[ffgjgf1]

> they won't have any official presence, period.

So they’d lose 20% of their global revenue just out of spite? Can you name a single rational reason why’d they do that?

> Or bypass

How? They won’t be able to sell directly to EU customers…

> Re-read the comment in context.

It just doesn’t make any sense. Apple wouldn’t be able to sell to clients in the EU on a large scale. It just wouldn’t work due to perfectly obvious reasons.

[DEADMINCE]

> So they’d lose 20% of their global revenue just out of spite? Can you name a single rational reason why’d they do that?

If EU fines exceed EU revenue.

> How? They won’t be able to sell directly to EU customers…

The EU would have to police its own citizens from going outsize their walls and buying iPhones from literally any other country.

> It just doesn’t make any sense. Apple wouldn’t be able to sell to clients in the EU on a large scale.

So it made sense, and you understood fine, you just disagreed and decided to be obtuse about it. Sigh.

The point was simply that the EU can't touch a company in another country with no presence in the EU, even if EU citizens are buying from it.

All they can do is try and block payments to it, firewall it off, and similar things.

So sure, the EU could police its citizens buying iPhones online, but that's going to be an awful lot of work considering all the third party sellers, and I don't think it would be terribly successful. Not without enforcement which would be extremely unpopular.

[ffgjgf1]

> If EU fines exceed EU revenue

They won’t. Also you’re assuming that Apple’s management is irrational and petulant, because if not it should be “if the cost of compliance with EU regulations exceeds their EU revenue/net income” which isn’t going to be even remotely true.

> obtuse about it

Not at all. It’s just that this seems fairly obvious to me:

A very small fraction of people buying iPhones in Europe now would buy them if they had to ship them from outside the EU, pay the VAT themselves and have no warranty/support.

So sure it won’t be 100%, just 80-90% which doesn’t change anything

[DEADMINCE]

> They won’t.

You're awfully cocksure with nothing to back it up.

Apple's global revenue in 2023 was about 120 billion. EU revenue was 24 billion. DMA allows fines up to 10% of global revenue. Two max fines under the DMA is already more than their EU profit.

> Also you’re assuming that Apple’s management is irrational and petulantv

I'm not the one making an assumption here. I'm saying if x then y which is perfectly reasonable. You're saying x would *NEVER* happen, which I would consider foolish.

I think Apple will comply with the EU to a point, I agree they are not trying to leave the EU at all. But ultimately they are still a US company and follow US leadership, who may want to do things or try and circumvent EU policies in a way they think are fine, but the EU doesn't.

I mean, there was already a clash with their first fine, it won't be surprising if more come.

I also really think you are being dismissive and downplaying their decision to not enter the AI market in the EU.

> It’s just that this seems fairly obvious to me:

> A very small fraction of people buying iPhones in Europe now would buy them if they had to ship them from outside the EU, pay the VAT themselves and have no warranty/support.

> So sure it won’t be 100%, just 80-90% which doesn’t change anything

I'm so confused at what point you are making here. You're saying EU citizens, if Apple left the EU, would just, and to quote "ship them from outside the EU, pay the VAT themselves and have no warranty/support."

Is this correct? Because that has been specifically the point I was making. Jesus. My point though, to clarify again, is if they do that, Apple won't be subject to any EU rules. All those iPhones bought outside the EU won't have 3rd party app stores, for example, and the EU would be powerless to enforce that. Seriously. That's the point I made several comments ago that you decided to dispute. Which now you are making yourself?