Apple Could Generate $280 Million a Year from HTC Deal

Status
Not open for further replies.

DRosencraft

Distinguished
Aug 26, 2011
743
0
19,010
6
This is why Samsung said they would keep fighting. It may be costly to fight these legal battles, but it probably isn't costing over a quarter BILLION dollars a year! That is a fairly big sum of money to be looking to make up in your revenue numbers ($70 million a quarter). Let's hope f or HTC's sake that this isn't quite accurate.
 

ta152h

Distinguished
Apr 1, 2009
1,207
2
19,285
0
Apple is raping and pillaging competing companies, much like Microsoft did until they monopolized every market they could, and got slapped down with legal problems.

So, we have Apple wanted to be what Microsoft was, Microsoft wanting to be what Apple is, and Google wanted to be everything Microsoft was, is, and ever will be, with a touch of Apple thrown in.

I always thought I would love to see Microsoft brought to their knees, and while they are a failing company, it's not nearly as pleasing as I thought. There's always another company doing the same nonsense and trying to gain the same control. The only difference is Apple and Google make products people want (not always sure why ...), whereas Microsoft makes stuff people need, but don't really want, and now they're even trying to make us like it (like that rubbish called Windows 8).

At least Intel makes spectacular products. The rest, not so much.
 

wildkitten

Distinguished
May 29, 2008
816
0
18,980
0
[citation][nom]ta152h[/nom]Apple is raping and pillaging competing companies, much like Microsoft did until they monopolized every market they could, and got slapped down with legal problems.So, we have Apple wanted to be what Microsoft was, Microsoft wanting to be what Apple is, and Google wanted to be everything Microsoft was, is, and ever will be, with a touch of Apple thrown in. I always thought I would love to see Microsoft brought to their knees, and while they are a failing company, it's not nearly as pleasing as I thought. There's always another company doing the same nonsense and trying to gain the same control. The only difference is Apple and Google make products people want (not always sure why ...), whereas Microsoft makes stuff people need, but don't really want, and now they're even trying to make us like it (like that rubbish called Windows 8). At least Intel makes spectacular products. The rest, not so much.[/citation]
Microsoft a failing company? A business that has never had a penny of debt liability is failing and still sells hundreds of millions of copies of it's product? I would hate to see what a company needs to do to be considered successful.

Why is it so many of Tom's commenters so full of hyperbole these past few months?
 

jazz84

Distinguished
Mar 24, 2010
80
0
18,630
0
[citation][nom]wildkitten[/nom]Why is it so many of Tom's commenters so full of hyperbole these past few months?[/citation]

Well, we just finished a big election year in the US, so everyone here has spent the last WAY TOO LONG being whipped into a rhetorical fervor and led to believe that a politics-driven apocalypse is right around the corner. Wouldn't surprise me if that's what's got everyone in an uproar over just about everything now...
 

ericburnby

Distinguished
Mar 4, 2010
636
0
18,980
0
[citation][nom]bllue[/nom]So 3-4+ billion dollars in licensing over 10 years. F that. Apple are the definition of patent trolls[/citation]

Another stupid comment of the day.

Motorola is asking Microsoft for around $4 billion PER YEAR for less than 50 patents which are part of a standard (the least costly of all patents to license). And you think Apple asking for $1/4 billion per year for a whole pool of patents including non-standard patents (the most expensive type of patent to license) is outrageous?

HTC was sabre-rattling all year long (just like Samsung with their "we'll never settle" rhetoric) talking about how they'll keep on fighting. In the end they licensed. And all the Android companies bashing Microsoft ended up signing license agreements too. I bet Samsung will also license.
 

wemakeourfuture

Distinguished
Dec 20, 2011
601
0
18,980
0
[citation][nom]TeraMedia[/nom]I would love to see an opinion piece by Zak to see where he stands on all of this Apple vs. X stuff.[/citation]

Unless he can copy and paste it from another source I don't think we will :p
 

Kami3k

Distinguished
Jan 17, 2008
990
0
18,980
0
[citation][nom]ta152h[/nom]Apple is raping and pillaging competing companies, much like Microsoft did until they monopolized every market they could, and got slapped down with legal problems.So, we have Apple wanted to be what Microsoft was, Microsoft wanting to be what Apple is, and Google wanted to be everything Microsoft was, is, and ever will be, with a touch of Apple thrown in. I always thought I would love to see Microsoft brought to their knees, and while they are a failing company, it's not nearly as pleasing as I thought. There's always another company doing the same nonsense and trying to gain the same control. The only difference is Apple and Google make products people want (not always sure why ...), whereas Microsoft makes stuff people need, but don't really want, and now they're even trying to make us like it (like that rubbish called Windows 8). At least Intel makes spectacular products. The rest, not so much.[/citation]

So much wrong with this post that all I'm going to do is quote this.
 

ikyung

Distinguished
Apr 17, 2010
566
0
19,010
6
Apple : HTC go work that corner street.
HTC : Will do pimp.
Apple : Samsung you work the other side.
Samsung : Dafuq? You don't want to mess with me Apple. Going to raise the prices on your chips by 20%
Apple : Sorry pimp.

