What Apple is driving at; how the Cupertino Colossus sees itself evolving

“An Apple car is a long ways off—if it ever actually arrives,” Dan Gallagher writes for The Wall Street Journal. “Closer at hand are questions about how the company sees itself evolving.”

“Apple fans may squeal at the prospect of an iCar. And Apple’s enormous financial resources — which include nearly $178 billion in cash — are often considered a ticket into any business,” Gallagher writes. “Questions about a foray into the automotive sector don’t revolve around Apple’s ability to foot the bill, though. They have more to do with how well Apple would take to a highly regulated industry with long design cycles, not to mention one well outside its core competency.”

“So it is tempting to consider such a move as a fool’s errand,” Gallagher writes. “Even so, Apple is making this particular gamble from a position of strength… Apple can’t afford to rest on its gold-plated laurels. Nor can it think small. Growing projected 2017 revenue by just 10% would require another $25 billion in revenue—about seven times Tesla Motors’ current annual sales.”

Read more in the full article here.

2 Comments

  1. Yes, hmmm, an electric auto product category that requires great design, hardware, software, electronics, displays, supply infrastructure, stores/dealerships, etc.

    Yep I guess Apple has NO experience in these areas as a core competency… 🙂

  2. Yesterday there was some discussion about the link to the Wall Street Journal Article: “Apple seeks to sack court-appointed monitor Bromwich”.

    The discussion was initiated by this comment: “is there a version of the article beyond WSJ since you have to have a paid subscription to review? Please PLEASE please MDN, please note when your linked articles are subscriptions only.”

    Amid the ensuing insults and brawl a solution came up: “you can put the WSJ link or the title of the story into Google and the result is paywall free.” I had to fiddle a bit more than usual with that particular link but I did get it working.

    This article did the same thing and I simply put the heading into google to bypass the pay wall as I’ve heard it called. Then I went back to read this pay wall where it says.

    “To Read the Full Story, Subscribe or Log In”

    Now truth in advertising would have said “To Read the Full Story, Subscribe or Log In or Put the headline title in a search engine.” but I guess that’s beneath the Whore Street Journal to do that, unless of course they are warned, get sued, taken to court, develop some integrity or whatever.

    Strangely enough that did not come up in yesterday’s discussion. I find that very strange that such a blatant kind of lawsuit opportunity would be passed over. Are there no sleazy lawyers in MDN’s readership? That actually might be good news and says a lot about the MDN community.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.