Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Watch Sales Ban Reinstated in U.S. Effective Tomorrow

GMShadow said:
They're not, and they lost a proxy fight last year because the CEO is running the company into the ground and wiping out billions in valuation as he does so.
Click to expand...
This. And yesterday, of all days, the former CEO of Disney, Bob Chapek, joined the board of Masimo.

I'm not sure yet what that means. In part of the proxy fight the CEO of Masimo was trying to increase the numbers of board members to dilute those who wanted the fight. So maybe this add reflects a larger board. OR, those who won the proxy fight are replacing board members more friendly to them. None of the articles I've found go into detail.
 
GMShadow said:
They're not, and they lost a proxy fight last year because the CEO is running the company into the ground and wiping out billions in valuation as he does so.
Click to expand...

It’s a risky bet and billions may be lost if the lawsuit ultimately fails.

But Masimo’s valuation seems to be doing just fine right now. Their stock popped a few % on this latest news and is close to an all-time high.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ToyoCorollaGR, Ballinous, Naraxus and 2 others
jz0309 said:
so the appeals court ruled in favor of the ITC ... so what are Apple's options?
a. stop selling AW9 and Ultra 2 all together
b. apply their "fix" which basically removes SpO2 altogether

in my mind it's b.
Edit: there is c. Settle with Masimo

But this is far from over, Apple will now focus on getting the remaining 2 patents invalidated while also working on non-infringing sensors/algorithms for the next gen watches
Click to expand...

The appeals court didn't "rule[] in favor of the ITC." The court denied Apple's request for a stay and noted it takes no position on the underlying merits of the case.
 
  • Like
Reactions: centauratlas and ronntaylor
MallardDuck said:
The wild card here is if you need a warranty replacement - those will have the feature disabled if they were imported after tomorrow.
Click to expand...
Or they might send you a Masimo W1 Medical Watch as a replacement for the Apple Watch.
 
JPack said:
Apple will pull out the LEDs and photodetectors to save money. It will have an obvious hardware difference.
Click to expand...

Redesigning the watch and testing it to make sure nothing else breaks would be a waste compared to just continuing to build watches tht can have the sensors reinsted once this fight is over.

JPack said:
Right now, if Apple deletes the SpO2 app, the hardware is useless anyway.
Click to expand...

Until Apple reinstalls the software.
 
  • Like
Reactions: arkitect
poematik13 said:
the class actions for this from all the customers who paid $400+ for series 9 watches only to have a key feature removed is gonna be legendary
Click to expand...
the ban ONLY affects NEW sales. Apple has no reason to remove that feature from existing watches, so why would there be a class action law suit? for new sales, Apple will not advertise this feature anymore, problem solved
 
  • Like
Reactions: centauratlas and cjgrif
JPack said:
Why do people always assume Masimo is up for sale?
Click to expand...
Actually, this is a big part of the internal fight that is going on at Masimo. The CEO inserted a so-called "poison pill" into his employment agreement that says that if the company gets bought or he is removed as CEO, he will get a $600 Million payment. The argument, and there are pending trials over this, is that he is harming his investors by making it impossible to sell the company.
 
GMShadow said:
They're not, and they lost a proxy fight last year because the CEO is running the company into the ground and wiping out billions in valuation as he does so.
Click to expand...
The CEO is the sole founder of the company, he won’t be ousted that quick, in particular since he’s arguably defending the interests of the company.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ToyoCorollaGR
jz0309 said:
the ban ONLY affects NEW sales. Apple has no reason to remove that feature from existing watches, so why would there be a class action law suit? for new sales, Apple will not advertise this feature anymore, problem solved
Click to expand...
New problem - older apple watches are now better than the new ones.

Solution - disable O2 functionality in older watches.

New problem - apple gets sued by owners of older watches.

New problem solved.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: BugeyeSTI
jlc1978 said:
Any publicly traded I always up for sale. Only quetions are "How much?" and "Can you raise the funds?"
Click to expand...
This is part of an ongoing fight that is happening on the Masimo board. The CEO inserted a poison pill clause that essentially blocks the company from being sold. The clause requires him to be paid $600 Million upon sale or removal as CEO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nrose101
JPack said:
Apple will pull out the LEDs and photodetectors to save money. It will have an obvious hardware difference.

Right now, if Apple deletes the SpO2 app, the hardware is useless anyway.
Click to expand...
there will not be HW changes until the new models later this year, disabling the feature thru SW appears to be the way Apple is going, based on the article from yesterday
 
jlc1978 said:
Redesigning the watch and testing it to make sure nothing else breaks would be a waste compared to just continuing to build watches tht can have the sensors reinsted once this fight is over.



Until Apple reinstalls the software.
Click to expand...

The hardware on all current Watches violates the patent. There are only certain ways to measure SpO2 and Apple chose to design hardware exactly the way the patent describes.

Fight is over for all intents and purposes. It's been through the courts, ITC, and president's desk twice now. Nothing is likely to change.
 
I7guy said:
And that’s a good thing imo.
Click to expand...

How is it a good thing that their customers have to get an objectively worse experience just so Apple can make every penny they possibly can? I'd like to remind you the reason the iPhone stayed on Lightning for so long was so Apple didn't have to give up on the Made for iPhone royalties, and despite this they're still selling a purposefully gimped USB-C port on regular iPhones and iPads
 
  • Like
Reactions: ToyoCorollaGR, Queen6 and arkitect
JPack said:
The hardware on all current Watches violates the patent. There are only certain ways to measure SpO2 and Apple chose to design hardware exactly the way the patent describes.

Fight is over for all intents and purposes. It's been through the courts, ITC, and president's desk twice now. Nothing is likely to change.
Click to expand...
the fight is far from over, Apple will do what they can to invalidate the remaining patents
 
  • Like
Reactions: onenorth
Reason077 said:
It’s a risky bet and billions may be lost if the lawsuit ultimately fails.

But Masimo’s valuation seems to be doing just fine right now. Their stock popped a few % on this latest news and is close to an all-time high.
Click to expand...
Uh, no. Masimo was at $303 in Dec of 2021 and are at $120 today. Their board is in the middle of a huge fight over the loss of value caused by the CEO when he bought a consumer audio company.
 
  • Like
Reactions: centauratlas and GMShadow
Timo_Existencia said:
Actually, this is a big part of the internal fight that is going on at Masimo. The CEO inserted a so-called "poison pill" into his employment agreement that says that if the company gets bought or he is removed as CEO, he will get a $600 Million payment. The argument, and there are pending trials over this, is that he is harming his investors by making it impossible to sell the company.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't that need to be approved by the Board of Directors?
 
tywebb13 said:
New problem - older apple watches are now better than the new ones.

Solution - disable O2 functionality in older watches.

New problem - apple gets sued by owners of older watches.

New problem solved.
Click to expand...
well, that is a far stretch, there is currently no legal requirement for Apple to do so.
 
Student of Life said:
Wouldn't that need to be approved by the Board of Directors?
Click to expand...
This was the cause for the proxy fight, which the CEO lost recently. The charge was that the existing board has been negligent in managing the CEO. The proxy fight replaced two board members with members chosen by an institutional investor who owns 9% of the stock.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back