or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Cook incentivizes his 1M restricted stock unit payout as top brass net $86.5M in share selloff
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Cook incentivizes his 1M restricted stock unit payout as top brass net $86.5M in share selloff - Page 2

post #41 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by enature View Post

Cook never had guts to increase iPhone's screen to a size that would make it easy to use for the majority.

That's just stupid enough to be funny.
Quote:
Cook failed to make iCloud reliable.

That's just stupid.
Quote:
Cook is a spreadsheet master who has no understanding of products.

You are just stupid.
Quote:
Cook failed to revitalize iOS.

And also blind. Reads like a poem, dunnit?
 
Quote:
Did you see the last Keynote? Shameful DISASTER!

Find another company to whine about.
post #42 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post


Oh it really would take an Apple fanatic to equate one's parents to two company executives.  It's not 'like' at all.

It was simply a binary choice question.  Like flipping a coin, you don't get to choose both.

And why not? Apple chose both and it'll keep both.
post #43 of 69

I hear a lot of Cook bashing and defense on this thread. I won't try to prove who's right and wrong but I'm just throwing the fact out there. From June 22, 2012 to June 21, 2013, Apple share has slid 27%, trailing 98% of the companies in S&P500, and pretty much on par with JC Penny (-29%). Had this agreement been in effect a year earlier, Tim Cook would have gotten only 50% of his RSU today.

 

You can make your arguments about why a successful company like Apple gets the same whipping as the troubled retailer: Wall Street manipulation, lack of innovation, clueless Tim Cook, etc. Pick your side, I'm not partaking in the debate.

 

However, given the management's team lack luster performance (stock-price wise), I think a fair compensation would be somewhere around 10% of the RSU granted. 50% just seems too generous to me.


Edited by zoffdino - 6/22/13 at 1:20pm
post #44 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by enature View Post

Unfortunately, most local Cook zealots will slam you here. They are so out of touch with the reality that they will keep defending Cook even when AAPL hits $300.
 
Cook never had guts to increase iPhone's screen to a size that would make it easy to use for the majority.
Cook failed to make iCloud reliable.
Cook is a spreadsheet master who has no understanding of products.
Cook failed to revitalize iOS.
Jobs chose 3.5"/4". Oh and the majority wants it? Interesting the 5 is still #1.


Jobs had MobileMe.
Jobs created iOS.

And I seem to remember Jobs touting copy/paste a year or so after the iPhone was released.
post #45 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post


Oh it really would take an Apple fanatic to equate one's parents to two company executives.  It's not 'like' at all.

It was simply a binary choice question.  Like flipping a coin, you don't get to choose both.

No, jungmark's right. Your fun little binary 'hypothetical postulate' is trivializing an existential matter of importance. If you don't like the parents example, it's like asking, which would you rather do without, your testicles or your right arm? (I know, don't tell me, you're left-handed.)

I don't think you guys over there realize that Apple is seen, unconsciously or not, as the antidote for all the crimes against the consumer commited by American business over the past 65 years. Or longer, I'm just talking post-war. Things like tail fins on cars, planned obsolescence, TV consoles from hell, that sort of crime.

If Apple fails, an entire process of redemption for Western capitalism fails. We ought not to play mind games with this.
Edited by Flaneur - 6/22/13 at 10:38am
post #46 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post


Jobs chose 3.5"/4". Oh and the majority wants it? Interesting the 5 is still #1.

Jobs had MobileMe.
Jobs created iOS.

And I seem to remember Jobs touting copy/paste a year or so after the iPhone was released.
You guys ought to think deeper. The fact that Jobs chose small screen in 2007-2010, does not mean he would stay loyal to it in 2012. Jobs didn't give a shit to what he said yesterday, let alone years ago. Jobs loyalty was to one thing - and one thing only - make Apple products easiest in use.
 
So, in 2007, a small size phone was the best choice - easy to hold to your ear.
But iPhone's success - a revolutionary success - redefined the very purpose of the phone. People started to interact more with the screen but talk less. Larger phones became easier to use. 
It is this subtle difference in consumers' preference that makes all the difference. A good CEO should be able to perceive it and act on it. Jobs had vision and balls to do it. Cook has neither.
 
In 2012 it was just gutless to keep it at 4", in 2013 it is stupid. In 2014.... if Cook still keeps it at 4", the board will fire him.
 
