“Amazon ‘loses’ money, Apple makes tons if it – yet Wall Street prefers Jeff Bezos’s losses to Tim Cook’s,” Jean-Louis Gassée writes for The Guardian. “Despite the company’s flat-lined profits, Wall Street loves Amazon and keeps sending its shares to new heights. Since its 1997 IP0, Amazon has gone from $23 to $369 a share. Amazon uses its e-commerce genius to prime the money pump. The company seduces customers through low prices, prompt delivery, an ever-expanding array of services and products, and exemplary customer attention.”
“Amazon’s daily revenue was about $200m ($17bn divided by 90 days). If it waits just 24 hours to pay its suppliers, the company has $200m to play with. If it delays payment for a month, that’s $6bn it can use to invest in developing the business. Delay an entire quarter … the numbers become dizzying,” Gassée writes. “Apple doesn’t need to play Amazon’s timing games. Product margins range from 20-25% for desktops and laptops (compared to HP’s 3-5%), to 65% or more for iPhones. With cash reserves reaching $147bn at the end of September 2013, Apple has had to buy shares back and pay dividends to bleed off the excess. Wall Street’s cautious regard for Apple seems ill-advised given Apple’s ability to generate cash in embarrassing amounts.”
“Audi, Tim Cook’s preferred brand, owns a small portion of the luxury car market (about 7.5%), but it constantly posts increasing profits – and shows no sign of slacking off. Similarly, today’s $21bn Mac business holds a mere 10% of the PC market, but Apple ‘uses’ that small share to command 45% of market profits,” Gassée writes. “The formula is no secret but, as with Amazon’s logistics and service, the payoff is in the implementation, how the chef combines the ingredients. It’s the ‘mere matter of implementation’ that eluded Steve Ballmer’s comprehension when he called the MacBook an Intel laptop with an Apple logo slapped on it. Why wouldn’t the Mac recipe also work for smartphones and tablets?”
Read more in the full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: As we explained back on October 23rd:
The well-heeled customer chooses Apple… These are the desirable customers. These are the customers that pay for substantive R&D. These are the customers that matter. This is why they get the world’s first and only 64-bit smartphone. This is, in fact, why they get the world’s modern smartphone in 2007, years before anyone else gets a serviceable knockoff.
These are the customers that pay for not only the best devices, but also for the best apps and services. This is why market share doesn’t matter for Apple and why Apple doesn’t really care about general market (unit) share. This is why the Mac lived while all the others’ PC businesses slowly died during Microsoft’s dreadful Dark Age of Personal Computing. This is why the Mac continues to thrive today. All of the smart and rich people have Macs. Intelligent developers understand this.
In each market in which it competes, Apple owns the only part of market that matters: Consumers with taste, the ability to discern value, and who possess disposable income and the will to spend it. Google, Samsung et al. can have all of the leftovers. They’re more trouble than they’re worth, which isn’t much, not even en masse.
If you have a billion users who settled for your product because it was part of a Buy One Get One freebie, how much content (music, movies, apps, books, etc.) are they going to buy and to how many paid services are they going to subscribe and how much are they worth to advertisers? Pretty much bupkis on all three counts.
We’d rather have the 400+ million (and rapidly growing) customers with the taste, the intelligence to recognize incredible value, and the money and the will to spend it. Wouldn’t you?
As long as you corner the market on the best customers, and there are enough of them to support a healthy business (very healthy in Apple’s case), market share doesn’t matter.
Because Wall Street is purposely trying to destroy Apple with their lies. All the banksters at the corner of Wall and Broad are known for doing this. Would you trust the same group of people that crashed the economy back in that far off year of 2008? Don’t tell us you forgot now, as a conspiracy analyst, I can safely say that this is all on Wall Street.
what a great name, wished my parents had named me “Armando Casablancas.” (army man of white houses, too cool.)
Why, thank you. I also really love your avatar picture. That icon really describes my feelings with our nation since about 2008. Once again, thanks for the complement, and your avatar is great as well.
compliment
Because wall street is a self serving evil beast and like Armando Casablancas says, it destroyed and crashed the economy with not even an iota of conscience, or care, just to gain it’s greedy objectives.
What’s amazing is that the sheeple forget and continue to follow this evil beast.
Doesn’t take a genius: Wall Street thinks Amazon owns the book industry essentially forever and thinks Apple has no more than a 7-10 year guaranteed profitability, possibly less. Mac is mature, iPod is mature, iPad and iPhone and Mac mini are all mature. And the tech market is changing really really fast. If Apple misses the next shift it could be plowing into earth in 7-10. That’s why the hesitation. “All the switchers!” You say. Wall Street says “if they switched in they can switch out.”
