Based on three things:

1) Various facts with regard to AMaps quality (fit and finish) vs GMaps quality. Knowledge of licensing terms [1] and the fact that 2012 is 5 years after 2007 (introduction of the iPhone [2]).

2) Interviews with Google executives over the various Android lawsuits and tweets from Andy Rubin amongst others.

3) The "make money now" mantra that has swept through Google cancelling dozens of projects and creating pricing models for the ones that remain (AppEngine, Maps, Etc.)

So like any good investigator one looks at what is known, and what is not known, and trys to come up with a series of steps that would lead to the observed outcome (in this case crappy maps on the iPhone). You can classify those in the range from "more likely" to "less likely".

So for example a theory that "Google Maps are no longer on the iPhone because Apple forgot to renew their license." would seem improbable, putting together something as complex as the iPhone doesn't allow for 'forgetting' such things. A theory that "Apple couldn't get a license" also fails the sniff test as Google clearly licenses things to folks all the time, they have a revenue model for that and as a publicly traded company they generally don't "not take revenue" when its possible to do so effectively. So if you get to the point in your reasoning that Apple could get a license if they wanted to, and Google could give them that license if they wanted to. Then you are left looking at a failed negotiation. I've participated in both successful and unsuccessful negotiations like these, its like many things where the details or scale may be different but the basic steps share a lot of similarities.

That leaves us speculating on how the negotiations failed.

Given how badly the AMaps product (as shipped) is in comparison to the GMaps product, clearly Google was in a fairly strong negotiating position. Given Apple's free cash flow and assets (remember they made more profit last quarter than Google made in all revenue) they clearly could afford to pay a pretty arbitrary price. The simplest answer (which for me makes it the most likely) is that Apple was unwilling to meet the terms Google set for licensing.

So you (Tichy) have posed variations on this question to a number of people on a number of threads here but I've yet to see any reasoning you might have for why you don't believe this is the case. I realize it is implied by the snark but not actually expressed as a dissenting opinion. I'd love to hear your reasoning on it if you are free to share it. I note in a sister comment you mention 'revoke' the license, I don't think Google did any such thing, I believe the license expired and it was up for renewal, it was the renewal that failed to materialize.

[1] "Our license to include the YouTube app in iOS has ended, customers can use YouTube in the Safari browser and Google is working on a new YouTube app to be on the App Store," explains Apple in a brief statement to The Verge. -- http://www.maclife.com/article/news/apple_ios_youtube_licens...

[2] "iPhone also includes Google Maps, featuring Google’s groundbreaking maps service and iPhone’s amazing maps application, offering the best maps experience by far on any pocket device. Users can view maps, satellite images, traffic information and get directions, all from iPhone’s remarkable and easy-to-use touch interface. " -- https://www.apple.com/pr/library/2007/01/09Apple-Reinvents-t...