or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › The bizarre campaign against Apple's Tim Cook
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The bizarre campaign against Apple's Tim Cook - Page 4

post #121 of 190

I also don't think Tim Cook is doing anything wrong, the quarterly results speak for themselves. There are just people trying to make money by causing stock price fluctuations.

post #122 of 190

Forget the SEC. If I were a stockholder, I would be looking at identifying a the rumour mongers who have a big stake in the outcome and launching a class action suit against them. The SEC can follow and put them in jail because by then, they’d have no money to pay for a top-notch lawyer.

 

I bet Apple’s latest quarterly numbers will blow away the competition. Well, they would, if the competition actually reported their numbers. When I last checked, Microsoft was remarkably coy about reporting sales of the Surface line, which you can bet they would be trumpeting from the rooftops if it were not embarrassing, and Samsung never gives a breakdown of sales.

 

No point speculating further because we should know soon.

 

More on my blog.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave MacLachlan View Post

At what point does the SEC get involved and start investigating these comments & rumors, especially ones that have no basis in reality and have drastic effects on the stock value?

Philip Machanick creator of Opinionations and Green Grahamstown
Department of Computer Science, Rhodes University, South Africa

Reply

Philip Machanick creator of Opinionations and Green Grahamstown
Department of Computer Science, Rhodes University, South Africa

Reply
post #123 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by poke View Post

There's a simple reason for all this: Apple has a lot of cash. Wall Street wants that cash and will stop at nothing to get it. 

 

Or is the reason maybe: Apple has a lot of cash. Wall Street wants that cash spent by Apple on something that will continue Apple's growth trajectory at 2007-2011 levels. Instead, Apple is saving it.

 

Either Apple is secretly working on a big new thing and saving the cash because they'll need it in the near future, or they really don't know how to spend it. Otherwise, they would've been buying back shares right now (especially if they believe the stock is undervalued themselves).

post #124 of 190
I suspect we'll get news on what Apple's going to do with its cash today. I think they know they can't go another quarter thinking and not doing,
post #125 of 190
OT: MacDailyNews has a criptic message/rumor indicating an "iWatch" will be announced soon. Anyone know their track record of scoops?

http://macdailynews.com/2013/04/22/apples-iwatch-imminent/
post #126 of 190
Got thru the whole thread...
...and have to do a shout-out @Slurpy: every single one of your posts were dead-on! I would suggest the Mods ask you to write for them. 1wink.gif

Every time this TC topic has come up over the last few weeks, I just want to repeat my 100% vote of confidence for Tim. He's still the best CEO for Apple in the foreseeable future, and even the Iger fans should admit this... even if he is my #2.

My personal lofty expectations will hopefully be born out with the upcoming WWDC and some mind-blowing iOS and OS X advances and innovations.

It is software that will differentiate mobile devices... as well as the "trucks" necessary to develop for them. Not the fickle commodity of the devices themselves.
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
post #127 of 190
If Jobs was still alive and at the helm, and given that the circumstances were the same, would he be receiving the same criticism as Cook?
post #128 of 190
Apple is doing just fine. AAPL is not. Tim Cook is only responsible for the first.
post #129 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdnc123 View Post

The amount of value chopped off the company was probably no more than 20% of what has been lost in this recent dump.  Losing 60 billion and losing 300 billion represent different signals from the market regardless if the percentages are similar.  Losing 300 billion says management actions or inactions have materially impaired future cash flows.

 

Listen here, bright boy, Apple does not need wall street, they do not need your pitiful shareholding, they are not in trouble, they have ample cash, they have real people working on real products they sell for real cash.

 

Wall Street just can't handle that as far as Apple is concerned they are irrelevant.

 

Sell out; Apple don't need you.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #130 of 190
AAPL up pre-market I'm assuming based on ARM posting better than expected results.

Tony Fadell was on CNBC this morning. Of course he was asked about Apple. Reminded people that game changing products don't come out every 6 months. Was asked if the team could hold together without Steve, he said absolutely and that he thought they were doing a great job.

Did Fadell leave on good terms or was he basically pushed out when the iPhone overtook the iPod? I've often wondered if its possible for Apple to pick up Nest and bring Fadell back to the company, if we're looking to new product categories, new revenue streams I think home automation could be big.
post #131 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by OllieWallieWhiskers View Post

Apple is doing just fine. AAPL is not. Tim Cook is only responsible for the first.

