Is Apple being "reckless" enough?

[PracticalMac]

Instead of those "is Apple losing its shine" negative puns,
we should really ask if Apple is "be(ing) Foolish, be(ing) Hungry" enough, AKA, "reckless".

That is, use that huge stock pile of cash it is sitting and greatly expand its R&D and eventually expand product offering outside of what they have made.

I think the iOS has the potential to be in everything, from cars to cash registers, but Apple seems content to just be consumer electronics.
Even if Apple partners up with another company to do this, it will still expand the market share, and entice more developers to do iOS software.

As example a new camera, by Sony I think, has Android operating system designed to make it easier to manage and edit the photos then uploading to social sites a snap.

On the iCloud side, I can see room for more features along Google Doc's lines.

What you all think?

 

[roadbloc]

On the iCloud side, I can see room for more features along Google Doc's lines.

Since Apple killed iWork.com, I doubt they'll ever do this.

 

[maflynn]

we should really ask if Apple is "be(ing) Foolish, be(ing) Hungry" enough, AKA, "reckless".

Being foolish an hungry does not equate to reckless. One can be foolish insofar as no being to serious and hungry is self explanatory. Neither of which means they should be reckless.

I do think they're playing it too safe but that doesn't mean they should be reckless with their resources.

 

[Consultant]

iOS already have the most developers of all mobile platforms. Most apps are iOS first.

"manage and edit the photos then uploading to social sites": ever heard of this thing called iPhone?

 

[SpyderBite]

Apple is doing fine. I suggest everybody let the pilot fly the plane and the surgeon perform the operation.

Apple has http://cooljobs.apple.com if you are really passionate about making a difference in the company.

 

[vvswarup]

Stock has a certain intrinsic value. That's not the market price of the stock. The current market price of the stock is based on how investors perceive future growth prospects. It's all supply and demand. If there are more buyers than sellers, the stock goes up. If the opposite true, the stock goes down.

We have heard a lot about how Android is taking over. It's true that they have a high market share. And that's probably a major factor in Apple's decline.

But if people look at the hard facts, they'll see something else. From a fundamental perspective, market share is not the be all, end all. What's more important is the ability of a company's business model/strategy to generate cash.

Compare the Android model and iOS model. First of all, the comparisons to Microsoft don't make sense. Microsoft sells Windows licenses to OEMs while Google gives away Android for free.

Google's strategy revolves around advertising. Android is designed to drive people towards Google's services in order to generate ad impressions, and revenue.

Now take the iOS model. Apple produces the hardware and software and sells the phone at a price above the manufacturing cost.

To me, the iOS model has greater ability to generate cash flow than the Android model. What would be interesting to see is the effect of Android on advertising revenue. How much did Android move the needle on revenue relative to the amount that Google spends on Android each year?

What I'm saying is that strictly from a fundamentals perspective, Apple has a safer strategy in terms of generating cash flow, which is of paramount importance to investors.

Disclosure: I am long Apple.

 

[PracticalMac]

"manage and edit the photos then uploading to social sites": ever heard of this thing called iPhone?

Really? Are you that short sighted?

Do you see pro photographers using an iPhone in a studio or taking long distance shots of birds, animals, or Kate Middleton sun tanning?

 

[smoledman]

iRadio isn't "reckless" enough? Seriously I don't see anything Apple does these days pushes the innovation envelope anymore.

 

[PracticalMac]

Stock has a certain intrinsic value. That's not the market price of the stock. The current market price of the stock is based on how investors perceive future growth prospects. It's all supply and demand. If there are more buyers than sellers, the stock goes up. If the opposite true, the stock goes down.

We have heard a lot about how Android is taking over. It's true that they have a high market share. And that's probably a major factor in Apple's decline.

But if people look at the hard facts, they'll see something else. From a fundamental perspective, market share is not the be all, end all. What's more important is the ability of a company's business model/strategy to generate cash.

Compare the Android model and iOS model. First of all, the comparisons to Microsoft don't make sense. Microsoft sells Windows licenses to OEMs while Google gives away Android for free.

Google's strategy revolves around advertising. Android is designed to drive people towards Google's services in order to generate ad impressions, and revenue.

Now take the iOS model. Apple produces the hardware and software and sells the phone at a price above the manufacturing cost.

To me, the iOS model has greater ability to generate cash flow than the Android model. What would be interesting to see is the effect of Android on advertising revenue. How much did Android move the needle on revenue relative to the amount that Google spends on Android each year?

What I'm saying is that strictly from a fundamentals perspective, Apple has a safer strategy in terms of generating cash flow, which is of paramount importance to investors.

Disclosure: I am long Apple.

Well said.

I am simply saying Apple could expand its iOS into embedded systems, like kiosks, in transportation (ie: car) services, and other ways not yet envisioned. USB for example was designed for keyboards, mice, printers, and now today is used in ways that it is completely unsuitable for, but done anyway.