Apple Now Debt Free, Says Internal Memo

An anonymous reader writes "99mac.se publishes an internal memo from Steve Jobs to Apple employees today. According to the Memo, Jobs states that "Today is a historic day of sorts for our company." Apple used $300 million in cash to pay off the rest of their debt, and is now a debt-free company. A big turnaround from over $1 billion in debt in mid-1997. Also noted in the memo is that Apple has $4.8 billion in the bank at this time." (Since this is not coming straight from Apple, confirmation -- or debunking -- would be helpful.)

Comments

Pre-emptive Mac bashing reply

[veddermatic]

"LOL Macs Suck!!@!!!"

"Yeah, they may be in good financial shape, but they can't play games!"

"LOL, if they'd come out with loganberry colored ones they'd make even more money! LOL!!!@!!!"

Re:Because..

[grecorj]

They didn't make a game console that doesn't make money

If you're referring to MSFT, they have 10x as much cash on hand and no debt.

I'm not sure of the significance here -- any finance prof worth his salt will tell you that there's no difference in how you finance your company (ie, debt, equity).

Re:Addicted to OS X

[DR SoB]

U twit, I knew someone would be stupid enough to post something like this..

Okay, "Until AT Times"-> Guess what you twit, the 286 was released in 1984. Nice try, thanks for coming out.

Also, in 1984 IBM introduced "High Density" disks. 1.2 Megs per 5 1/4. :P That macs your 400K disks seem pretty, well, irrelevant.

"The 68K was a hella lot better chip than the 8086"

Actually your wrong, do to the rate of decent, gravity and all, if I dropped both chips from a building, they would hit the ground at exactly the same time. (Faster in what aspect you RETARD?!)

"weaselnuts"

Did you think of that yourself? It's "lame".

How anyone could think that in 1984 a mac had more power then an IBM PC, still amazes me. Guess these are the same people talking all the crap about the G4 now, huh?

Ohhh, Imac's are sooo cool. Look at the pretty colours.

I guess if your 12 yrs old, Mac's do seem pretty cool.. Kinda like wearing your pants around your ankles.

Late Victorian Holocausts

[meehawl]

The British colonial empire was certainly not a good thing, but it did little permanent damage, at least in India.

Oh yeah? During the later part of the 19th Century the British system of Empire created sociopolitical famines in South America, India, and China that eclipsed any of the death toll numbers of their 20th Century wannabe imitators, such as the Nazis:

Responding to famines in pre-British India, its Moghul rulers embargoed food exports, regulated prices, distributed food for free, and relaxed tax collection. Similarly in the 17th and 18th centuries, the Chinese state managed effective famine relief and flood control systems. But the British state's occupation of India and its Opium and Arrow wars against China destroyed all these systems ... From 1757 to 1947, India's per capita income failed to improve. In the last half of the 19th century, India's income fell by 50%; life expectancy fell by 20% between 1872 and 1921; the population hardly grew. There were 17 serious famines in the 2000 years before British rule, but 31 in the 120 years of British rule. Empire, not Asia's 'immemorial' traditions, or overpopulation, kept India poor ... In times of drought, Britain actually _increased_ taxation and food exports from famine stricken India. He then proves that British imperialists were well aware of the famine, and allowed the policies to continue. Worse still, they offered food relief only in exchange for hard labor, at a caloric ratio slightly worse than that of the Nazi death camp at Buchenwald. By British estimates roughly 20 million Indians died, while their colonial masters spouted racist mantras.

Prodigies

[meehawl]

The British were rich long before colonialism.

That's true, but when you say "rich", you should qualify it to say that British society was characterised by a well-developed, rigid social stratification based on the enslavement and dispossession of the Irish and Scots and their conversion into captive rentiers.

The tactics that worked so well on the Irish and Scots (Plantation, Genocide, Ecological Terraforming) were later expanded by the London capital companies into larger-scale developments in North America and, later, Australia and New Zealand, to create the "neo Europes".

So yes, you're right, they were "rich" before Colonialism emerged as a coherent ideology in the 19th Century.

Most Empires have begun with smaller scale beta projects close to home. Before the Spanish began on their conquest of Central and South America, they spent the best part of a century conquering, then exterminating the indigineous inhabitants of the Canary Islands. Once purged of natives, the Islands were converted into vast monoculture sugar plantations. This strategy was later replicated throughout SPanish (and Portugeuse) dominions.