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 2

post #41 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetz View Post

.

The stock has tanked. Shareholders like me are pissed (and I've lost nowhere near as much as some other people I know). If he doesn't have a feasible plan.

The only plan Tim Cook needs is the one to find a way to shut up every idiot analyst spewing rumors and 'sources' and every blog et al that posts their bull. Because that is what brought down the value, not the record breaking sales of the new iPhone etc.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #42 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

 
The only plan Tim Cook needs is the one to find a way to shut up every idiot analyst spewing rumors and 'sources' and every blog et al that posts their bull. Because that is what brought down the value, not the record breaking sales of the new iPhone etc.

Our army would be invincible if the enemy would just stop firing bullets at us. /s

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #43 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by quinney View Post

That would result in a competition among trolls to get the highest number of thumbs down. Is that what you really want?
As comments get voted down they become more transparent...until they eventually are unable to be read.

Users who are voted down more than a hundred times per month are automatically banned for the rest of that month.

Those banned more than four months in a row get an electric shock through their device and are then banned permanently.

How'd you like those apples?

1wink.gif

That's the kind of AppleInsider I'd create, ladies and gentlemen!

Vote ME for President!!!
Android: pitting every phone company in the world against one, getting a higher number, and considering it a major achievement.
Reply
Android: pitting every phone company in the world against one, getting a higher number, and considering it a major achievement.
Reply
post #44 of 190
So Forbes claims “Some Wall Street sources close to some Apple executives” say the company might be searching for a replacement for Cook.

Ok if we're to believe this I'd like to know who these executives are that are supposedly blabbing to Wall Street "sources". Are we supposed to believe direct reports of Cook are involved in a whisper campaign to get him fired? Or working behind the scenes with the board to remove him? Sorry but not buying it. At all.
post #45 of 190
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?

At the point where the company (or aggrieved investors) asks it to do so.

post #46 of 190
What else could you expect from the greedy SOB bastards on Wall Street.
I only wish that Steve Jobs was alive so that he could tell them what to do with themselves.
Tim Cook is too much of a gentleman to tell them.
post #47 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


Not talking about future products has been part of Apple's MO since the beginning. What you call "an issue" is doing business. You would rather Apple Osbourne themselves than actually update products when they are ready to be updated. If what you want were realistic there would be no Apple Insider for you to bitch and moan on because there would be no Apple. By the way, it is not "dropping the ball" by not sending you a telegram about any and all potential future releases so just. Stop.

I disagree.

 

Apple's MO **used to be** to not talk about future products, but to release fresh updates at a reasonable rate, which kept customers happy. Even though Apple was silent, you could trust that it was still in the game and that investing in APple products was not a dead end. That MO worked but it is entirely different than Apple's current MO for many of its product segments like the Mac Pro.

 

The *new* MO is to still not talk about future products, *and* to suddenly and inexplicably go YEARS without updates, as if the products were forgotten. That new MO is toxic to customers and to Apple's culture. Not giving a shit about a certain group of customers is not a sign of pursuing excellence.  

post #48 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave MacLachlan View Post

This forum really needs a "thumbs-down" feature for comments.

I've been saying that for ages too.

 

Maybe that's why I'm not on Facebook either. It creates some sort of perverse and unrealistic world where people can only give thumbs up to each other, yet you can't rate down comments that deserve to be rated down?

 

If somebody is a dumbass or if they write something really stupid, then they should be downrated.

 

I welcome the day when I can open this site and I see that certain comments have gotten -20 thumbdowns.

I am not sure about the value of a thumbs-down feature.

 

In fact, since it cuts both ways, it could backfire. Given how many trolls (and likely lurker-trolls) there are here on AI, think about how easy it would be to do 'drive-by' thumbs-downs of pro-Apple comments and commenters......!

 

If one dislikes a post, one can always provide a response countering the post.

post #49 of 190
1000 % no 2000% accurate.

I have never seen such negative BS in all the negative articles on Apple.