The same applies to iCloud. Yes, Apple always sucked at syncing - it sucked during Jobs (iDisk anyone?). But it was forgivable in the pre-Dropbox era. Now having unreliable cloud service is criminal. Cook does not understand it. Jobs would fire and hire people, shout and curse,  but he would have it - by now iCloud would work. 
 
Cook keeps saying "We want to make the best products." Sadly, he does not understand what "the best" means.
 
People can keep blaming Wall Street, trolls, crooks, shareholders, consumers, and Samsung; and Cook can incentivize his awards all he wants... but soon AAPL will see $3XX price. 
post #47 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by minicapt View Post

Thank you for the reaction from Redmond.

Cheers

Meanwhile Redmond's entire mobile effort has been a complete disaster. They're essentially a non-starter in the market, and it's been nearly three years of Windows Phone already (since October 2010.)
post #48 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by enature View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ Web View Post

With AAPL share plummeting 10% in 2 days from historic lows during a stock buyback period, Cook obviously believes AAPL shares are worth less under his cockeyed misguided leadership.
 
Cook never had guts to increase iPhone's screen to a size that would make it easy to use for the majority.
Cook failed to make iCloud reliable.
Cook is a spreadsheet master who has no understanding of products.
Cook failed to revitalize iOS.
 
Did you see the last Keynote? Shameful DISASTER! Craig Federighi introduced "swipe for the control pannel" and "moving photo backgrounds" like something radically new. Can you imagine Steve Jobs presenting this old shit that has been on Android for months if not years? Or... Flat Design? Have Apple execs ever played with Windows 8?
Steve Jobs would fire people on the spot rather than put this Apple mockery on the worldwide display.
 
Are Apple Execs living in some kind of bubble and do not see where the world, the competitors, and consumer trends are? It used to be that Apple defined consumer trends, now Apple desperately tries to catch up and fails.
But who cares? As AAPL price continues to melt, Cook zealots will keep singing praises to this inept and gutless CEO.

 

First, I don't believe stock price is a good indicator of a company's success or failure as the stock market is an utter gamble based on the unstable emotions of investors/speculators and the wildly unpredictable events of the outside world.

 

Second, Cook never increased the iPhone's screen size because he's only been in charge since after the finalization of the iPhone 5. You clearly have no grasp of recent history.

 

I can't comment on iCloud as I don't use or follow the service extensively enough.

 

Third, how can you say Cook has no understanding of products. You are talking about the man in charge of building Apple's supply chain for all of their products from the ground up! I think he understands products very, VERY well. If you mean to say he's not the visionary to lead the company's future product development, I think that's a bit of soothsaying to me. I don't think he's been in the position long enough for anyone to know either way, not to mention he still has amazingly bright people underneath him.

 

Fourth, did you even watch the Keynote? iOS looks pretty revitalized to me. Whether you like the new look and feel of iOS 7 is a matter of opinion, not a fact for the general populace. Again, you have no grasp of recent history. Steve Jobs, himself, introduced Notification Center as if it was new when Android had it for quite some time. They did the same thing with many features years before Cook ever took the helm. From what you're saying, Jobs would've had to fire himself!

 

And with all of your points refuted, your conclusion is worthless.

When a company stops chasing profit and start chasing the betterment of their products, services, workforce, and customers, that will be the most valuable company in the world.
Reply
When a company stops chasing profit and start chasing the betterment of their products, services, workforce, and customers, that will be the most valuable company in the world.
Reply
post #49 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by enature View Post
 
Cook zealots can keep blaming Wall Street, trolls, crooks, shareholders, consumers, and Samsung; and Cook can incentivize his awards all he wants... but soon AAPL will see $3XX price

And?

post #50 of 69
rkevwill is right. When RSUs vest, the original value of the shares is treated like ordinary income... it's just given to you in the form of stock. So you owe taxes on that value immediately, just like regular pay. It gets a little more complicated, because if the stock went up or down since the grant date, the difference is treated as a capital gain when you sell it.

Typically when RSUs vest, the recipient doesn't even have a choice: a portion of the stock is automatically sold just to cover the taxes. When you look at that filing, you can see that Tim Cook acquired 80,000 shares and sold about 41,000 shares on the same day. My guess is that this was an automatic sale by the brokerage, and 100% of the proceeds will go to fed & state taxes (and fees to the brokerage).

