac, Aug 18, 2011.

  1. PracticalMac, Aug 18, 2011
    Last edited: Aug 18, 2011

    PracticalMac macrumors 68030

    PracticalMac

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    Location:
    Houston, TX
  2. maril1111 macrumors 68000

    maril1111

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2010
    Location:
    Denmark
    #3
    Yeh why doesn't apple go ahead and buy canon and nikon as well... seriously i like the fact that there is competition also every company is good at their own stuff and producing it if another company buys them they might just take the best ideas and lead the bought company to bankruptcy
     
  3. Apple OC macrumors 68040

    Apple OC

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2010
    Location:
    Hogtown
    #4
    How about they buy Exxon Mobile ... ah, wait that is an oil company, not a mobile company.

    Seriously ... only another Camera company should buy Kodak.

    the camera on a Mac or iPhone does not compare with real cameras and most likely never will. :cool:
     
  4. TC25 macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2011
    #5
    One of the many reasons Apple is successful is they've always know what their core businesses are. Almost everything they sell is either their core business or products that end up sending revenue to their core business. 'Bying' Kodak would be as dumb as 'bying' Foxconn because they assemble the iPhone or 'bying' Samsung because they use their SSDs.
     
  5. fireshot91 macrumors 601

    fireshot91

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Location:
    Northern VA
    #6

    ^^ That annoys me. Just saying.
     
  6. Tarzanman macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2010
    #7
    Even though Apple could afford to buy Kodak, Samsung is more than 4x the size of Apple.

    If anything, Samsung could buy Apple.
     
  7. PracticalMac thread starter macrumors 68030

    PracticalMac

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    #8
    Me to.

    ....
    D'OH!! ^2 ;)

    ----------

    As the article points out:

    1. A number of patents Kodak holds applies to digital cameras, and Apple is concluding a suite with Kodak.

    2. Their is a patent war right now, if you did not notice. Its not that Apple should get into the camera market, its that it should protect its merchandise from patent infringement claims or higher licensing fees by patent holders.


    Of would you rather have Google or Microsoft get Kodak and charge Apple more for those licenses?
     
  8. TC25 macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2011
    #9
    The title of this thread is "Should Apple By Kodak" not "Should Apple By Kodak's Patents". Yes, I noticed there is a patent war right now.
     
  9. Invincibilizer macrumors 6502a

    Invincibilizer

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2011
  10. macingman macrumors 68020

    macingman

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2011
    #11
    Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A5288d Safari/7534.48.3)

    Oh god. Please don't get started with this. Apple is the most valuable company in the world fact. Samsung is not 4 times bigger than the largest company in the world.
     
  11. Tarzanman macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2010
    #12
    Why open your mouth if you have no idea what you're talking about? I won't bother explaining the difference between market cap and total assets.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung. Total assets: US$ 317.8 billion
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc. Total assets: US$ 75.18 billion
     
  12. WordMasterRice macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2010
    Location:
    Upstate NY
    #13
    You could also stack on top of that, it's US market cap, not world market cap.
     
  13. aluren macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2008
    #14
    JP Morgan Chase has like 2 trillion in total assets. How big is Apple compared to that? And back on topic, I don't think Apple should buy Kodak. If you're worrying about patents, I would much rather have them buy webOS than Kodak.
     
  14. ucfgrad93 macrumors P6

    ucfgrad93

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Colorado
  15. nomik2 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2010
    #16
    Not to mention that JP has more than double the equity and almost double the revenue.
     
  16. PracticalMac thread starter macrumors 68030

    PracticalMac

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    #17


    Well, I seriously doubt Kodak would just sell just its patents.
    Ergo, if anyone wants Kodak's patents, they have to acquire at least a majority shareholder stake in the company.

    Perhaps what I should have in title is "... to secure patents"
     
  17. dccorona macrumors 68020

    dccorona

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2008
    #18
    while I agree apple needs to do something with their cash (seriously, what could they possibly need all those liquid assets for?), buying Kodak does not seem like a smart move to me

    though maybe that's why I don't run a big company...hehe

    but really, doesn't sound like a good choice. Theres more to buying a company than just acquiring their patents, as I think google is going to find with their motorola deal. Apple does not want to be bothered with maintaining a company like that...at best, they should buy them for the patents and dissolve the company, but that is not really ideal for anyone, and I doubt they'd sell under those terms (is Kodak really in THAT bad of shape?)
     
  18. wordoflife macrumors 604

    wordoflife

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2009
  19. Goldfrapp macrumors 68040

    Goldfrapp

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2005
    #20
    Theirs alot of other companies that Apple could by. Why Kodak? There insignificant. If I was the CEO of Apple, I would of byed Verizon and call it Apple Wireless Incorporated. An company like Apple can afford too by any company in the world right now. Just saying.
     

Share This Page