That chart makes me dizzy.
Apple has to retail the iPad at 4x the production cost to pay for all the lawyers.
No they don't. Ford knew that by giving his employees a good wage, they'd buy his cars. Apple's lawyers buy iPads.
That chart makes me dizzy.
Apple has to retail the iPad at 4x the production cost to pay for all the lawyers.
Again... people confusing market cap with profits.Dumb phones make up ~70% of the mobile market, but they also account for something ridiculous like ~10% of revenue/profit lol. There is a reason that while apple has less market share they are generating more profits/revenue than ALL the other phone companies combined (both smart and dumbphones)
No they don't. Ford knew that by giving his employees a good wage, they'd buy his cars. Apple's lawyers buy iPads.
Again... people confusing market cap with profits.
Example:
APPL Market Cap $264B
NOK Market Cap $38B
Apple is expected to report approx. $50B in revenue this year (Q4 final results will be reported on Oct. 18) a majority of which is NOT iPhone sales.
Nokia reported Q2 2010 revenue of $22B. (Nokia hasn't reported Q3 or Q4 2010 numbers yet... at least not on their investor relations page yet.)
A majority of which is phone related sales.
That's nearly half of what Apple made for the whole year and they haven't reported the other half yet. I'd say that makes Nokia pretty profitable.
Not bad for a company with a $38B market cap.
Nokia Q1 Profit was 820M Euros or $1.14B USD... still not too bad.Nokia made $ 0.7 b profit in first half 2010 compared to Apple's $6.4 b
If you see what I mean...
Revenue is not profit.
What a shame, I grew up loving Nokias and now they're just plain desperate.
I don't understand why everyone thinks Apple has done no wrong here.
Apple came to the mobile game late, 2007, Motorola have been producing phones since at least the early 90's. Current market share is irrelevant. Apple stood on the shoulders of many innovators when producing the iPhone.
Patents are patents, it doesn't matter if its a Dyson vacum cleaner or a higly specialised piece of technology, £100 of millions are spent developing products, its not a free-for-all.
IF Apple stole patented technology they should be made to pay, in the same way if I marketed a copied Dyson Vacum with a different name but the exact same technology I would get my ass sued.
Jobs = Fail
Again... people confusing market cap with profits.
Example:
APPL Market Cap $264B
NOK Market Cap $38B
Apple is expected to report approx. $50B in revenue this year (Q4 final results will be reported on Oct. 18) a majority of which is NOT iPhone sales.
Nokia reported Q2 2010 revenue of $22B. (Nokia hasn't reported Q3 or Q4 2010 numbers yet... at least not on their investor relations page yet.)
A majority of which is phone related sales.
That's nearly half of what Apple made for the whole year and they haven't reported the other half yet. I'd say that makes Nokia pretty profitable.
Not bad for a company with a $38B market cap.
Patents are patents, it doesn't matter if its a Dyson vacum cleaner or a higly specialised piece of technology, £100 of millions are spent developing products, its not a free-for-all.
According to the "much nicer chart" (below), Nokia is suing apple for violating 3G & WiFi patents, among other things. According to the article, Motorola is suing Apple for violating 3G & WiFi patents, among other things. How can that be? Do Nokia & Moto have JOINT patent ownership?
+1
The lawyers always win.
I currently have a Nokia phone. It Sucks! The only thing that they could realistically say Apple learned from their phone is how NOT to develop a phone OS.
Some lawyers need the death penalty.
As the saying goes, a good lawyer is swimming among the sharks deep in the ocean.
Nokia Q1 Profit was 820M Euros or $1.14B USD... still not too bad. They also have $13 Billion USD in cash and liquid assets on hand. Not exactly on death's door as many seem to believe.