It’s actually a very easy to understand situation.
Why do they prefer Amazon over Apple?
Why did America prefer Obama over Romney?
It’s a fair correlation.
Have at it…..
Because Obama said he would be a President for everyone and not just white rich folk?
Just a thought.
Don’t watch a politican’s mouth, watch their feet.
O talks and promises on a daily basis. What he has delivered or not is KEY.
Well, the press had a three and a half year track record to see that Obama wasn’t for ‘everyone’, and a MUCH longer track record to see that Romney was closer to being that type person.
Because Obama lied.
Pretty much, only it’s that he lied, he just told the populace what they wanted to hear and they were foolish enough to buy into a fantasy.
‘only it’s NOT that he lied’
Sorry.
Dumb asses all Obama/Romney/McCain/Feinstein ARE WALL STREET GENTRY. NO MATTER HOW THEY OR YOU PROTEST ABOUT IT!!
Not the point or connotation, but thanks the same.
Thanks, one and all, for those insightful analyses and thought-provoking paranoid screeds.
You guys (and I mean everyone who has posted in this thread so far) are all funny. Thanks for those jokes, I really needed them this morning.
Because Wall Street believes in this fairytail that Amazon can turn on the profit spigot whenever they want to but they just choose to invest profits into the business. But wouldn’t a lot of this infrastructure spending be capitalized and depreciated over time?
Also the argument that Amazon chooses to invest in the business over taking profits is a weak one. I mean what company doesn’t invest in R&D, infrastructure, innovation etc? The expectation is you do that AND make a profit. It’s not an either or situation.
Apple appears to be deliberately trying to drive investors away by merely sitting on $146 billion in reserve cash and never doing a darn thing with most of it. OK, it spent billions on a respectable stock buyback but companies with far less money have done that much. Despite the buyback it didn’t do a darn thing for Apple’s share price.
Seriously, can’t Apple find one damn company to acquire as an immediate additional revenue stream with just a small part of that cash? That makes no sense at all. Apple’s share price has come to a complete halt and Apple can’t figure out how to fix that while sitting on a mountain of cash. It’s just beyond my understanding. It actually appears as though they’ve just given up on growing the business any further.
“Seriously, can’t Apple find one damn company to acquire as an immediate additional revenue stream with just a small part of that cash?”
You mean, like Universal? Or MGM? Or both? Or even AT&T?
Coz amazon can grow easily . Earning 0.0000001 this year , next year 0.00001 . That is 100 times GROWTH .
That is the true reason . The stock market Is about future , how to measure future ? Growth .
I don’t see the hate at Amazon. Yes, the Kindle Fire is an iPad rip-off but the original Kindle was a great device. In fact, I just ordered a paper white Kindle e-reader, not the Kindle Fire mind you, but the monochrome one. I used the original before, and I loved it.
I liked the Kindle original also.
It’s because of the DCF formula the analysts use to value companies. Come on guys learn finance
Cash is king. In this case, Apple simply needs to continue the stock buyback. I’m all for Apple reducing outstanding shares based on free cash flow from operations. I’m not in agreement with Ichan to leverage up Apple to make a huge buyback now.
Shareholders will be richly rewarded in this scenario. In ten years they could be worth more than a share of Berkshire.
I think you’re wrong about Apple’s shares becoming like Berkshire’s shares. Apple’s share price could easily fall faster than Microsoft’s did if investors refuse to buy the stock because of Apple’s arrogant attitude towards shareholders. Investors believe in Warren Buffet. No one believes in Tim Cook. Tim Cook is likely one of the most hated and disrespected CEOs in the world of tech.
I thought Warren told Icahn to stuff it where Apple is concerned?
Ask the soon to be unemployed workers at 3 Heinz plants how they feel about Warren Buffet, since he now controls Heinz. Close to 2500 to be turfed in the next 12 months.
Apple would need half a trillion $$ in order to buy back the company. While they may even have that much one day (they are almost one third of the way there), The question is whether that would really be necessary (or smart).
Apple can’t buyback the company!
I’m not well heeled, but that doesn’t mean I want to buy cheap products. I don’t necessarily like the connotation that using Apple products alludes to an elitist attitude that MDN likes to play up.
