Not to be grammar police, but either this guy is allergic to his "s" key or he thinks Apple is plural. The tile of the post, "But Apple make fewer acquisitions", "Apple over-invest in their supply chain", Apple pay a significant portion" makes me think that he thinks the plural for Apple is Apple.
Which is really intriguing in light of the Citizen's United court case and our general promotion of the concept of corporate personhood. That a corporation is its own entity rather than a representation of the interests and rights of the people who run it.
People keep saying that the Supreme Court ruled, in the Citizens United case, that corporations are people. No one has ever actually produced a quote from the court's opinion suggesting so.
In fact, the ruling was precisely that corporations are representations of the rights of their owners, and therefore conduits for their owners' exercise of free speech.
How cool, let's dump a bunch of downvotes on something because we disagree with one part of it.
The point was that it's interesting that American English treats a corporation as a single entity but British English treats it plurally (i.e. as a proxy for the people controlling it).
