Again, I think you are looking at this from the wrong viewpoint, at the wrong level. Of course the power is transient, it always is. That isn't the issue. > If

Again, I think you are looking at this from the wrong viewpoint, at the wrong level. Of course the power is transient, it always is. That isn't the issue. > If you don’t know how they got into the position they are in, how do you know how stable it is, or how vulnerable they are to competition? I.e. how can you analyze their business? Eh? You just did that, not me. I've mentioned Apple once, to say that I don't know enough about their rise [financially] to comment re point that parent was making re Google and Amazon. But > Apple is now a ship whose direction is slow to change, and they are ripe for disruption. This is why I think you're looking at this at the wrong level. "ripe for disruption"? So what? What I'm talking about is a company that can develop their own chips, spend a billion dollars buying a modem business off another company, lobby against regulations on use of forced labour. That's what it can do now, not a decade ago or a decade in the future.