I think the reason iPhone users buy more apps isn’t because they’re rich but because Apple makes it simple and beneficial to acquire apps. Apple’s curation process is likely to blame, not the income barrier that purportedly neuteres purchases.
I think Apple does want market share. They don’t need it to be profitable (obviously) but it helps to keep their content fresh and focused.
The dark ages of windows was also a dark age for Macs. Remember navigating one aisle of software at compUSA as opposed the the walmart size inventory in the PC software department.
Google could easily usher in a new such era if Apple does continue to shed market share while their profits will mostly go unaffected.
I’ll never leave Apple but I do enjoy having a prime app selection that I was never afforded as a Mac user in the decades past. And market share may eventually effect developers affinity for iOS.
Apple doesn’t JUST want rich customers because they’re capable of getting less wealthy customers to continue to thrive in their Eco system because they do it so well. Market share isn’t irrelevant — in fact it’s only irrelevant when comparing profits. Let’s not forget other areas where it is a massive contributer: accessories, software, and accessibility to the standard.
I think you posted on the wrong article. This sounds like a response for the “Why We Say ‘Hee Haw ‘Demographic'” article.
your command of the english language shows you to be well heeled, and your understanding seems to show you as intellegent as well, so you are exactly the person, regardless of income, who would understand the total value of an item and its place in the world, so cheers to you and all the people who have taste, discernment, and morals, regardless of income!
Spell check before hitting the post button.
Why you can’t even use the ‘shift’ key…
Except you can and I mis-posted.
What?
This will all change if Apple continue innovative . Once the next wow thing out and earn big , Apple market value can even be double .
What are you talking about? Apple always innovates and has new ideas for shameless copy machines to rip off. *coughSamsungcough* You must be one of those iOS 7 haters who hate it for whatever reason (too colorful, no skeumorphism, not grey enough, looks too much like Android, looks too much like Windows 8, does not have a built-in time machine, etc.) Give it up, please. Your Apple FUD is getting stale and boring.
Your pandering is getting boring, and you’re in danger of becoming a blind believer.
There are serious functionality problems with iOS 7 that come from hasty, poorly planned design. The Calendar app is one of the most horrific monstrosities I’ve ever used. Parroting buzzwords from MDN won’t change that.
Wow. Where have you been? I’ve missed you.
Your superlatives are even worse.
“Most horrific monstrosities ”
Yeah right, just like the holocaust and rawanda…
Your self important comments are just as blind and shallow
You left off the “…I’ve ever used.”. Learn to read, dipshit.
Chrissyone, welcome back.
I have to agree with Chrissy on the Calendar, not my favorite.
And you still work at Amazon, right, ChrissyOne?
That’s what my resume says.
Oh… a One Star on my comment. I’m crushed. Considering that I’ve already worked at Adobe and Microsoft, I’m quite used to MDN readers hating everything that I do.
The answer to the question of “Where how you been?” should now be obvious. 😉
(And excuse my sloppy typing today. at least you know it’s me!)
Touchy, touchy!
My point was simply that your negative comments regarding iOS 7 might possibly be related to who signs your paychecks.
Not one bit. I’m still an iOS and Mac user. I’m also passionate about good design. And iOS 7 is very, very not.
I don’t work at Amazon.com and I think iOS 7 sucks also. Quit acting like a fanboy. It’s embarrassing. IOS 7 is not a runaway bestseller. Don’t act like a lemming.
One thing Amazon gets right – it’s one of our core values:\
It’s called being “Vocally Self-Critical”. It’s part of our culture. And it means that when we see something that sucks, we say it sucks. Because that way we can improve it.
You know who was the undisputed king of this principal at Apple?
Yeah, his name was “Steve”.
And we miss him.
I very much enjoy my new 5S and my iPad Air. Although my fingerprint sensor no longer works, so I hope to look into that. So I had no choice but to start using iOS 7. I’m with you, I don’t like it. I don’t like the look and so far I have seen few things that I consider an improvement in efficiency. But that’s just me. I don’t play follow the leader. I’m just an honest guy. I don’t say that I like things just to be part of the cool crowd. That’s for fools. If everyone liked the same thing it would be a pretty boring world. I was able to change some things to make the appearance less pale. But I still don’t like it. And apparently a lot of people feel the same way. And you’re right, the calendar really, really sucks. Hopefully Apple will allow its customers the ability to change things going forward. I’m not a fan of iOS 7. But being an Apple guy I don’t have much choice right now.
