This is a great test of whether you "get" Apple. A lot of comments about what Apple should be doing, like how to take more market share from Android or Windows, actually make zero sense for Apple. This one actually does make sense.<p>The right kind of perspective on this is -- and it will make some people apoplectic -- future cars are like iPads with wheels. They both are basically giant batteries with very sophisticated software and well crafted interfaces. Apple has the engineering organization to deliver those key things along with a certain approach to integrating services, sales and support. What they're missing is the automotive engineering and that's something Tesla has done a great job of building up.<p>The price would be unusually high for an Apple acquisition but only in absolute terms. What makes it an "Apple-y" acquisition target is that it's an engineering piece of a much larger system, the "iPad on wheels", where the real future value is.<p>That is why Jobs was confident an Apple car would take 50% of the market. Not by building a better mousetrap but by redefining the product category.
Apple is such an absolutely massive company, but Musk makes them look so small. On the one hand, Apple has more brand recognition and cash than God. On the other hand, when you spend your time dreaming about electric cars, rockets, and hyperloops... who would want to play with laptops?<p>Musk plays the game on an entirely different level.<p>I think Sergey Brin understands this. Google is playing on that level. Self-driving cars, robotics, machine learning, Google Glass, augmented reality, NLP, etc.<p>The future will be a different world, and while Apple shaped much of the last 20 years, I'm afraid that time is over.
I'm not seeing the synergies - the in-dash entertainment center having similar styling just isn't cutting it for me. That sort of thing would be more suited for a partnership kind of deal.
I was really hoping Microsoft would, and make Elon Musk CEO of Microsoft (back when they were looking still).<p>Musk is a Microsoft fan. Microsoft would get a much-needed visionary, and Tesla (and other initiatives) would get a much-needed cash infusion.<p>I don't think Musk/Tesla would fit in at Apple. Apple already has enough "vision". I can't see him wanting to answer to anyone, and I can't see Apple giving him the reigns from Tim Cook (like the article agrees with).
I don't see Musk working well within the structure Tim Cook would need to create in order for Tim to keep his job. I think it would be a huge mistake for Tesla.<p>Plus, the kind of manufacturing and operations Tesla is looking at is something Apple would be just as inexperienced with, and still might not work out.<p>To me, it would make sense for a Detroit company to buy Tesla. Older group cannibalizes younger while letting them retain overall independence. Car brands have done that before.
Is it possible the meetings were about batteries?<p>Tesla is going to start making their own batteries.
Apple uses a lot of batteries.<p><a href="http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_24531612/tesla-motors-may-make-its-own-batteries" rel="nofollow">http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_24531612/tesla-motors...</a>
What? No! Of course they shouldn't.
There's such a small overlap of core competencies that it makes it very hard for Apple to tell if they're getting a good deal or not. That should be enough of a reason for them to think twice.
All of this speculation reminds me of the AOL/Time warner or Skype/Ebay mergers. They were lauded as revolutionary at the time, but eventually fell apart when the companies discovered they had nothing in common. So will it be with Apple/Tesla, in my opinion.
If Apple wants to make a big, high profile investment that's aligned much better with their core business, they should buy an ISP/Mobile Network like Verizon or AT&T. Then they could shake up both sectors by cutting prices & encouraging competition.
If Apple bought Tesla...<p>-The car would only have one pedal, not two, to make it easier for new drivers.<p>-It won't have Windows.<p>-The navigation would use Apple Maps.
Ah, very clever, omitting the question mark at the end of the title, thereby avoiding the imperatives of Betteridge's Law by technicality.<p>EDIT: And I see the actual article title got around the law in a different way, by asking the question such that the answer "No" is nonsensical! Still, I like the sound of that exchange:<p>Writer: What if Apple bought Tesla?
Me: NO
OH FOR Christ Sake.<p>Are all these Journalist really that much of an idiot? Or do they try to sell a new Steve Jobs to the world.<p>Elon Musk is not Steve Jobs, Far from it. Not saying this as good thing or a bad thing. But for those area that Steve Jobs are genius at, Elon Musk doesn't even earn pass marks.<p>Lei Jun , CEO of Xiaomi, I mean WTF, Steve Jobs of China?
I admit Lei Jun is good in things Steve Jobs aren't very good it. But again, no Lei Jun is not another Steve Jobs.
Apple does have interest in cars. Last year Apple patented Car Dashboard touchscreens.
<a href="http://mashable.com/2013/07/18/apple-car-dashboard-patent/" rel="nofollow">http://mashable.com/2013/07/18/apple-car-dashboard-patent/</a>
Excellent, excellent and, dare I say, excellent idea!!!<p>Other excellent 'OMG tht wud b 2 awsum' dynamic synergy takeover/purchase ideas:<p>1) Santa Claus buys Disney<p>2) Comcast buys Time Warner<p>3) Superman buys Spiderman<p>4) Peter GriffIn buys statue of Gwyneth Paltrow making out with Harriet Tubman
It would go bankrupt within a couple of years.<p>Tesla survives because of government incentives but if you were to invest private money on it, research would eat most of it in the blink of an eye.