If Wall Strret is so smart and Amazon will maybe money and grow into their P/E someday while Apple has already accomplished the growth in four years......


then Apple at Amazon's P/E is worth $133,647 a share.

Apple is going to do the last four over and instead of growin n four years....Apple will spread the same total growth over 15 years.
post #50 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

In fact, since it cuts both ways, it could backfire. Given how many trolls (and likely lurker-trolls) there are here on AI, think about how easy it would be to do 'drive-by' thumbs-downs of pro-Apple comments and commenters......!

 

Yes, I did address that point in another comment of mine.

 

I wrote that the day that there are more anti-Apple trolls on this site than actual people who like Apple, well, that's the day when it would no longer be useful for me to visit here. The thumbs down feature would be a good barometer of measuring the demographics of the users on this site.

post #51 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

Sure, why not? It would be a great thing.

 

The day that a pro-Apple comment gets more thumbs down than an anti-Apple comment made by Samsung shills and other haters who frequent this site is the day that I would no longer visit here.

Then you're just setting yourself up for that.

 

Warts and all, AI is one of the last few sane places for a true Apple enthusiast, and I would hate to see it lose those.

post #52 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eluard View Post


This smacks just a little of homophobia.

Th big joke there being that he has never come out and no one has a shred of proof he might be. They are basing it on him working for a gy friendly company and he's never been seen in public with a female and he's not married.

But in truth I don't think Cook allegedly being gay is the real issue. I think it's just folks so determined to believe that Steve was Apple so there's no way it can survive without him, to a point of pathology.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #53 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Then you're just setting yourself up for that.

 

Warts and all, AI is one of the last few sane places for a true Apple enthusiast, and I would hate to see it lose those.

I am still here and not any place else, so I do agree that AI is better than other options out there, though there are some warts as you mention.

post #54 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleSauce007 View Post

What else could you expect from the greedy SOB bastards on Wall Street.
I only wish that Steve Jobs was alive so that he could tell them what to do with themselves.
Tim Cook is too much of a gentleman to tell them.

Not sure that the job -- or even a desirable trait -- of CEO of one of the most valuable companies on earth is "too much of a gentleman...."

post #55 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

I am still here and not any place else, so I do agree that AI is better than other options out there, though there are some warts as you mention.

Some of us are (occasionally) glad to have you here!1wink.giflol.gif

post #56 of 190
A company's purpose is to sell products and make money.

Apple sells tons of products and makes tons of money.

What does Wall Street expect?

Apple just sold 47 million iPhones in a single quarter... beating its old single-quarter record by 12 million units... and in the process generated billions of dollars in profit. It should be noted that Apple is currently the #2 smartphone manufacturer by units sales... but it's even more impressive because they only sell mid-range to high-end smartphones. They aren't propping up their sales numbers with a bunch of cheap, disposable phones.

I understand that when a company is "failing" you should blame the CEO.

So... where are we right now?
post #57 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by k2director View Post

I disagree.

Apple's MO **used to be** to not talk about future products, but to release fresh updates at a reasonable rate, which kept customers happy. Even though Apple was silent, you could trust that it was still in the game and that investing in APple products was not a dead end. That MO worked but it is entirely different than Apple's current MO for many of its product segments like the Mac Pro.

The *new* MO is to still not talk about future products, *and* to suddenly and inexplicably go YEARS without updates, as if the products were forgotten. That new MO is toxic to customers and to Apple's culture. Not giving a shit about a certain group of customers is not a sign of pursuing excellence.  

1) Years without updates? 1rolleyes.gif

2) There is article after article about Apple "dropping the ball" before, during, and now after Steve Jobs. Your selective memory over Apple's long history of not releasing products when you want them is pathetic. AI even predicted the Mac mini would be eliminated due to it's excessively long time between updates, as one example of many.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #58 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by k2director View Post

Apple's MO **used to be** to not talk about future products, but to release fresh updates at a reasonable rate, which kept customers happy.

...

The *new* MO is to still not talk about future products, *and* to suddenly and inexplicably go YEARS without updates

 

Apple went silent at the same time as a series of missteps (maps, production problems) and extended lull between significant updates or announcements.

 

So all we get to hear about for the last 7 months is their missteps with generous side of speculation. If Apple won't supply something positive to talk about, someone else will fill in the blanks.

post #59 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Some of us are (occasionally) glad to have you here!1wink.giflol.gif

That's good to hear, and some others would of course wish that I were banned, especially when the topic veers off into other certain areas.lol.gif

 

My goal has never been to please all of the people, all of the time, so I am ok with that.1smoking.gif

post #60 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip View Post

A company's purpose is to sell products and make money.

Apple sells tons of products and makes tons of money.

What does Wall Street expect?

Apple just sold 47 million iPhones in a single quarter... beating its old single-quarter record by 12 million units... and in the process generated billions of dollars in profit. It should be noted that Apple is currently the #2 smartphone manufacturer by units sales... but it's even more impressive because they only sell mid-range to high-end smartphones. They aren't propping up their sales numbers with a bunch of cheap, disposable phones.

I understand that when a company is "failing" you should blame the CEO.

So... where are we right now?

On top of all that, Wall Street is currently valuing Apple at a paltry 6 time cash-adjusted earnings. That's about 1/3 of the AVERAGE stock on the market.

So even if Apple slows down to just becoming an average company, the share price needs to triple to be roughly equivalent to the rest of the market.

The valuation is truly insane.

But, then, I'm used to it. The media and business press has been telling lies about Apple for decades. In the 90s, it was all about how Macs were incompatible and unaffordable and how Apple was going to go out of business any day.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #61 of 190

Isn't it fairly standard that when a giant corporation loses 45% of its value over the course of 5 months that shareholders and boards of directors tend to consider firing the CEO?

 

I mean, seriously, if Google lost 45% of its value and there were rumors Larry Page was on his way out, would AI write this kind of article? No, because he maybe should be on his way out.

 

On the other hand, I think everyone at Apple and most shareholders realize that canning Cook would be stupid in terms of the stock price, as it would make investors nervous that Apple will never find another "Steve Jobs type" who can drive the company's value up like Steve did. Would firing Cook start a carousel of CEOs and other execs? That question would probably know another 45% off of AAPL. I would assume that if they don't like what Tim's doing, they'd keep him on as a spokesperson with the CEO title and just dole his duties out to different people; create the perception of unity and stability while changing gears behind the scenes.

post #62 of 190
Q
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

I've been saying that for ages too.

Maybe that's why I'm not on Facebook either. It creates some sort of perverse and unrealistic world where people can only give thumbs up to each other, yet you can't rate down comments that deserve to be rated down?

If somebody is a dumbass or if they write something really stupid, then they should be downrated.

I welcome the day when I can open this site and I see that certain comments have gotten -20 thumbdowns.
Totally agree! The other problem with AI is that when someone truly is a dumbass here, and makes totally moronic claims, and you call them out for being a total dumbass they report you to the AI censorship police who then take you to task for being open and honest! At least give us the thumbs down to use against these toilet bowl floaters and trolls! Especially now that it has been proven that Samesung pays people to go after their competitors in online forums!
post #63 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Superbass View Post

Isn't it fairly standard that when a giant corporation loses 45% of its value over the course of 5 months that shareholders and boards of directors tend to consider firing the CEO?

I mean, seriously, if Google lost 45% of its value and there were rumors Larry Page was on his way out, would AI write this kind of article? No, because he maybe should be on his way out.

Did AI write an article about Steve Jobs being fired when Apple dropped 40% in early 2008 or 45% of its value in late 2008, both under 2 months?

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #64 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

That's good to hear, and some others would of course wish that I were banned, especially when the topic veers off into other certain areas.lol.gif

 

My goal has never been to please all of the people, all of the time, so I am ok with that.1smoking.gif


How about some of the people just once.