All the white space. All the crappy fonts. How could they make the Camera so (mostly) good and the camera roll so awful? I say “mostly” because they killed one feature that really made the camera special – the fact that the frame was taken when you let off the button, rather than when you pressed it. This allowed you to pre-press the button and let go of it when you were ready to shoot, enabling you to get hand-to-reach angles better, without having to stab blindly at the button. Now, when you hold the button down, it takes an endless succession of photos, as if it were the worst sports camera ever made.
The Camera Roll is a disaster. The white space is stupid. It makes photos harder to see. If it didn’t then why would there be black space around a photo once you clicked on it? What the hell is a “Moment”?
And Calendar… what a catastrophe. I used to be able to click on a day and get a quick list of that day’s events at the bottom, instantly. Now I have to wait for an animation which reveals the whole day’s timeline, and the event I’m looking for almost always requires me to scroll to get to it. If I don’t scroll through the whole day, I may miss an event. Setting the time and date are an exercise in frustration. I can’t see what day it is when I using the day scroll. Trying to zero in on it now requires a tennis game reminiscent of two-way Wheel of Fortune.
Mostly, I’ve noticed that I just have to pay much more attention to the interface. This is because without stronger visual queues, I have to read more of the actual text to see where a button is and what it does. Buttons used rot be more iconic. now they look like Windows 3.1.
If you think this is an improvement, that’s fine. You are an idiot and you are wrong.
I agree, some of the white wash is a bit much. And I think the album display would be just as uncluttered with a black background.
Also the scroll wheel you speak of it unruly and unpleasant looking.
And what is with the volume notification squares?? Gross! It looks like a poorly ported PC game. They should make it Dots like they did with the service bar, which I love!
GAWD that volume notification… Thank you for being so opaque and blocking the center of my video for an eternity after I press the button. That’s perfect.
>.<
Terrible!!
Bushwhacked
In iOS 6 the ability to delete apps running in the background was much easier then the cumbersome method employed in iOS 7. They seem to have change things just to say they change things. I’m very disappointed with iOS 7. And the way beyond just the appearance.
It feels so unfinished. Those stupid blue and red text boxes… none of the text lines up. There’s no adequate demarcation between buttons. It’s just plain ugly in every way.
I’m no fan of Amazon (although I do buy stuff from them) and I do count myself a fan of Apple (and I do buy stuff from them as well) but how about this for a mind game. Apple sits on a massive pile of cash; Amazon does not. What’s the difference. It is not that Amazon doesn’t make lots and lots of money. They do. It’s because while Apple cannot seem to find ways to prudently invest all that cash to continue to grow their high profit business, Amazon is absolutely relentless in reinvesting every penny in doing things that will ultimately only increase their dominance.
The fundamental problem for Apple whether the CEO is Steve or Tim is: what is the next breakthrough product? What is the next product that will, in 10 years, become more that 50% of the company like the iPhone has? I think the evidence is that there is no such product, that even for Steve, the iPhone was a product that will never be repeated. Apple will have breakthrough products in various areas. They will constantly improve what they currently make. And they will branch out into new services. But the product that will reproduce the iPhone just doesn’t exist.
Amazon, by contrast, has never built a business based on one super, super product. Rather, they continue to reinvest to make their existing business more and more efficient at larger and larger scales. Along the way, they open up new lines – cloud services, for example. But mainly they grow by investing every penny in increased reach and efficiency.
Robebo nails it. Amazon is king of online Internet sales and it is not a fad and there is nobody nipping at their heels to take that away.
Apple has a very profitable business making a lot of great products that are somewhat faddish. Their position could be lost as quickly as they earned it. They have to continue to deliver or else. They are stuck in the rat race. And, if last year was any indication, their delivery times are getting slower. Furthermore, JD Powers shows Samsung beginning to edge Apple in satisfaction surveys.
I love Apple and Amazon. Personally, I believe both stocks are overpriced — Amazon moreso than Apple.
Jean-Louis Gasseé? The same guy who ran Be Inc. and created BeOS? Is he still butthurt that Apple didn’t buy Be Inc and use BeOS as the backbone of Mac OS? If Apple didn’t buy NeXT, then they wouldn’t have gotten Steve Jobs. BeOS was great, but it would not have been a suitable platform for Mac OS X. JLG needs to understand this.
