Tim Cook to visit Beijing with $1 billion in goodwill

“Tim Cook has just made a very public investment in the future of China, betting $1 billion on the country’s version of Uber as he prepares for a trip to Beijing,” David Goldman and Charles Riley report for CNNMoney.

“The investment in Didi Chuxing is an unusual one for Apple, which typically swallows smaller companies whole,” Goldman and Riley report. “The deal could benefit Apple’s relationship with Beijing, and give Cook something positive to talk about during upcoming meetings with senior officials.”

“In April, less than seven months after Apple launched iBooks and iTunes Movies, the services were shut down in China. They disappeared as Beijing implemented new rules for foreign companies that provide online content such as videos, games and books,” Goldman and Riley report. “The trip is a chance for Cook to build and manage Apple’s relationship with key regulators, and perhaps bring iBooks and iTunes Movies back online.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Yup.

Why Apple is really investing $1 billion in Didi, China’s version of Uber – May 13, 2016
Uber CEO responds to Apple’s $1 billion investment in Didi Chuxing – May 13, 2016
Things to know about China’s Didi, Apple’s latest $1 billion investment – May 13, 2016
Apple invests $1 billion in Chinese ride-hailing service Didi Chuxing – May 12, 2016
Apple’s battle with China offers a stark reminder of geopolitical risks – May 11, 2016
Apple’s Tim Cook to visit China for high-level government meetings later this month – May 6, 2016
Apple CEO Cook ‘pretty confident’ of soon resuming movie and book sales in China – May 3, 2016
The New Yorker: What Apple has to fear from China – April 30, 2016
China’s increasing censorship hits Apple, but Apple might punch back – April 22, 2016
China shutters Apple’s online book and movie services – April 22, 2016


  1. Does anyone know the labor / union structure in mainland china? Compared to the US and EU, will the Chinese Uber, presumably state supported to some extent, encounter any administrative friction, or will it largely require just knowing their audience to be affordable and a logical add-on to mass transportation?

      1. That is simply incorrect.

        A 15-second trip to Google would have revealed the ACFTU (All-China Federation of Trade Unions). Under which, there are some dozen trade unions).

        Twenty years ago, blurting out a statement like that (without a clue whether it was true or not) would have been plausibly excusable. Today, it looks positively foolish.

        It is exactly on the same level as if someone in, say, Netherlands declared that in the United States, they prosecute and put in jail women who have abortions. It may sound plausible to someone who is completely ignorant, but it is absurdly untrue.

          1. Another short trip to Google and again, we confirm broad and rather inaccurate statement.

            From the Chinese constitution:

            “No one may make use of religion to engage in activities that disrupt public order, impair the health of citizens or interfere with the educational system of the state. ”

            So, it is quite clear from the actual wording of the constitution (actually, its English translation; I can’t read the original), that the freedom of speech and religion is somewhat regulated, and, if we try to be objective, we can’t claim that it offers guarantees of freedom of religion (or speech).

            In other words, Chinese authorities, in their suppression of dissent and religious expression, have been acting in accordance with their constitution.

            Look, Birdseed, I don’t disagree with you on the substance, but you must learn to argue with facts, and not with broad made-up statements that can be refuted within 15 seconds.

            1. Hey Birdseed, looks like PreDrag is a know-it-all Bird Brain who knows nothing. Being “edumacated” by Google is like being “edumacated” by Wikipedia.

              Get a life PreDrag and take your know it all and friggin a shove it.

      2. Back in the communist days of the former Yugoslavia, we used to have the government-ran Socialist Union of the Working People of Yugoslavia (literal translation), which was technically an all-encompassing workers union meant to represent workers and protect their rights. Since this was a single-party communist dictatorship, and the system was so-called “socialist self-management”, where workers were presumably sharing in all the decision making of any company (through their delegates in the managing boards), this federal trade union had no practical purpose, and their only work was securing volume discounts on department stores, entertainment, transportation, vacations, etc.

        I wouldn’t be surprised if the Chinese trade unions operated under similar constraints.

    1. As mentioned below, there is the All-China Federation of Trade Unions.

      It is difficult to objectively assess the level of independence of this organisation (and all the individual trade unions under its umbrella) in the bureaucratic opacity of China, but at least on paper, its purpose is to represent workers.

  2. “The investment in Didi Chuxing is an unusual one for Apple, which typically swallows smaller companies whole,”

    Apple doesn’t have the time or desire to try and run a company like this.
    This way the company runs itself.

  3. Protection money. Youse guys got real nice factories here, be a real shame if something were to happen to them.

    Remember that the Chinese made the original spaghetti.

Reader Feedback

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