So, the real question, is why not sell all of it? Two possibilities:
1. He really does have incredible faith that the stock is undervalued, so no reason to sell now.
2. He wants the preferential tax treatment for long-term capital gains. If he sells now, the increase in value is taxed at the top tax rates. If he waits a year, that split gets will get taxed at the lower long-term capital gains rates.

What if he does sell the rest? Does that mean he's lost faith?
The short answer is no. Think about it this way: if they gave Tim Cook a $17m cash bonus, would you expect him to turn around and use that cash to buy more Apple stock? Especially knowing that he's got a 10-year incentive plan to receive more stock from the company? Of course not. Any financial advisor would tell you (whether you're rich or not) that it's insane to invest all of your current finances in one company, especially if that company is also your employer (the company that you're relying on for your future finances).

Finally, if you look at the details of the story, Cook is actually making his future stock grants even more dependent on the company's performance, signaling that he has confidence in the continued success of the company.
post #51 of 69
Common sense and reason from a one-poster? WELCOME!
post #52 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


That's just stupid enough to be funny.
That's just stupid.
You are just stupid.
And also blind. Reads like a poem, dunnit?
 
Find another company to whine about.
Shut up and go away, you useless troll.

It appears you want to go out again in a blaze of glory. One can only hope next time it will stick.  If the comments you were replying to were that stupid why not argue the facts and make a cogent and well reasoned argument instead of personal attacks and telling him to shut up and go away? 

 

I also disagree with his comments. For one I think Tim Cook has given the strongest indication yet that he will release a larger iPhone by stating that it will happen when no compromises need to be made. That clearly suggest it will happen once the parts are in place. Before they always said that 3.5" then 4" were the perfect size.  iCloud has had some issues but so has every other cloud service. It is improving all the time. Tim Cook also oversaw the biggest change to iOS since the iPhone was released so his comment was baseless. He is a numbers guy but also has managed to take over as CEO and do an admirable job considering the overall economy. It is unreasonable to expect him to have kept those inflated $700 share prices. He has done everything he could to stabilize and maintain shareholder value. The recent dip had more to do with Bernanke's announcement  than Apple. 

 

That is how forums work. When you disagree with someone you argue the facts and logic to support your opinion. You don't call them stupid and tell them to shut up and go away. 

post #53 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac View Post

That is how forums work. When you disagree with someone you argue the facts and logic to support your opinion. You don't call them stupid and tell them to shut up and go away. 

The unthinking, so as not to call them stupid, imagine that Apple can crank out screen sizes like Samsung can. Or settle on a size and sell a couple million like HTC might do with the One.

They have no clue about the years of development that Apple puts into a phone, and the years of arrangements with display or chip suppliers that are necessary before they can hit the market in 20 countries in the millions on the first weekend and in the tens of millions over the course of the device's lifetime.

They do not think about realities, so they don't deserve a real response. It's like arguing with a child. And they keep coming back. They never get it. They are wasting our time. Cogent argument doesn't help, because they lack the requisite neurons. It's like trying to explain empathy to a sociopath.

But "Apple should have seen the market's turn toward larger screens a year ago." Right. About a year before that Apple was probably investing that $2 billion in Sharp to get IGZO going. Or quietly buying up and stockpiling indium. Or preparing iOS for a new resolution. Any number of things that we have no idea about.

The basic problem is that these big-screen tantrum throwers can't think. About real things. Why do they deserve a logical response?

Then there's the real possibility that they are not for real, but merely trolling for dollars. Harping on Apple's two perceived vulnerabilities, valuation under Tim Cook, and screen size . . .
post #54 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post


The unthinking, so as not to call them stupid, imagine that Apple can crank out screen sizes like Samsung can. Or settle on a size and sell a couple million like HTC might do with the One.
 

 

It is fine to call that collective group stupid, my point was not to directly call another poster stupid. Your very well stated posts proves my point by elevating the discussion since you made some great points. You beat him down with salient arguments and didn't need to tell him to shut up and go away which adds nothing of value but more noise. It is best to fight fire with water not more fire. All we can do is flag posts by trolls and let the mods do their job and either ignore them not try not to be like them. 


Edited by gwmac - 6/22/13 at 1:46pm
post #55 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post

They have no clue about the years of development that Apple puts into a phone, and the years of arrangements with display or chip suppliers that are necessary before they can hit the market in 20 countries in the millions on the first weekend and in the tens of millions over the course of the device's lifetime.