Amazon could implode very, very quickly. They have no cash cows and no cash in the bank. As I’ve quoted here before from Slate:
“…That’s because Amazon, as best I can tell, is a charitable organization being run by elements of the investment community for the benefit of consumers. The shareholders put up the equity, and instead of owning a claim on a steady stream of fat profits, they get a claim on a mighty engine of consumer surplus. Amazon sells things to people at prices that seem impossible because it actually is impossible to make money that way. And the competitive pressure of needing to square off against Amazon cuts profit margins at other companies, thus benefiting people who don’t even buy anything from Amazon.
It’s a truly remarkable American success story. But if you own a competing firm, you should be terrified. Competition is always scary, but competition against a juggernaut that seems to have permission from its shareholders to not turn any profits is really frightening.”
Was that Yglesias or Felix Salmon? Both are excellent writers.
I like Amazon, I buy a lot of stuff from them (not their tech or kindle stuff), but the only way for them to make profit is to sell a huge amount more, or to make higher profit margins. I can’t see how they could increase their margins greatly without increasing costs – in which case I’ll go elsewhere, and I can’t see that their is a massive scope for them to increase sales volumes, at least not to the levels that their share price would seem to require.
Tim Cook is no Jeff Bezos. Jeff Bezos has made plenty of powerful friends and he also believes in expansion of his company into all sorts of businesses. Apple just keeps slogging it out with the same hardware while sitting on a huge amount of reserve cash that could easily be used for expanding Apple much, much further. Amazon is a very shareholder friendly company. Jeff Bezos clearly outlines his near and long term goals. With Apple, who the heck knows what they’re going to be doing tomorrow. Tim Cook is always talking about some mythical Apple product pipeline with fantastic, amazing products. Beat’s me what he’s talking about. As a shareholder, I know absolutely nothing about Apple’s goals.
One thing I do know as a shareholder is that Amazon is just kicking the crap out of Apple in shareholder value. Everyone claimed that Apple would be standing tall long after Amazon collapsed by the wayside, but the opposite has come to pass and it’s Apple that has had the collapse, at least from a shareholder’s point of view. Apple refuses to spend that reserve cash for anything that will boost its revenue and I don’t understand why Apple’s business is contracting when they have the cash to grow more than any company around. Certainly more than Amazon or even Google. Why would investors put money into a company like Apple that SEEMS deliberately intent on stagnation?
WTF ever. Amazon is a retail company, they sell stuff that other companies make. Big Frikkin Whoop. How hard is it to be transparent and reveal your plans even 100 years into the future? Not hard, let me demonstarte; “we are gonna sell crap”
Apple on the other hand, like any producer of goods, ad not just a reseller, cannot give away the family jewels by broadcasting whats their future holds, or other wannabees like samedung will copy the hell outtof it.
Just look at what happened with the iWatch. Even though Apple NEVER said it was going to produce a watch, the mere rumor started by idiot analcysts scared SameDung enough that it rushed a pile of garbage to market in a desparate attempt to get the drop on Apple.
Could you even imagine the carnage that would result if Apple announced the products it was developing for release in 12-18 months?
Maybe you should do a little research on what happens to companies who do that. I would suggest googling Osbourne Computers. The only company who lives (or lived) on the promise of what might come next is MS, and that strategy hasn’t been working terribly well for the last 6 years.
Just a retail company? Try doing a search on Amazon Web Services. Apple had the money and knowhow to do something like this but they prefer to sit on their cash.
If you don’t like it, then you can leave. Android might be your style. Don’t let the door hit you on your way out.
Jeff Bozos is a regular attendee of Bilderberg, alongside Eric T Mole. That explains a lot!
Anyone who has bought Apple stocks and wants the price to go up wants to know why as we’ll. Complaints about Apple not being innovative is not enough of a reason to be harping on Apple especially when Apple’s sales still keep going up. Apple is not losing money. Why is it always never enough with Apple yet others are losing money and there shares go up. Anal-ists really have there heads up there ASS!!!!
♪♪Floating On A Bubble! ♫
*POP* goes the AMZN ! 😯
Greed is NOT good. It’s a mortal sin.
Amazon deserves to go down.
Simple:
Amazon is a retailer that has systematically destroyed its competition. It’s cash flow is reliable and practically guaranteed.
Apple, on the other hand, has steadily moved away from contracts with enterprise and education, instead putting all its eggs in the consumer market. There, it’s being outmaneuvered by companies that distribute better to emerging markets, companies that offer multiple screen sizes, user customization, and other features that Apple refuses to offer. (Fact: Samsung long ago eclipsed Apple’s iPhone in total mobile profits; in the “smartphone” category, Apple holds a lead in the USA by 3% according to Canaccord Genuity.)