 

I'm kidding... really... just kidding...  1biggrin.gif

Hmmmmmm...
Reply
Hmmmmmm...
Reply
post #65 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaarrrgggh View Post

First off, it was not Apple's best quarter ever. It was a quarter with record revenue and record profits (by a narrow margin), but best quarter implies fundamentally improving underlying data... which there was none.

 

So, you're saying that the goal of a company is to NOT make money?  And that it's leaders saying that a quarter with the best revenue and profits ever is somehow NOT the best?  Wow, I'm glad that the government doesn't get a hold of this logic as it would use that to justify almost all that it does.

post #66 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Superbass View Post

Isn't it fairly standard that when a giant corporation loses 45% of its value over the course of 5 months that shareholders and boards of directors tend to consider firing the CEO?

I mean, seriously, if Google lost 45% of its value and there were rumors Larry Page was on his way out, would AI write this kind of article? No, because he maybe should be on his way out.

Apple lost "stock market value"

They still generate billions of dollars in cold hard cash every month by selling great products.

It's the fickle stock market that's to blame for the "loss in value." I don't know how another CEO would fix that.

Maybe investors would be more comfortable investing in some other mobile device and computer company. Maybe a better performing mobile device and computer company.

What company would that be?
post #67 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


Did AI write an article about Steve Jobs being fired when Apple dropped 40% in early 2008 or 45% of its value in late 2008, both under 2 months?

 

You can't compare Steve Jobs to Tim Cook.

 

Steve Jobs brought the company back from the dead and was untouchable because he was the company in a lot of ways.

 

Tim Cook is the guy that Steve recommended for the job. It's weird to assume he's got as long a leash as Steve had.

 

Also, the total value lost is what, 4 times as much this time?

post #68 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.

This is a crock.  You are reading more into a 300 billion dollar loss versus a 60 billion dollar loss as being something more than just a percentage because of the size of the number.   Must be an economist right?

post #69 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

All Tim Cook needs to do is come out and say something that projects serious confidence along these lines. Not platitudes. Then back it up with serious action.

He's helming a company that's making record profits & revenue quarter after quarter. He doesn't need to cowtow to grandstanding & bluster.
Edited by Lord Amhran - 4/22/13 at 6:14pm
post #70 of 190
So if Tim Cook should go, who should be his replacement? No one on MacRumors seems to be able to answer that question Maybe someone here will throw out names. Should it be someone inside Apple? Or an external candidate? Jack Dorsey? Should Apple buy Twitter and install Dick Costolo as CEO? Or Yahoo and Marissa Mayer? Should the bring Woz back or maybe have Larry Ellison take control of the board? What exactly does the anti-Tim brigade want?
post #71 of 190
Yep, he is a manager not a leader. Don't get me wrong this is not a bad thing, but to be a successful company, you need all the people on the bus and in the right seats. Apple needs another Steve, and Tim is not the right person nor is he in the right seat.

It is what it is and the stock price shows it
post #72 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Amhran View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

All Tim Cook needs to do is come out and say something that projects serious confidence along these lines. Not platitudes. Then back it up with serious action.

He's helming a company that's making record profits & revenue quarter after quarter. He doesn't need to cowtow to grandstanding & bluster.

"Grandstanding and bluster" was what SJ was doing in the quote I cut-and-pasted in that post? Why don't you go back and re-read what I wrote.

 

Great selective quoting of a post.......

post #73 of 190

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. They don't care about the business, they don't care about the products, they don't care about the CEO, they don't care if Apple is still around in 5 years (or even next week). They just want the cash. It's driving them insane seeing all that cash locked up in a viable business. It'd be so much better for them if Apple was in crisis and the activists could move in and put that cash to work making Wall Street some quick money. Right now the market cap is way too high for anyone to exert any significant control over Apple, but if they can topple it, bring down the market cap, they can "liberate" Apple's cash.

post #74 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. They don't care about the business, they don't care about the products, they don't care about the CEO, they don't care if Apple is still around in 5 years (or even next week). They just want the cash. It's driving them insane seeing all that cash locked up in a viable business. It'd be so much better for them if Apple was in crisis and the activists could move in and put that cash to work making Wall Street some quick money. Right now the market cap is way too high for anyone to exert any significant control over Apple, but if they can topple it, bring down the market cap, they can "liberate" Apple's cash.

