4 ms·

I'm not sure if this is still true, but I recall reading something about Apple not participating in any philanthropic ventures? With so much money (and aside fr

by rglover 15y ago

I'm not sure if this is still true, but I recall reading something about Apple not participating in any philanthropic ventures? With so much money (and aside from the point that they invest a lot in their products), it's a wonder why they don't work on innovating products to help struggling nations. Granted, there's no rule that says a company needs to do these sorts of things, but I think it would be a cool move.

ugh 15y ago
Can Apple do that? Helping struggling nations is not exactly extracting value for the shareholders and that’s what Apple has to do. You can argue that spending some money (maybe a few million dollars per year) is good PR work and good for the company’s image – but spending a substantial portion of those 76 billion? Hardly a good way to use the money (from the shareholders’ perspective). Apple could certainly participate in philanthropic ventures but it’s not a way for them to get rid of their money.
- yread 15y ago
  Is sitting on a cash hoard extracting value for the shareholders?
  - ugh 15y ago
    Not much, but at least Apple is not exactly “destroying” value (by gifting the money).
    - 3am 15y ago
      Sure. They should issue a $50/ share special dividend, and they'd still have enough left over to buy eBay. It's arrogant corporate behavior that's only being put up with while their growth rate is so high. Watch how quick the knives come out when they slip up.
  - megablast 15y ago
    They do invest the money, and make quite a bit of money on it as well. They have a range of short term to long term investments, as most companies who have lots of cash do. They also invest a lot in factories that build parts for their devices, ensuring a cheap, early supply of new components.
Game_Ender 15y ago
At what point is Apple poor enough that they can use their money as they wish?
duopixel 15y ago
I've had very bad experiences with these types of organizations. I once visited an institute for blind people and I had the chance to see them using the computer lab. I was moved by the scene: all these eager young people hungry for learning, and yet they didn't have internet. Their Braille library was 20 books. So I made a huge effort and found someone who could donate a router, took $500 in savings (which, as a student in Mexico, was quite a sum) and asked friend to match my donation. So my donation was in essence two years of internet. Some time went by and when I followed up, the router was stowed in a closet and my donation had gone to "administrative purposes" because they were having trouble making ends meet. This is a huge problem in charitable organizations, most of the money doesn't go to the people who need it, it goes towards maintaining the organization and generating more money through bothersome print and phone campaigns. I've met a couple of people who have worked in these organizations, and they become jaded once they catch the mechanics. There are certainly exceptions: The Bill and Melinda Gates foundation and the Turner Foundation function on the funds provided by their founders. I still believe in charity, but in a more peer-to-peer fashion, not necessarily involving money but mentoring that builds long-standing roads to success.
- rglover 15y ago
  Yeah, I could imagine that a lot of charitable organizations have a rough time operating. Perhaps refining their business model would be a great startup idea? I'd love to see a startup that focused on building charitable organizations. Perhaps a kickstarter for charity? Something where people can offer up a small recurring donation every month. Might actually exist already. If not, though, that would be killer and a great way to help circumvent some of the issues you mention.
- sek 15y ago
  I had similar experiences, the administration on charity organizations are often less efficient than government institutions. I was at the Red Cross in Germany and at 14 o'clock nobody was at work anymore. They were out because the weather was so nice told me the apprentice browsing on Facebook, there was nobody else there and she couldn't help me with my problem. This makes me angry, there is no competition in this area so nobody controls if their administration is efficient. All this money is gone for the people who really need it.

by rglover 15y ago

ugh 15y ago

Can Apple do that? Helping struggling nations is not exactly extracting value for the shareholders and that’s what Apple has to do. You can argue that spending some money (maybe a few million dollars per year) is good PR work and good for the company’s image – but spending a substantial portion of those 76 billion? Hardly a good way to use the money (from the shareholders’ perspective). Apple could certainly participate in philanthropic ventures but it’s not a way for them to get rid of their money.

yread 15y ago
Is sitting on a cash hoard extracting value for the shareholders?
- ugh 15y ago
  Not much, but at least Apple is not exactly “destroying” value (by gifting the money).
  - 3am 15y ago
    Sure. They should issue a $50/ share special dividend, and they'd still have enough left over to buy eBay. It's arrogant corporate behavior that's only being put up with while their growth rate is so high. Watch how quick the knives come out when they slip up.
- megablast 15y ago
  They do invest the money, and make quite a bit of money on it as well. They have a range of short term to long term investments, as most companies who have lots of cash do. They also invest a lot in factories that build parts for their devices, ensuring a cheap, early supply of new components.

Game_Ender 15y ago

At what point is Apple poor enough that they can use their money as they wish?

duopixel 15y ago

I've had very bad experiences with these types of organizations. I once visited an institute for blind people and I had the chance to see them using the computer lab. I was moved by the scene: all these eager young people hungry for learning, and yet they didn't have internet. Their Braille library was 20 books. So I made a huge effort and found someone who could donate a router, took $500 in savings (which, as a student in Mexico, was quite a sum) and asked friend to match my donation. So my donation was in essence two years of internet. Some time went by and when I followed up, the router was stowed in a closet and my donation had gone to "administrative purposes" because they were having trouble making ends meet. This is a huge problem in charitable organizations, most of the money doesn't go to the people who need it, it goes towards maintaining the organization and generating more money through bothersome print and phone campaigns. I've met a couple of people who have worked in these organizations, and they become jaded once they catch the mechanics. There are certainly exceptions: The Bill and Melinda Gates foundation and the Turner Foundation function on the funds provided by their founders. I still believe in charity, but in a more peer-to-peer fashion, not necessarily involving money but mentoring that builds long-standing roads to success.

rglover 15y ago
Yeah, I could imagine that a lot of charitable organizations have a rough time operating. Perhaps refining their business model would be a great startup idea? I'd love to see a startup that focused on building charitable organizations. Perhaps a kickstarter for charity? Something where people can offer up a small recurring donation every month. Might actually exist already. If not, though, that would be killer and a great way to help circumvent some of the issues you mention.
sek 15y ago
I had similar experiences, the administration on charity organizations are often less efficient than government institutions. I was at the Red Cross in Germany and at 14 o'clock nobody was at work anymore. They were out because the weather was so nice told me the apprentice browsing on Facebook, there was nobody else there and she couldn't help me with my problem. This makes me angry, there is no competition in this area so nobody controls if their administration is efficient. All this money is gone for the people who really need it.