3 ms·
$1.6B is nothing to Apple. They had $80B in cash at the end of September and could very well pass $100B after the holidays. I don't think there's any way Apple
by martingordon 15y ago
$1.6B is nothing to Apple. They had $80B in cash at the end of September and could very well pass $100B after the holidays.
I don't think there's any way Apple will dilute the brand of one of their flagship products in their hottest market. Plus, it works both ways: they would have to find a trademark that works everywhere else so that competitors don't snatch up the new trademark in other countries.
- Tyrannosaurs 15y agoHaving the money and it being nothing are different. If I need to I could come up with $10,000 for something. That doesn't mean that it's not significant and it doesn't mean that it's the right thing to do if I have an alternative.
- martingordon 15y agoThe cost of switching to a different name isn't $0, though. Both the cost and added complexity is significant. Some considerations: * Cost of finding and registering a different trademark that's available worldwide. * Cost of developing new marketing materials. * Cost of tweaking software to use new name. * Cost of tweaking production lines to print new name on devices and packaging. * Cost of lost sales due to customer confusion (Chinese traveling to America; Foreigners traveling to China).
- Tyrannosaurs 15y agoI'm not saying that there are no costs, there clearly are, the most significant of which is brand dilution. What I'm saying is that $1.6bn is clearly not nothing, not to Apple, not to anyone.
- astrodust 15y agoYou know how many lawyers you can buy for $1.6B? Here's a hint: LOTS OF LAWYERS.
- yiran 15y agoYou know how many officials you can bribe with $1.6 B? Here's a hint: LOTS OF THEM.