In general, I'd disagree with that. A CEO, unfortunately, is ultimately responsible for overall operations and is also accountable to the shareholders. To say that a CEO is not responsible for a company's share price is, generally speaking, an absurd assertion. In this instance in Apple's history, however, you may be right (unintentionally). The question is how much more should/can Cook do to prop up $AAPL? More than a few people, including some here, want to see faster use of cash in the form of dividends or share buyback. I am personally against that because history has shown repeatedly, with very, very few exceptions, that such moves are effective only in the short term. 

 

So, without using his cash reserves as described above, all Tim Cook can do is continue to manage the company as well as he can to maximize profits. He is doing that, by and large. If the stock market is punishing him for not spending the company's cash fast enough, then I hope the board holds firm in supporting him because such market reactions are bound to lose steam in time. If, however, the market is in fact prescient in predicting a true plateau for Apple, then is Cook responsible? 

 

Some of the "advice" being tosse around are clearly ridiculous. Some say Apple needs to launch a cheaper phone. But then they fret about decreasing profit margins even before such a phone is launched. Others say Apple needs to make phones with bigger screens. But a bigger screen costs more. So, unless Apple compromises elsewhere, a bigger iPhone will again have lower margins. 
 

The market is treating Apple irrationally right now. I believe Cook should do what Jobs did a few years ago when $AAPL also dropped 50% of its market cap - stand pat on financial manipulations and execute the product development plan. Any deviation from this course will turn Apple into any other company. Apple does not do well when it imitates others.

post #132 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by OllieWallieWhiskers View Post

Apple is doing just fine. AAPL is not. Tim Cook is only responsible for the first.

The CEO is responsible for the company first and foremost, true. However, they have a responsibility to speak up and take action if the stock has a drop like they have. $700->600 I am willing to tolerate silence. By $500, I really expect executives to be buying stock as a show of confidence. At $400... well, let's hope earnings tells the story. If it doesn't though, I want to know what the company is going to do to address shareholder value.

I have no objections to Tim, but he can't pull off Steve's ignoring shareholders game yet... he hasn't proven himself that way. If things haven't improved in another 18 months I don't think he will get to take advantage of those RSUs.
post #133 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by OllieWallieWhiskers View Post

Apple is doing just fine. AAPL is not. Tim Cook is only responsible for the first.


What??!!?  1rolleyes.gif

na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #134 of 190

While there a lot of things going right and good with Apple, there are quite a few things that are turning sour as well. I consider myself a big fan of everything Apple. However, over the last few months, I have had quite a few instances where Apple has done things that I am not happy/comfortable with. And some of these things have impacted me personally. My opinions about Apple have changed to be quite ambivalent at this point. I have probably not yet reached a stage where I am ready to ditch my iPhone for an Android, but I have to say I have thought about it several times.

 

Let me list the things Apple has done, which have impacted me personally, and you decide for yourself whether it is right on my part to have changed my thinking about Apple. There are several other things, but there I am not impacted personally.

 

- We build apps for iOS and Android - and about 6 months back, Apple rejected our app, saying that they would not allow recurring in-app subscriptions. We built a stock market monitoring tool, which provides real time market data and provides instantaneous news (our servers monitor the news filters you have registered for, and if there is any news matching a filter, you get an immediate Push Notification). In my mind, such a service is an obvious candidate for a recurring subscription - because the features it offers are all expensive things, and add lot of value every day. Apple said their recurring in-app subscriptions were targeted only towards companies that created periodical content like magazines etc, and not for services like what we were trying to build. When we said we also offered instant news updates, so if a company that offers daily/weekly updates can get recurring subscriptions why should we not be eligible. Apple then said - you don't create the content, you only distribute it from other sources. But we pointed out that pretty much 90% of content in any periodical is also sourced from sources like Associated Free Press, Reuters, Bloomberg, IDC, etc, and they just said - we don't have to explain anything to you, if you want the app published, you should remove recurring subscriptions. No more discussion. We had no choice but to release the app for Free, because that way at least we would make some amount of money regularly from ads!

 

- On one of our other apps, we were rejected saying that this functionality was not using iOS capabilities, and could be done with a web app instead. This was a social site for movies, with a catalog of all current movies, where they were playing, reviews, trailers, user comments, etc. It also integrated with Location, showing route to the theater playing the movie. We had to appeal against the decision twice before someone finally saw the stupidity of what Apple was doing, and decided to allow us to publish the app.