Hence investors see Apple as an increasingly niche market luxury good that, while indeed superior in performance, will take on the Porsche position of the computing industry, while other players will in a few years take the volume role and eventually dominate in profits. We’ve seen this before, folks. Don’t you remember how investors fled the Mac as soon as they realized Apple wasn’t doing enough to maintain competitive pricing and healthy market share?
Yes, I said market share. It matters. If Apple announced an increase in market share, AAPL would jump in price. You know it and Cook knows it. Problem is, Cook, the “supply chain genius”, has outsourced so much Apple production that he can’t fulfil emerging market demand. He even relies on Samsung to make Apple’s current products. While it is noble of Apple to finally in-source Mac Pro manufacturing, it is obvious that Apple needs more mobile manufacturing capacity. If Cook invested in state-of-the art mobile manufacturing closer to end markets (Eastern Europe, South America, South Africa), instead of blowing $US 5 billion on Aerobie offices and hundreds of billions on stock price manipulation, debt acquisition, and executive overcompensation, then perhaps today Apple would have a family of competitively-priced iPhones to achieve penetration in emerging markets. Instead, Apple remains a US-centric brand, with limited success elsewhere.
Skate to where the puck will be, Cook, or get off the ice and leave it to someone who can skate faster than you do..
Amazon and Apple are not direct competitors despite the endless posts all over the internet trying to state such. I doubt Apple will ever ship a Playstation to your nephew or deliver groceries to your front door.
Amazon is plowing the cash into new markets and the infrastructure needed to deliver the goods it sells while Apple is borrowing money to pay out ill advised dividends to Wall Street thieves that give not one damn about Apple or the customers it serves.
spot on. If Apple plowed its excess cash into new product development and manufacturing infrastructure instead of $5 billion aerobie offices and executive largesse, then smart investors would see that Apple is still working hard to expand into new markets. Cook is mismanaging the flow of iTunes cash that Jobs gave him.
Amazon’s losses were not as bad as expected — this is good news and therefore the Amazon stock price will rise. Apple’s “massive” profits not as good as expected — this is bad news and therefore the APPL stock price will fall. A company is worth the present value of its future cash flows, discounted at the cost of capital. There are many many reasons why people buy and sell their stocks, the variables are just too complex to quantify. In general, however, the good news/bad news idea mentioned above will always cause stocks to rise/fall accordingly, all other things being equal.
I have thought hard about Amazon.
Standard Oil, Microsoft and Enron all showed that greed motivated the pursuit of monopoly practices. Very easy for the Department of Justice to understand. Simply “Follow the Money”.
But Amazon is it monopolistic?
If we “follow the money” there is no money. At the end of each and every quarter of earnings, $20 billion income $40 million profit! That’s two dollars in a thousand dollars or 2cents in ten dollars. That’s two cents profit for every $10 eBook sold. Yet it buys that eBook from the publisher for $14 dollars. That’s a LOSS of $3.98 per eBook or 30% LOSS.
So Amazon is subsidizing its eBook sales with profits from other departments?
WHY?
This is a question that the Department of Justice should ask.
Is this practice sustainable?
What is Amazon’s motive to sell eBooks at a loss?
Is this practice good economics?
Is this practice, before Apple entered the market with eBooks, a monopolistic practice to eliminate the competition?
Was Amazon’s practices brought to the attention of the Department of Justice?
Did the Department of Justice intend to prosecute Amazon?
What did the Department of Justice think of this practice before Apple?
Who brought to the attention of the Department of Justice initially Apple’s alleged monopolistic practices?
Did the Department of Justice compare Amazon’s practices before and after Apple?
Does the Department of Justice intend to examine Amazon practices?
What constitutes a monopolistic price – a loss price of 30% or a fair profit of 30%?
What constitutes a monopolistic percentage of the market? 90%? 75%? 50%?
Is price a factor in monopolistic practices viz the Japanese color TV case where Sony was excluded because it sold the most expensive TV in US?
Why does Amazon not make huge profits?
Is it to minimize USA taxes.
Is the Department of Justice partizan?
It is in the interests of Justice that the Department of Justice answers these questions through Freedom of Information searches.
Before further court appearances of Apple in the eBook case.
I believe that there is a US VERSUS THEM mentality in US today. We a free to pursue John Lennon because we don’t like him when we are in power and have the might of US departments doing our bidding. Well that idea leads to crime and eventual revolt. And the end of us US.