Basically what's going on right?
 
G

Guest

Guest
[Whenever anyone buys an Android device Microsoft gets a paycheck. So Samsung would rather pay a billion at a time when they lose lawsuits instead of going into a licensing agreement?..lol Yeah that's sound business sense. I have no sympathy for Samsung. If they had done their homework in the first place they wouldn't be in this mess to begin with.]

Another typical Apple fanboy troll. What homework? Apple is sueing everyone using ridiculous claims and appeal to general public misplaced sense of patriotism. As always, part of the business strategy of Apple is lawsuit. Don't forget Apple only has a landslide win in California while all over the world the lawsuit has failed. And the Asian suppliers see through that pretty well. Why do you think other manufacturers do not consider building new plant just for Apple is not a good option? Because Apple will switch suppliers at a drop of a hat historically. There is no true partnership with Apple because Apple does not value anyone else. This is not a company other companies want to put their faith in with it comes to long term business relationship.
 

ericburnby

Distinguished
Mar 4, 2010
636
0
18,980
0
[citation][nom]JacekRing[/nom]Apples got them to agree to $6 to $8 (supposedly) per smartphone. But when they were sued they only wanted to pay $0.01 per smartphone for licensing. WOW.[/citation]

Another stupid comment. FRAND patents go for much less than non-FRAND patents. And if it was a single patent then $0.01 would be fair. Multiply that by a billion devices per year and suddenly that "penny" patent is worth $10 million per year. If you've got a bunch of these FRAND patents at $0.01 then you're making lots of money.

That's how FRAND (or standard essential patents) work. You get pennies per patent but you collect on every single device ever sold anywhere in the world. Could you imagine having a patent on USB? Every single computer, cell phone, mouse, keyboard, digital camera, thumb drive or similar gets you a royalty. Even at a penny per unit you're making a fortune.
 

epdm2be

Distinguished
Feb 15, 2011
150
0
18,680
0
[citation][nom]lengcaifai[/nom]iOS and Android keep fighting over = windows phone 8 wins[/citation]
They only win because MSFT killed Nokia's Symbian & Meego first from the inside out, which were the real threat.
All that's left now is a bunch of greedy companies who use false advertising to sell their mediocre products. For all I care they can ALL go!
 

epdm2be

Distinguished
Feb 15, 2011
150
0
18,680
0
I''ll correct that for you:

"Apple is raping and pillaging competing companies, much like Microsoft STILL do..."

But it seems some of us have short memories. Just read for example the URL below to jog your memory.

http://www.tomsguide.com/us/Google-android-OS-Mobile-Patent,news-6622.html

I remmeber commenting back then that Android was a pitfall and that companies like e.g. Nokia and RIM should stay as far away from it as possible! Again the proof that Android is a financial black hole used by the American industry to suck dry all non-US innovation.

It seems that American companies these days use everything BUT innovation to fill their CEO's greedy pockets.
 

wildkitten

Distinguished
May 29, 2008
816
0
18,980
0
[citation][nom]Teramedia[/nom]I would love to see an opinion piece by Zak to see where he stands on all of this Apple vs. X stuff.[/citation]
That would depend on what he is, an editorialist or a journalist. Considering all he does is write up the facts and leave it to people to make up their own minds, I would say journalist. People bash him all the time when he writes articles about something positive with Apple, but completely ignore him as author for the articles where Apple look bad, so he has gotten, undeservedly, a reputation of being pro-Apple. I think the most anyone can say about Zak Islam is that he is the Apple beat writer and it's his job to write up articles about them whether they show Apple in a positive or negative light.