They do not think about realities, so they don't deserve a real response. It's like arguing with a child.
That's a lot of assumptions on Flaneur's part. ALL major smartphone makers came up with screen's above 4". Only Cook failed. So don't give me a bunch of excuses about production logistics as to why Cook failed to deliver. 
And portraying such excuses as a deeper understanding of Apple's philosophy is plain naive and childish. 

Edited by enature - 6/23/13 at 12:27am
post #56 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post

[...] So yes, he was dissembling on two counts. But it's not bullshit, it's exactly the way you want the CEO to handle it.

 

Not me. I'd rather hear "We're not prepared to do that now" possibly with the addition of "...but who knows how we'll feel in the future."

 

I don't want the CEO making up excuses that can't withstand the scrutiny of a six-year-old's deductive reasoning. Aside from the obvious blow to credibility it's insulting to the people who buy Apple products.

 

He appears to be good at running the company but maybe he's just not so good at speaking directly to critics.

post #57 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by enature View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post

They have no clue about the years of development that Apple puts into a phone, and the years of arrangements with display or chip suppliers that are necessary before they can hit the market in 20 countries in the millions on the first weekend and in the tens of millions over the course of the device's lifetime.

They do not think about realities, so they don't deserve a real response. It's like arguing with a child.
That's a lot of assumptions on Flaneur's part. ALL major smartphone makers came up with screen's above 4". Only Cook failed. So don't give me a bunch of excuses about production logistics as to why Cook failed to deliver. 
And portraying such excuses as a deeper understanding of Apple's philosophy is plain naive and childish. 

All of those phones have huge compromises and as consequence are inferior devices.

 

Only Apple failed? Where is the 4"+ device with a screen comparable in quality to the iPhone? You have 1 or 2, the Xperia Z and HTC one. Between those, the iPhone still has the better screen from a lot of metrics, and then see how many devices (HTC one and Xperia Z) are sold.

 

Both are heavier, both are huge, both had problems getting out of the factory, both are small sellers (compared to the iPhone).

How in the world can you counter this?

 

Don't get me wrong, I think Apple is the only one that CAN produce a great 5 inch device and they are not doing it just because they are earning 10 billion net profit each quarter, otherwise they would.

 

The truth is that current high end devices have big screens because OEMs do not have the capacity and talent to produce a high end 4" device with reasonable battery life and horsepower. All the smaller versions are "cheap". But only a blind man would say that there is no market for a premium and lucrative 5" phone. It is much better for media consumption and the lack of talent from Android OEMs (that forced them to produce bigger phones) came as a blessing in disguise, as the "smaller phone" as fashion status disappeared completely, and usability became king.


Edited by pedromartins - 6/23/13 at 5:57am
post #58 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by pedromartins View Post

All of those phones have huge compromises and as consequence are inferior devices.

 

Only Apple failed? Where is the 4"+ device with a screen comparable in quality to the iPhone? You have 1 or 2, the Xperia Z and HTC one. Between those, the iPhone still has the better screen from a lot of metrics, and then see how many devices (HTC one and Xperia Z) are sold.

 

Both are heavier, both are huge, both had problems getting out of the factory, both are small sellers (compared to the iPhone).

How in the world can you counter this?

 

Don't get me wrong, I think Apple is the only one that CAN produce a great 5 inch device and they are not doing it just because they are earning 10 billion net profit each quarter, otherwise they would.

 

The truth is that current high end devices have big screens because OEMs do not have the capacity and talent to produce a high end 4" device with reasonable battery life and horsepower. All the smaller versions are "cheap". But only a blind man would say that there is no market for a premium and lucrative 5" phone. It is much better for media consumption and the lack of talent from Android OEMs (that forced them to produce bigger phones) came as a blessing in disguise, as the "smaller phone" as fashion status disappeared completely, and usability became king.

Not true...your logic is flawed.......first....the same OEMs are the ones that produce the retina displays for the iPad and the iPhone 5......so...if they can make them for Apple why would they not include them in their own products? The Android OEMs are making bigger screen phones because that is what their customers WANT not because it is the only screen they can produce!! Don't forget Apple does not make their own hardware. The same companies that make the iPhone screens also are the Android OEMs.......

Tallest Skil:


"Eventually Google will have their Afghanistan with Oracle and collapse"

"The future is Apple, Google, and a third company that hasn't yet been created."


 


 

Reply

Tallest Skil:


"Eventually Google will have their Afghanistan with Oracle and collapse"

"The future is Apple, Google, and a third company that hasn't yet been created."


 


 

Reply
post #59 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by geekdad View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by pedromartins View Post

All of those phones have huge compromises and as consequence are inferior devices.

 

Only Apple failed? Where is the 4"+ device with a screen comparable in quality to the iPhone? You have 1 or 2, the Xperia Z and HTC one. Between those, the iPhone still has the better screen from a lot of metrics, and then see how many devices (HTC one and Xperia Z) are sold.

 

Both are heavier, both are huge, both had problems getting out of the factory, both are small sellers (compared to the iPhone).

How in the world can you counter this?

 

Don't get me wrong, I think Apple is the only one that CAN produce a great 5 inch device and they are not doing it just because they are earning 10 billion net profit each quarter, otherwise they would.

 

The truth is that current high end devices have big screens because OEMs do not have the capacity and talent to produce a high end 4" device with reasonable battery life and horsepower. All the smaller versions are "cheap". But only a blind man would say that there is no market for a premium and lucrative 5" phone. It is much better for media consumption and the lack of talent from Android OEMs (that forced them to produce bigger phones) came as a blessing in disguise, as the "smaller phone" as fashion status disappeared completely, and usability became king.

Not true...your logic is flawed.......first....the same OEMs are the ones that produce the retina displays for the iPad and the iPhone 5......so...if they can make them for Apple why would they not include them in their own products? The Android OEMs are making bigger screen phones because that is what their customers WANT not because it is the only screen they can produce!! Don't forget Apple does not make their own hardware. The same companies that make the iPhone screens also are the Android OEMs.......

No, your logic is flawed, I never said anything about they not being able to produce great 4" screens, or are you having any trouble reading what I wrote?

 

First, they (Samsung) can produce those screens, but Apple buys all of them with years of advance. That's what made Samsung invest so much in amoled, despite all screens being inferior to the one used on the iPhone. The "samsung" that makes phones is a complete different "samsung" that makes screens. They have nothing in common, and treat each other like regular clients.

 

Second of all, "OEMs do not have the capacity and talent to produce a high end 4" device with reasonable battery life and horsepower".

The vast majority of phones sold by (for example) Samsung, LG and Sony have screen sizes smaller then 4.5", but there's no highend 4" model because they can't produce one. Just watered down versions that nobody is willing to pay for, like the galaxy s3 (and s4) mini.

 

Besides what you wrote about they not making their parts is completely irrelevant and makes you look very ignorant about the matter. The screen is unique. The CPU is unique. The way the phone is "mounted" is unique. The phone is unique.

 

Can you say the same about a plastic s4 with a qualcomm processor running android with a 2.2 froyo skin on top?


Edited by pedromartins - 6/23/13 at 10:02am
post #60 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by pedromartins View Post

All of those phones have huge compromises and as consequence are inferior devices.

 

Only Apple failed? Where is the 4"+ device with a screen comparable in quality to the iPhone? You have 1 or 2, the Xperia Z and HTC one. Between those, the iPhone still has the better screen from a lot of metrics, and then see how many devices (HTC one and Xperia Z) are sold.

 

Both are heavier, both are huge, both had problems getting out of the factory, both are small sellers (compared to the iPhone).

How in the world can you counter this?

 

Don't get me wrong, I think Apple is the only one that CAN produce a great 5 inch device and they are not doing it just because they are earning 10 billion net profit each quarter, otherwise they would.

 

The truth is that current high end devices have big screens because OEMs do not have the capacity and talent to produce a high end 4" device with reasonable battery life and horsepower. All the smaller versions are "cheap". But only a blind man would say that there is no market for a premium and lucrative 5" phone. It is much better for media consumption and the lack of talent from Android OEMs (that forced them to produce bigger phones) came as a blessing in disguise, as the "smaller phone" as fashion status disappeared completely, and usability became king.

 

Pedro, neither you nor I nor anyone here knows what goes into the decision making behind closed doors at Apple, Samsung, HTC, or any other company. You have no idea if they can or can't make a 4" phone equivalent to the S4 or HTC One. Perhaps they feel that their money is better spent on making larger phones and there isn't a large enough Android market to bother for people than want 4". But you cannot sit there and say they are incapable of making such a device because all you are doing is speculating. So try not to speak as if you are Moses laying down the law when you are only guessing like the rest of us. I get that you hate Samsung with an absolute passion. 

