or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Bonuses help Apple's Tim Cook earn $59M in 2010, Steve Jobs keeps $1 salary
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Bonuses help Apple's Tim Cook earn $59M in 2010, Steve Jobs keeps $1 salary

post #1 of 74
Thread Starter 
Apple Chief Operating Officer Tim Cook earned a huge pay increase in 2010, thanks to cash bonuses and stock-based compensation, bringing his total earnings to more than $59 million, while CEO Steve Jobs kept his traditional $1 annual salary.

The compensation was revealed on Friday in the company's 2011 Proxy Statement, filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

Last March, Cook, 50, was given a "special award" to recognize his his "outstanding performance" in overseeing the company's day-to-day operations in 2009 when Jobs was on a medical leave of absence. He earned 75,000 restricted shares of AAPL stock, as well as a $5 million discretionary bonus.

Cook earned an annual salary of about $800,000, and added to his $52.3 million in stock awards and $5 million cash bonus, the chief operating officer received a total compensation of $59.1 million in fiscal 2010. It was a huge pay increase for Cook, who earned $1.64 million total in 2009.

Apple's Compensation Committee also determined in September that it was appropriate to increase Cook's base salary from $800,000 to $900,000, a raise that will be reflected in his compensation for the 2011 fiscal year.

Also given a raise last year was Bruce D. Sewell, who took over as Apple's general counsel and senior vice president in 2009. Sewell earned $650,000 in 2010, and will receive a $50,000 pay raise to $700,000 this year.



Not receiving a pay raise was Jobs, who has famously kept an annual salary of $1 per year since he rejoined Apple in 1997. Jobs remains well compensated, however, as he owns about 5.5 million shares of AAPL stock.

"Since rejoining the company in 1997, Mr. Jobs has not sold any of his shares of the Company's stock," the filing reads. "Mr. Jobs holds no unvested equity awards. The Company recognizes that Mr. Jobs's level of stock ownership significantly aligns his interests with shareholders' interests."

Apple's annual shareholder meeting will be held at the company's "Town Hall" (Building 4) at its Cupertino Calif., campus on Feb. 23 at 10 a.m. Pacific Standard Time. Admission to the meeting is allowed to shareholders on a first-come, first-served basis.
post #2 of 74
$59 million? He must kiss the ground that Steve Jobs walks on every day of his life.
post #3 of 74
As an MBA, let me point out having been around and seen many of his type, he didn't do anything remotely to earn this in a "fair" way. Anyone competent could have done what Cook did; Jobs magic is obviously the real reason for Apple's success. It is crazy in corporate America there is such a huge disconnect between what the average worker in a company earns and the top execs. The BOD doesn't answer to the common shareholder anymore. I suppose I could understand him getting $5 million, but $59 million?! Just how much is enough?
post #4 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by cylack View Post

As an MBA, let me point out having been around and seen many of his type, he didn't do anything remotely to earn this in a "fair" way. Anyone competent could have done what Cook did; Jobs magic is obviously the real reason for Apple's success. It is crazy in corporate America there is such a huge disconnect between what the average worker in a company earns and the top execs. The BOD doesn't answer to the common shareholder anymore. I suppose I could understand him getting $5 million, but $59 million?! Just how much is enough?

And how much closer to a Tim Cook level bonus has that MBA gotten you?

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #5 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by cylack View Post

As an MBA, let me point out having been around and seen many of his type, he didn't do anything remotely to earn this in a "fair" way. Anyone competent could have done what Cook did; Jobs magic is obviously the real reason for Apple's success. It is crazy in corporate America there is such a huge disconnect between what the average worker in a company earns and the top execs. The BOD doesn't answer to the common shareholder anymore. I suppose I could understand him getting $5 million, but $59 million?! Just how much is enough?

It is in the character of very few men to honor without envy a friend who has prospered. ~Aeschylus
post #6 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by cylack View Post

As an MBA, let me point out having been around and seen many of his type, he didn't do anything remotely to earn this in a "fair" way. Anyone competent could have done what Cook did; Jobs magic is obviously the real reason for Apple's success. It is crazy in corporate America there is such a huge disconnect between what the average worker in a company earns and the top execs. The BOD doesn't answer to the common shareholder anymore. I suppose I could understand him getting $5 million, but $59 million?! Just how much is enough?