 

- I have an iPhone 4S that is about 16 months old. The power button does not work, and I have to use the "Accessibility feature" to lock the phone, and unlock it. But it is very difficult to reboot the phone because I can only do it by allowing battery to die. This happened about 2 months after the warranty ran out at the end of 1 year. When I took the phone in for repairs, Apple flatly refused to repair it. They said if the phone was under warranty, they would replace it, but since warranty coverage was over, they could not repair it. The only option for me would be to upgrade to the iPhone 5 - and because my phone is almost crippled without the power button, I cannot get much when I sell it too! I tried several stores, several people, all give same response. Some suggested that there are third party "fixers" who could attempt to replace the power button, but if they messed up, my phone would be bricked. This is the sort of support I get, after buying a phone paying Rs 44,500/- (about $820). Even if I am ready to pay Apple, they would not fix the phone for me. The guy told me, you should have bought Applecare, paying another Rs 5,500/-. I asked him if that covers everything - he said it covers everything overseas, but in India it does not cover anything if the phone has signs of water damage, or cracked glass, etc. In India, only manufacturing defects would be covered - whereas overseas, Applecare works more like an insurance, so Apple replaces the phone with a refurbished model, no questions asked, whatever the issue.

 

This is what Indians get, despite paying probably the highest prices anywhere in the world for the iPhone! I know most of the high prices are because of taxes but from a customers point of view, this is not how you expect to be treated when you buy a premium product. Apple still makes its 40% margins, despite however high Indian taxes are! Cant they provide decent customer service after taking these sort of margins?

 

For a company that has such high profit margins, and such a massive mountain of cash, they could probably do better when it comes to customer support policies. To be fair, Indian operations of Apple are handled through the Reliance iStore and the Imagine Store - not directly by Apple. But Apple should be aware of the policies followed by its partners and should take care that the partners don't spoil Apple's name and image in India!

 

Over the last 4-5 months, we have stopped developing for iOS native. We decided that we would rather develop using PhoneGap or RhoMobile, and release the app on both iOS and Android, rather than take the risk with Apple's random policies. We have now realized - especially after using RhoMobile, that this is actually better off for us, as we can target all platforms with a single codebase, without sacrificing performance too much.

 

What an irony, that Motorola (and therefore, Google), have probably created the best development environment to protect iOS developers from the vagaries of Apple's policies! Of course, Apple being Apple, they will probably not allow apps developed in RhoMobile, but that would probably attract way too much regulatory attention.

 

From being a big fan of Apple, I have reached a point where I hope Apple gets a major rap on the knuckles on one of its court cases, or from the regulators, because of anti-competitive policies or anti-consumer policies, etc. I have started thinking that Apple has way too much power in the market, and it is probably good if someone, either Samsung or Google, or regulators, do something to significantly clip Apple's wings.

 

I think many people would agree, that an Apple that is more an underdog, is a better Apple for all of us. This company makes MS look like boy scouts with their policies. We would'nt really enjoy Apple much, if Apple has a strong position in the market.

post #135 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post


What??!!?  1rolleyes.gif

The CEO's responsibility is to make the company effective. It's not his job to manipulate the company day-to-day or week-to-week for short term jumps in the stock value.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #136 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by macarena View Post

I consider myself a big fan of everything Apple. However, ....

 

Apple rejected our app, saying that they would not allow recurring in-app subscriptions. We built a stock market monitoring tool, which provides real time market data and provides instantaneous news .....

 

- On one of our other apps, we were rejected ..... We had to appeal against the decision twice before someone finally saw the stupidity of what Apple was doing, and decided to allow us to publish the app......

 

- I have an iPhone 4S that is about 16 months old. The power button does not work.....

(I am cutting and pasting just a few relevant parts, since your post rambles on.....)

 

Whine, whine, whine.

 

1) "Big fan of Apple, however.....". Big giveaway.

 

2) Apple has had unambiguous policies regarding in-app subscriptions. If you didn't bother to check that before you wasted your resources developing the app -- or thought you'd go ahead anyway, and take your chances -- that's your foolishness. Perhaps you can explain why and how Apple continues to have the largest app ecosystem if developers are having so many problems?

 

Incidentally, your stock market app sounds like a pathetic me-too product. There's a sea of them out there (check out, e.g., Bloomberg; Schwab -- both brilliantly implemented).

 

3) Your movie app got accepted. So what are you whining about? (In any event, it sounds like another me-too product. Check out IMDB and how it's been implemented -- again, brilliant).