As for him copying and pasting, this is no different than most other news articles on Tom's. They don't really go out and do breaking news, they do a lot of testing and reviews and summarize news articles from other sites. If you look, most every news article on Tom's is cited from another source. So he can hardly be singled out for doing that.
 

ta152h

Distinguished
Apr 1, 2009
1,207
2
19,285
0
[citation][nom]wildkitten[/nom]Microsoft a failing company? A business that has never had a penny of debt liability is failing and still sells hundreds of millions of copies of it's product? I would hate to see what a company needs to do to be considered successful.Why is it so many of Tom's commenters so full of hyperbole these past few months?[/citation]

That's a legitimate question, and maybe you'll learn something new.

Who does Microsoft work for? It's stock holders. Simple, right?

Who has Microsoft failed? It's stock holders. Simple, right?

So their main reason for generating money, they've failed at. Yet, it's hard to understand?

Let's put it another way, if you bought Microsoft stock 10 years ago, you'd be able to sell your stock for 10% less. That's good? Let's figure in inflation, and you've basically lost your shirt with this failing, yes failing, company.

Let's look at some other tech stocks, that are really big. Apple? Well, they went up 60x in that time period. Another software giant, which is probably more comparable would be Oracle. They went up 2.5x in that time period. IBM sells a lot of software too, they doubled in that time period.

Google is basically a software company too, and Microsoft competes with them quite a bit. Guess what? They went up 5.5x in less than eight years.

Anyway you look at it, a stock that goes down 10% over ten years is a failure. There are definitely worse failures, but that doesn't change that Microsoft's situation. It wouldn't change the fact you've suffered badly as a stock holder, and wouldn't make it less painful. And, at the end of the day, Microsoft's primary responsibility is to work for their stockholders. And they've failed.
 
[citation][nom]ta152h[/nom]That's a legitimate question, and maybe you'll learn something new.Who does Microsoft work for? It's stock holders. Simple, right? Who has Microsoft failed? It's stock holders. Simple, right? So their main reason for generating money, they've failed at. Yet, it's hard to understand? Let's put it another way, if you bought Microsoft stock 10 years ago, you'd be able to sell your stock for 10% less. That's good? Let's figure in inflation, and you've basically lost your shirt with this failing, yes failing, company.Let's look at some other tech stocks, that are really big. Apple? Well, they went up 60x in that time period. Another software giant, which is probably more comparable would be Oracle. They went up 2.5x in that time period. IBM sells a lot of software too, they doubled in that time period. Google is basically a software company too, and Microsoft competes with them quite a bit. Guess what? They went up 5.5x in less than eight years. Anyway you look at it, a stock that goes down 10% over ten years is a failure. There are definitely worse failures, but that doesn't change that Microsoft's situation. It wouldn't change the fact you've suffered badly as a stock holder, and wouldn't make it less painful. And, at the end of the day, Microsoft's primary responsibility is to work for their stockholders. And they've failed.[/citation]

MS's stock is one of the best investments possible. Do you not understand the concept of a split? MS does them often to keep their stock price low enough for the average investor while still giving a lot of payback in investments. Since the mid or late 90s, the value of a buying a single MS stock back then has gone up something like 30,000 percent thanks to the many splits that MS has done.Thirty THOUSAND percent!

Compared to Apple's ridiculously volatile stock pricing (went down like $200 in less than a week recently), MS's decently paced and steady improvement in value thanks to splits is a god-send for a smart investor. You buy a stock and a couple to a few years later, it may be the same price, but you splits mean that you can now have several of that stock and at the same price, that's a up to a several hundred percent improvement in value!
 

TeraMedia

Distinguished
Jan 26, 2006
904
1
18,990
3
@blazorthon and @ta152h, umm, in the last 10 years (11/2002 and later) MSFT the stock hasn't done much price-wise, taking splits into account

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=MSFT+Basic+Chart&t=my

What ta doesn't consider is dividends. MSFT pays them quite nicely, so to say there has been a negative ROI after taking those into account is simply wrong. I once got a dividend of something like $25 / share on my original investment share count ($12.5 / share with today's shares after the Feb 18, 2003 2:1 split, the only split since 1999).

Simply put, inreases in market cap indicate growth in revenue and profitability potential. Dividends indicate profit. Is APPL worth their current market cap, esp. in light of everything we're reading? The analysts appear to be starting to think that it is not. The bigger the bubble, the louder the burst. APPL is faced with the continual up-hill battle of convincing consumers that their products are worth a premium $, even though competing products are similar and often technologically and/or interactionally superior. As soon as someone stands up and says, "Hey! The emperor isn't wearing any clothes!" that game comes to an end. They will have a nice cash base by then, but they won't have a corporate culture that knows how to be truly innovative and create world-changing new technologies.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY