Tick-Tock, Tick-Tock

April 12

Well enough about NeXT and Steve Jobs' past, and on to Apple's future - or lack thereof. Well lessie what the papers and CNBC have to report. Well the second Quarter numbers are in and of course I more than just suppose, that the MacComerades are jumping up and down in their respective Red Square. Apple posted another minor profit - 55 million in fact. This IS nice in the face of the 780 million they lost a year ago granted. But with a total revenue shortfall of .25 billion dollars from that same quater a year ago you're looking at more voo-doo economics that bascially poses more questions than Apple has answers for. Obviously the surgical strikes on their employee base - on the order of entire groups, as well as attrition rates assumed by the dismanteling of the Newton Group as well as Claris - can be called "focus" one one hand. But on the other hand, you're looking at minor profit levels from the increadbile shinking Apple Computer. Even the minor increase in unit sales doesn't really do much for me, because like NeXT's sales figures when they went from one processor type to another - they were selling to the current installed base instead of increasing market share. And since the last available numbers, about Apple's user base, still showed nearly a 50% across the board fall in marketshare - the boxes they shipped in the current 2nd quarter - were almost certainly to those still clinging to the tree of Apple. I'll be more interrested in the units shipped when IDC shows the numbers as they translate to marketshare. If the future is as consistant as anything of the most recent past, then it's almost a certainty that the above theory will ring true. In the meantime, I'll grant Apple their modest millions in quarterly profit - for two solid quarters in a row no less - IMAGINE THAT - and wonder how many billions will shrink in revenue before they get back into serious profitability. Personally, I wonder if we're seeing NeXT Computer Inc., switching to NeXT software Inc., version 2.0 - or worse - Warner Atari changing into Trammel Atari. If it's the later of the two - be afraid - be very afraid.

April 13
There's been chatter in the pop-press as well as the BBBS section (and you think I wasn't watching while I was on vacation? ho ho!) about how Compaq's numbers and Apple's numbers compare for their respective quarterly results. Well, interresting as they might seem, you've bascially got one company that is chopping off limbs left and right - compared to one that is buying out the likes of Digital, and is a major player in the Wintel market. I'm more interrested in the fact that you probably won't be seeing any "slam" ads from Apple against Compaq anytime soon - at least one would hope - since Compaq has the Alpha chip on their gun-rack which still blows the G3's out of the water by a ratio of magnitudes. Of course, you can say that this is splitting hairs - and to a certain extent it is. But the upshot is, Compaq is holding a hell of a lot of cards in their hands, and geekspecs are just a few of them. Number flukes aside, the bigger question is which company has a future that needs tweaking to take advantage of current equity, and which company is trying to pull out of a nose-dive and re-invent itself with technology that is otherwise in synch to the marketplace as it now stands. Even SGI is now going with Intel processors for the future - as well as NT. This means SGI is becoming a high-end Wintel manufacturer to save face and maintain it's position, pulling a profit margin out of it's hat, while making the transition from niche provider of tech - to one of high-end relevance. One wonders if Apple has the balls to do likewise. Somehow between Steve Jobs' ego, and the ball and chain of NeXT's legacy code hanging around their neck - I seriously doubt it. The fact is, no mater what Steve Jobs says about competition and enemies not being it's forte in it's plans for future success - they just can't avoid going it alone as the market reaches out for standardization and a good cheap powerful experience in computers. Compaq has known this from day one, and has never deviated from it. Apple has always been an outsider, and when the market shifted focus from a split tower of babble with Apple, Atari, Amiga/Commodore, to one comprised of IBM/Wintel, you found Apple sitting NOT so pretty. It's not a numbers game anymore. It's one of client seats, and musical chairs. And for the time being it looks like Apple's left standing. It's only a matter of time before they fall.

April 14

As much as Apple hates the media, and often blames them for it's woes in true Rush Limbaugh childishness, you have to love the Wall Street Journal. In a single article they can provide - and did provide - enough soundbites to empasize an entire week's worth of critique from yours truly. So of course I'm going to. Well lessie - what do we have here? WSJ 04_16_98: Industry analyst Mazzucilelii with GMK & Co., NY, - quote - "This quarter doesn't anwer yet if they can regain growth". Well no kidding when their overall earnings shrinkage puts them down to the level of a 6 billion a year revenue company - down from an 11 billion dollar a year company circa 95. In less than 3 years, Apple is now officially half the company they used to be. The problem with this life-boat drill in progress, is that they may have to bail water faster than the market will bear. If their market continues to shrink as it seems to be doing, they're going to have to "focus" - aka:hack and slash - more than 40% of their enterprise to survive. The problem with this aproach is that it puts them into a painfully long death scenario, ala Atari or NeXT circa 1994, where survival is not declaring bankrupcy - but instead having a few workers to answer the phone. This is NOT how to support a few million users who are just waitiing for an excuse to migrate away from your platform. Not only that - but if you're going to cut equity to match lower overall earnings, you're playing a deadly game that can catch up very fast in the balance sheet. When you get down to a certain size you're basically pushing operational overhead down the throat of slim margins of profitability. With earnings per quarter down to the double digits it doesn't take much to push them back into serious red-line if forecasts are off by a nanometer. 55 million profit out of more than a billion in sales. That's not a gain, that's called keeping your head above water. If that's how slim their cutting it now, it's going to be hell and high water before they make anything close to a serious turnaround. I just wonder if they can tread it for as long as it takes before they end up drowning.