 

4) Buy the frackin' protection plan the next time. It's there for a reason. Otherwise you get what you get, which Apple tells you about up front, and it is a function of what local laws require. Live with it. (Perhaps you can explain why the iPhone has, by far, the highest customer satisfaction ratings?)

post #137 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cash907 View Post

Well let's see: the stock has been in a relative free-fall since peaking around the release of the iPhone 5, multiple reports of sales, stock, and revenue not meeting expectations, and going on what, 8 months now without a single new product or announcement.

 

While I feel bad for Cook in that it's true the positives outweigh the negatives, and that this wouldn't be a problem if it were any other company and not Apple, it's not any other company and it IS Apple. Fair or not, the public and the market both hold Tim and the company both to a higher standard. Frankly, the longer this slide goes on, the clearer it becomes to me that Ive should have taken the big chair, and Cook should have stayed where he was and continued on as the logistics guy. One can only wonder if that supply chain problems that have plagued the iMac line and recently the iPhone line (8 million defectives returned to Foxconn? What's that about, and who is getting fired over that screw up?) had Cook been focused on what he does best instead of trying to replicate what Jobs and to a lesser extent Ive apparently do naturally.

 

Legitimate points made here.

If two people always agree, then one of them is redundant.
Reply
If two people always agree, then one of them is redundant.
Reply
post #138 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


The CEO's responsibility is to make the company effective. It's not his job to manipulate the company day-to-day or week-to-week for short term jumps in the stock value.

I wish you were completely right.

 

Week to week? No investor (except for day traders) or CEO should be concerned. But over medium to long term, a CEO is indeed responsible for a stock's performance, even if the balance sheets are otherwise just fine.

post #139 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

I wish you were completely right.

Week to week? No investor (except for day traders) or CEO should be concerned. But over medium to long term, a CEO is indeed responsible for a stock's performance, even if the balance sheets are otherwise just fine.
How does Apple shake the damn day traders? I think they're more responsible for the current stock decline than anyone else.
post #140 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


The CEO's responsibility is to make the company effective. It's not his job to manipulate the company day-to-day or week-to-week for short term jumps in the stock value.


Who the f*ck is talking about day to day or week to week. You talk as if $700 to $400 happened overnight.

 

If the company is not run effectively then the stock goes down... just as the stock will go up if the company is run properly.

 

Of course the CEO is responsible for the stock price. Many a CEO has received a boot in the ass for losing shareholder value.

 

Right now shareholders don't seem to have faith in the long term picture for Apple.

na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #141 of 190
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post
... and if the company is not run effectively then the stock goes down...

 

And that's the only reason for the stock to go down?

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #142 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post


How does Apple shake the damn day traders? I think they're more responsible for the current stock decline than anyone else.


When AAPL is 70% owned by institutions?

 

The term "day traders" should give you an idea of their effectiveness at moving a stock's price.

 

[remember, it took 7 months to go from $700 to where we are now)

na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #143 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

And that's the only reason for the stock to go down?


In the end... yes.

 

[but then... I'm looking at a span of at least 10 years. You're not one of those damn day traders, are you?]

na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #144 of 190
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post
In the end... yes.

 

So explain why it's down now while the company IS being run effectively.

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #145 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

So explain why it's down now while the company IS being run effectively.


Is it being run effectively for long term viability? Stock price is a view down the tunnel.

 

That is a question that will be answered over the coming years.

 

I look at Microsoft and its hefty p/e during the bubble years... and over the last 13 years MSFT has grown into its p/e.

 

If you wait long enough maybe Apple will grow into its p/e as well... slowly rising as the profits shrink.

 

Or, investors could be wrong and Apple still has another decade of glory years to come.

 

We'll see.

na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #146 of 190
Installing Tim Cook as CEO of Apple is the equivalent of handing a newborn infant the keys to a 2000cc Harley and telling him to compete in a Motocross! He's a bean counter, not a leader. Apple's Fall 2012 product dump under Cook's auspices confused the public by eclipsing Apple products with other Apple products. All steak and no sizzle, it was the most boring, amateurish, and insipid Apple product intro in history! Apple was $705 at that moment in time and 6 months later it's now almost half. The numbers tell the story! How is Tim Cook not responsible for destroying Apple's value?

To equate Tim Cook with Steve Jobs is a sick joke. Steve's aura had more creativity than Cook's entire being. The least Cook could have done, if he were a businessman of any skill, was give Wall Street the special dividend "investor friendly" company's were issuing in droves last December. But Cook didn't have the smarts or antennae for that either. Tim Cook is a tool!