 

Even you have admitted in the past that the HTC One has a fantastic screen. The reason that they aren't selling as well as the S4 has a lot more to do with marketing money and brand recognition than quality. That also applies to Sony since they are barely hanging on with smart phones. I certainly agree with you that Apple should and very likely will make a larger iPhone. This will likely happen next year. But I don't think for a moment it is technical limitations preventing it. They wanted to transition the old 3.5" with 30 pin to 4" with lightning and needed 2 years to get enough app developers on board and not give them a double whammy with yet another resolution with a larger phone as well so fast. I think it is very likely we will see a cheaper iPhone released along with the flagship iPhone in a few months and both will be 4". Then next year we will very likely see a larger iPhone. I would estimate it to be 4.8". Once that happens their product matrix will be complete and will take them into another decade without the need to introduce any more iPhone models other than the normal yearly updates. They will cover all the bases with an low-mid-high offerings. 

post #61 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by pedromartins View Post

No, your logic is flawed, I never said anything about they not being able to produce great 4" screens, or are you having any trouble reading what I wrote?

 

First, they (Samsung) can produce those screens, but Apple buys all of them with years of advance. That's what made Samsung invest so much in amoled, despite all screens being inferior to the one used on the iPhone. The "samsung" that makes phones is a complete different "samsung" that makes screens. They have nothing in common, and treat each other like regular clients.

 

Second of all, "OEMs do not have the capacity and talent to produce a high end 4" device with reasonable battery life and horsepower".

The vast majority of phones sold by (for example) Samsung, LG and Sony have screen sizes smaller then 4.5", but there's no highend 4" model because they can't produce one. Just watered down versions that nobody is willing to pay for, like the galaxy s3 (and s4) mini.

 

Besides what you wrote about they not making their parts is completely irrelevant and makes you look very ignorant about the matter. The screen is unique. The CPU is unique. The way the phone is "mounted" is unique. The phone is unique.

 

Can you say the same about a plastic s4 with a qualcomm processor running android with a 2.2 froyo skin on top?

your not grasping the logic...that is why you don't get it....

The same retina screens on the rMBP...ipad and anything else that has a high res screen that has an Apple logo on it is not made by Apple....it is made by and OEM....those same OEMs make their own mobile phones....among other things......so saying they make crap hardware is the same as saying Apple products are crap.....Apple did not make them.....the same OEMs that you are putting down make all the products inside of Apple products... except for the CPU......but that is NOT what I said. That was not what my comments was about. It was about your logic that OEMs cannot produce a high end  4 or 5 inch screen. Funny they can make rMBP and iPad screens but the screens on OEM phones are crap? Yet they are made by the same companies......your logic is flawed.....

Tallest Skil:


"Eventually Google will have their Afghanistan with Oracle and collapse"

"The future is Apple, Google, and a third company that hasn't yet been created."


 


 

Reply

Tallest Skil:


"Eventually Google will have their Afghanistan with Oracle and collapse"

"The future is Apple, Google, and a third company that hasn't yet been created."


 


 

Reply
post #62 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by geekdad View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by pedromartins View Post

No, your logic is flawed, I never said anything about they not being able to produce great 4" screens, or are you having any trouble reading what I wrote?

 

First, they (Samsung) can produce those screens, but Apple buys all of them with years of advance. That's what made Samsung invest so much in amoled, despite all screens being inferior to the one used on the iPhone. The "samsung" that makes phones is a complete different "samsung" that makes screens. They have nothing in common, and treat each other like regular clients.

 

Second of all, "OEMs do not have the capacity and talent to produce a high end 4" device with reasonable battery life and horsepower".

The vast majority of phones sold by (for example) Samsung, LG and Sony have screen sizes smaller then 4.5", but there's no highend 4" model because they can't produce one. Just watered down versions that nobody is willing to pay for, like the galaxy s3 (and s4) mini.

 

Besides what you wrote about they not making their parts is completely irrelevant and makes you look very ignorant about the matter. The screen is unique. The CPU is unique. The way the phone is "mounted" is unique. The phone is unique.

