3 ms·

You need to re-examine how you think about things. Court is expensive, but it doesn’t take $200B dollars to go to court. Further, Apple has spent a lot of cash

by graeme 6y ago

You need to re-examine how you think about things. Court is expensive, but it doesn’t take $200B dollars to go to court. Further, Apple has spent a lot of cash on buybacks. Plus its own regular spending: Apple is clearly willing to spend on R and D, production, etc Not every fact in the world has to tie together into a narrative. Falling for this is the first step in the road to conspiratorial thinking.

caiobegotti 6y ago
You downvoted me with such condescending tone that borders an ad hominem because you did read too much on what I said and left zero space for debate. You must be proud.
- graeme 6y ago
  If you think I’m wrong, feel free to present an argument that Apple has saved $200 billion in cash to fight court cases, and that they have in some way neglected to spend on priorities to fund this. Your response was ad hominem. I used a strong tone because you presented a very strong conclusion that I don’t believe to be supported by evidence. You linked a fact you don’t understand (Apple’s cash pile) to the topic de jour (Apple’s new court case). I really do think this is a starting point to conspiratorial thinking: grand conclusions on the basis of a couple ideas. Maybe the way I warned you wasn’t likely to succeed, but I meant it completely sincerely. Have a look at Apple’s stock buyback history: they spend $385 billion from 2012-2019: https://www.aboveavalon.com/notes/2020/4/23/apples-460-billion-stock-buyback https://www.aboveavalon.com/notes/2020/4/23/apples-460-billi... Dividends are harder to quickly find, but they seem to pay out about $12-$15 billion by year. The money paid out to investors dwarfs their cash pile. Two other facts: * A lot of Apple’s cash is overseas. They can’t easily repatriate without tax consequences * Apple has about $100 billion in debt. The cash offsets this > Now I totally understand why Apple have piled up a huge mountain of cash and never spent a dime. Given the fact above, your conclusion doesn’t seem very logical.

by graeme 6y ago

caiobegotti 6y ago

You downvoted me with such condescending tone that borders an ad hominem because you did read too much on what I said and left zero space for debate. You must be proud.

graeme 6y ago
If you think I’m wrong, feel free to present an argument that Apple has saved $200 billion in cash to fight court cases, and that they have in some way neglected to spend on priorities to fund this. Your response was ad hominem. I used a strong tone because you presented a very strong conclusion that I don’t believe to be supported by evidence. You linked a fact you don’t understand (Apple’s cash pile) to the topic de jour (Apple’s new court case). I really do think this is a starting point to conspiratorial thinking: grand conclusions on the basis of a couple ideas. Maybe the way I warned you wasn’t likely to succeed, but I meant it completely sincerely. Have a look at Apple’s stock buyback history: they spend $385 billion from 2012-2019: https://www.aboveavalon.com/notes/2020/4/23/apples-460-billion-stock-buyback https://www.aboveavalon.com/notes/2020/4/23/apples-460-billi... Dividends are harder to quickly find, but they seem to pay out about $12-$15 billion by year. The money paid out to investors dwarfs their cash pile. Two other facts: * A lot of Apple’s cash is overseas. They can’t easily repatriate without tax consequences * Apple has about $100 billion in debt. The cash offsets this > Now I totally understand why Apple have piled up a huge mountain of cash and never spent a dime. Given the fact above, your conclusion doesn’t seem very logical.