[themacguffinman]

What's the added risk here? It's fine to "risk" almost the entire iPhone itself to be manufactured in China but the servers for some random AI features need to be pure?

Sounds more like technical marketing and the company will treat any decisions around it as a marketing exercise.

[roughly]

Apple's commented previously on why they build in China, and it's beyond just the pricing - the supply chain for every single part they use is in China and mostly in the same geographic region, so there's a level of flexibility there they couldn't get in the US. It wouldn't surprise me if it was genuinely a goal for Apple to manufacture more in the US - they're a notoriously privacy-focused (corporate, not end-user) company, and China's known for IP wandering its way off campus. They're not going to sacrifice the iPhone economics until the US option is actually viable, but I'm not surprised they keep kicking the tires on US manufacturing.

[Reason077]

> "the supply chain for every single part they use is in China"

Not entirely true. Some of the highest value components in an iPhone, including the CPU/SoC, baseband, and the majority of OLED displays, are sourced from countries that are not mainland China.

[lttlrck]

You clipped off

> and mostly in the same geographic region

[nimish]

> They're not going to sacrifice the iPhone economics until the US option is actually viable, but I'm not surprised they keep kicking the tires on US manufacturing.

Apple could, with its immense cash hoard and cash flow, _make_ the US viable, but it chooses not to because it'd rather take the easy way out and have China or India or $COUNTRY fund it and return money to shareholders. They've returned money to shareholders rather than invest it in US operations, by design.

This is a classic feint to protect Tim Cook's entire raison detre. He built his career on super high efficiency operations by outsourcing to cheap labor countries. It relies on the low-to-no tariff access to US consumer money.

And I don't care that it's better for their stock price; that's Apple's problem not mine as a US citizen. And even as an Apple investor I would rather the money be spent on US on-shore operations.

[seanmcdirmid]

There is no way Apple as a public company could just burn cash getting everything made in the US, shareholders would revolt long before the money ran out.

> And I don't care that it's better for their stock price; that's Apple's problem not mine as a US citizen.

That is the shareholder’s problems. People like to think that their investments won’t go batsh*t insane overnight.

> And even as an Apple investor I would rather the money be spent on US on-shore operations.

Apple doesn’t even make all, or even most of its money in the states. Not all of its shareholders are American, if they went this route they could lose half of their revenue overnight (as other countries note the protectionism and tariff or simply forbid Apple products from being sold).

[nimish]

This is correct if you only care about Apple stock price. But consider that there are people who simply do not care about Apple's stock price. Like me, an Apple investor. I care more about the US's industrial base than I do about whether it goes up 5% or down 5% (or whatever, it's besides the point)

>Apple doesn’t even make all, or even most of its money in the states. Not all of its shareholders are American, if they went this route they could lose half of their revenue overnight (as other countries note the protectionism and tariff or simply forbid Apple products from being sold).

So? I don't care about their revenue, I care about the future of American industry. Having a bunch of cash hoarded by old people is irrelevant if it isn't reinvested in something I care about. And I don't care about your supercar or Nobu reservation, or if some fund returns an extra 2%. This is despite being a direct beneficiary.

Live by shareholder return, die by shareholder return; the US is not and shouldn't ever be geared to shareholder return over everything else. Apple and other companies have freeloaded off the US for far too long.

[seanmcdirmid]

Again, Apple ceases to be much of a company at all if they go your route of being isolationist. It isn't even about the stock price: their revenue tanks, their ability to produce tanks, everything about the company is basically just decimated. You might as well say "I don't care if Apple exists or not". So blow Apple away and how does that help the future of American industry?

Juche doesn't work in North Korea, it isn't going to work in the USA.

[tooltalk]

It's mostly about cost and market access to China.

Most smartphone supply-chain for Samsung and Apple exist outside China -- primarily in Japan (camera, sensors), South Korea (DRAM/NAND, OLED), and the US (various ICs fabbed at TSMC in Taiwan). There are quite a few reliable estimates/teardowns showing that these three countries account for close to about 90% of iPhone BOM (bill of materials). That's one reason why Samsung's smartphone unit was able to pull out of China without much disruption back in 2019 -- ie, low dependence on China.

I feel that Apple has pushed this misleading narrative a bit too long to defend their massive China outsourcing.

[Reason077]

They've actually been diversifying iPhone manufacturing away from China for a few years already. As of April 2024, 14% of all iPhones were already manufactured in India. That's around 30 million phones per year. And Apple plans to double their India manufacturing again by 2028.

[JohnBooty]

So they shouldn't reduce risk anywhere, if they're currently unable to do it on the iPhone?