 

Can you say the same about a plastic s4 with a qualcomm processor running android with a 2.2 froyo skin on top?

your not grasping the logic...that is why you don't get it....

The same retina screens on the rMBP...ipad and anything else that has a high res screen that has an Apple logo on it is not made by Apple....it is made by and OEM....those same OEMs make their own mobile phones....among other things......so saying they make crap hardware is the same as saying Apple products are crap.....Apple did not make them.....the same OEMs that you are putting down make all the products inside of Apple products... except for the CPU......but that is NOT what I said. That was not what my comments was about. It was about your logic that OEMs cannot produce a high end  4 or 5 inch screen. Funny they can make rMBP and iPad screens but the screens on OEM phones are crap? Yet they are made by the same companies......your logic is flawed.....

 

They can make great 4" screens, but they can't put the same internals inside a 4" phone. They do not have the talent. They have to cut CPUs in half, take half the ram and storage, and try to fit a huge battery because android is a pig, and they always fall short of making great smaller devices.

 

The companies that make the screens have nothing to do with the companies that make smartphones, even if the name is the same. They are independent. That's why they are called conglomerates.

 

The samsung that makes screens for Apple loves Apple, because they are their best and bigger client, so the Samsung that makes phones only has the rest that Apple doesn't want. So they invested in amoled, that still produces inferior displays to the ones used on iPhones. They are crap, actually.

 

That's why Apple is always the first with great tech, and great screens. In most cases, Apple finances the plants and machinery used to produce components and other companies provide the hands needed. Simple as that. With your flawgic, the company that makes screws should be seen as the ones responsible for ferraris. Or the slaves/workers should be seen as the ones responsible for Eiffel tower. The way macs and other iProducts are assembled and the way they use the tech available has nothing to do with what crappy companies like Samsung, Dell or HP do with their trash.

post #63 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by pedromartins View Post

 

They can make great 4" screens, but they can't put the same internals inside a 4" phone. They do not have the talent. They have to cut CPUs in half, take half the ram and storage, and try to fit a huge battery because android is a pig, and they always fall short of making great smaller devices.

 

The companies that make the screens have nothing to do with the companies that make smartphones, even if the name is the same. They are independent. That's why they are called conglomerates.

 

The samsung that makes screens for Apple loves Apple, because they are their best and bigger client, so the Samsung that makes phones only has the rest that Apple doesn't want. So they invested in amoled, that still produces inferior displays to the ones used on iPhones. They are crap, actually.

 

That's why Apple is always the first with great tech, and great screens. In most cases, Apple finances the plants and machinery used to produce components and other companies provide the hands needed. Simple as that. With your flawgic, the company that makes screws should be seen as the ones responsible for ferraris. Or the slaves/workers should be seen as the ones responsible for Eiffel tower. The way macs and other iProducts are assembled and the way they use the tech available has nothing to do with what crappy companies like Samsung, Dell or HP do with their trash.

 

You have no ideas what Samsung, HTC, Apple or any other company are capable of making. You also have absolutely no inside knowledge of why these companies choose to release the products that they do or don't release.  Everything you wrote is 100% pure conjecture and speculation. AMOLED has also come a very long way and your opinions carried more weight 2 or 3 years ago. The Samsung Galaxy S4 has a very nice display and the only real 2 shortcomings are visibility in sunlight and a grayish hue to white colors. It may not be as nice as the HT One or iPhone 5 display but it has closed the gap quite a ways compared to the Galaxy S3 screen. In reality displays have now reached a point where your average consumer can't tell the difference in typical use.

post #64 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by rkevwill View Post

Apparently some of the commenters are not aware, that when deferred stock and options become vested, you owe taxes immediately. Many executives sell stock in a cashless exercise, to pay that tax liability. They may indeed, keep the rest of the shares for future use.

Apparently some commentators ^^^^^^ are not aware Cook has already made hundreds of millions selling shares and in fact has sold almost every share that has ever vested.  So while they may indeed keep future shares the track record is clearly to sell as soon as the shares vest.

 

Interesting standards Apple came up with.  As long as Apple is in the top 67% of performers Cook gets to keep at least 75% of his stock options for that year.  Talk about setting the bar low.

post #65 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac View Post

 

Does Samsung sell better screens to other companies than the ones they use on their own S line? That was my point.