April 15

More lovely soundbites from the WSJ. Eric Lewis of the International Data Corporation fame, a former cheerleader group for Steve Jobs in past days, had this to say about Apple's current tardiness in the sub 1K computer market -quote - "It's a significant negative for Apple to yet tackle the sub 1K market because this has opened it up for the competition". Well, duh! I don't know about you, but this little writing exercise in quoting, is just more than a few observations that the rest of the industry has been slow to catch onto for quite some time. The difference is I'm not being paid at all - let alone at the levels old Eric is being paid. Hey Eric! How about a little sugar for the clock?! What's echoed in this soundbite, is the same thing I've been saying for weeks - which is - why the hell is Apple, now of all times for godsake, stalling on getting it's act together for this market segment? I mean even the still to come Artemis "educational" line is still well above the 1K mark, which is why their educational marketshare is plummiting. I've said that before and of course before the week is out I'm sure I'm going to be saying it again. For you literary types out there - I'm foreshadowing. The only thing I can chalk it up to is either Apple can't afford to play with the big boys and their slim (ie: affordable) profit margins, or Apple is a greedy bunch of fuckwits

April 16

Fred Anderson - of Apple CFO fame - had this to say in the WSJ - quote "we don't see any meaningful growth until December". One takes several things away from this brief but meaningful soundblte. First, he's admitting the obvious that even the MacCommrades won't, Apple is struggling for it's life. Second, talking about the December quarter is a safe forcast that won't scare investors - since if you can't sell shit in December - then you shouldn't be selling shit at all. The other less obvious bit of the equation is this. In the face of Steve Jobs and his rampaging machine of PR hype and bluster, to even tip the scale just a bit in the range of a negative comment, means one of two things. A - Freddy isn't succumbing to the Steve Jobs reality distortion field. B - Apple is facing potential lawsuits from investors if they start bullshitting too much. An endless parade of nonsense is fine when you're a private company called NeXT with a dingbat at the helm. But when you're under SEC litigation status, you'd better tip the cards or there's going to be hell to pay if your forecast is too far from reality. This is something that drives the Macjihad out of their tiny skulls whenever they get bad press, because the press is usually a result of publically disclosed numbers. Something they tend to forget when they're choking your ISP with spam daily - or worse spamming anyone else out there who says something contrary to incessant joy-joy crap - ala the EvangaList. I wonder if Fred is going to be spammed into the ground by his own people? I wouldn't rule it out. I'm sure Steve was gritting his teeth just a tad when he actually verbally pointed out the obvious about Apple's status.

April 17

It's been mentioned in a couple of editorial asides that the "Think Different" campeign has been aped/knocked off by people like ABC and C-Net in their own content (like the TV show Ellen for instance). The editorials then go on, about whether this was some kind of validation for Apple or an example of a successful campeign or not - tawdry sundries of imitation being flattery and all that. Really, it's not that deep. Most of the advertising fluff out there that has high media numbers on it - like 100 frigging plus million on it - get's mimed by someone else - all the way down to cheesy used car dealers. The point being, if you really want to go deep on something so insignificant, try this one on for trivial size. The first equity builder using "Think" as far as the computer biz is concerned is IBM. They used "Think" as a mantra for decades. So much so in fact, that their entire notebook line is based on the word. The curious upshot, in the advertising and marketing scheme of knockoffs and cheesy non-origonality, is Apple's mantra an ironic gesture apeing IBM? You're welcome to go there, but I won't, for reasons of taste and better arguments to dredge up. But you're welcome to. Actually, if you're wonton to asides, what really annoys me is - recently - a Sun Microsystems executive refered to the "Think Different" campeign with the remark "Think Again" in reference to Apple's wayward status. Hey, I've got the lock on that mantra from many months ago - you bastards. Get your own damn catch phrase.

April 18

In another WSJ aside it was mentioned that the CEO search is on the indefinite back-burner according to Apple executives. Another relevation from nowhereland. Dammit, with "newsleads" like this, you have to wonder if Apple is just pissing in the wind, or what, for soundbites. Obviously there's never going to be a serious candidate that is going to work well with Jobs, aside from his zelots. And sorry to say, that Jobs has pretty much run the gammut for yes-men that will take the slot and boost the stock valuation of Apple with anything credible resumewise. Unless he pulls another Sculley "soda water" dare, to someone with Steve's knack for being a conniving son-of-a-bitch, nothing is going to change soon with the CEO slot. And lord knows, I think Steve is all too aware or paranoid to let another Sculley in that knows enough about the way the business world works, and would remove Jobs at the first heartbeat. Steve's in it for the long haul - like a tennacious pit-bull that got it's rag doll back and won't let go. It's not just stubborness, it's not just irony, it's not ego - it's all of these things and more.