A lot of people think they can do a good job as president of the US too. There is a lot more to the job then you would think. Any plain old MBA isn't going to be a good fit to lead an engineering company. You need to be multi-talented. Remember that Tim is the potential successor to Steve Jobs. He not only knows all of Apple's operations, but he has the right spirit for Apple. His job is his life. It is not like he is some real estate mogul and this money isn't going to support some playboy lifestyle. I'm sure he invests his money in things that create jobs (or in Apple stock). Money is power and I like to see power in the hands of someone like Tim.

Besides, his salary is $800,000. He had a one time bonus of $5 million probably for his role as temporary CEO at the beginning of the year. The rest is stock based compensation. That stock was probably given to him at $80 a share. Apple is now at $334 a share.
post #7 of 74
Now that what I call a bonus

Maybe it should be mandatory for every CEO of a publicly traded corporation to have a salary of $1 and only be compensated with company shares!
post #8 of 74
Having an MBA doesn't make a person a business expert any more than having a teaching degree makes one a great teacher.

What Cook did was amazing. Steve had to leave Apple at a time when it's stock was down to less than $80 a share. Many were afraid Steve would not be coming back because of ongoing health issues. Investors were scared to even invest with Apple at that time.

Cook set up a world-wide manufacturing process that made Apple even stronger than it had been with Steve. The connections he made with so many manufacturing facilities so easily and so readily gave Apple the opportunity it needed to remain healthy while Jobs was away. It also provided the opportunity for Apple to thrive now that Steve is back.

Anyone competent? There might have only been a half a dozen people in the whole world who could have pulled off what he did. Investors didn't panic and Apple has now grown into the number one tech company in the world.

Yes, Apple is Steve's vision, but the highly talented help him pull off that vision.

Cook deserved what he made and there are millions of shareholders who are glad he was as good as he was.
post #9 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by cylack View Post

As an MBA, let me point out having been around and seen many of his type, he didn't do anything remotely to earn this in a "fair" way. Anyone competent could have done what Cook did; Jobs magic is obviously the real reason for Apple's success. It is crazy in corporate America there is such a huge disconnect between what the average worker in a company earns and the top execs. The BOD doesn't answer to the common shareholder anymore. I suppose I could understand him getting $5 million, but $59 million?! Just how much is enough?

i have personally seen and read about so many MBA's at senior exec levels make so many stupid decisions that yes, he does deserve it and probably did a lot of work to earn it.

RIM is a perfect example

SJ might make good design decisions but someone has to turn it into millions of products manufactured on time. it's not like the iphones magically appear once SJ OK's a design
post #10 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by cylack View Post

As an MBA, let me point out having been around and seen many of his type, he didn't do anything remotely to earn this in a "fair" way. Anyone competent could have done what Cook did; Jobs magic is obviously the real reason for Apple's success. It is crazy in corporate America there is such a huge disconnect between what the average worker in a company earns and the top execs. The BOD doesn't answer to the common shareholder anymore. I suppose I could understand him getting $5 million, but $59 million?! Just how much is enough?

I'm mostly with you on this one. There seems to be a big disconnect in a lot of areas concerning wages (ie. sports, entertainment).

But...

If Apple feels that Tim Cook is the guy it needs to succeed then you have to pay the piper or lose that person.

Meaning: Apple doesn't believe that "any" competent person could do Tim's job.
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #11 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by cylack View Post

As an MBA, let me point out having been around and seen many of his type, he didn't do anything remotely to earn this in a "fair" way. Anyone competent could have done what Cook did; Jobs magic is obviously the real reason for Apple's success. It is crazy in corporate America there is such a huge disconnect between what the average worker in a company earns and the top execs. The BOD doesn't answer to the common shareholder anymore. I suppose I could understand him getting $5 million, but $59 million?! Just how much is enough?

And just what would have happened to consumer and investor confidence if they had put 'anyone competent' in there? He was compensated for his value to the company, not what he did.
post #12 of 74
Typo : Jobs returned to Apple in 1996 or 1997, not 2007.
post #13 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by blirette View Post

Typo : Jobs returned to Apple in 1996 or 1997, not 2007.

Think before you speak: He returned to Apple in 2007 after his absence due to illness.
post #14 of 74
Apple took top spot on AMR's manufacturing and supply chain rankings THREE YEARS in a row beating out every other U.S company.

Supplychaindigital: "The company’s supply chain strategy has been greatly admired for many years now but to remain in the No. 1 position of AMR’s findings is unprecedented."

Dell was always known as the supply chain king, able to manufacture and deliver cheaper than anyone else and Apple beat them. Apple beat Wal-mart as well! This is one heck of a competitive advantage.

