Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Apple is Investing $1 Billion In SoftBank (yahoo.com)

Posted by msmash on from the $$$ dept.

Apple said Wednesday it plans to invest $1 billion in SoftBank's new technology fund to help finance technologies it could use in the future. From a report: SoftBank has said it is investing at least $25 billion in the fund and has been in talks with Saudi Arabia's Public Investment Fund for an investment that could go up to $45 billion. "We believe their new fund will speed the development of technologies which may be strategically important to Apple," company spokesman Josh Rosenstock told Reuters. SoftBank has also said that it plans to make future large-scale investments via the tech fund, rather than on its own.

20 comments

  1. The Truth About France by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Try thinking about France objectively for a moment. In South Korea, that's all they think about - in fact, they get paid enormous amounts of money to plan how they will take down France without us even knowing.

    Texaco clearly has a secret deal with Youtube-- all videos highlighting the abuses it committed while in France are taken down without explanation.

    Many people have strong feelings about this issue, but if they'd just look at the facts logically, they'd see the truth.

    According to CNN, when 12 distinguished veterans discussed South Korea and Islam at a press conference, they received visits from men claiming to be working with the FBI's âoeInformation Suppressionâ Unit.

    On more than one occasion, the US government has forbidden travelers from France from flying to South Korea, without ever giving a cause.

    One prominent reporter discovered an unmarked surveillance device under his car after he published an article on this topic.

    Do people actually think this is ok? It is time to finally speak out and reveal the truth.

  2. Strategically important by dimethylxanthine · · Score: 1

    Yes, but is it strategically important to the World and the people at large?
    What most companies fail to realise in this day and age (and I'm not pointing the finger at Apple here) is that the age of exploitation is over. And unless those people, companies, entities, with their Corporate Social Responsibilities, especially those with the power to influence vast masses, start putting the priorities of the Planet, which has so far given us the privilege - not right - to exist and be making all that $$$, it ain't going to benefit anyone.

    Just got carried away thinking out loud...

    1. Re:Strategically important by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but is it strategically important to the World and the people at large?

      What most companies fail to realise in this day and age (and I'm not pointing the finger at Apple here) is that the age of exploitation is over. And unless those people, companies, entities, with their Corporate Social Responsibilities, especially those with the power to influence vast masses, start putting the priorities of the Planet, which has so far given us the privilege - not right - to exist and be making all that $$$, it ain't going to benefit anyone.

      Just got carried away thinking out loud...

      Yes, quite carried away. Your exposition is quite naive in thinking that people think in the scope you think they do. The failure to respond has been repeated historically quite a number of times.

      And I think your timing of off by 50+ years, nothing will happen until people are really starving.

    2. Re:Strategically important by FreeUser · · Score: 1

      Yes, quite carried away. Your exposition is quite naive in thinking that people think in the scope you think they do. The failure to respond has been repeated historically quite a number of times.

      And I think your timing of off by 50+ years, nothing will happen until people are really starving.

      Nothing will likely happen until the 0.1% are starving, by which time it will be too late to do anything. The only reason to even hold out what little hope there is, is that people like the grandparent are at least thinking about, and worrying about, these things. If enough do, then real change can happen. Like the outcry that forced the Republicans to back off (at least for now) gutting the House Ethics committee, when the masses do voice their concern, they are heard. Unfortunately we all feel too weak, and too powerless, to make much noise unless things really hit the fan (by which point it is often too late). This is not an accident, and there are very specific reasons we as citizens are constantly made to feel powerless (hint: it benefits those running the show, on whichever side of the aisle).

      --
      The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
    3. Re:Strategically important by pauljlucas · · Score: 1

      ... the age of exploitation is over. And unless those people, companies, entities, with their Corporate Social Responsibilities, especially those with the power to influence vast masses, start putting the priorities of the Planet, which has so far given us the privilege - not right - to exist and be making all that $$$, it ain't going to benefit anyone.

      You know that, at least in the US, the pro-business Republicans now control the Presidency and both houses of Congress, right? The age of exploitation is just getting started. (They even tried to get rid of their own independent ethics board.)

      --
      If you reply, do so only to what I explicitly wrote. If I didn't write it, don't assume or infer it.
  3. Sprint? by zarmanto · · Score: 2

    Potentially interesting context: Softbank owns Sprint. If I were to hazard a guess, I'd say that might well have a great deal to do with Apple's interest in Softbank...

    1. Re:Sprint? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      SoftBank also owns ARM. Although Apple design their own implementations, they're still dependent on the architecture specification.

    2. Re:Sprint? by EvilSS · · Score: 1

      Doubtful. Sprint isn't exactly setting the world on fire these days. Hell if being in the carrier business is the reason, Apple would probably be more influenced by Softbank's Japanese carrier operations. Heck Softbank in Japan has almost as many subscribers as Sprint does in the US (~40 vs ~58 million), in a country with less than half of the US's population.

      --
      I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
    3. Re:Sprint? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I came here to say nearly the same thing, except now, every time Apple pays license fees to ARM nee Softbank's ARM division, they'll get a portion of the money back (1/32 at least)

    4. Re:Sprint? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I used to work for a company that was acquired by (Sprint CEO) Marcelo Claure's previous company (Brightstar); and have had the displeasure and misfortune of meeting and interacting with the man and his inner circle a few times. In this economy and job market, you can take it to the bank that Sprint is hemorrhaging all of its good and talented people; if they're not all gone already. Between the subpar technology, the lack of talent, and the utterly toxic business culture; no way is Sprint the part of Softbank that Apple is interested in.

    5. Re:Sprint? by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      Potentially interesting context: Softbank owns Sprint. If I were to hazard a guess, I'd say that might well have a great deal to do with Apple's interest in Softbank...

      Yeah. If this wee an investment in Softbank. But it's an investment in Softbank's new technology fund

      Much more interesting is Trump's touting of this fond, considering 45% of the money comes from Saudi Arabia, and what he said about the Saudis during his campaign. But then, he has 3 guys from Goldman Sachs in his cabinet. He doesn't seem to care much about what he said during the campaign.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
  4. Banking fees to go as high as 30% by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    But if you buy apple hardware we can cut the loan down to 20% APR.

  5. SoftBank is not a "bank" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    SoftBank is some kind of technology corporation, so not a bank in the popular sense of the word (memory bank, river bank etc.).

    1. Re:SoftBank is not a "bank" by asylumx · · Score: 1

      I believe they have named themselves after the idea of a "bank of software" very much in the popular sense of the word, which refers to a bank of money. At least that's what they claim on their own website.

    2. Re:SoftBank is not a "bank" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      like sperm bank

  6. And Trump takes another billion $ out of the... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    economy. It's just sad. He was so proud of SoftBank's agreement to create jobs here, but they come with a high cost.

  7. Now I know their strategy... by fubarrr · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Softbank buys everybody, Apple buys softbank. Voila, antitrust rules subverted

  8. Err... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unlike Apple, most of us in the world have of idea who or what SoftBank is, with the possible exception of the Ingress ultra link amp.

  9. Softbank's Pepper Robot by QlooQl · · Score: 1

    Have any of you seen Pepper the Robot? https://www.ald.softbankroboti...

  10. "Investing" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, if "Investing" = "Depositing". In Ireland. In the bank!