Lastly, this quote unquote "Dilger editorial" reads like a defense of Tim Cook written by his mommy.
post #147 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post


Who the f*ck is talking about day to day or week to week. You talk as if $700 to $400 happened overnight.

If the company is not run effectively then the stock goes down... just as the stock will go up if the company is run properly.

Of course the CEO is responsible for the stock price. Many a CEO has received a boot in the ass for losing shareholder value.

Right now shareholders don't seem to have faith in the long term picture for Apple.

We're talking about a short period of time here despite Apple increasing YoY revenue and profits. As Cook stated, he can't respond to ever rumour out there or he wouldn't be able to get anything else done so if analysts want to jump on a DigiTimes rumour about suppliers saying Apple is cutting back orders that is not Cook's fault. There is nothing Cook can do about these "Sky is falling" Chicken Littles that keep forecasting the demise of Apple. With so much mindshare they get all the media attention. The more negative it is the more attention they get.

You seem to think this is something new; as if none of this happened under Jobs. The stock fell more rapidly and more often and farther under Jobs. People said that Apple's time at the top was over. Clearly it wasn't. Eventually it will be but so far there is nothing to say that Apple is doomed. This is a short period and Apple still has the highest revenue, profits, mindshare, and market cap of any tech company. Only Exxon has a higher market cap, and not by much.

The real question is why you are falling for it. You people remind me of a toddlers at the beach running toward the water when it recedes from the beach and then running away screaming when it rolls back in... but at least they are enjoying themselves.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #148 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


We're talking about a short period of time here despite Apple increasing YoY revenue and profits. As Cook stated, he can't respond to ever rumour out there or he wouldn't be able to get anything else done so if analysts want to jump on a DigiTimes rumour about suppliers saying Apple is cutting back orders that is not Cook's fault. There is nothing Cook can do about these "Sky is falling" Chicken Littles that keep forecasting the demise of Apple. With so much mindshare they get all the media attention. The more negative it is the more attention they get.

You seem to think this is something new; as if none of this happened under Jobs. The stock fell more rapidly and more often and farther under Jobs. People said that Apple's time at the top was over. Clearly it wasn't. Eventually it will be but so far there is nothing to say that Apple is doomed. This is a short period and Apple still has the highest revenue, profits, mindshare, and market cap of any tech company. Only Exxon has a higher market cap, and not by much.

The real question is why you are falling for it. You people remind me of a toddlers at the beach running toward the water when it recedes from the beach and then running away screaming when it rolls back in... but at least they are enjoying themselves.


Your comprehension level seems to be dropping, Solipsism.

 

I have nothing but time to see if these investors are correct.

 

You may be the one who is falling for it.

na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #149 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

You seem to think this is something new; as if none of this happened under Jobs. The stock fell more rapidly and more often and farther under Jobs. 

I don't understand this faulty comparison people keep making? Steve Jobs was an acknowledged genius. No one would ever claim Tim Cook is genius. Apple replaced a genius with a supply chain guy. Cook might have worked well with Steve as leader. But as a leader Cook is a pure failure.

post #150 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

Your comprehension level seems to be dropping, Solipsism.

Certainly possible... or my comments about stocks going up and down is accurate.
Quote:
I have nothing but time to see if these investors are correct.

which investors? The ones shorting Apple? The ones calling for Cook to be fired? The ones ignore Cook has made Apple more profitable than every before?
Quote:
You may be the one who is falling for it.

Then call me crazy for thinking stocks fluctuate due to people making irrational, emotional decisions but you'll have a hard time proving that doesn't happen in the stock market.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #151 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ Web View Post

I don't understand this faulty comparison people keep making? Steve Jobs was an acknowledged genius. No one would ever claim Tim Cook is genius. Apple replaced a genius with a supply chain guy. Cook might have worked well with Steve as leader. But as a leader Cook is a pure failure.

So you're argument is that it was OK for the stock to crash repeatedly under Jobs because he's a genius but it's not allowed under Cook because he's not a genius? Fucking brilliant¡

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #152 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


Certainly possible... or my comments about stocks going up and down is accurate.
 

 

... or that you got emotional and made this argument about Cook specifically.

 

My argument was that CEOs are responsible for stock price. If investors do not trust a CEO's abilities then the stock goes down. Stock price is the view down the tunnel.

 

My statements weren't about Cook specifically.