This I believe is mainly due to Tim Cook.
Wikipedia Bio on Cook: "... helped the company reduce inventory levels and streamline its supply chain, dramatically increasing margins"

I don't know about levels of executive compensation and what is fair: seems like the large sum (vs previous year) is due to various factors like taking over when Jobs was sick and shares vesting (share compensation awarded can be spread over several years)

Lots of companies (from rumors) have been head hunting Cook to be their CEO. (Look what happened to Rubenstein who became Palm CEO). What we don't need is Cook to go to HP or something. We want Jobs to be free of the nitty gritty of supply chains and have time to dream and innovate.
post #15 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wonder View Post

Think before you speak: He returned to Apple in 2007 after his absence due to illness.

Or rather read the article. blirette is correct.
post #16 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wonder View Post

Think before you speak: He returned to Apple in 2007 after his absence due to illness.

The poster did.

Please reread the article. The passage is referring to Jobs' original return to Apple not after his illness. As does the following sentence.

****

Not sure I could live on just a million a week.

****

Meanwhile, people who work at the Apple store are barely scraping by, working at a tough job in a retail environment while standing on their feet all day.
post #17 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by cylack View Post

Just how much is enough?

That's none of your business. He is worth what the BOD have determined that he is worth, not you.

I bet you think he ought to be taxed heavily so liberal politicians can give HIS hard earned money to bums who are uninterested in employment for health insurance, housing, and food.
iMac 24" (Late 07), iMac 17" G5, Mac mini (Early 09), MacBook (Mid 07), iPad WiFi 32, iPhone 4, iBook G4 1.2, HP Compaq 610 Laptop, eMachine W5233, (1) Xserve G5 and (1) Xserve G5 Cluster node with...
Reply
iMac 24" (Late 07), iMac 17" G5, Mac mini (Early 09), MacBook (Mid 07), iPad WiFi 32, iPhone 4, iBook G4 1.2, HP Compaq 610 Laptop, eMachine W5233, (1) Xserve G5 and (1) Xserve G5 Cluster node with...
Reply
post #18 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by cylack View Post

As an MBA, let me point out having been around and seen many of his type, he didn't do anything remotely to earn this in a "fair" way. Anyone competent could have done what Cook did; Jobs magic is obviously the real reason for Apple's success. It is crazy in corporate America there is such a huge disconnect between what the average worker in a company earns and the top execs. The BOD doesn't answer to the common shareholder anymore. I suppose I could understand him getting $5 million, but $59 million?! Just how much is enough?

Why the heck do YOU get to decide that $5 million is "enough?" Apple is absolutely booming. They can pay him what they want.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post

Now that what I call a bonus

Maybe it should be mandatory for every CEO of a publicly traded corporation to have a salary of $1 and only be compensated with company shares!

Ridiculous. How would they live? You're actually going to pass a law to that fact? Hey guys, I think Nancy Pelosi is posting on AI.


Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

I'm mostly with you on this one. There seems to be a big disconnect in a lot of areas concerning wages (ie. sports, entertainment).

But...

If Apple feels that Tim Cook is the guy it needs to succeed then you have to pay the piper or lose that person.

Meaning: Apple doesn't believe that "any" competent person could do Tim's job.

Exactly. It's reality. It reminds me a little bit of my job on a much smaller scale. We have members of the public that crow about teachers making too much money, getting "free" healthcare, "4 months" off a year, etc. Beyond their obvious misconceptions, they fail to realize one thing: Teachers are subject to economic incentives like everyone else. I came to my district because of the working environment, the students, reputation...and the MONEY. Apple is no different.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #19 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by NomadMac View Post


Meanwhile, people who work at the Apple store are barely scraping by, working at a tough job in a retail environment while standing on their feet all day.


They work in a retail store. How much to they deserve.
Although I've been impressed with the genius bar staff answering some of my questions, most staff I've been in contact with on the floor had to go in the back and ask someone for an answer to my questions.

No special skills or knowledge makes for a smaller pay check.
post #20 of 74
How many more CEO's out there are willing to put it all on the line.
post #21 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Ridiculous. How would they live? You're actually going to pass a law to that fact? Hey guys, I think Nancy Pelosi is posting on AI.