They appear to have hired plenty of people to help spread that lie. Just this thread along the resident shills are saying that it "didn't count" when the stock tanked to well below it's peak percentage and did so multiple times in much shorter time frames because it was under Jobs despite their cries back then that Apple was doomed.

Most importantly, Cook has only been at the helm for one and half years and the stock is still above what it when he took over yet they aren't crediting for any of the stock growth, counting any market reasons for its decline, or considering the massive investments, revenue, profits or mindshare Apple has. The only realistic conclusions one can draw is that they are paid shills here to disrupt Apple's mindshare for a price or they have success so much that they will find some argument to disparage Apple regardless of what they stated previously.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #75 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. They don't care about the business, they don't care about the products, they don't care about the CEO, they don't care if Apple is still around in 5 years (or even next week). They just want the cash. It's driving them insane seeing all that cash locked up in a viable business. It'd be so much better for them if Apple was in crisis and the activists could move in and put that cash to work making Wall Street some quick money. Right now the market cap is way too high for anyone to exert any significant control over Apple, but if they can topple it, bring down the market cap, they can "liberate" Apple's cash.

I too subscribe to this theory. I'd add another option, that they want to push Apple into making products for the untouchable masses to create big sales numbers to project a different and false illusion of growth.

Edit: Wow, I eclipsed the 1K post milestone.
post #76 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

So if Tim Cook should go, who should be his replacement? No one on MacRumors seems to be able to answer that question Maybe someone here will throw out names. Should it be someone inside Apple? Or an external candidate? Jack Dorsey? Should Apple buy Twitter and install Dick Costolo as CEO? Or Yahoo and Marissa Mayer? Should the bring Woz back or maybe have Larry Ellison take control of the board? What exactly does the anti-Tim brigade want?

These chuckleheads would think Woz would be a better choice. "Woz would make iOS open. iOS needs to be open."

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #77 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by poke View Post
It's driving them insane seeing all that cash locked up in a viable business. 

So, what do you propose Apple does with this cash? After all, it does not belong to Cook or the management, but they can certainly decide what to do with it.

post #78 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by quinney View Post


That would result in a competition among trolls to get the highest number of thumbs down. Is that what you really want?

Ars Technica has a nice "Up/Down" voting system. When a certain level of down votes accumulate, that post gets hidden and you have to click on it to read what the moron wrote. They also tag responses with enough up votes as "Reader Favorite," which can be appended to the end of the original article.

 

If trolls want to race to the bottom, more power to them. Maybe have the system auto-ban them from posting for a period of time if they exceed X number of down-voted postings?

 

I know there's no perfect system, but I'd love to see something that would help filter out the crud.

post #79 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave MacLachlan View Post

I know there's no perfect system, but I'd love to see something that would help filter out the crud.

But isn't that's what "moderators" are appointed for? To delete crud and ban repeat offender crudsters?

post #80 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

So, what do you propose Apple does with this cash? After all, it does not belong to Cook or the management, but they can certainly decide what to do with it.

If in any way possible I'd privatize the company but they'd have to borrow a lot. They'd certainly be able to pay it back quickly and with low interest but it's technically possible. You can't really count all the cash they have as they do need some for running the business, some for potential issues that could arise, and (of course) most of it is overseas so they lose a huge chunk to taxes if they want to bring it back to the states. If there is a way around that by back stock overseas I don't know of it.

Another is just keep doing what they're doing. Do the stock buybacks, issue dividends, and invest in their future. The fucktards don't care about success, they want the drama. Risky moves are exciting and when you have more cash security than the entire valuation of your biggest competitors combined there is really nothing you can do to excite those people. These are the people that want an on-screen regardless of story or plot. They are the Michael Bay fans of business and technology.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

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