 

I think you are losing your rationality. Me? I'm waiting to see if they are correct. I couldn't care one way or the other. I no longer have a dog in this fight but that could change if Cook pulls a rabbit out of the hat... like Jobs in 2003 and 2007 and 2010.

na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #153 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

Who the f*ck is talking about day to day or week to week. You talk as if $700 to $400 happened overnight.

If the company is not run effectively then the stock goes down... just as the stock will go up if the company is run properly.

Of course the CEO is responsible for the stock price. Many a CEO has received a boot in the ass for losing shareholder value.

Right now shareholders don't seem to have faith in the long term picture for Apple.

I'd say Apple is run pretty effectively. They makes billions of dollars every month. They sell close to half a million iPhones every day. They have incredible customer satisfaction. They make developers happy.

And yet the stock goes down. Seems like a company's stock price isn't always tied to their performance.

Apple is currently the #2 smartphone manufacturer by unit sales. And it should be noted that Samsung is #1 but Samsung also sells a lot of smartphones in the $100-150 range across the globe. Apple only sells mid-range to high-end smartphones... phones that start at $450... so their sales are even more impressive when you consider that.

If people don't have faith in the long term picture for Apple... what would be a better company to invest their money into? What other mobile device and computer company is more suitable for investment?

Should people pull their money out of Apple and put it into HP or Dell? Or just avoid tech companies altogether?
post #154 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


So you're argument is that it was OK for the stock to crash repeatedly under Jobs because he's a genius but it's not allowed under Cook because he's not a genius? Fucking brilliant¡

No. There was always a sliver of hope, a promise if you will that Steve would conjure up "one more thing". We could always depend on a next act with Steve Jobs at Apple's helm. Apple under Tim Cook feels like the last season of The Sopranos. I have a sinking feeling under Tim Cook's guidance there will be no next act -- no "one more thing" -- for Apple.

post #155 of 190
Originally Posted by MJ Web View Post
There was always a sliver of hope, a promise if you will that Steve would conjure up "one more thing".

 

That means absolutely nothing.


Apple under Tim Cook feels like the last season of The Sopranos.

 

So sell your stock, give up your interest, and leave the boat before it sinks. Rid us of this nonsense.

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #156 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by igriv View Post

Bzzzt! Wrong. Tim Cook works for the board, which represents the owners of the company -- the shareholders.

Again, once the record profits & revenue stop flowing in THEN I say he has something to be beholden to the board over but for now he's making them money hand over fist and has nothing to answer for.
post #157 of 190
Originally Posted by igriv View Post
Who is this "us"?

 

Everyone but you.

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #158 of 190
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

... there was still another company on earth selling lots of smartphones (and attempting to sell tablets): Samsung.

 

Bingo.  If anyone out there thinks Samsung isn't behind the mindless anti-Cook campaign, then let us all know.  And try to explain your reasoning. Should make for quite a few laughs.

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply
post #159 of 190

There is nothing wrong with Tim Cook now that Steve Jobs is gone.  He was there long before and did an excellent job then and now.  Investors are responsible for running the stock price up, as well as down.  Just how many iterations of an iPhone do we really need ?  When it needs to be revised, it will be, not before.

 

Wil the stock hit 700$ again soon, I don't know.  If buyers run it up, then it will.  Corporations do not directly influence the price of the stock - demand does.

post #160 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

... or that you got emotional and made this argument about Cook specifically.

My argument was that CEOs are responsible for stock price. If investors do not trust a CEO's abilities then the stock goes down. Stock price is the view down the tunnel.

My statements weren't about Cook specifically.

I think you are losing your rationality. Me? I'm waiting to see if they are correct. I couldn't care one way or the other. I no longer have a dog in this fight but that could change if Cook pulls a rabbit out of the hat... like Jobs in 2003 and 2007 and 2010.

1) It's not often I get accused of being too emotional. You may want to rethink why you think I'm emotional when you are the one overreacting to natural changes in the market.

2) I get what you're saying but you're wrong. The job of the CEO is not the stock, but the company. The stock is only partly an affected by the success of the company, but much of it are out of the control of the company. What you are suggesting is what is wrong with many companies and CEOs that come on board with huge paychecks, huge sign on bonuses and huge departure bonuses. They stay 6 months to a couple years with absolutely no intention of making the company better. They kill quality to increase profits, they lay off their workforce to cut costs. The numbers look good at first but it's a house of cards. You are saying Cook should be like Usain Bolt but don't realize this is a marathon, not a sprint.
Edited by SolipsismX - 4/23/13 at 11:39am

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AAPL Investors
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › The bizarre campaign against Apple's Tim Cook