Lighten up. It was a joke
post #22 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by cylack View Post

As an MBA, let me point out having been around and seen many of his type, he didn't do anything remotely to earn this in a "fair" way. Anyone competent could have done what Cook did; Jobs magic is obviously the real reason for Apple's success. It is crazy in corporate America there is such a huge disconnect between what the average worker in a company earns and the top execs. The BOD doesn't answer to the common shareholder anymore. I suppose I could understand him getting $5 million, but $59 million?! Just how much is enough?

Not sure what an MBA has to do with this discussion, since you can have an MBA and know nothing about business, e.g. I have 3 people who have completed their MBAs and have no clue about running a business in real world and how to manage start-up environment and the organizational input and mindset to keep a young company going.

It seems to me your MBA is waste of time, since understanding the value of human commodity and that value to company as whole, is why Tim Cook is being awarded such a great bonus.
post #23 of 74
59 million reasons not to leave Apple to become CEO of HP. If the HP job hadn't opened up, I think he would have probably made significantly less.
post #24 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by cylack View Post

As an MBA, let me point out having been around and seen many of his type, he didn't do anything remotely to earn this in a "fair" way. Anyone competent could have done what Cook did; Jobs magic is obviously the real reason for Apple's success. It is crazy in corporate America there is such a huge disconnect between what the average worker in a company earns and the top execs. The BOD doesn't answer to the common shareholder anymore. I suppose I could understand him getting $5 million, but $59 million?! Just how much is enough?

And in my experience with MBA's I've found most of them just barely competent. What right do you have to criticize Cook? Do you work for a major corporation at such a high level that you have the experience to know? Somehow, I doubt that. Cook is considered to be very good at his job, and has had feelers out from other major companies for a while. Thankfully, he seems to want to stay at apple. If Jobs thinks this guy is really good, then it's assured that he is, as Jobs is not easy on anyone.

Considering that at companies that aren't nearly as successful as Apple is, the top executives are often getting much more than Cook, I don't think he's getting too much at all. The fact that Jobs has not gotten any compensation other than the one dollar a year, and compensation for corporate use of his jet since 2003, allows Apple to spread some of what he may have gotten to other top executives.

And Apple doesn't offer their top executives anything other than what their other employees get, other than the anount of compensation. I read a good article about that earlier today. I'll update this post when I find that article in a short while.

Addendum:

Ok, here is the article. You'll see, surprisingly that there are no special executive packages at Apple. This is one reason that good compensation is needed. It's more than fair.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110107/...e_compensation
post #25 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by cylack View Post

As an MBA, let me point out having been around and seen many of his type, he didn't do anything remotely to earn this in a "fair" way. Anyone competent could have done what Cook did; Jobs magic is obviously the real reason for Apple's success. It is crazy in corporate America there is such a huge disconnect between what the average worker in a company earns and the top execs. The BOD doesn't answer to the common shareholder anymore. I suppose I could understand him getting $5 million, but $59 million?! Just how much is enough?

Jeesh... didn't take long for the MBA divas to come out of the woodwork. Once again, folks like cyclack prove once again that one can be booksmart and be absolutely clueless how the real world works.

Folks like Cook deserve every single penny they earned. Not only was he instrumental in keeping Apple going (especially during SJ's absence), folks like him provided a means for regular folks to profit handsomely.

How many AAPL shares did that MBA eduction of yours tell YOU to invest in in 2008 when the entire economy took a turn in the dump?

Since you're a holier-than-thou MBA graduate, how would you have run Apple from nothing to the 2nd most valuable company, in one of the worst recessions in history?

Cook is also responsible for keeping a company running smoothly. A company mind you, that employs directly AND indirectly hundreds and thousands of people. People with jobs, mortgages, disposable income, etc. They pay taxes which keeps our cities running. Many of those people become successful and perhaps start up their own business to continue the economic engine as well.

And of course, Cook's bonus is on paper, not cold hard cash. Meaning?? It is in his best interests to continue making Apple the best company around and keep that stock value going up.

How's that MBA doing for ya Thornton Melon? Might be time to take a refresher course.
post #26 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by cylack View Post

As an MBA, let me point out having been around and seen many of his type, he didn't do anything remotely to earn this in a "fair" way. Anyone competent could have done what Cook did; Jobs magic is obviously the real reason for Apple's success. It is crazy in corporate America there is such a huge disconnect between what the average worker in a company earns and the top execs. The BOD doesn't answer to the common shareholder anymore. I suppose I could understand him getting $5 million, but $59 million?! Just how much is enough?

