[prewett]

In addition to anti-trust problems, why would Apple want a capital intensive, low-margin, commodity business? Verizon has a net profit margin of about 13%, Apple is currently about twice that. Furthermore, Apple makes computers (the iPhone being a pocket computer using the cell network instead of wired or Wi-fi). Managing millions of cell towers would be diluting their focus into a low-margin, commodity business, away from their high-margin luxury hardware/software engineering business. In fact, Apple commodified the cell networks into dumb pipes for data. Apple benefits by being on any/all networks. (See: commodify your complement [1])

(The rumored Apple self-driving car, if true, was also a silly idea. Aside from self-driving cars being an order of magnitude or two more difficult than popularly expected, building cars is not something Apple has any experience with, and is a capital-intensive business with little barrier to entry [besides capital]. Buffett noted that totaled since their beginning until now, car companies and airlines have, on net, lost money for their investors.)

[1] https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2002/06/12/strategy-letter-v/

[basch]

>Managing millions of cell towers would be diluting their focus

Somewhat disagree. If you stuck Apple and ATT into a single holding company, each company still has identical focus. Does Berkshire Hathaway buying another company dilute the focus of any other?

I am always surprised when companies want to eliminate small divisions and projects that break even as if they cant just exist off to the side, pay for themselves, and be otherwise ignored. Not everything has to contribute to corporate profit. Resources that pay for themselves aren't consumed in a way that can be reallocated if they are eliminated.

[PaulHoule]

The puzzle of capitalism is that a company that won't spend to expand their network will happily spend $15 billion to buy a competitor.

As a worker you're mainly concerned about how many dollars you get for an hour of work, a capitalist is concerned about the return they get on investment -- they want to invest as little as possible but get as large a return as possible.

A consequence of that is that a huge valuation like what Apple has is a bit of a bluff. If they really started to invest that capital their valuation would collapse, their capital looks valuable because they can run a big business while using very little of it.