No, it doesn't, but this did NOT happen in a vacuum. The Lawsuit was settled and the agreement to buy the $150 million in preferred stock INCLUDES the requirement that the cross agreements SETTLING that lawsuit must be included before the sale could be completed. It was a REQUIREMENT of the sale... not an option.
There is a section in their SEC 10Q/K reports titled "LITIGATION". Check your facts. There is nothing mentioned of material regarding a settlement with Microsoft.
The litigation section has always been used to report potential liabilities to Apple... not litigation instigated by Apple. In this instance Apple sued Canyon for passing on Apple IT, The suit later brought in both Microsoft and Intel as defendants when discovery showed that both were aware of the infringement and agreed to it. This suit was dropped by Apple when Microsoft agreed to buy the stock and cross license the patents. The terms of the licenses were sealed... and therefore could not be revealed. Apple won.
For you, fact that Apple would require consideration from Microsoft (i.e. $'s) to get access to Apple's IP and make IE the default browser on Macs, is proof that this is a settlement? You said (in an oddly worded sentence):
the agreement to buy the $150 million in preferred stock INCLUDES the requirement that the cross agreements SETTLING that lawsuit must be included before the sale could be completed. It was a REQUIREMENT of the sale... not an option.That statement is about as credible as your previous statement on Cash and Depreciation:
Depreciation is never allowed to be considered CASH... and it isn't liquid by any means... no matter how much you want to pretend that's where Apple's cash was located. ... You're blowing smoke.I'm afraid I gave you way too much credit for understanding and interpreting financial statements! Have you ever taken an accounting class? At least I got a good laugh out of your ignorance of the topic (no offense Mr. snarky). If you think that I'm blowing smoke, then I'd say you've been hitting the bong a bit too much. Go look at the cash flow statement that I posted previously, or click here to see Apple's Cash Flow Statement that covers 1995 - 97, and pay special attention to the words "Depreciation and amortization". Yep, it's a component of Total Cash that then shows up as one Cash amount in the Balance Sheet. Sheeh!Exactly where does the negative amount for depreciation enter into CASH? Let's look at the 10Q assets:
And your statement on revenue recognition (revrec) is a hoot:
"In addition, some reports indicate that Microsoft had to pay up to $2 billion to Apple in licensing fees over the next five years... and Apple's books seem to show that kind of income coming from undisclosed sources."Perhaps you didn't know this, but it's illegal to hide revenue, loans, and selling of equity from the SEC and IRS. So your statement is complete nonsense!
The simple fact is that you are either misreading or misconstruing something here. The filings DO NOT say what you are asserting. There are preliminary documents pertaining to the terms of the Equity agreement that need to be executed first - it's NOT stipulating that a LAWSUIT must be settled first.
Don't believe me, here's what Apple said about the deal:
In August 1997, the Company and Microsoft entered into patent cross licensing and technology agreements. In addition, for a period of five years from August 1997 as subject to certain limitations related to the number of Macintosh computers sold by the Company, Microsoft will make future versions of its Microsoft Office and Internet Explorer products for the Mac OS, and the Company will bundle the Internet Explorer product with Mac OS system software releases and make that product the default Internet browser for such releases. While the Company believes that its relationship with Microsoft has been and will continue to be beneficial to the Company and to its efforts to increase the installed base for the Mac OS, the Microsoft relationship is for a limited term and does not cover many of the areas in which the Company competes with Microsoft, including the Windows platform. Accordingly, Microsoft's interest in producing application software for the Mac OS not covered by the relationship or upon expiration of the relationship may be influenced by Microsoft's perception of its interests as the vendor of the Windows operating system. In addition, the Microsoft relationship may have an adverse effect on, among other things, the Company's relationship with other partners. There can be no assurance that the benefits to the Company of the Microsoft relationship will not be offset by the disadvantages.There it is in black-and-white for all of you Apple Juice drinkers to ignore:
"Microsoft will make future versions of its Microsoft Office and Internet Explorer products for the Mac OS."What can be more clear - MS WILL OFFER OFFICE and IE ON THE MAC, it GIVES MS BROWSER PREEMINENCE, it DOES NOT COVER WINDOWS....and...
"the Company will bundle the Internet Explorer product with Mac OS system software releases and make that product the default Internet browser for such releases"
...and...
"does not cover many of the areas in which the Company competes with Microsoft, including the Windows platform"
P.S. You should seriously consider taking some remedial accounting classes. Just a thought Mr. Snarky...