Whether I agree or not with your assessment of Cook's skills, your basic point still stands. Boards of directors and top executives at American corporations look after their own interests first, second and third. When and if something is left over, it might go to others. The exploding gap between how much they and everyone else benefits from corporate profits isn't happening for no reason.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #27 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Why the heck do YOU get to decide that $5 million is "enough?" Apple is absolutely booming. They can pay him what they want.



Ridiculous. How would they live? You're actually going to pass a law to that fact? Hey guys, I think Nancy Pelosi is posting on AI.




Exactly. It's reality. It reminds me a little bit of my job on a much smaller scale. We have members of the public that crow about teachers making too much money, getting "free" healthcare, "4 months" off a year, etc. Beyond their obvious misconceptions, they fail to realize one thing: Teachers are subject to economic incentives like everyone else. I came to my district because of the working environment, the students, reputation...and the MONEY. Apple is no different.

I'll tell you when it's too much. It's too much when executives of certain financial companies take a third of the profits for themselves, and sometimes more. It's too much when executives fire people so that they can award themselves with higher salaries and compensation as old man Warner and his son tried a couple of decades ago.

There are limits.
post #28 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

Whether I agree or not with your assessment of Cook's skills, your basic point still stands. Boards of directors and top executives at American corporations look after their own interests first, second and third. When and if something is left over, it might go to others. The exploding gap between how much they and everyone else benefits from corporate profits isn't happening for no reason.

I don't see this as being a lot of money at all. Look to financial firms to see executives ripping off stockholders and employees. What percentage of profits is Cook getting? Almost nothing. And he's in good part responsible for those profits.
post #29 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

Whether I agree or not with your assessment of Cook's skills, your basic point still stands. Boards of directors and top executives at American corporations look after their own interests first, second and third. When and if something is left over, it might go to others. The exploding gap between how much they and everyone else benefits from corporate profits isn't happening for no reason.

Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I'll tell you when it's too much. It's too much when executives of certain financial companies take a third of the profits for themselves, and sometimes more. It's too much when executives fire people so that they can award themselves with higher salaries and compensation as old man Warner and his son tried a couple of decades ago.

There are limits.

In that, I totally agree. The "norm" is for executives to essentially take the money and run. Do a lousy job, hey it's in the contract they get a golden-parachute. When their company is doing great, it's because of their leadership and visionary skills. When it's doing bad, hey it's someone else's fault.

Tim Cook and Steve Jobs rightfully so, deserve their compensation imho. The are in the very small minority methinks of executives that actually do care about other things not including themselves.
post #30 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I'll tell you when it's too much. It's too much when executives of certain financial companies take a third of the profits for themselves, and sometimes more. It's too much when executives fire people so that they can award themselves with higher salaries and compensation as old man Warner and his son tried a couple of decades ago.

There are limits.

Totally different scenario. That's not what's happening here at all. And, while those scenarios might constitute immoral behavior, the government should not decide what they can and can't do. It's up to the shareholders. Now, obviously things change when companies want bailouts.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #31 of 74
Love how people comment as if they know Tim Cook, his day to day job, and the inner corporate workings at Apple. The guy is a part of the ever growing machine of Apple. Steve obviously thinks he does enough, as he has a job, and that pretty much sums up the equation, regardless of the speculative rants on this forum.
post #32 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I don't see this as being a lot of money at all. Look to financial firms to see executives ripping off stockholders and employees. What percentage of profits is Cook getting? Almost nothing. And he's in good part responsible for those profits.

With you 100%. Tim Cook's leadership and results have built value for AAPL and done a lot for me as a shareholder. There's a night-and-day difference between a legitimate value creator like a Tim Cook at Apple and a manipulating parasite like Richard Fuld was at Lehman Brothers.

I admit to being a Fanatical Moderate. I Disdain the Inane. Vyizderzominymororzizazizdenderizorziz?

Reply

I admit to being a Fanatical Moderate. I Disdain the Inane. Vyizderzominymororzizazizdenderizorziz?

Reply
post #33 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I don't see this as being a lot of money at all. Look to financial firms to see executives ripping off stockholders and employees. What percentage of profits is Cook getting? Almost nothing. And he's in good part responsible for those profits.

I'm not sure what world you live in, where $59 million is not a lot of money, but that's not my point anyway. The distribution of corporate wealth has become ridiculously skewed towards the top, and the trend has shown no signs of abating. And it's not because American execs are getting so much better at their jobs. In fact we know that US top execs are very often rewarded handsomely even for failure. This is not nearly as much of an issue outside of the US. In short, the system is rigged.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #34 of 74
RTFA.

