Tim Cook says Warren Buffett’s investment shows that Apple isn’t really a tech company anymore

“Berkshire Hathaway’s major investment in Apple shows that Warren Buffett understands the iPhone maker is really a consumer products company at its core rather than a technology company, Apple CEO Tim Cook told CNBC,” Matthew J. Belvedere reports for CNBC.

“‘[Buffett] has been very clear, he didn’t invest in technology companies and companies he didn’t understand. He’s been totally clear with that. And so he obviously views Apple as a consumer company,’ Cook told CNBC’s Becky Quick in an interview that aired Monday,” Belvedere reports. “‘We believe that technology should be in the background, not the foreground, and that technology should empower people to do things and help them do things they couldn’t do otherwise,’ said Cook, who attended this weekend’s Berkshire shareholders meeting in Omaha, Nebraska, for the first time.”

“As sales growth of its hardware business slows, Apple has been growing its services,” Belvedere reports. “While discussing what it means to have Berkshire in Apple’s corner, Cook said Buffett’s faith in the company ‘seemed like recognition’ of this continuing evolution.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: With Buffett leading the way, perhaps the market will finally begin to understand Apple is not just “the iPhone maker.”

Berkshire Hathaway’s Warren Buffett: ‘I like our Apple holdings very much’ – May 6, 2019
Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway Apple holdings up over $10 billion this year – May 3, 2019

[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Fred Mertz” for the heads up.]


  1. while it’s good that many are recognizing the value of Apple’s services and other products than the iPhone, the word Cook said that made me nervous was “Consumer”. I desperately want Apple to be the PRIMARY supplier of PCs, tablets and phones to BUSINESSES.

    1. I believe Apple is too secretive a company to be an enterprise-type company. Most businesses like to know ahead of time what they’re getting into. Apple’s upgraded products are quite spotty when it comes to time schedules. I would love to see Apple conquer the enterprise as it would give the stock some decent stability, but I don’t think that will ever happen. Apple remains a consumer-oriented company and it won’t likely change. Price-wise, Apple will never be competitive enough and will simply let other companies steal their market share without a fight.

      Apple appears to have this arrogant attitude of if a potential customer doesn’t want to pay what Apple asks, then they should take a hike. An enterprise company should be flexible and bargain. That’s definitely not Apple. Anyway, that’s how I see it.

      I’m happy Buffett openly supports Apple but he’s just one out of many big investors and most big investors wouldn’t touch Apple with a ten-foot pole. Most would rather go with Facebook, Amazon or Microsoft as sure winners.

      1. Three sure fire winners whose 2018 profits COMBINED for less than 85% of Apple’s profits last year – and that’s with Apple being run like shit, according to many posters here. Just what kind of losers are running those three?

    2. “I desperately want Apple to be the PRIMARY supplier of PCs, tablets and phones to BUSINESSES.”
      What does that even mean? To sell better than Windows or Android (not happening) or to primarily focus on businesses (a small market when compared to ‘pretty much everyone else’)?

      1. What this means is I want Apple to put a heavy priority on selling to businesses. This does NOT mean they should neglect the private/individual customer. To do this, as stated above by Danox, YOU MUST BUILD THE HARDWARE THAT BUSINESSES WANT TO BUY. This could be as simple as a corporate Mac Mini with ports and upgradability. Or a screaming Mac Pro. However, Apple also MUST state they want to sell to businesses and will support the business market for the LONG TERM including an update/upgrade schedule. They must produce Pro machines that customers will buy.

        I see the new iMac and the iMac Pro as machines that businesses would by IF they each had a door on the back for upgrading the RAM and storage and to make the fans easy to clean. (Remember, offices as WAY more dusty than homes).

        It’s attention to detail I want from Apple. I want this because I KNOW Apple Macs are WAY more productive than Windows machines with almost none of the BS that Windows inflicts on users.

        1. If the last few conference I’ve been to are indicative, there’s a whole lotta businesses that want to buy MacBook Pros. And, speaking for the guys that have to SUPPORT users, the LAST thing they want them to have is ANYTHING upgradable or configurable, that’s just one more thing for a user to foul up. In most companies, they just swap our your current laptop with the next available model… and I say laptop because MOST business and professional users are using laptops. There’s a case to be made for a Mac Mini, but, then we’re talking about a much smaller percentage of businesses.

          “Pro machines that customers will buy”
          And, then, considering Mac Pros, they’re a single digit percent of all Mac systems sold, and that’s in a good year.

  2. So now we’re re-defining “tech”, what difference does it make, between “services” and ‘tech”….. ??

    Until Apple stops making iPhones, Macs. and iPads and starts making washers, dishwashers and widgets that us no tech, they are a tech company. and the “services” they provide require “hi-tech” solutions and support…

    What does it accomplish to to try and re-classify Apple as not a tech company?

    1. Re-classifying Apple as a no-tech company is simply a trick to try to fool big investors. It’s sort of silly but Apple has to keep trying to hide that their iPhone business is rapidly failing. It’s just a form of marketing trickery to sell Apple stock. I’m not sure it’s really fooling anyone, though. Apple’s P/E is still the same weak P/E, so no big investors are buying into it the ruse. I keep hoping that Apple might actually pull off some magical hardware product, but I know that’s really just a long-shot. The reality is that with Steve Jobs long gone, such a thing happening is quite unlikely while Tim Cook is CEO.

        1. What is the purpose of services profit if Apple doesn’t reinvest it in amazing new products? I can live happily without rental music, Apple branded GS credit cards, and cloud subscription.

          Pandering to billionaires is silly when Apple doesn’t need a dime of new investment. What Apple need is a reason for me to visit its stores to buy a new Mac. How about a consumer headless mini tower with multiple drive bays that costs half of a trashcan?

  3. Tim Cook needs to go to Wikipedia and update it for the record, because according to Wikipedia.org, when you search “Apple, Inc.”, the following first sentence of the first paragraph reads:

    “Apple Inc. is an American multinational technology company headquartered in Cupertino, California, that designs, develops, and sells consumer electronics, computer software, and online services. It is considered one of the Big Four of technology along with Amazon, Google, and Facebook”

Reader Feedback

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