4 ms·

Apparently working together with Apple is extremely difficult because they are so controlling and demanding, and that is even without the cultural and timezone

by dtech 2y ago

Apparently working together with Apple is extremely difficult because they are so controlling and demanding, and that is even without the cultural and timezone difference, so I doubt it's viable.

ajb 2y ago
Apple regularly does acquisitions (like, multiple per year), so I guess it's not impossible - but they seem to usually be much smaller companies which presumably assimilate. Their last big one[1] seems to have been the purchase of Intel's smartphone modem for $1B, still a lot smaller than VW's market cap of $58B. A company which does multiple acquisitions per year will have a team specialising in the integration of acquired companies, and practice and institutional knowledge of the issues of doing so. But a merger would be different - a smaller company will slot in under some existing executive, with maybe the CEO promoted into the top team if it's a really hot company; a merger would require the merger of two executive teams, which would be a difficult event. So yeah, might not be viable. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mergers_and_acquisitions_by_Apple https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mergers_and_acquisitio...
- londons_explore 2y ago
  Might make sense to acquire part of VW. Ie. one or two brands, one or two factories, and a chunk of the design team. Then sign an IP/licensing deal that both halves of the new company have access to most/all of the IP developed historically.
  - swores 2y ago
    Or even make it a full acquisition, but allow VW to remain a separate organisation with its own CEO and own board who answer to Apple's shareholders (and/or to the very top Apple execs) rather than to a separate group of shareholders? I.E. securing any future VW profits, and ensuring that the IP licensing deal is indefinite, while staying hands off and allowing VW to keep doing what they do with the exception of using Apple software.
    - londons_explore 2y ago
      Unfortunately, with our current capitalistic system, it doesn't make sense to buy a company which has no intention to be as profitable as you are. Basically, shareholders expect you to invest all the cash in your stockpile for a similar percentage return (on average), and they won't want you to invest in a capital heavy but almost profitless industry like carmaking unless you think you can turn it into a business of similar profit levels per unit investment to your existing business.
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
    - constantcrying 2y ago
      VW has comparable revenue to Apple, 4 times the employees, twice the assets and triple the equity. Additionally it can only be bought by negotiating with a single family. No, apple can not buy VW. This idea is totally absurd.
      - swores 2y ago
        If you look a few comments higher than mine, you'll see that the context of my comment and the one I replied to start from: > In another universe, I wonder [about Apple + VW joining forces] We're not speculating on what might happen tomorrow, just discussing hypotheticals for the scenario in which those companies were wanting to be partners of some kind.
        constantcrying 2y ago
        Seems like a complete nightmare. A Californian software company and a German car maker, seems about as conflicting as possible.
        swores 2y ago
        Agree with you, that's why my thought was that, if they were to do anything, an acquisition in which VW retains their autonomy and leadership would make more sense than one in which the two executive teams merge and attempt to manage the new dual-culture single company.
  - constantcrying 2y ago
    The potential brands which can build a car on their own are VW, Audi and Porsche. It is pretty much unimaginable that they would be sold to Apple. And what would apple even do with the teams? They now have 10k people in Germany ready to design a car for them, sounds totally nightmarish.
- constantcrying 2y ago
  >Their last big one[1] seems to have been the purchase of Intel's smartphone modem for $1B, still a lot smaller than VW's market cap of $58B. That isn't how you can buy VW, the market cap is totally misleading. VW Group has a bizarre structure, it is actually directly controlled by some Porsche Holding company, which is directly owned by the Porsche–Piëch family.
  - ajb 2y ago
    Oh it ended up owned by Porsch? So confusing. I remember the short squeeze, but usually I don't follow this stuff. I wasn't really quoting $58B as the price Apple would pay - just an indicator of the size of VW. But probably the wrong one I guess? I know that a merger doesn't involve paying the market cap. It's more about convincing the shareholders that their final shares in the merged company would be worth more than the sum of whatever shares they have in each part. If it's legally structured as an acquisition, the purchase price is a bit of a fiction.
    - constantcrying 2y ago
      >Oh it ended up owned by Porsch? No, VW Group owns Porsche, the car brand. There is also Porsche SE which is a tiny company, which owns controlling shares over VW Group. The short squeeze happened because there aren't actually that many shares around which you can buy. >I know that a merger doesn't involve paying the market cap. It's more about convincing the shareholders that their final shares in the merged company would be worth more than the sum of whatever shares they have in each part. Shareholders opinions are totally irrelevant. The only thing that would matter is the family who owns Porsche SE agreeing, which isn't going to happen. Market cap is the product of the number of shares and what the market thinks a single share is worth. So the market cap matters as it puts a bound on what the price could be. But in this case the price at which shareholders would accept such an acquisition is irrelevant, as their is a single shareholder who holds controlling shares and gets to make the decision.
- epolanski 2y ago
  > still a lot smaller than VW's market cap of $58B Just to point out, that doesn't mean that you can buy VW for $58B...
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]

by dtech 2y ago

Apparently working together with Apple is extremely difficult because they are so controlling and demanding, and that is even without the cultural and timezone difference, so I doubt it's viable.

