[DEADMINCEDOS]

> Let’s not get silly and totally absurd.

Sure, like let's not be silly and absurd and refuse to consider the possibility Apple might leave the EU?

> Also it’s the cost of compliance that has to surpass their profit

Right, but the fines the EU issues are from their global revenue. While I think this is reasonable, for the same reasons it's a problem that the rich can speed and not care about a fine, but it could well be enough for Apple to withdraw.

[ffgjgf1]

Why would Apple willingly choose to lose 20% of their revenue instead of 2%? That’s simply not rational i.e. absurd

[DEADMINCE]

It's only absurd because you chose absurd numbers to use.

Where are you getting that 2% figure from? The entire issue is that EU fines take from global revenue, not EU revenue.

This is very simple. If EU fines are greater than EU revenue, it would be absurd for Apple not to leave.

[ffgjgf1]

> getting that 2% figure from

It’s a rough not very educated estimate of what proportion of their global revenue Apple might lose by complying with the regulations ( I’d personally bet it’s significantly less than that). Do you have a better figure?

[DEADMINCE]

> Do you have a better figure?

Yes, clearly, and I mentioned it numerous times.

Once again, you're just making assumptions. So, all this time you've just assuming the max fines won't apply - that's the entire crux of your argument, right?

As where I've been talking about a situation where the max fines are being imposed.

I really don't think you're reading or keeping the context of the discussion in mind when replying. I have no other explanation for you assuming 2% and asking if I have a better figure in spite of me specifically citing the max fine number as a prerequisite for my scenario numerous times.