He was paid $5.8 million.

The rest was stock, increasing his share in the company and giving him a far greater interest in increasing the value of those shares.

Also, note that Apple still does not pay dividends.

In the same year, Apple had $62.5 billion in net sales. $5.8 million is a very, very small percentage of that figure, and a slightly-less-small-but-still-minuscule percentage of their $18.4 billion operating income. Less than 1%.

That's the world we live in. $5.8 million is chump change for guys who own significant portions of a $300 billion company. If you don't like it, sod off and found your own dull, socialist hell-hole.
post #35 of 74
That $59 million is from incentive stock options, if I'm not mistaken. If so, he earned it. Doing a lousy job running Apple's manufacturing processes would have flatlined the stock.

We can bitch when it's a salary and the shareholders are upset, but powerless. But Apple's shareholders have the best at the helm and I doubt any are concerned, especially since the pay comes out of the company's shares.

What is excessive, as far as the number of options? Well, that can be debated night and day.

$59 million is not out of the question, IMO, for his excellent performance in a critical component of the Apple juggernaut.

For those MBAs who claim he did nothing special, be sure to apply and see if you can land his position and perform similarly. Then, when the stock goes up 10-fold and you get your $59 million, you can donate your excessive pay to charity.

Otherwise, it's sour grapes.
post #36 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Davewrite View Post

Apple took top spot on AMR's manufacturing and supply chain rankings THREE YEARS in a row beating out every other U.S company.

Supplychaindigital: "The company’s supply chain strategy has been greatly admired for many years now but to remain in the No. 1 position of AMR’s findings is unprecedented."

Dell was always known as the supply chain king, able to manufacture and deliver cheaper than anyone else and Apple beat them. Apple beat Wal-mart as well! This is one heck of a competitive advantage.

This I believe is mainly due to Tim Cook.
Wikipedia Bio on Cook: "... helped the company reduce inventory levels and streamline its supply chain, dramatically increasing margins"

Where do you draw the line between reducing inventory levels and not being able to keep up with demand?
post #37 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by cylack View Post

As an MBA, let me point out having been around and seen many of his type, he didn't do anything remotely to earn this in a "fair" way. Anyone competent could have done what Cook did; Jobs magic is obviously the real reason for Apple's success. It is crazy in corporate America there is such a huge disconnect between what the average worker in a company earns and the top execs. The BOD doesn't answer to the common shareholder anymore. I suppose I could understand him getting $5 million, but $59 million?! Just how much is enough?

What good is an idevice if you have no one to market it, plus people to come up with the whole apple store?

Job's may be the prominent figure, but he sure isn't the only reason why apple is successful.
post #38 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by NomadMac View Post

Meanwhile, people who work at the Apple store are barely scraping by, working at a tough job in a retail environment while standing on their feet all day.

Im going to respond to that with the same view I have of unions, strikes, and minimum wages:

If you dont like the job, quit. You chose it, no ones forcing you to do it.

Exactly what Richard Branson said to his moaning cabin crew a few years back and I wholeheartedly agree.
post #39 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by bugsnw View Post

That $59 million is from incentive stock options, if I'm not mistaken. If so, he earned it. Doing a lousy job running Apple's manufacturing processes would have flatlined the stock.

We can bitch when it's a salary and the shareholders are upset, but powerless. But Apple's shareholders have the best at the helm and I doubt any are concerned, especially since the pay comes out of the company's shares.

I am shareholder and I am concerned. And it hasn't got anything to do with grapes, sour or otherwise.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #40 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar View Post

Where do you draw the line between reducing inventory levels and not being able to keep up with demand?

If you're Apple. You don't.

Not keeping up with demand has the bizarre side effect of not only increasing demand, but generating the illusion of excessive demand and artificially inflating the popularity of the product. And not only Apple are playing that game these days, there are plenty of other examples.

Do people still seriously believe that a multi billion dollar company couldn't get its shit together in terms of supply and easily meet consumer demand? This is all dirty reality distortion trickery to boost pre-orders and day one sales.

Works on me. Though. Can I pre-order an iPad 2 yet? Or, better still, just "subscribe" to Apple?


I also find it hard to believe why any shareholder would have an issue with the top brass at Apple being so intrinsically invested in the value of their stock. But then I'm no expert.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Bonuses help Apple's Tim Cook earn $59M in 2010, Steve Jobs keeps $1 salary