 

Facts:

 

-There's a huge lucrative market for a nice premium 5" screen device;

-There's an even bigger market for a nice premium 4" screen device;

-Only Apple makes that 4" device, lots of attempts by some OEMs have failed (galaxy mini, similar sony and HTC devices, etc);

-Android + high end CPUs and GPUs needs huge batteries that can only be used on huge phones ---- bigger screen as convenience. The additional drain (by a bigger screen) is nullified by the size of the battery. Despite a 2.5x bigger battery, the S4 loses on every single battery test against the iPhone 5, if the screen is ON.

 

You know the tasteless criminals that samsung is, and the way they approach the market (they make every single device they can and flood the market, that's their strategy).

post #66 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by pedromartins View Post

 

Does Samsung sell better screens to other companies than the ones they use on their own S line? That was my point.

 

Facts:

 

-There's a huge lucrative market for a nice premium 5" screen device;

-There's an even bigger market for a nice premium 4" screen device;

-Only Apple makes that 4" device, lots of attempts by some OEMs have failed (galaxy mini, similar sony and HTC devices, etc);

-Android + high end CPUs and GPUs needs huge batteries that can only be used on huge phones ---- bigger screen as convenience. The additional drain (by a bigger screen) is nullified by the size of the battery. Despite a 2.5x bigger battery, the S4 loses on every single battery test against the iPhone 5, if the screen is ON.

 

You know the tasteless criminals that samsung is, and the way they approach the market (they make every single device they can and flood the market, that's their strategy).

 

Once again you have no idea why these companies make their decisions nor do you have the slightest idea about their pricing or supply issues. If you care to list specific criticisms or comparisons of certain features or models I will be glad to engage you in conversation but your broad generalizations are all over the place. So go have a glass of porto and enjoy some tapas and cool down. Samsung really is not the anti-christ or an incarnation of evil. They are just a Korean conglomerate not worthy of causing you to develop hypertension over your irrational hate of that company. 

post #67 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ Web View Post

With AAPL share plummeting 10% in 2 days from historic lows during a stock buyback period, Cook obviously believes AAPL shares are worth less under his cockeyed misguided leadership.

Did you even read the article?  Cook asked the board to pay him for his performance, if Apple does not meet expectations he has his incentive stock option pay reduce.  He looses money.  What CEO of any corporation that you can name would do that to his pay?  And what control does he have over a poor performing stock market, over a 2 day decline?  The NASDAQ has lost 7.4% this week in an overall decline.

post #68 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by v5v View Post

Not me. I'd rather hear "We're not prepared to do that now" possibly with the addition of "...but who knows how we'll feel in the future."

I don't want the CEO making up excuses that can't withstand the scrutiny of a six-year-old's deductive reasoning. Aside from the obvious blow to credibility it's insulting to the people who buy Apple products.

He appears to be good at running the company but maybe he's just not so good at speaking directly to critics.

He doesn't seem to be able to convince critics like yourself, because you want a lie: "Sure we could do a larger screen, but we decided to settle on what we got," or somesuch. Instead he says the tradeoffs would result in a phone that would not be to Apple's standards. The standards Apple follows, by the way, are those of the old Nikon and Leica crowd when it comes to color accuracy and white balance, not the standards of the average phone buyer.

He was telling the absolute truth, witholding the part about the breakthrough that's going to allow them to put out a larger screen (in the range of 30 million or so the first year) without sacrificing battery life and weight, and witholding any direct slamming of Samsung for using trash like AMOLED. Keeping the developers happy is also in the equation too, but I can't speculate on that.

They aren't going to sell out the photographers and others who care about the best possible visual experience. That would solve your six-year-old child problem if you would keep that in mind. He's a product guy after all.
post #69 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post

He doesn't seem to be able to convince critics like yourself, because you want a lie: "Sure we could do a larger screen, but we decided to settle on what we got," or somesuch. Instead he says the tradeoffs would result in a phone that would not be to Apple's standards.

 

Then how do you explain the Retina iPad? Either it *IS* possible to build a larger screen that meets Apple's exacting standards or the iPad is a substandard device, and a contradiction of Cook's claims about maintaining high standards.

 

I am not a Cook hater, but do honestly believe the statements he made on this subject were pure hooey. He was making excuses. WHY he would have done that is anyone's guess, but there's no question at all in my mind that he was deflecting attention from something.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Cook incentivizes his 1M restricted stock unit payout as top brass net $86.5M in share selloff