ajb 2y ago

Apple regularly does acquisitions (like, multiple per year), so I guess it's not impossible - but they seem to usually be much smaller companies which presumably assimilate. Their last big one[1] seems to have been the purchase of Intel's smartphone modem for $1B, still a lot smaller than VW's market cap of $58B. A company which does multiple acquisitions per year will have a team specialising in the integration of acquired companies, and practice and institutional knowledge of the issues of doing so. But a merger would be different - a smaller company will slot in under some existing executive, with maybe the CEO promoted into the top team if it's a really hot company; a merger would require the merger of two executive teams, which would be a difficult event. So yeah, might not be viable. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mergers_and_acquisitions_by_Apple https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mergers_and_acquisitio...

londons_explore 2y ago
Might make sense to acquire part of VW. Ie. one or two brands, one or two factories, and a chunk of the design team. Then sign an IP/licensing deal that both halves of the new company have access to most/all of the IP developed historically.
- swores 2y ago
  Or even make it a full acquisition, but allow VW to remain a separate organisation with its own CEO and own board who answer to Apple's shareholders (and/or to the very top Apple execs) rather than to a separate group of shareholders? I.E. securing any future VW profits, and ensuring that the IP licensing deal is indefinite, while staying hands off and allowing VW to keep doing what they do with the exception of using Apple software.
  - londons_explore 2y ago
    Unfortunately, with our current capitalistic system, it doesn't make sense to buy a company which has no intention to be as profitable as you are. Basically, shareholders expect you to invest all the cash in your stockpile for a similar percentage return (on average), and they won't want you to invest in a capital heavy but almost profitless industry like carmaking unless you think you can turn it into a business of similar profit levels per unit investment to your existing business.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
  - constantcrying 2y ago
    VW has comparable revenue to Apple, 4 times the employees, twice the assets and triple the equity. Additionally it can only be bought by negotiating with a single family. No, apple can not buy VW. This idea is totally absurd.
    - swores 2y ago
      If you look a few comments higher than mine, you'll see that the context of my comment and the one I replied to start from: > In another universe, I wonder [about Apple + VW joining forces] We're not speculating on what might happen tomorrow, just discussing hypotheticals for the scenario in which those companies were wanting to be partners of some kind.
      - constantcrying 2y ago
        Seems like a complete nightmare. A Californian software company and a German car maker, seems about as conflicting as possible.
        swores 2y ago
        Agree with you, that's why my thought was that, if they were to do anything, an acquisition in which VW retains their autonomy and leadership would make more sense than one in which the two executive teams merge and attempt to manage the new dual-culture single company.
- constantcrying 2y ago
  The potential brands which can build a car on their own are VW, Audi and Porsche. It is pretty much unimaginable that they would be sold to Apple. And what would apple even do with the teams? They now have 10k people in Germany ready to design a car for them, sounds totally nightmarish.
constantcrying 2y ago
>Their last big one[1] seems to have been the purchase of Intel's smartphone modem for $1B, still a lot smaller than VW's market cap of $58B. That isn't how you can buy VW, the market cap is totally misleading. VW Group has a bizarre structure, it is actually directly controlled by some Porsche Holding company, which is directly owned by the Porsche–Piëch family.
- ajb 2y ago
  Oh it ended up owned by Porsch? So confusing. I remember the short squeeze, but usually I don't follow this stuff. I wasn't really quoting $58B as the price Apple would pay - just an indicator of the size of VW. But probably the wrong one I guess? I know that a merger doesn't involve paying the market cap. It's more about convincing the shareholders that their final shares in the merged company would be worth more than the sum of whatever shares they have in each part. If it's legally structured as an acquisition, the purchase price is a bit of a fiction.
  - constantcrying 2y ago
    >Oh it ended up owned by Porsch? No, VW Group owns Porsche, the car brand. There is also Porsche SE which is a tiny company, which owns controlling shares over VW Group. The short squeeze happened because there aren't actually that many shares around which you can buy. >I know that a merger doesn't involve paying the market cap. It's more about convincing the shareholders that their final shares in the merged company would be worth more than the sum of whatever shares they have in each part. Shareholders opinions are totally irrelevant. The only thing that would matter is the family who owns Porsche SE agreeing, which isn't going to happen. Market cap is the product of the number of shares and what the market thinks a single share is worth. So the market cap matters as it puts a bound on what the price could be. But in this case the price at which shareholders would accept such an acquisition is irrelevant, as their is a single shareholder who holds controlling shares and gets to make the decision.
epolanski 2y ago
> still a lot smaller than VW's market cap of $58B Just to point out, that doesn't mean that you can buy VW for $58B...
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]